From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Jul 1 00:59:37 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 20:59:37 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4686FC79.7070208@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171066 Katie wrote: > This article says she's "Episcopalian" which is definitely NOT the same > as Evangelical. Could someone have gotten these two "E" words mixed up? > Because Episcopalians are quite mainstream - as they are Anglicans in > the UK, and that's the official church of the UK...so I don't see where > she's evangelical. Most British people are Anglican, even if they are > lapsed or non-practicing. So... Bart: There is an old saying: The Episcopal Church is notable for interfering with neither one's politics nor one's religion. I see the Christian message is based more on the so-called "High" Anglican Church rather than the so-called "Low" Anglican Church The low church, being more Calvinist in leanings, does not accept the concept of "free will", and one of the major themes of the series is that nobody starts out as good or evil; it's our choices that make us good and evil. I'm going to take a bit of a leap, here, because the concept of "soul" is not well-defined in the books, but it would appear that one's free will originates in one's soul. That is part of what makes the horcrux so terrible; if you lose a piece of your soul, you lose your ability to make choices. Morty has an illness which prevents him from being able to make choices; by making the horcruxes, he lost the chance of ever being cured. And what does good or evil choices get you? That's part of the next great adventure. Bart From kamilaa at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 01:33:06 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 20:33:06 -0500 Subject: Snape and Patronuses . . .err, Patronusi? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171067 Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: I don't think he can...I don't think he has a happy enough memory to make a Patronus... Maybe this is why he prefers a different way of fighting off Dementors than Harry. I don't think you need to have a *nice* happy memory to conjure a Patronus. When Harry produced one for extra credit during his Transfiguration OWL practical, he used the mental image of Umbridge getting sacked. If all it takes is the thought of something bad happening to someone you don't like, I would expect Snape to be a Patronus champ. Isn't that the truth? But aside from all of that, wasn't Snape an Order member, and therefore didn't he communicate with other Order members via his Patronus? And if he couldn't do so, wouldn't we surely have heard something about that by now? I am almost certain I remember him coming on the Trio in trouble (or perhaps only Harry) at some point and Harry registering that a silvery something shot out of his wand towards the Castle. I know Hagrid did so once or twice, but I am almost certain Snape did as well. I'd check for myself, but I'm away from my books. Or, more correctly, currently they're away from me. =D Kamil From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 02:18:49 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 02:18:49 -0000 Subject: The importance of titles in HP In-Reply-To: <109467.3297.qm@web35015.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171069 > Deborah: > Has anyone thought of the "royal" titles that occur throughout the Harry Potter books? We have seen knights, ladies, a friar, a baron, a prince, a lord, and a king title attributed to different characters. Does anyone think this could play out in some way in HBP? Goddlefrood: Yes, as it happens, I have. There's little in them. They are *not* royal titles at all, I'll come to the symbolism of Ron Weasley momentarily. Surely you mean DH though, HBP came out some time ago ;-). I'm taking part of this from comments I made in response to an essay at hp_essays some time ago but is largely written off the bat. That had led to a revision of her views relative to the Wizengamot, but is also relevant to argue the counter to those theories that posit that there is something akin to the real world of the benighted isles with all its various titles going on within the wizarding world. There is not as far as I am concerned. As it stands in canon, and from other sources that are considered such, there is no indication of any kind of wizarding king, aristocracy or nobility, or even any landed gentry. I am aware that many theorise that such things, or certainly something similar, may have existed at points during the existence of the WW. These appear largely to be based on the titles referred to by Deborah above. All a little thin from my viewpoint, especially when the comprehension that I glean from the extrapolations in respect of such titles is not similar to other's understanding of these things, and, yes, I'm referring to mine, but also many and varied others I would hope. I do acknowledge that we have been shown that some wizards and witches are more powerful in a political sense than others in the HP universe. The title "sir" can be bestowed on anyone for more or less any reason and at any time, and this more particularly occurred around the time of the Tudors and their predecessors. The immediate predecessor to the Tudors was Henry VII. That was when Nearly Headless Nick walked amongst the mortal. It may be, for instance, that Sir Nicholas (hereafter NHN) merely offered his horse to someone in a position to elevate him to a knighthood, which was not limited only to the king of the day, but also lay in the power of other powerful barons and notables. Such a bestowal could have been hereditary or more probably only for his lifetime (I base that only on the instinct I have for NHN). This also applies equally to others in the nooks with the title "Sir". That there are no recent sirs in canon, other than the teachers when being addressed by their students, strongly suggests that no new elevations among wizards has occurred for some centuries. It is not unreasonable to conclude that during NHN's life time there was at least some contact between wizards and witches and Muggles, otherwise why would it be necessary to later have a Statute of Secrecy? The Grey Lady is a well known moniker amongst ghost stories from the blighted isles. There are several grey ladies, but it is *not* a lady as in the title but just a reference to those ghosts being female. One such story comes from the west country of England where I spent many of my formative years. There was a house, the name of which now escapes me, set in some beautiful parkland whose former owner had gone off to fight in a war. His wife looked out from her window constantly expecting his return once his time for return had passed. He never returned but that Grey Lady still looks out from her window, so the story goes. I never did see her but many claim to have done so. Baron is a title, but it is quite low down the pecking order of aristocratic titles, just above a baronet in fact. This depends on context too because at one time baron was the term for the local major landowner who was high up in the feeding chain during feudal times and often had his own Court known as a Court Baron. If the Bloody Baron is placed in time based on his attire then he would belong around the 15th or 16th century. By that time a baron was a minor aristocrat. Again this does not mean that it was a wizarding title, but rather one that had been obtained or maybe inherited during the Bloody Baron's lifetime. It may also have only been a self bestowed nickname like Lord Voldemort. I am Lord Voldemort = Tom Marvolo Riddle, surely we're all here aware of that? It was self bestowed as was Snape's Half-Blood Prince. In Snape's case it was his mother's surname and not in any way linked to the royal title Prince. The interim conclusion is that there's nothing in these titles because the only ones worth even considering, being Sir and Baron are quite clearly titles obtained before seclusion and no modern wizards other than one egomaniac styling himself Lord has a title. The reference to king for Ron is little more than a common usage in respect of sporting heroes. Elvis Presley would know what I mean even though he was no sportsman. For what value it may have to anyone there is my view. Nothing in them, purely a little amusement on JKR's part probably. Goddlefrood From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 03:52:54 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:52:54 -0000 Subject: My current opinion of Snape (Longish) / Re: Clues to Snape's Loyalties In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171070 Sherry wrote: > > I see Hermione's support of Snape in a completely different way. and just to be clear, I felt this before I was convinced of what a horrible person he was, inside and out after he murdered Dumbledore. Hermione strikes me as one of those people who just blithely believes a person in authority is good and is right, just because the person is in authority. I don't get the impression that she actually *thinks* about whether or not Snape is all the things Harry believes him to be. But to her, Snape is a teacher, and therefore, he must be good and he must be right. Maybe Harry's reactions are often emotional and perhaps not always right. but Hermione appears not to think at all for herself in situations like this, but just to accept authority figures on faith because of their position, never really considering if they deserve that or not. Carol responds: Sherry, I know how you feel about Snape, so I'll leave him out of this post (for the most part) and just respond to the general point about Hermione and authority figures. I don't agree that she "blithely believes that a person in authority is good and is right." For example, she pretends not to like Professor Grubbly-Plank's lessons so that she won't hurt Hagrid's feelings but she and the boys know perfectly well that Grubbly-Plank is a model teacher and Hagrid isn't. More to the point, perhaps, she's immediately suspicious of Umbridge's remarks on "progress for progress' sake must be discouraged" and "pruning wherever we find practices that ought to be prohibiited," correctly concluding that "the Ministry's interfering at Hogwarts" (OoP Am. ed. 214). She objects in class to Umbridge's course aims and textbook for the very good reason that both are designed to avoid teaching the students to use defensive spells (242). Earlier, she objected to the whole subject of Divination, criticizing Trelawney for seeing "that ridiculous Grim again" (this time in the crystal ball) and walking out of that class when Trelawney tells her that her mind is too "hopelessly mundane" to master "the noble art of Divination" (208). In contrast, she never talks back to snape (the closest she comes is pointing out that they're supposed to be starting hinkypunks in Lupin's DADA class). While she sometimes complains outside of class that Snape is unfair or sympathizes with the boys when he gives them detentions, she always does excellent work in his class and on his essays, even the werewolf essay that he assigned as substitute DADA teacher (which no one else wrote). With the exception of Professor Lockhart, whom Hermione as a little second-year had a silly crush on, she seems to be an excellent judge of teachers. (She's right about Umbridge, Grubbly-Plank, Hagrid, and Trelawney.) Her praise of Snape's first DADA lesson, echoed by the Hufflepuff Ernie Macmillan, surely as impartial a student as we're likely to find with regard to Snape, is therefore, IMO, not to be taken lightly. Carol, broiling in Tucson but happy to have her computer back with its power supply stabilized, knock on wood! From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 04:43:04 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:43:04 -0000 Subject: A Night at the Prophesy and the Niggling Details In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171071 > Mike: > > Besides, didn't JKR's version have you picturing the eavesdropper > > being hauled away before Dumbledore even opened the door? > > zgirnius: > So did I, Mike: Exactly! And how does that help Dumbledore in this conversation with Harry? As opposed to just telling Harry that the eavesdropper was prevented from hearing more than the first half of the prophesy. Why does he need to leave Harry with this impression? At this time, Harry couldn't care less *why* the eavesdropper was prevented from hearing more. He doesn't even care *who* the eavesdropper was. In the other thread, you laid out a scenario which would make Dumbledore's version perfectly plausible. In your part that I snipped you said Albus could have let Aberforth handle the eavesdropper his way. Both are valid points, but it isn't that events could match Dumbledore words. It's that JKR chose to have Dumbledore use words which would need to be reconciled at all. If she did not want us to question Dumbledore's version, she only needed to have him use different words, ones that would not have changed the way the conversation was happening in OotP. Words that would not have left a false impression about what happened that night of the prophesy. She didn't choose to go that route and I have to ask why. > > Mike: > > Also, ask yourself, would JKR have been lackadaisical in her > > writing of the prophesy reveal chapter? > > zgirnius: > If Dumbledore's account is true, there was nothing lackadaisical in > the choice of words by Rowling or Dumbledore. Mike: Even if Dumbledore's version is not true, I don't think there was anything lackadaisical in JKR's writing of the scene. I think she had a purpose for having Dumbledore telling Harry the way he did. > zgirnius: > My gut feeling is that a man once described by his creatrix as 'the > epitome of good' would not be behind such a plan. Mike: And yet the creatrix had *Dumbledore* deliver the 'what did I care if nameless, faceless people or creatures died' line. She had Dumbledore admit that his feelings for Harry were getting in the way of his "plan". And that Voldemort would count on good people not being able to take the cold-hearted approach to the battle. > zgirnius: > As a way Death Eater Snape might have thought about delivering the > prophecy (minus any idea this was bad for LV, I mean merely that > he did not care about the danger he was causing to some nameless > people) this makes perfect sense, but it is positioned as the > very awful bad thing he did in the story, that (at least I and > Dumbledore believe) he now regrets. Mike: Except Dumbledore has the "nameless" line, not Snape. Hedging my bets, I can concede that Snape may still have been a loyal DE when he was eavesdropping the prophesy. But after ten or so years of Voldemort's reign of terror, exactly who would Dumbledore think this eavesdropper was working for? Snape wasn't there picking up interview tips, and I don't for a minute think Dumbledore would buy that story. And seeing as this was most likely occurring during the school term, any question of Snape tailing Dumbledore trying to get a teaching interview seems unlikely. So I concur with lizzyben's assessment, just letting Snape go seems like a poor choice for someone that didn't want the prophesy released. >From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/171052 > lizzyben: > "My - our - one stroke of good fortune was that the eavesdropper was > detected only a short way into the prophecy and thrown from the > building... zgirnius: I don't understand. You think Dumbledore deliberately let a likely Death Eater who may have heard the whole prophecy go to Voldemort, right? And he learned later which part Snape had actually heard. If he thought it was undesirable for Voldemort to know the whole thing, why would he let Snape go? That could make it worse, I presume. If it could not, then why is this a stroke of good fortune? Mike: I don't want to speak for lizzyben, but I don't think you are getting her point. The slip up was Dumbledore starting out with "My". Because a Dumbledore that wanted the prophesy released to Voldemort, would not want anything that might warn off Voldemort from acting on it to be included in that release. So that would constitute "good fortune" for Dumbledore, Voldemort didn't get the "power the Dark Lord knows not" part. But it certainly wasn't "good fortune" for Harry and his parents. Had Voldemort heard the "power" part, he may have chosen a more circumspect course of action, instead of the bold, arrogant, unconcerned approach he took of directly attacking the Potters. So how is the fact that Voldemort only heard the first two lines Harry's (our) "good fortune"? He got dead parents out of the deal, because Voldemort acted instead of planning a more careful approach to the problem. As to Dumbledore wanting the prophesy released and hoping for it to come true, think back to the situation they were in. Voldemort had been kicking their asses. They were losing. Moody showed Harry the old picture of the order and pointed out all the people they had lost before he got to Harry's folks. And that was just Order loses. I'm sure Dumbledore could recognize a *real* prophesy as opposed to Trelawney faking it. He saw his chance and took it. And though he may regret the decision as much or more than Snape did, he got his "chosen one". And Dumbledore started Harry's training in his first year. He put the Mirror of Erised where Harry could find it and taught him how it worked. In CoS he made the comment about help being given to those who ask, and Fawkes must have either been instructed to bring the Hat, or he already knew the Hat would produce the sword. And why does he send Harry and Hermione back in time in PoA? Wouldn't going himself been a better idea to ensure the outcome? The biggest clue has to be the Tri-Wizard Tournament. Since when can a third party commit someone else to a binding wizard contract? If Dumbledore knew that Harry didn't put his own name into the Goblet, he knew that it couldn't bind Harry to compete, couldn't compel someone that didn't volunteer his own person. The Goblet may have been confused by Fake!Moody into picking Harry, but the deeper magic of binding wizard contracts cannot be so easily manipulated, else that would present an impossible condition to deal with. Mike, asking - if "regardless" means without regard, what does "irregardless" mean? From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Sun Jul 1 04:53:32 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:53:32 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171072 wrote: > > As some people are understandably eager to make their predictions > known, here we go! Note *minor* question changes. > Anne Squires responds: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Short answer: No. Long answer: I think he will suffer a fate worse than death, although I'm not sure what that could possibly be. Perhaps he will be sent somewhere to live in solitary confinement, no followers, no power, magical or otherwise, just by himself until the end of his **mortal** days. All the while, he will know that he faces the fate of all mortals, eventual death. This would be the worst possible end for a man who titled himself "Flight From Death." 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid :( 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? no b. Draco? no c. Hermione? no d. Luna? yes e. Ron? no f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill Weasley and Fleur Delacour 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Ms. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie McMillan b. Head Girl? Hannah Abbott c. DADA Instructor? The "real" Moody d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? His loyalties lie first and foremost with Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore. To a lesser extent his loyalties lie with The Order of the Phoenix. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Voldemort has 1/7 of his soul b. The Diary c. The Ring d. The Slytherin Locket e. The Hufflepuff Cup f. Something that belonged to Rowena Ravenclaw. I think it's a crown or a tiara of some sort, or a wand (Perhaps the wand that was in the display window of Ollivander's shop.) So, my answer is Ravenclaw Crown or Ravenclaw Wand. g. Harry or Harry's scar which would be something having to do with Gryffindor. I do think this was an accident and Voldemort intended to turn something else into his final horcrux. That item will be found at Godric's Hollow. That item will be a relic of Godric Gryffindor's. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's Patronus: A Bumblebee (or something strongly related to Albus Dumbledore) Snape's Boggart: A Deceased Lily Evans Potter (a la Molly Weasley's boggart) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? It is a room filled with unconditional love, compassion, empathy, and forgiveness. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. The Order of the Phoenix has a spy for Voldemort. (Is this too stupidly obvious? I know it is rather vague. Sorry. I just know there is a spy; I'm just not sure who it is. I used to believe in ESE!Lupin; but then I read an interview with JKR in which she highly praised Lupin. So, I don't believe that any longer. I have also read many convincing arguments for ESE!McGonagall. Since I think the "real" Alastor Moody will be the new DADA professor, then I think it might be him. Harry needs to be very leery of whoever holds that position. "Constant Vigilance," right?) 2. Ludo Bagman is a Death Eater. 3. Stan Shunpike is not a Death Eater. Harry will see to it that he is freed and cleared of all charges. 4. Draco Malfoy will help Harry, Ron, and Hermione. Draco will redeem himself. 5. Snape is a spy for the Order against Lord Voldemort. Towards the end of the novel Snape will give Harry something (information, a potion, an artifact, whatever??) which will guarantee Harry the ability to defeat LV. Anne Squires From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Sun Jul 1 06:03:32 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 06:03:32 -0000 Subject: My go on the "Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171073 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? *** NO -- 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? *** YES -- 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? *** SEVERUS SNAPE -- 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? *** WEREWOLF BITE -- 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? ** NO b. Draco? ** NO c. Hermione? ** YES d. Luna? ** YES e. Ron? ** YES f. Neville? ** YES g. Ginny? ** YES -- 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? *** LUNA & DUDLEY -- 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" *** PETUNIA DURSLEY -- 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? ** NEVILLE LONGBOTTOM b. Head Girl? ** PANSY PARKINSON c. DADA Instructor? ** ALASTOR MOODY d. Potions Master or Mistress? ** SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? ** MINERVA McG -- 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? *** WITH DUMBLEDORE & THE ORDER -- 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. ** IN VOLDEMORT b. ** HARRY c. ** MARVOLO'S RING d. ** LOCKET AT GRIMMAULD PLACE e. ** DIARY f. ** TIARA g. ** CUP -- In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? *** Patronus: BAT *** Boggart: THE SUN -- Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? *** THE POWER OF LOVE -- Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1) ** Snape and Fawkes are one and the same 2) ** We find out that Sirius and Remus were lovers 3) ** Someone within the Order (not Snape) turns out to be a traitor 4) ** Regulus Black is alive 5) ** Metamorphmagi will come into play on an important level Cheers, Inge From catlady at wicca.net Sun Jul 1 06:06:15 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 06:06:15 -0000 Subject: SnapeGag/HxHunt/Ginny/LND/LostMagic/Brave/MoreLND/PoA/SnapeHouse/More things Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171074 Lanval wrote in : Ouch, bless him! I hope this was not the incident that caused him to become a 'late dog'? >> I answered in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/32366 because I don't want to push the Elves' tolerance for going off-topic TOO far. Pippin wrote in : << According to Fudge, murdering Pettigrew was not the worst thing Black did. The worst thing Black did was betray the secret. And -- this is important-- Harry was **not** to be told about this. Of course Snape doesn't know, no one does, that Harry has already found out. >> Yes, but ... surely the reason for keeping it secret from Harry that Black had betrayed James and Lily was to prevent Harry from endangering himself by seeking vengeance on Black, and surely that risk was gone when Sirius was imprisoned and soon to be soul-sucked. So surely it wouldn't have bothered Fudge if Sirius on his way to the Dementor's Kiss cried out: "It was I who betrayed your parents, Harry Potter!" So Snape didn't need to gag Sirius to prevent that. (However, I'm persuaded by the posts that pointed out that Snape uses one spell that simultaneously binds and gags.) << Do you think Snape had it figured out about the Secret Keeper switch? I don't. Harry himself doesn't know about that until after Snape is knocked out, and even then Harry isn't sure he can believe it. >> Why didn't Snape Legilimens Lupin and Black, ideally before throwing off the Invisibility Cloak? Ann wrote in : << DH theories which ignore the Department of Mysteries or Horcruxes are unlikely and inconceivable, respectively. >> I wouldn't be in the least surprised if DH began with Harry discovering that all the Horcruxes have already been destroyed, altho' I'd be less surprised if he discovered it in the third or fourth chapter. If she doesn't want to write the Horcrux Hunt videogame, she doesn't have to. mjanetd wrote in : << Does Ginny remind anyone else of Harry's parents? She looks like Lilly (long red hair) and acts like his father (hexing anyone who looks at her in the hallways). >> This is a forbidden 'I totally agree' post. SSSusan wrote in : << What Little Niggling Details do you fear will be left unanswered at the end? >> I want to know why Peeves fears/obeys the Bloody Baron. Phoenixgod2000 wrote in : << I've always been of the opinion that Harry losing his magic is actually worse than him dying. (snip) If he flees the wizarding world, he has to live in the muggle world and he is totally unprepared for that considering his muggle education goes to about 5th grade. >> Between Harry having inherited enough money to live on, and most of the subject material learned in school being useless, Muggle!Harry has plenty of time to make up his missing Muggle education. If the WW continues to exist, Muggle!Harry could go into the import-export business, importing Muggle goods to the wizarding world and importing wizarding products to the Muggle world. If the whole wizarding world is destroyed (some people survive but all lose their magic), he would have to come up with a purely Muggle career. Maybe he'll be very good at some sport besides Quidditch. If said sport were a respectable martial art, he could become a teacher of it, as he was a good teacher of the Defense Association. I think if Harry remains alive and magical and in the Wizarding World, he ought to take the opportunity to play professional Quidditch while young enough, then become an Auror, then become (unjinxed) DADA teacher at Hogwarts and eventually Headmaster. I don't agree with Rowling's suggestion that Harry's had such an adventurous life that being a teacher would be too dull for his tastes, and I don't agree with listies who say that Harry's had such an adventurous life already that he won't want an adventurous job like being an Auror. Pippin wrote in : << For example in PS/SS, (snip) he shows through his actions that making friends and learning to be brave are important to him. >> Harry was already brave before PS/SS began. Despite how the Dursleys had treated him and kept treating him, he still talked back to them, asked questions they didn't want him to ask, and generally demonstrated that they hadn't crushed his spirit. mz_annethrope wrote in : << Some smaller niggling things: -How did Harry's grandparents die? >> Deepthi gave the link in : says: << MA: What about Harry's family ? his grandparents ? were they killed? JKR: No. This takes us into more mundane territory. As a writer, it was more interesting, plot-wise, if Harry was completely alone. So I rather ruthlessly disposed of his entire family apart from Aunt Petunia. I mean, James and Lily are massively important to the plot, of course, but the grandparents? No. And, because I do like my backstory: Petunia and Lily's parents, normal Muggle death. James's parents were elderly, were getting on a little when he was born, which explains the only child, very pampered, had-him-late-in-life-so-he's -an-extra-treasure, as often happens, I think. They were old in wizarding terms, and they died. They succumbed to a wizarding illness. That's as far as it goes. There's nothing serious or sinister about those deaths. I just needed them out of the way so I killed them. >> << -How did Remus Lupin prevent himself from biting people when he transformed after his time at Hogwarts and before the invention of the wolfsbane potion? >> I suppose that, when possible, he locked himself into a sturdy steel shed before each transformation. It helps to have a friend who owned the shed and locked and unlocked the chain and padlock, but I believe there are also time-controlled locks. I suppose when no cage and lock were available, he went as far away as he could, perhaps in the Forbidden Forest, and just hoped he wouldn't stumble across any humans. << -Are there female centaurs? Male hags? If not, how do they reproduce? >> You left out male Veelas. I have a theory that hags are the females and ogres or trolls the males of the same species. And I once offered a theory that Veelas grow on trees. << -Come to think of it, how do house elves reproduce given that there doesn't usually seem to be more than one per house? Well, maybe I don't want to know the answer to that. Sounds too grim. >> We know that House Elves have mothers, because in GoF, Winky cried: "My poor Mr Crouch, what is he doing without Winky? He is needing me, he is needing my help! I is looking after the Crouches all my life, and my mother is doing it before me, and my grandmother is doing it before her oh, what is they saying if they knew Winky was freed? Oh, the shame, the shame!" and in OoP, '[Kreachur's] life's ambition is to have his head cut off and stuck up on plaque just like his mother.' I think they must have fathers as well, or why would the species bother having males? I like to think that House Elves are permitting to go, late at night while masters are asleep and all work is completed, to a House Elf pub, where they can meet and fall in love for purposes of getting married and producing more servants (this might explain how Dobby and winky came to know each other before freedom), but other listies think it more likely that the masters arrange to breed them. Betsy Hp wrote in : << But I'm not questioning the plausibility of PoA. I just question the delivery system. Lupin had to make this massive speech to fill the kids in on the Marauder background. It's a boring bit of story-telling. >> No, it isn't. It's an exciting, fascinating story. In the book, we are reading words on the page, whether they're the narrator's words or a character's words. In a movie, we see either people acting out a story or one person talking, so in a movie this sort of story-telling has to dissolve into a flashback. Ann wrote in : << I suspect he's done some *major* refurbishing, at a guess to hide his Potions lab. But why is he living there at all, when Hogwarts is presumably safer and more convenient? >> In , JKR says: << Q: Where do the Hogwarts teachers live during the school holidays ? Do they stay at Hogwarts ? (Andrew Zimmer) A: No, they don't. Filch, the caretaker, stays. >> I guess none of them stay at Hogwarts over the summer because they aren't allowed to. Alla wrote in : << > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Neville > b. Head Girl? Ron >> Alla, is that a typo or are you hinting at a Potion of Instant Sex Change? Lizzyben wrote in : << But if [one] think[s] of DD a calculating man who deliberately let the prophecy loose to create an "equal" capable of defeating VD >> Then one thinks that DD believed in the prophecy. It's one thing to calculate that Voldemort's personality is that if he hears a prophecy that someone is a danger to him, he will kill that person. It's another thing to calculate that Voldemort's attempt to kill a baby born at the end of July will cause the AK to rebound, disembodying Voldemort and giving the baby extra powers. Geoff wrote in : << I replied to this in 84552 by writing: "I feel that I can only disagree with your view on Harry Potter. He cannot be an everyman or Christ. No person can be a Christ figure except Christ himself, God in human form. We can be Christ-like; we are enjoined to imitate Christ ? read Philippians 2 for example." >> When an author is writing an allegory, a character in that allegory can be a Christ figure, such as Aslan in Narnia. Granted, Aslan is a supernatural lion rather than an apparently natural human, but I believe allegorical stories have been written in which a human character represents Christ. Bart wrote in : << one of the major themes of the series is that nobody starts out as good or evil; it's our choices that make us good and evil. >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/23598 From: "Aberforth's Goat" Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 12:47 pm Subject: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Calvinism << Not so fast! The CoS passage actually has some of the most "Calvinistic" passages in the canon. In fact, it was that passage that got me thinking about this. Let's pull it out for exegesis: * "Exactly," said Dumbledore, beaming once more. "Which * makes you very different from Tom Riddle. It is our choices, * Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." * Harry sat motionless in his chair, stunned. "If you want proof, * Harry, that you belong in Gryffindor, I suggest you look more * closely at this." [....] * * "Only a true Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the hat, * Harry." So: Harry's choices *reveal* something--they peel the layers off the onion--they show us the person he actually is. His true identity, his soul, his platonic essence. And that person is, fundamentally, a Gryffindor. He may not even have known it, but there's a white hat in his soul and when it comes to a crisis, he'll wear it. Mike Crudele wrotein : << Since when can a third party commit someone else to a binding wizard contract? If Dumbledore knew that Harry didn't put his own name into the Goblet, he knew that it couldn't bind Harry to compete, couldn't compel someone that didn't volunteer his own person. The Goblet may have been confused by Fake!Moody into picking Harry, but the deeper magic of binding wizard contracts cannot be so easily manipulated, else that would present an impossible condition to deal with. >> It's not just a wizarding contract, which could be defined by wizarding law and thus could be changed by wizarding law, it's a MAGICAL contract, and therefore part of MAGICAL Law, which (despite the name of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement) is a subset of Natural Law, and needs no more enforcement than does the Law of Gravity or Conservation of Mass-Energy. I don't doubt that a person could be stuck with a binding magical contract by someone else's action -- the person might not even KNOW they were bound by a magical contract until some wizarding diagnostician run a lot of tests. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 06:51:26 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 06:51:26 -0000 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171075 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: > Anyway, again, please don't take offense, i am not trying to be > confrontational. I just want to have some proof that these are just > great books, not some story about Christianity...which would totally > ruin them for me. (And which, by the way, I see no evidence for. It's > not like Narnia, where the symbolism is barely symbolism. It's pretty > obvious. I see NONE of that in HP. They're just great books.) > Katie, having been an Anglophile and a history scholar for more than > 10 years, and having gone twelve years to Catholic school, and thus > feeling like I may have a leg to stand on here. What I don't understand is why the books would be "ruined" if they're "some story about Christianity." If you're an Anglophile, and a Catholic, you're going to miss out on an awful lot of great literature if you avoid poems and texts that can be described that way. Not just LotR and Narnia but Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. The Fairie Queene. Lots of Chaucer's work. I could go on. I'm a Christian, but I wasn't raised as one, and I certainly wasn't one when I started reading Tolkien, who once said of LotR that "Christ's face is on every page". Didn't bother me a bit. Doesn't bother my cousin, and she's an orthodox Jew. Why would Rowling's books be ruined for you if there's some intentional Christian message in them? I don't get it. From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Sun Jul 1 07:20:56 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 07:20:56 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171076 > > Bart said: > > ...creating a horcrux is NOT just a matter of committing a > > murder. It's a willingness to lose a piece of one's own soul. > > In general, the only kind of person who could do that is someone > > who is so out of touch with their own soul that they don't even > > miss its absence; in other words, a sociopath or psychopath. > > Dumbledore is neither. > > > > Would you become immortal if the price was that you would > > contract Alzheimers Disease? When you create a horcrux, you may > > be harder to kill, but you are no longer you, unless you were > > essentially soulless to begin with. > > Jo: > Bart, think you're taking this a wee bit too far into the real > world. > > Perhaps Dumbledore, omniscient as he is, invisible hand guiding > Harry and his chums, thought he might be needed for the last > battle. > > I think that splitting his own soul out of necessity would be a > huge sacrifice, and an unwelcome one, but I think that it is in > Dumbledore's character to make that sort of sacrifice if it was > necessary in the bigger picture. Anne Squires: I agree that DD is a master manipulator. However, I do not think he is evil or a practitioner of the Dark Arts which he would have to be in order to have created a horcrux for himself. JKR describes DD as the "epitome of goodness" in CBCNewsWorld: Hot Type, July 13, 2000: JKR: "I loved writing Dumbledore and Dumbledore is the epitome of goodness." Furthermore, if he had created a horcrux for himself then he would not have died. And, JKR has stated unequivocally that DD is dead. "But I see that I need to be a little more explicit and say that Dumbledore is definitely ... dead." RCMH2, August 2, 2006. Thus, DD couldn't have created a horcrux because he is too good, and furthermore, if he had created one he would not have died. The horcrux would have anchored him to this world. Jo also wrote: There are so many examples of > his willingness to make sacrifices like this: > > 1. Employing Trelawney even though students would suffer as she > is a bad teacher. > 2. Making Snape kill him (controversial, please don't shoot me > down!) > 3. Making Harry live with the Dursleys > 4. Insisting Sirius his at Grimmauld Place > 5. Lupin having to spy on the werewolves > > So many other examples...Dumbledore is responsible for the great > unhappiness of many of our favourite characters, he must have > made a sacrifice along the way. Maybe the hypothetical Horcrux > harnesses the compassionate bit of his soul...(this is a joke by > the way but I still think that Dumbledore may have a Horcrux). > > Jo x > Anne Squires again: 1. Yes, Trelawney is a bad teacher. She is at Hogwarts for her own protection. Also, DD doesn't want LV to get hold of the prophecy. He used this ruse to provoke and manipulate LV into showing himself at the Ministry of Magic in front of the entire Wizarding World. If LV had been able to get his hands on Trelawney then everyone might still believe Fudge and Umbridge that LV had not returned. 2. I'm not sure he "made" Snape kill him. I will admit that I tend to lean this way. If it's true then DD certainly isn't the "epitome of goodness" that JKR purports him to be. I hope we get some more information about what happened on that tower. Having said that, I do, however, think it's *possible* that DD was dying anyway----from the injury to his hand, or from the potion that he made Harry give him in the cave, or a combination of the two. If the potion from the cave was killing him then he was protecting Harry from guilt. At any rate, I think it's *possible* that he was not long for this world no matter what. This way LV will utterly and completely trust Snape. Snape is in the perfect position to betray LV to the Order/Ministry/Good Guys. Snape could now be in deep cover. If DD was already dying and was suffering then Snape's actions could have been akin to euthanasia. IMHO, we don't know enough about what happened on the tower to draw any firm conclusions or make any condemnations of anyone. 3. Honestly, I don't think DD had any real choice when it came to leaving Harry with the Dursleys. It did, in fact, keep him alive. We know that DEs attacked the Longbottoms after Harry was placed with the Dursleys. I am convinced that they also would have sought out and attacked Harry if he had been anywhere else. Harry was only "safe" under the blood protection. I believe that DD truly regretted the situation. If he or any other loving wizard or witch could have taken Harry **safely** I don't think DD would have hesitated to allow it. 4. If Sirius had remained hidden at 12GP, as he was specifically told, he would not have fallen beyond the veil. He probably would have been cleared of all charges. As we begin year seven, if Sirius had restrained himself in book five, he probably would be a contributing and active member of the Order. In the end, LV was exposed. Harry and DD were then finally believed. If Harry said Wormtail was alive and Sirius Black was innocent, then everyone would believe the "Chosen One." DD didn't hurt Sirius in this instance; Sirius hurt himself. 5. Sometimes when there is a war going on you have to send your soldiers and spies into dangerous and difficult situations. Besides, the members of the Order aren't draftees; they're volunteers. If Remus wants to refuse this mission it is his choice to do so. He is not being forced. Ultimately, it's the fact that the Ministry is making life so unbearable for the werewolves that gives LV a foothold with them anyway. DD certainly has nothing to do with that fact that the Ministry's own policies create allies for LV. JMHO, Anne Squires From orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk Sun Jul 1 10:32:00 2007 From: orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk (or.phan_ann) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 10:32:00 -0000 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171077 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abbey" wrote: > The article, "Is Harry Potter the Son of God?" presents > persuasive evidence from the books and from interviews with Rowling > that the Harry Potter story is, in fact, an intentional Gospel > allegory written with evangelistic intention, and that this will > become abundantly clear in the final book. Ann: I'm afraid I'm not convinced. The article says that Harry's surname connotes Christ via a quotation from Isaiah. But any number of surnames would suggest Christ more readily (off the top of my head, Carpenter, Fisher, Lyon, Lamb) and Isaiah is in the Old Testament, so the line can only be addressing God the Father, Who is *not* the same as the Son. Blood symbolism is pretty widespread. Jesus came as a friend to sinners, but to suggest that Luna's a sinner because she's odd or Hagrid is because he's half-giant is at best ill-considered. I could go on. Also, the article only discusses whether Harry can be seen as a Christ figure, not whether the series is intentionally evangelistic. On the other hand, I do think that JKR's Christianity does have some effect on the series. Voldemort has some Satanic qualities and the graveyard scene at the end of GoF, in my opinion, resembles a Black Mass. As Sistermagpie says, the trial in OotP isn't much like Jesus' trial, but as one of the most famous trials in Western culture I should think that it was at least at the back of her mind. And her ideas of Good and Evil are obviously Christian-influenced. But I don't think we should take this too far. The Wizarding World is obviously religious (there's the Fat Friar and St. Mungo's, for instance) but JKR hasn't gone into too much detail about this, I assume to avoid offending anyone. (There are old debates in the archives about religion in the Wizarding World, if anyone wants to get into that; see part of Message 34239 and downthread.) As far as I remember, none of the characters we've seen are practicing Christians, a slightly odd choice for an evangelically-minded series. As for using the knowledge of JKR's faith to predict DH, well, I'm not convinced it'll come out as any more than Good things happening, and the famous plot twist from the Gospels being re-used. But JKR's treatment of religion does leave out some interesting things. This is a milieu in which souls and the afterlife are maybe not facts of life, but certainly empirically verifiable in a way that nothing spiritual in the real world is. No-one in the Wizarding World can ignore the existence of souls. What's that going to do for religion? Suppose the facts of life in the Wizarding World contradict religions? Isn't this something JKR should have mentioned by now? What's their afterlife like? Why isn't Harry interested in this - I know he's not interested in anything, but this is life after death for crying out loud! Why, if a person can live without a soul (poor Barty Crouch Jr.!), should a Horcrux keep someone alive? I have a nasty feeling that JKR's overlooked some very basic aspects of the Potterverse... > montims: > Well, to be quite candid, if the Potter series IS "an intentional > Gospel allegory written with evangelistic intention", that will > destroy it for me and I will feel manipulated Ann: I understand this. It would feel rather manipulative to put all the evangelistic content in the last book, as if JKR had suddenly announced that she was uninterested in the series and just wanted her readers' souls. You know the saying "There's only one thing men want"? Same thing. If explicit Christian content had been in all the books so far, that might be different. > Bart: > That is part of what makes the horcrux so terrible; if you lose a > piece of your soul, you lose your ability to make choices. Morty has > an illness which prevents him from being able to make choices; by > making the horcruxes, he lost the chance of ever being cured. Ann: I disagree. Not only does canon shoot this down - Voldemort made his first Horcrux at seventeen, and we know he's made choices since then, such as killing the Potters - but it goes against JKR's theme of choice being what matters, *which you rely on for the idea of a Horcrux depriving its owner of free will*. That is, it's self-contradictory. Since we're discussing Christianity today, I'll also mention the Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16) - we get a chance until the eleventh hour. Ann From LynnKQuinn at aol.com Sun Jul 1 10:28:05 2007 From: LynnKQuinn at aol.com (eyemlynn) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 10:28:05 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's watch is like an alethiometer? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171078 >Me (Lynn) earlier: I am currently reading "The Subtle Knife", the second book of Pullman's His Dark Materials, and I've been wondering what if DD's watch worked kind of like the alethiometer. He did check it at Privet Drive when he dropped Harry off. Maybe it was telling him that he needed to do that in order for Voldemort to be defeated. Maybe he's been checking it all along and that's why he knew what he would have to teach Harry for him to be successful in SS. I guess I haven't fully thought this idea out but it would seem to explain a lot of DD's actions that seem to put Harry in danger and/or seem manipulative. Jen: What is an alethiometer? Does it give information about the future, like probabilities? Sorry I didn't respond but being still moderated I thought maybe someone else would (after over a year here if anyone is interested) I haven't finished all the books in "His Dark Materials" and I'm trying not to have it spoiled for me. I did a little search and inadvertently found out the ending or at least part of it. Great books so far. Anyway, the main character, Lyra, is given a compass like tool called an alethiometer. She is able to ask it questions and it tells her what she needs to do. It is controlled by elementary particles that are able to think for themselves. I'm not done the trilogy so there may be more to it but I don't want to know now. So far I am thoroughly enjoying it. There are many similarities between the 2 books. Both authors have heroes of the opposite sex. Specters sound like Dementors, they both have Trelawney's but I think Lyra could kick Harry"s butt anyday...lol Anyhow, I can see Dumbledore having some tool (watch or silver spinny thing) that lets him know he's on the right track either by asking or by increasing probability like Jen said. My vote is for the watch as the silver spinner seems to have another purpose. I seem to remember JKR mentioning Pullman as one of her favorite authors (correct me if I'm wrong). She also mentioned "The Woman who Walked into Doors". Another author who wrote well in the opposite gender. I believe that was an Oprah interview (again correct me, I have 3 small children under 6 so my memory fails) Anyway, I like the idea that DD had some help and was not just all knowing, omniscience, and a little manipulative. He was fulfilling his fate. Just a small thought Lynn From claire.kavanagh at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 1 12:29:36 2007 From: claire.kavanagh at yahoo.co.uk (claire.kavanagh) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:29:36 -0000 Subject: How Will It End - Predictions from Keith Olbermann/ Harry giving up his magi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171079 First post ever! I think there is something to the argument about Harry losing his magical powers, though it may not happen in the depressive terms we might imagine... My thoughts come from the struggle HP has always had with his love for the magical world v the loneliness of being the "boy who lived." While I don't want Harry to be forced back into the muggle world because he has lost his powers, I agree that it would be a relief to him not to have celebrity any more. What about some variation where the nature of the WW are changed to divest Harry of his status? If I may compare it to the end of Season 7 Buffy the Vampire Slayer: where all girls with the potential to defend the world from evil are called via magic, providing some indication of how the world will continue once the series (or book) ends, giving the characters some direction for the (non-existent) future and saving the heroine from the crippling loneliness that she has dealt with from season 1. Sorry if you don't like the comparison but I thought it was worth mentioning. clara From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 13:45:09 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:45:09 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights File Uploaded to Files Area In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171082 vmonte: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Harry will not die. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes! Yes! 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark on his arm. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? - no b. Draco? - no c. Hermione? - no d. Luna? - yes e. Ron? - no f. Neville? - yes g. Ginny? - yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill/Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" JKR says it won't be Petunia, so I'll have to say Filch. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Theodore Nott b. Head Girl? - Susan Bones c. DADA Instructor? - Percy d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - Minerva 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Snape's loyalties lie with himself. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Marvolo Gaunt's Ring b. Diary of Tom Riddle c. Slytherin's Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Nagini f. Voldemort g. Harry Potter's Scar Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's patronus is a spider. Snape's boggart is himself as a failure (I really have no idea.) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape wants the power/horcrux that is inside Harry (for himself). HBP p510-511 "By attempting to kill you, Voldemort himself singled out the remarkable person who sits here in front of me, and gave him the tools for the job! 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 (which, incidently, is a gift any Death Eater would kill to have), you have never been seduced by the Dark Arts, never, even for a second, shown the slightest desire to become one of Voldemort's followers!" 2. Harry saved Ginny's soul from Riddle's horcrux in CoS and Ginny will save Harry in DH. (Ginny will remember something important that Tom Riddle told her.) CoS, Page 310 "If I say it myself, Harry, I've always been able to charm the people I needed. So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be exactly what I wanted....I grew stronger and stronger on a diet of her deepest fears, her darkest secrets. I grew powerful, far more powerful than little Miss Weasley. Powerful enough to start feeding Miss Weasley a few of my secrets, to start pouring a little of my soul back into her..." 3. Voldemort will take back the horcrux that is inside of Harry; unfortunately, that horcrux is now infused with love and it will kill him. We know after this last book that a Horcrux does not have to be confined to an object. "The Snake?" said Harry, startled. "You can use animals as Horcruxes?" "Well, it is inadvisable to do so," said Dumbledore, "because to confide a part of your soul to something that can think and move for itself is obviously a very risky business" (HBP, p506). At the end of OOTP Voldemort has to flee from Harry's mind because he feels the love Harry has for Sirius. Love will kill Voldemort. 4. Snape was in love/obsessed with Lily. 5. Hermione will solve the mystery behind Snape (that he is out for himself) when she views Harry's memories in a penseive. She will also notice things that were missed by Harry and Dumbledore. Vivian From horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 1 14:03:44 2007 From: horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk (horadesiesta) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 14:03:44 -0000 Subject: My current opinion of Snape (Longish) / Re: Clues to Snape's Loyalties In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171083 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Yet Hermione does not seem to hate Snape. She does not precisely > take his side, but she is able to step back. In book 1, she speaks > approvingly of Snape's logic, a quality lacking in many wizards. Clara adds: HP and the PS, chapter 16, Through the Trapdoor: Hermione says: "This isn?t magic - it?s logic - a puzzle. A lot of the greatest wizards haven?t got an ounce of logic, they?d be stuck in here for ever." 1. I think that all the way back in Book 1, JKR was pointing out to us that Snape, apparently responsible for the potion bottle test, might not actually be the Pure-blood Slytherin everyone thought him to be. (Did anyone pick up that clue?) 2. Maybe, in a foreshadowing of book 1 to events in the last book, Snape will help to defeat Voldemort and co. using logic. (I?m still working on how, exactly.) Clara, who is prepared to lend Snape her copy of Edward De Bono. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 15:17:35 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:17:35 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171084 This month features Godric. Godric Gryffindor Medieval (precise dates unknown) One of the four famous Founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Godric Gryffindor was the most accomplished dueller of his time, an enlightened fighter against Muggle-discrimination and the first owner of the celebrated Sorting Hat. Alla: I wonder whether the fact that Godric was the most accomplished dueller of his time can give us any hints about DH? I mean, the fact that he was an enlightened fighter against Muggle discrimination while pleases me a lot to hear it again, nothing new, no? But Dueller? If Godric Heir, be it Harry or not is revealed, will he or she have fantastic, unmatched duelling skills? From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Jul 1 15:23:39 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:23:39 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171085 - Hey TK! Glad you're doing this again. I intend to do [much] better this time round. ;P > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Well If he dies he has to stay dead, isn't that JKR's own rule? So I'm going for NO, he doesn't die, but it may look that way for a moment. > > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Oooh... Maybe I should have said Yes, above, cause I am going to say No here too. I am going out on a limb to say that the portion of Voldemort that lives in Nagini will live, the rest of Voldie will die. > > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Hagrid. > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin > that scared him? A cursed bite of some description. Vampirish or Werewolfish or other. > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? No > b. Draco? Yes > c. Hermione? No > d. Luna? No > e. Ron? No > f. Neville? Yes > g. Ginny? Yes > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? > Bill and Fleur > > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" It has to be someone who has been trying to so I will guess Filch. > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: With Dumbledore gone Hogwarts is hellbound I'm guessing. It will be Slytherin all the way. > a. Head Boy? Draco Malfoy > b. Head Girl? Pansy Parkinson > c. DADA Instructor? Voldemort somehow (don't ask how I can't imagine I just think it will be) > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Narcissa? > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall (Imperio'ed) > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Harry. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > a. Diary > b. Gaunt Ring > c. Hufflepuff Cup > d. Slytherin locket > e. Ravenclaw Wand > f. Nagini > g. In Voldemort I add there is an extra one, unwittingly made by Voldemort and it will be his downfall it's part of Harry. > > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > > Unicorn = patronus > being nice to Harry = boggart (LOL This is flyingmonkey's answer but I love it ! ) > > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, definitely. Ron and Hermione will venture into it. > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > 1 Harry will use a dark magic he acquires from the Ravenclaw Wand horcrux, he will inadvertantly hurt someone of the side of Good with it. > 2 Viktor Krum will be involved in the final battle against the breeding Dementors > 3 Caradoc Dearborn will be found alive, but not well, in the Forbidden Forest > 4 Harry Ron and Hermione will time turn back to the climactic night of OOtP and will have a major role in how the night turned out. > 5 Snape will save Ginny's life. > From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jul 1 15:41:35 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:41:35 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171086 > > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > > If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, > write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters > or characteristics of new character for full credit. > > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No > > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes > > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Peter Pettigrew (Lupin will be soul sucked by dementors, alas) > > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? The Dark Mark > > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? > b. Draco? > c. Hermione? > d. Luna? > e. Ron? > f. Neville? > g. Ginny? Yes to all, but Hogwarts will not open til Oct 31 of Year Seven, after Voldemort's final defeat > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur > > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Argus Filch > > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ron Weasley > b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger > c. DADA Instructor? Tonks > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? He's Dumbledore's man, through and through > > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > a. In Voldemort > b. The Diary (destroyed) > c. The Ring (destroyed) > d. The Locket (last seen at Grimmauld Place_ > e. Hufflepuff's Cup > f. Rowena Ravenclaw's Wand > g. In Harry > > > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Albus Dumbledore Boggart: Dead!Harry > > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love > > > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in > your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be > scored. > > 1. Lupin killed Sirius > 2. Petunia was once a member of the Order > 3. All Ron's brothers will die (I *hate* this. But he saw himself standing alone in the mirror and I fear that will come true at a terrible cost.) > 4. Peter Pettigrew did not kill 12 Muggles or AK Cedric Diggory > 5. Percy is a spy for the Order Pippin From muellem at bc.edu Sun Jul 1 15:56:34 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:56:34 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171087 colebiancardi: illegally top-posting. Yes,yes, I will join in the reindeer games :) > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? no > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Hagrid (first choice) Lupin (second choice) > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? The Dark Mark > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? no > b. Draco? no > c. Hermione? yes > d. Luna? yes > e. Ron? yes > f. Neville? yes > g. Ginny? yes > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ron > b. Head Girl? Hermoine > c. DADA Instructor? there will be no DADA class in DH > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore, of course!! > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. > a. Diary > b. Ring > c. Hufflepuff cup > d. Nagini > e. The Tiara in the RoR(which Harry marked the cupboard where he hid the HBP's potion book) > f. The locket(which Kreacher has) > g. Harry's scar (oh my, did I become a Horcrux!Harry convert!!) > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Boggert: Lord Voldemort Patronus: A Dragon > > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Room of "Love" > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > 1. Regulus will play a huge role in DH - he isn't quite dead yet. 2. The identification of all but one of the Horcruxes will be easy-peasy for the Trio 3. Snape's reason for turning against the DE's is due to Regulus's *death* 4. Harry will be able to talk to Sirius in DH, although briefly 5. MoM will be an unexpected ally for the Trio and will join forces with the OotP. colebiancardi From ida3 at planet.nl Sun Jul 1 16:17:50 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:17:50 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171088 zgirnius: > Interesting point, I had not thought of it. Though I suppose > Dumbledore might not believe the 'right' baby could die at the > hands of a DE ('either must die at the hand of the other'). Dana: That part of the prophecy would also only count if LV had marked the boy as his equal. Harry before he was marked as LV's equal could have been killed like any other kid on the block. So without LV's involvement in the killing of the baby there would not have been the "right" baby. It was LV's choice what made the baby become the one the prophecy was refering to. It could have been Neville if LV had chosen him. zgirnius: > Just stepping in here, to point out that *if* Dumbledore chose to > sacrifice his own life on the Tower by *asking* Snape to kill him > (he did say please ) rather than attempt a rescue, this was > surely not a cold, calculating, evil decision, but a noble act of > self-sacrifice. And Snape could have walked away if he wanted to, > like any other Order member. In other words, the Tower scene > meaning what *I* believe it means in no way makes lizzyben's view > of the prophecy events more likely. Dana: Killing splits the soul (pg 465 UKed PB chapter "Horcruxes") that is what Slughorn stated and no where in canon, is it said that justified killing would not split the soul in the same way. It is not just murder that splits the soul, it is killing another human being. Sirius specifically stated that Barty's method of fighting the DEs with their own methods made him as bad as the DEs themselves. To Barty killing of a DE might have been justified and in any legal system in the world it might be but to DD it does not and therefore DD would never ask Snape to kill him and split his soul. DD would not sacrifice just his own life but Snape's soul which is a violation; it is against nature (same page as previous quote) You can't ask someone to kill you and sacrifice that person's soul that is not what self-sacrifice means and it is not an act of good. Maybe in our distorted world we believe that there is some type of justified killing of another human being because we have become so accustomed to it, that we do not see that a life is still the most precious thing we have in this world. Without life everything else is meaningless. Snape made a vow that prevented him from doing the right thing and DD, all through the books, let people come to their own choices. Snape made a choice in the beginning of the year that it would be either his life or that of DD and that choice affected the choices he had to make throughout the year and on the tower. He sacrificed DD because of his own human weakness and theorizing that he did it because he was asked/ ordered, takes away the responsibility of his actions and choices. Something everybody had to face the entire story but for some reason no one wants Snape to face his. Lizzyben's view included another "Snape is not responsible for his own choices" because DD ordered Snape to bring the prophecy to LV and she also included that DD sacrificed himself by having Snape kill him on the tower. That is why I included it in my post. You can't sacrifice your own life by asking someone to kill you and if Snape indeed never killed before, it would mean that he would have to damage his own soul to perform this act. That would mean fighting evil with evil something we are specifically shown through out the books, is not the way of good. DD does not believe you can fight evil with evil and that Harry can only defeat LV because he has an undamaged soul and a heart filled with a power LV detests. Harry was extremely lucky that Snape indeed was there, even though Snape did not safe Draco to help Harry keep his soul intact. Therefore to even think that DD would ask such a horrible thing, something that is in violation with nature, to do for him or on his orders would not be an act of good and would be morally wrong to ask of anyone. In my opinion there is a lot of assuming going on that Snape would know Harry was there or that he would know DD was dying but to me it doesn't matter because Snape made a choice in the beginning of the year that left him no room to do the right thing on the tower. If Snape had not done that then he could have prevented Draco from ever coming to one single attempt. He therefore as DD expected of him could keep everybody safe *before* Draco would do anything that would pass the point of no return. But everything he did on the tower was directed by the vow he took and therefore whatever Snape thought was his only option it can never in my book be considered anything else then an act of evil on Snape's part. To me the flight of the Prince and Snape's face reflecting pain was when he realized that there had been a witness to the events on the tower and thus Snape realizing there would be no way back from this now. If no one had witnessed how DD died then Snape could claim, what many readers claim, that he led the DEs out of the castle as fast as he could to protect everyone but that he was to late to safe DD. But now with Harry as a witness he could no longer do so. I believe that Snape would have tried to kill Harry if Buckbeak had not intervened. To me Snape mocking Harry and raging on about Harry's filthy father was just Snape thinking Harry was on watch with the other kids and coming after him because Snape told the DEs it was over implying he was one of them. Snape did not know what DD was doing that night. How do I know this? Because DD specifically stated to Harry that Harry needed to go and WAKE UP Snape (pg 545 chapter "the lighting-struck tower). DD did not have Snape on alert; he was expecting Snape to be asleep. No one knew besides Ron and Hermione that DD had taken Harry with him. To me that was Snape's original plan to have everybody think the DEs killed DD when Draco failed. Snape had never planned to come off that fence but Harry ruined it for him. If Snape truly had done the most difficult job of his life that night why is he not yelling at Harry like he did to Hermione in PoA that he does not understand? Why is he mocking Harry instead of having pain attached to his face the entire time he faces Harry if he knew from the moment on the tower that Harry was there? No, his face only chances when Harry made it known to him he saw what Snape did. That he killed a defenceless and wandless man. Snape is indeed not a coward for trying to pull of the murder of the only man that trusted him, with the intention to pretend he is still on the same side. It is my interpretation of canon and part maybe speculation but we will see if JKR would ever find it justified to ask someone to kill you or that she made Snape spin himself into a death end. zgirnius: > I disagree, it is canon that Dumbledore said so, but not that it > was the truth. I *believe* it was, just as you do, but there is > no "proof" that we are right (for the next three weeks). If a > poster believes Dumbledore would set Voldemort on the Potters for > the greater good, surely she can also believe that the same > Dumbledore would lie to Harry for that same greater good. Dana: The poster can believe whatever she wants that is her right as an individual but where is the proof that DD lied to Harry. And if there isn't any proof that DD lied to Harry then his own promise that he never would lie to him is proof. The greater good does not exist if you have to lie about it. If you truly believe that you are doing the right thing then you do not have to resort to lying. That is indeed what Snape does to Fudge in PoA and again in OotP when he tells DD that he had no way of knowing Harry would still believe Sirius was in danger while we know that Snape never came back to fill Harry in that Sirius was safe, something that I still do not understand because if Snape was convinced he was right then why would he need to lie. Snape never stated for instance to DD that he believed Harry to be incapable of getting away from Umbridge or that he did not believe Harry would find away to get to the DoM. He specifically states that he did not know Harry still believed Sirius to be a captive of LV. Lying makes something false and if you have to bend the truth to make it look better then you know that what you are doing is wrong. If you actually believe in what you are doing is for the greater good then you stand by your decision and you face up to the responsibility of that decision. You do not lie about it. Every single thing in these books would fall apart if it had all been planned by DD and pretty much the entire story as it stands now would become a lie too. zgirnius: > Surely what matters most is not why Snape changed, but *that* he > did (assuming he did, naturally)? If Snape truly ceased to serve > Voldemort for whatever reason lo these 20 years ago, and switched > to helping the Order 'at great personal risk', those > actions/choices of Snape's are good rather than evil. One can > disapprove of his reasons and think it preferable for him to have > more noble ones, but if he is risking discovery and death to help > the good guys, that's 'good' enough for me. Dana: Every Order member was working for the Order at great personal risk. Snape taking risks was not bigger then that of anyone else. They were all opposing the same man and they all risked being killed by him or one of his DEs. Lupin in OotP specifically states that LV was picking them off one by one. Snape might have redeemed himself by going to DD but the reason DD gives for is his return, according to DD himself, was initiated by the choice LV made and Snape knowing the people it involved. This choice could only have been made after Harry was born so it took Snape at least 9 whole months to come to his remorse and only when LV made his decision to include a person Snape owed a debt too, did he try to prevent LV getting to the Potters. That to me raises a big red flag on the truthfulness of Snape's remorse. As I stated before, your moral values should always be on, not just when they hit close to home. You can't just switch your moral values off because you do not know the people that are going to be killed. And to me Snape is much too eager to have people killed and is to eager to claim having a hand in their deaths for me to feel comfortable with the idea that Snape truly had remorse about what he did and that the debt he owed James had nothing to do with his so-called return to the right side. Also his inactions as a spy to prevent anything on the basis that he could not have known this or that, while it was his job to find out these things is for me not a supporting factor that he did everything in his power to help the Order. Snape did not do anything that would risk discovery because he was sent by LV to spy on DD and so he himself was actually safer then any other Order Member because Snape was with DD on LV's orders and as Bella in Spinner's End confirmed other DEs knew this as well. DD kept Snape away from the Order so Snape would never have risked being seen with any of them and he was supposed to be close to DD. The only thing Snape did that risked his life for awhile was staying on as a teacher after LV's down fall and thus being considered to live in DD's pocket but cleaver Snape had not closed all the doors to the past behind him and so Lucius could vouch for him there as well. We never see in canon, beside DD suggesting the Fidelius charm because he was alerted by one of his useful spies, that Snape gave the Order any information that could keep them one step ahead of LV. Before LV met his downfall at GH, the Order was losing its grip and were losing Order Members at a very fast rate (no, I do not want to imply Snape had a hand in that, there is no canon to support that either). So to me Snape kept himself in a most convenient neutral position and only gave a minimum of information. He was never accused of giving the Order information while even DD could detect there being a spy in their midst just because LV seemed to know an awful lot about the Potters movements. Bella's doubts about Snape had nothing to do with things Snape might have done before LV met his faith at GH but only his actions afterwards as she herself confirmed that Snape was where he was ordered to be. So no I'm not convinced by any of Snape's actions before or after GH that Snape really had returned to the side of good. I'm still on the fence when it comes to declaring Snape an LVM but I'm pretty darn sure that Snape would not shy away of giving LV information to help his own cause but it remains to be seen if I am right as without hard proof except Snape's own claim, that is not rebutted by either Narcissa or Bella, it falls in the category of speculation. zgirnius: > - There is an important difference between Dumbledore's story of > Snape's remorse and Dumbledore's acceptance of it, and Snape's > actions regarding Sirius. Snape regretted his action and tried to > make amends, or at least, so Dumbledore believes. Sirius, the same > twenty years after the fact, still has no regrets, so far as Snape > knows. (Snape overhears the conversation in which Sirius states > he 'deserved it'). Dana: To me there isn't because Sirius does not have to regret anything because Snape did not die or get hurt. You do not know how Sirius would have felt if Snape would have gotten hurt. Snape might have regretted his actions but he never acted like he regretted anything. He has no respect for the dead and bullies Harry from day one because he is the boy that lived, something Harry never asked for but Snape did set in motion. James saved Snape's live but Snape disrespects James risking his own life to safe his while he expects Harry to thank him on bended knee. And Snape keeping what he did a secret so no one knows what he did while he himself ran to DD to tell what Sirius did to him, is to me Snape expecting everyone to settle with DD's explanation and that he should be forgiven for his mistakes while he never forgives others for there's and never accepts DD's decision on these matters. Sirius never stated Snape deserved to be killed, he stated that it served him right (to be played a trick on in my opinion), for always trying to find out what they where up to, for trying to get them expelled. And let me state this for the record, it was again Snape's snooping around that got people into trouble only this time it was something far more serious then the risk of getting expelled or getting detention. zgirnius: > - Regarding the point that there is little virtue in doing > something because you don't want to hurt 'people you know': > Do you believe that a person who has done evil things can ever make > a choice to change? I find this hard to believe in light of your > eloquent exposition on the theme of choice in the series (snipped, > as I agree). Dana: Yes, I believe that someone who made a wrong choice can be truly sorry for what they have done and yes I wholeheartedly believe people deserve a second chance. I might not have given the feeling on this list with my posts that I'm very open-minded but I am and I sincerely looked at Snape's case from both views but I came to the conclusion that Snape's remorse doesn't sound true for me. For the simple reason that I see Snape's hatred direct his actions and it makes his moral values take a back seat so he can have his revenge played out. Snape hated James and he shows no where in canon that he is sorry James died. Snape in the shack states to Harry specifically that he would have been served well if Sirius had killed him. You'd have died like your father to arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black (pg 265 UKed PB chapter "The Servant of Lord Voldermort"). Snape is not sorry James died; it served him well, just like it would serve Harry well, because he put his trust in the wrong man. Where is Snape's remorse in this? Where do we see him feeling responsible for LV going after the Potters? That he truly felt it as his biggest regret? People might speculate that it was not his debt to James but that Snape somehow loved Lily but to me that don't matter because to me it still means that Snape was only partly truthful about his remorse. Part truths are also still part lies. So in this case you can be very sure that the part he lied about being sorry that LV interpreted the prophecy to include James and if it had only been about James then Snape would not have regretted it one bit and he actually shows through out the book that he indeed never was sorry James died as a result of what he did. Although I have no clear cut proof to show to you but I believe that DD believed Snape's story of remorse BECAUSE it included James. I believe that DD believed that Snape had overcome his hatred for James in order for him to do the right thing. I believe that is why DD in the first PS/ SS told Harry about Snape trying to keep him safe regardless of his hatred for James. That he wanted to show that no matter how much Snape might hate him that DD believed Snape would always do the right thing and not let his hatred get in the way. DD was not a fool to believe that people indeed could overcome their hatred for a person in order for them to do the right thing. James saved Snape's life (which DD tells Harry in the same story) at great personal risk because it was the only right thing to do but DD underestimated the quantity of Snape's true hatred and that Snape could never overcome this hatred. I know many have used McGonagall's statement in the hospital wing to proof that there must be more to DD's trust in Snape but read the quote again. McGonagall never states that DD told her he had an ironclad reason to trust Snape. What she really says is that DD always *hinted* at having an ironclad reason to trust Snape, the ironclad part is her own interpretation for DD's reasons about his truth in Snape. (pg 574 UKed PB Chapter "The Phoenix Lament"). DD like with James believed Snape had chosen to do what is right instead of what is easy and he truly believed that Snape showed great courage to admit he was wrong and risk his own life to safe a man that he hated with all his might. The only problem unlike James, Snape is not a Gryffindor and although Slytherin's as Phineas tells us are not cowards, they will do everything to save their own necks first. It is not for nothing that JKR let Harry cause Peter to have a debt to him. Because if the life- debt is indeed a kind of magic that would request the debtor to sacrifice his own life (no he does not have to die just risk it) to safe the person they owed the debt to, then Snape's actions to try to safe James was because this type of magic left him no other choice then to try and that to me makes his remorse story a false one. If Snape would not have been magically bound to undo bring James in direct danger when LV interpretted the prophecy in such away then I believe Snape would have done nothing. Of course we still have the possibility that Snape just used the remorse story to get close to DD because he was ordered by LV to do so. Anyway to me there are a lot of things in canon that show me that Snape let other things come in the way of making morally appropiate decisions and that he never takes one bit of responsibility for them if he can put the blame with someone else instead. Well at least until HBP because there a tiny pesky jinxs prevented him having all that he wanted. Living through the UV and get away with killing DD. He might never have set out to want to kill DD but I truly believe he thought he could get away with it but he was once again thwarted by Harry Potter. JMHO Dana From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Sun Jul 1 16:45:15 2007 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:45:15 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171089 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > This month features Godric. > > Godric Gryffindor > Medieval (precise dates unknown) > One of the four famous Founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and > Wizardry, Godric Gryffindor was the most accomplished dueller of his > time, an enlightened fighter against Muggle-discrimination and the > first owner of the celebrated Sorting Hat. > > > Alla: > > I wonder whether the fact that Godric was the most accomplished > dueller of his time can give us any hints about DH? I mean, the fact > that he was an enlightened fighter against Muggle discrimination while > pleases me a lot to hear it again, nothing new, no? > > But Dueller? If Godric Heir, be it Harry or not is revealed, will he > or she have fantastic, unmatched duelling skills? Quick_Silver: Actually I noted that JK called Godric the most accomplished dueler of his time as well. Personally I'm not a big fan of any theory involving there being heirs to any of other houses. However it could be that JK is getting the concept of a person being specifically skilled at dueling out there. People talk about how much Harry would have to learn to be able to compete with Voldemort or Snape or even Dumbledore on a magical basis yet Harry, unlike any of those three magical geniuses (who strike me as being very loner-ish), will probably have his friends/allies to share the burden. Using Snape as an example how much of his potions knowledge is actually used in a duel? Probably very little...so right there there's something that Harry doesn't have to focus on (or he can have Hermione focus on it) while Harry buffs up his fighting skills. What's more dueling is not about simply knowing magic...reaction times and the ability to make things up on the fly come into play...areas where Harry seems to be well prepared. Quick_Silver From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 1 16:55:25 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 12:55:25 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny Message-ID: <380-2200770116552546@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171090 Dana: I know many have used McGonagall's statement in the hospital wing to proof that there must be more to DD's trust in Snape but read the quote again. McGonagall never states that DD told her he had an ironclad reason to trust Snape. What she really says is that DD always *hinted* at having an ironclad reason to trust Snape, the ironclad part is her own interpretation for DD's reasons about his truth in Snape. (pg 574 UKed PB Chapter "The Phoenix Lament"). Magpie: Actually, I've never heard anyone use McGonagall's statement as proof there's more to DD's trust in Snape since, as you say, she never suggests she knows what the reason was. They use Dumbledore's own statements that he "trusts Snape completely" and point out that he has never shared *why* he trusts him completely. At one point he looks like he's going to, but he doesn't. It's an open question. Whether his reason is "ironclad" or not there's no way to know, because we don't know what the reason is. Dana: The only problem unlike James, Snape is not a Gryffindor and although Slytherin's as Phineas tells us are not cowards, they will do everything to save their own necks first. Magpie: FWIW, I wouldn't trust house distinctions too much here. Slytherins don't necessarily always choose to save their own necks--Regulus, for instance, appears to have gone to his own death the way Harry would. Draco did not choose to save his own neck on the Tower by killing Dumbledore. More importantly, if you want the character who most exemplifies choosing to save his own neck, that would be Peter Pettigrew, a Gryffindor. (Peter, of course, would have killed Dumbledore on the Tower.) Dana: Because if the life- debt is indeed a kind of magic that would request the debtor to sacrifice his own life (no he does not have to die just risk it) to safe the person they owed the debt to, then Snape's actions to try to safe James was because this type of magic left him no other choice then to try and that to me makes his remorse story a false one. Magpie: Although Peter does not act to save Harry in GoF (despite being indebted to him), and Snape does not owe a life debt to Harry. Snape's living on perfectly well having not saved James. Dumbledore starts to say he believes his remorse over finding out who the Prophecy targeted (and while yes, we shouldn't turn our ethics on and off depending on if we know the people, most all our characters do it all the time) was what caused him to return...(to something, someplace or some state of mind), but Dumbledore knows about the Life Debt too. He explicitly hints about its power to Harry re: Peter. So I don't think we can assume that Dumbledore would be tricked into thinking Life Debt-itis was true remorse. His take on Snape's feelings towards James are more complex, even knowing their history and how life debts work. -m From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 16:56:27 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:56:27 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171091 > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes, possibly excluding the soul part that is in Harry. > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Snape > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? His Dark Mark, assuming this is even discussed in DH. > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? No > b. Draco? No (or will not specified) > c. Hermione? No > d. Luna? Yes (if she stays alive) > e. Ron? No > f. Neville? Yes > g. Ginny? Yes (if she stays alive) > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur (Lupin and Tonks will be married in the epilogue). > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Mrs Figg > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Will not be specified in DH > b. Head Girl? Will not be specified > c. DADA Instructor? Will not be specified > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself, and with his Debt to James > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket (last seen in 10GP) d. Hufflepuff Cup (entrusted to Bella, hidden by the Longbottoms). e. Ravenclaw Wand (seen in Olivander's window in SS/PS) f. Harry (the soul bit in him may not be technically a Horcrux) g. Voldemort > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Will not be specified > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love > > > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Harry will have to look into Voldemort's mind and/or the soul bit inside himself in order to find and/or destroy at least one of the other Horcruxes. 2. Frank and Alice Longbottom took the Cup Horcrux from Bellatrix. She tortured them in order to find where it was, but they weren't telling. 3. During the Occlumency lessons Snape was trying to find the soul bit inside Harry, and failed. 4. Snape loved Narcissa, not Lily. 5. Arthur Weasley's Office for the Detection and Confiscation of Counterfeit Defensive Spells and Protective Objects will play a part in the search for at least one Horcrux. Neri From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jul 1 16:57:46 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 1 Jul 2007 16:57:46 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 7/1/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1183309066.9.8240.m55@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171092 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday July 1, 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 xellina at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 17:17:41 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 21:17:41 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707011017g4ef05768rbdce81a21c65df1d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171093 > > Wasn't Hagrid a Hufflepuff? I could never get this in the cannon, can a > person who attended Hogwarts and was in one house, afterwards become head of > some other? > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xellina at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 17:24:50 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 21:24:50 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Grindelwald create a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707011024qb5e6f20t6802e3357b024aba@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171094 2007/6/29, verosomm : > > I'm wondering if we know (or have a good idea) that Grindelwald created a > horcrux... > someone mentioned on here that one other wizard has created one... did JKR > say that > someone other than VD had created one? If so, I think the assumption that > it was > Grindelwald would be correct. > Cassy: I'm fairly sure that cannon does NOT mention any Grindewald horcruxes, or actually anything about Grindewald, save the fact that Dumbledore defeted him. Well, Slughorn was talking about how horcruxes are usually created, so, naturally, *someone* had to create them before, but we don't know who exactly. It could have been, say, Salazar. > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ida3 at planet.nl Sun Jul 1 19:09:14 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 19:09:14 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: <380-2200770116552546@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171095 Magpie: > Actually, I've never heard anyone use McGonagall's statement as > proof there's more to DD's trust in Snape since, as you say, she > never suggests she knows what the reason was. They use Dumbledore's > own statements that he "trusts Snape completely" and point out that > he has never shared *why* he trusts him completely. At one point he > looks like he's going to, but he doesn't. It's an open question. > Whether his reason is "ironclad" or not there's no way to know, > because we don't know what the reason is. Dana: Then I suggest you search the list on the word ironclad and see what comes up but just too save you the trouble, here are just a handful of those the search came up with. (Just picked the first few the search came up) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/170019 Carol: But we still don't know DD's "ironclad reason" for trusting Snape because he didn't reveal it. All he said was that he trusted Severus snape completely. We can't judge whether that reason is "airtight" until we read it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169849 Carol responds: Well, yes. But what DD was still concealing as of the end of HBP is his "ironclad" reason for trusting Snape, which is not what Harry presents it to be in the hospital wing and which is not the same as Snape's reason for returning to our side. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169772 Jen: Dumbledore trusted him even after the Potters died, after Sirius died, up to and through the night he himself died, but it doesn't mean Dumbledore's ironclad reason will be the whole of Harry's trust as well. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169618 Kvapost now: Oooh, delicioso! Snape having his own Horcrux(-es?)! I'm just thinking of that ironclad reason for DD to trust Snape. Laurel: I think the "iron clad reason" is another Unbreakable Vow, that Snape made with Dumbledore when Snape turned to the Good Side. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/168302 Carol: McGonagall, who trusts Snape only because DD does once she finds out that he's been a Death Eater? Clearly not. She states that she doesn't know the "ironclad reason" for DD's trust in Snape. Hagrid, whom DD would trust with his life but would be foolish indeed to trust with a secret not protected by a Fidelius charm? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/167072 Bart: A major mystery through the books was: Why did Dumbledore trust Snape so much? Dumbledore let it be known that he had an ironclad reason to do so, but, other than hints, he never actually stated his reason. Magpie: > FWIW, I wouldn't trust house distinctions too much here. Slytherins > don't necessarily always choose to save their own necks--Regulus, > for instance, appears to have gone to his own death the way Harry > would. Draco did not choose to save his own neck on the Tower by > killing Dumbledore. More importantly, if you want the character who > most exemplifies choosing to save his own neck, that would be Peter > Pettigrew, a Gryffindor. (Peter, of course, would have killed > Dumbledore on the Tower.) Dana: Actually I wasn't but I should have made it clear and so you are definitely right. I actually meant that DD would not understand the quality of courage and the difference when it comes to James and Snape and that he made a mistake in thinking that they indeed where the same. But I do not deny I chose my words wrongly in trying to make my point. My point was actually that Gryffindor's would put themselves in the line of fire directly when doing the right thing, while Slytherin's take the risk indirectly and would minimize it as much as they can. Regulus if he indeed was R.A.B did not face LV directly when he found out LV's secret and left it to chance it would be discovered, his imminent death had nothing to do with the possibility that LV would discover that he swapped the real locked for a fake one, as the note specifically states that he expects to be dead before LV reads that note. Draco tried to have DD killed by letting someone else bring him deathly objects and bringing DEs into the castle was not Draco's choice but he was ordered to get them in. So Draco's direct confrontation with DD was not a way Draco himself wanted to deal with it and he actually couldn't do it in this way while he had no problem sending the objects to DD. If DD had died from them then it would have been enough for Draco, he never wanted to have a face to face with DD. And to me his use of Madam Rosemerta clearly indicates to me that Draco thought about himself first as he did not want to be implicated in these attempts. Peter faced Sirius head on to get himself out of trouble with the DEs after LV's downfall, that is not a lovely thing to boost about but he nevertheless did. Snape hid his remorse behind LV's orders and never closed the door to support his defection. DD makes use of this in GoF but it changes nothing that Snape did not put himself in the line of fire to help out someone else and the only time we see Snape do it, is in an evil packed to have DD killed and as I stated in my pervious post I truly believe that Snape would have tried to get away with it and blame the other DEs for DD's death. James on the other hand put himself between Snape and the werewolf to prevent Snape getting hurt. Sirius puts himself (although it failed due to Peter's betrayal) in the line of fire to keep his friend safe and in PoA he again puts himself in the line of fire to take out Peter without any thought about the consequences to himself and OotP he does so again when Harry is in trouble while he could have gotten caught in the process. Harry puts himself in the line of fire over and over again to help out others. The courage they have is different of that of a Slytherin and they do not think about the consequences it might have for themselves, when they do something for someone else. Peter might be the exeption to the rule because he only does so to help himself but even Neville puts himself in the line of fire and so does DD himself on more then one occassion where he takes the heat to protect Harry. I believe that DD believed Snape did the same thing that Snape chose to do the right thing regardless of the consequences to himself but as we see in Spinner's End that was never so. Snape covered his own ass first before he acted on his so-called remorse and he kept enough of his options open so he would never be implicated in betraying LV. Magpie: > Although Peter does not act to save Harry in GoF (despite being > indebted to him), and Snape does not owe a life debt to Harry. > Snape's living on perfectly well having not saved James. Dumbledore > starts to say he believes his remorse over finding out who the > Prophecy targeted (and while yes, we shouldn't turn our ethics on > and off depending on if we know the people, most all our characters > do it all the time) was what caused him to return...(to something, > someplace or some state of mind), but Dumbledore knows about the > Life Debt too. He explicitly hints about its power to Harry re: > Peter. So I don't think we can assume that Dumbledore would be > tricked into thinking Life Debt-itis was true remorse. His take on > Snape's feelings towards James are more complex, even knowing their > history and how life debts work. Dana: Yes, Peter does, he tried to persuade LV to change his mind, even Snape, in Spinner's End, says he is not stupid enough to try. I do not think the life-debt is something like an UV that would kill you if you do not honor it but that it pushes you to act when the person you owe it to comes in direct danger. We see that Snape does not feel any responsibility for the Potters ending up death because James chose to put his truth in the wrong man (which he actually did but that as a side note). We see as canon stands now that Snape did nothing more then alert DD that LV was planning to attack the Potters. If Peter had not betrayed the Potters then it would have been sufficient enough to keep the Potters safe and with it Snape would have released himself from the debt. Snape himself was at Hogwarts the night LV went to GH so he did not know that the Potters were in danger of dying that night so he was not bound to act. Another option and I think that is more likely is that you can't be the cause for someone's dead when you owe that person a debt. Snape would have been the cause for LV hunting the Potters and this would make him directly responsible for James's death but after he gave DD information and as a result they put the Fidelius Charm in place he would no longer be the cause for their deaths if LV would be able to get to them, Snape released himself of that responsibility eventhough the debt itself was never settled. Peter by helping LV get himself a body would be directly responsible for Harry's death if as a result of his help LV killed Harry. Peter tries to convince to use another wizard but LV had already made up his mind. Peter was still responsible but Harry never died and so neither did Peter. Of course a third option is that it is a combination of both. DD knows about the debt and if it is as I suggest in the later option or a combination of the above then he at that time would not consider Snape's actions to be debt related because at that time LV was not hunting the Potters themselves yet. I believe that LV had not made his choice between the Potters and the Longbottoms when Snape went to DD and that Snape only knew at the time that it could involve the Potters when LV would make his final choice. Remember that the Fidelius was put in place only one week before the Potters died and that it was a direct result of a warning from one of DD's useful spies. Therefore DD did not know Snape actions where Snape trying to release himself from the debt before he had to do something that would put himself into direct danger and Snape settled himself at Hogwarts no longer able to know what LV was up to. No Snape trying to keep Sirius safe as he was supposed to be the SK and if LV wanted to get to the Potters then he needed to go through the SK to get there. No checking up on the progress of LV's actions because as long as Snape did not know anything about it then he was not responsible for it. But Snape was somehow able to act just one week before while he was at that time also already at Hogwarts. I totally agree that DD believed that Snape's feelings towards James were more complex and that he believed Snape truly had overcome these feelings because he suddenly realized that he what he had done. That he believed that Snape would always do the right thing because he was man enough to face is mistakes eventhough he hated the man it involved. DD misjudged Snape being far more calculated and sophisticated in shoving off responsibilities for his actions and that Snape would have never risked his own life to save James and he actually never did. JMHO Dana From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 18:30:19 2007 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (constancevigilance) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 18:30:19 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus (CV's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > CV: > > 2. Peeves will have an important function. He may go through the > > veil, since not being alive, he should have no problem coming back > > out. > > SSSusan: > I love this idea! CV: thank you. > > CV: > > 3. Lupin will duel to the death with Fenrir Greyback. > > SSSusan: > Oooh, oooh! To which one's death?? CV: actually, I think they both may go down. Lupin pulls a bloody sword from the expiring Fenrir and then collapses with just enough strength to make a final goodbye speech. > > CV: > > 17 - and FINALLY!!! That we will see Quirrell again. The Man with > > Two Faces, Quirinus Janus, The God of Beginnings and Endings. > > SSSusan: > I was getting worried! All the way to #17 with no mention of the Q- > man. > CV: (psst) Look at item #1 in my list (quoting): 1. A character everybody believes is dead will re-appear. In the flesh. Not Dumbledore. (OK, I was hedging for points, but everybody KNOWS who I was talking about.) The Q-man may not actually make an appearance, but I'm certain that at least part of my scenario will turn out to be true. Years ago, I pegged Durmstrang as in occupied Norway (in 1945) with Grindelwald as a Nazi wizard. Since then, there has been confirmation that Durmstrang is in Norway (notice the quote niffler challenge from yesterday? Who do you think sent the owl to Accio Quote alerting them to the existence of that canon? Twas me.) Then JKR says that, yes, 1945 is significant and yes, wizards participated in WWII. My theory has played out correctly so far and gathered vindication all the way. I firmly believe that Quirrell attended Durmstrang and met Victor Krum there. Notice that both these guys mirror JKR at the time of their books - Quirrell as the troubled victim of spousal abuse in PS/SS and Krum as the international star in GoF. I think Victor (The Victor) Krum represents Quirrell (and JKR) after they have become victorious over abusive relationships. So, Victor, as the reborn Quirrell, is positioned as the hero to ride to the rescue. However, I still think that the Q-man himself will be on board, to doubly emphasize JKR's victory over her situation. > (Even if this doesn't happen, I think you should get props from JKR > herself for your creativity with this theory... just as Pippin > should for ESE!Lupin, which I also don't think is gonna pan out. ;-)) > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > CV: thank you. And look out for ESE!Pigwidgeon, too. There's something weird about that bird. From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 19:07:49 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 12:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <299093.18910.qm@web30012.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171097 Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Melanie: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Harry will not die 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Of course Voldie will die. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark on his arm. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? - yes b. Draco? - yes c. Hermione? - yes d. Luna? - yes e. Ron? - yes f. Neville? - yes g. Ginny? - yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill/Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" I'm going with Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Ernie MacMillian b. Head Girl? - Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? - Nymphadora Tonks d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? They lie with Dumbledore and the Order 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Marvolo Gaunt's Ring b. Diary of Tom Riddle c. Slytherin's Locket d. The Award for Special Service to the school (Riddle's) e. Nagini f. In Voldemort g. Harry Potter's Scar Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's patronus is a leopard Snape's boggart is himself murdering Dumbledore. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The room of love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Charlie Weasley will have a much bigger part in Deathy Hallows and will die. 2. Petunia Dursley will end up doing something to help Harry in the end after Voldemort makes an attempt to attack Harry at their home. 3. Draco Malfoy will admit that Voldemort must be stopped and help Harry in the end. 4. Love will ultimately be the downfall of Voldemort. 5. A battle will take place at Hogwarts in which all of the houses will band together and fight. --------------------------------- Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 19:30:04 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 19:30:04 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171098 Carol's responses: Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No! 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes! 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? I predict a double wedding: Fleur/Bill and Tonks/Lupin (the Ginny/Harry and Ron/Hermione weddings will be mentioned in the Epilogue and will not be part of the main story) 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg! 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? He's Dumbledore's Man through and through. > > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. Oops. There are six Horcruxes, according to Dumbledore (and I believe him). a. Riddle's diary b. The ring with the Peverell crest c. Hufflepuff's cup d. Slytherin's locket (the unopenable locket from OoP) e. Ravenclaw's wand (on the cushion in Ollivander's window) f. Nagini g. the last soul piece is in Voldemort (but he's not a Horcrux, anchoring his own soul to earth. The soul bit in him is what remains of the original soul, the part that's being anchored by the actual Horcruxes). FWIW, neither Harry nor his scar is a Horcrux, IMO. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's Boggart is Harry being killed by Voldemort, signifying Voldemort's inevitable reign over the WW. His (new) Patronus is a Phoenix symbolizing that Dumbledore is his guardian spirit. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Healer!Snape will save someone on the good side from Sectumsempra or another Dark curse. 2. Snape will release the DEs from Azkaban on Voldemort's orders and subvert Lucius Malfoy's loyalties to the good side in the process. 3. The goblin leader Ragnok will lead a rebellion. 4. One of Luna's seemingly absurd beliefs will turn out to be true. 5. Trelawney will make a third Prophecy, which will come true. Carol, hoping that she did this correctly! From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 20:15:05 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 20:15:05 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171099 > Dana: > DD is not a war leader, he is the leader of an underground fraction > that works to *oppose* LV, not to eradicate him and his DEs. > > They work against LV so he can't reach his goals but that does not > automatically mean that DD ever used deathly force in his fight > against the Dark Lord. And canon actually proofs the contrary. We, in > the battles between DEs and the Order members, never see the Order > members use unforgivable curses like the AK to win the battle. LV in > his fight against the Order seems to only ever have lost 3 DEs and he > did not loose them to the Order but to aurors and one he killed or > let him be killed himself. No where in canon can you find one person > that was killed at the hand of a Order Member (working as an Order > Member). That should be enough proof that DD did not believe in > fighting fire with fire and sacrificing innocent lives would still > fall in the category. lizzyben: I refer you to HBP, page 77: Harry says: '"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 as I can, and Voldemort too if I can manage it.' "Spoken like your mother & father & Sirius' true godson!" said Dumbledore, with an approving pat on Harry's back.' Harry is talking about killing as many Death Eaters as he can, and DD *approves*. Would he say this if he disapproved of killing DE in battle? What's more, DD encourages Harry by saying that this is what his dead parents & role model would *want*. More emotional manipulation. DD never criticizes Harry for using an Unforgivable Curse at the MOM. Harry is beginning to display a rather scary amount of hatred & anger, but here DD actually *encourages* Harry to use violence. And he invokes the memory of Harry's dead loved ones to do so. I find this passage rather despicable. DD does the same thing in the Horcrux chapter, near the end of the novel. He makes Harry think about all the loved ones LV has killed, & inflames Harry's feelings of hatred & revenge - in order to make Harry *want* to kill LV. With love, of course. Uh-huh. Consistently, while DD preaches a message of love, he is actually encouraging Harry to use violence. DD clearly believes that using deathly force against DE or LV is acceptable - what's more, he encourages Harry to use violence against them. Horrible thing to do to a teenager; smart thing to do to a weapon. Dana: > Sirius in GoF in his remarks about Barty Sr. specifically indicates > that Barty giving his aurors the authority to use unforgivables, in > their fight against the DEs, was not the way the Order fought their > battle against LV and that this decision made Barty as bad as the DEs > themselves. That was not what the Order was/ is about. lizzyben: Crouch Sr. is a good parallel to DD. I think Barty Crouch Sr. is another example of someone w/good intentions who begins to become what he is fighting against. When Hermione organizes the DA, she begins to use some of the same tactics as the DE. When DD tries to stop LV, he becomes in some ways just as ruthless & heartless as the evil he is fighting. It's like that Nitcheze quote: "Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you." DD has looked into the abyss too long. He, like Crouch Sr., has begun to adopt immoral tactics to accomplish his goals. He begins to believe that the ends justify the means, that whatever decision he makes is automatically "good", and that he has the right to sacrifice others for his cause. In this, no matter how noble DD's goals are, IMO he is using evil tactics to accomplish them. > Dana: > I disagree with you that DD made the decision to endanger 3 people to > save the lives of thousands because with this you want to imply that > DD was insincere about wanting to protect the Potters once he learned > that LV was after them. lizzyben: No, that's not what I'm saying. DD heard the prophecy before he knew who exactly it referred to. IMO, he leaked the prophecy knowing it would endanger some "nameless, faceless" person, but also might ensure LV's defeat. He knew LV would be come obsessed w/the prophecy of his death, and that this would give DD a weapon to bait or distract LV. DD only learned actual identity of the family later, when Snape reported how LV had interpreted the prophecy. Then DD arranged the Fidelius charm, etc. to protect the Potters. There's two possible interpretations of DD's actions - Puppetmaster Lite DD might have been horrified once he learned the actual identity of the family, and sincerely done everything he could to protect the Potters; while Puppetmaster Dark DD might have also intended to sacrifice the Potters to fulfill the prophecy. But DD could have leaked the prophecy, and also been sincere in later trying to protect the Potters - the two are not mutually exclusive. Dana: > If LV had given the assignment to one of his DEs to kill every boy > that was born at the end of July instead of going after the boy > himself, then the second part of the prophecy would not have been > fulfilled in these attacks but baby boys would still have died as a > result. DD knowing what LV was about does not mean that he could > predict with absolute certainty how LV was going to act. And to me > that would be an awful big gamble with human lives just on a mere > expectation on what LV might be going to do next. You might really > believe that JKR meant her epitome of goodness to be such a cold- > hearted baby killer on the mere premises it might mean the end of an > evil wizard's reign but I do not. lizzyben: But we already know that DD *did* let Snape go w/at least the first half of the prophecy. Wasn't that an awfully big gamble? Especially since you say that he couldn't predict LV's actions if he found out, & that LV might assign a DE to kill every baby born that month. DD could have prevented that risk, but he did not. The only question is whether DD's actions were deliberate or simply a reckless or naive mistake. DD is very confident in his own intelligence & his knowledge of LV. He says that it was "a stroke of good fortune" that LV only heard the first half of the prophecy. Why would he say that, when, as you say, that meant that LV would feel like it was safe to attack any baby that might fit the prophecy? How could that possibly be "good fortune"? If LV knew the whole thing, he would have an incentive to wait & not risk acting. Because he only knew half, he acted on the prophecy, attacked Harry & marked him as "his equal." That's the good fortune. DD is basically saying that the events of Godric's Hollow were "fortunate" for his cause. To me, that strongly suggests that he leaked the first half of the prophecy in order to assure that LV would act upon it. And it's beyond tactless that DD would say, in front of Harry, that it was "fortunate" that LV heard the first half & was unaware of the risk involved in killing the Potters. DD constantly makes these kinds of slips. He often seems unaware of the way his words might hurt others. Dana: > DD did not sacrifice Order members for the cause as the only one that > did not know what LV was after in OotP was Harry. Arthur as Sirius > tells his own sons made a choice to work for the Order and that they > did not understand that some things are worth dying for. The > sacrifices made are by the members own choices not DD's. DD did not > withhold information on why they needed to guard the door to the DoM. > DD does not hold Order members at gun point and state you do as I say > or else die. Bode did not die because DD sacrificed his life but he > was murdered because the DEs were afraid that he could implicate them > in what happened at the DoM. > > Everyone working for the Order does so at great personal risk, it > never was up to DD to sacrifice any of their lives and they could > walk a way at any time they had chosen to do so. lizzyben: OOTP was the moment when I jumped onto the DD-is-evil train. While I always mistrusted him, his actions in that novel showed a man who was willing to risk his followers' lives for no good reason. All the Order members, even Sirius, refer to the prophecy as a real "weapon," & risk their lives to guard it. Only DD knows the real contents, and he knows that the prophecy doesn't actually offer LV any method to defeat Harry. He also has a perfect copy of the MOM prophecy in his own office. But he doesn't tell the Order members that, so they risk their lives guarding a prophecy that is actually quite useless. One member almost dies, one goes insane, one goes to Azkaban, one is killed & for what? When Harry breaks the prophecy orb, DD waves it aside as unimportant. The only value of the MOM prophecy was as bait for LV. DD used LV's obsession w/learning the 2nd half of the prophecy in order to lure him to the MOM. The Order guards mostly served as decoys to fool LV into thinking that the prophecy was a valuable "weapon", when it was not. But it doesn't sound like DD ever informed other Order members of his actual plan. And the image of Arthur Weasley risking his life to guard a useless prophecy bothers me. I believe that Order members do pledge their lives, and their deaths, to the cause. It couldn't be any other way. They do work at great personal risk, and must follow DD's orders w/o always knowing the reasons behind them. They do so knowing that those orders might cause their death. As Arthur says, there are some things worth dying for - this indicates that Order members do join knowing that they may be asked to die for a larger cause. By joining the Order, they are pledging to be willing to sacrifice their lives. And sacrifice they do. In the first war, almost all the Order members are either killed or drived insane. It does make me wonder a little about DD's leadership tactics. The way DD operates the Order is very similar to the way LV operates the DE. Both leaders require absolute loyalty & obedience. Both recruit very young members. Both are essentially cults of personality, in which followers hold their leader in awe & reverance, & follow orders w/o question. And IMO, both LV & DD often use & sacrifice their followers as pawns in their game of Wizard's Chess. They are on opposing sides, w/opposing goals (one good, one evil), but their methods are actually quite similar. Dana: > To me there is a big difference and DD specifically states to Harry > that Harry has to do nothing if he chooses to walk away but that LV > will never let it rest until Harry is death. This doesn't mean that > DD ever thought about sacrificing Harry but only that he had a plan > to not get emotionally involved and just train the boy till he was > ready to fulfill the prophecy. A prophecy LV chose to act on and in > doing so made the prophecy a true one. lizzyben: DD is training a young boy to try to defeat a powerful, psychotic wizard. Isn't that sacrificing Harry? If we believe DD, the prophecy only has meaning because LV is trying to kill Harry because of it. So why doesn't DD offer to hide Harry, & conceal his identity, as he offers Draco & Narcissa? Harry is just a kid - if LV is targeting him, DD should be trying to protect Harry, not shoving him into the confrontation. But DD doesn't ever offer to hide Harry. He's encouraging Harry to kill LV, essentially risking Harry's life & safety, in order to save the Wizarding World. It's not so different, really, from making a decision to leak a prophecy that endangers one family's life & safety, in order to defeat LV. That's why I see this decision as being perfectly in character for DD. > lizzyben: > > Why not? Thank you for arguing this w/me, because I'm really, really > > ready to be convinced. I also hope that DD wouldn't do something > > like this - but I can't deny that the evidence points in one > > direction. > > > Dana: > What evidence? That DD had a plan to train Harry until he was ready > to face LV? Because that was DD's plan, never did canon ever indicate > that DD let the prophecy leak so the Order or the WW would have a > ready weapon to defeat the Dark Lord. That is just mere > interpretation of canon by some readers that DD would be capable of > doing so. But it would actually make the whole story about Peter's > betrayal, LV's choice, Snape (to me still so-called) remorse, Lily's > sacrifice and DD's own promise to never lie become mere story fillers > because actually it had been planned from the beginning and DD lied > through all 6 books until he saw green in the face. > > And the remarks DD makes about it being our choices that make us who > we are, would just be an empty gimmick because essentially he took > away the choices of everyone involved in the story. lizzyben: I was referring to evidence that DD didn't deliberately allow the prophecy to be leaked. I was looking for evidence that proves that that could not be the case - because right now it is a plausible interpretation. But even if this theory is true, it doesn't remove the individual choices of others - Peter still betrayed, Snape still felt remorse over the bringing the prophecy, Lily still sacrificed her life, etc.; it just means that DD was the catalyst for these events. And IMO, there's already plenty of examples of DD taking away people's choices. Did Sirius choose to be imprisoned in his house? Did Harry choose to be raised in an abusive home? Did Marietta choose to be obliterated? DD cavalierly makes choices *for* people, and this is what really bothers me about him. Just as Sirius didn't always live up to his quote about treating inferiors well, DD doesn't always allow people to make independent choices. Dana: To think that JKR > wrote her epitome of goodness to be a cold-hearted calculated > controller that did not care how many innocent people died to reach > his goal, is to me missing the essence of the story in the fight > between good and evil. Because wouldn't DD's fight be exactly the > same as that of LV's? Would it then not only be all about power? Why > did DD then not take the job as MoM? He could have all the power he > ever wanted and even have more people at his disposal. lizzyben: I've never suggested that DD doesn't care how many innocent people died. What I'm saying that DD may have leaked the prophecy in order to *prevent* more deaths, by ensuring LV's defeat. He'd do this believing that "the ends justify the means", and that saving thousands of innocent people justified endangering one family. And that "epitome of goodness" quote made my jaw drop. Because whether this theory is true or not, DD has already made many decisions that I wouldn't expect an "epitome of goodness" to make (imprisioning Sirius, abandoning Harry, etc.) So that quote doesn't prove much about what DD would or would not do. And to me, the novels are not really about an epic fight between the good guys & evil guys, anyway. That's a fantasy cliche, but it isn't what happens in the HP novels. If it were, we should be seeing some LOTR-style epic battles between the forces of good & evil. The novels should widen in focus to many exterior battles, and loyalties should be known by now. But, in the next to the last novel, the novel's focus actually narrows to 4 characters - Harry, DD, Snape, & Draco. It's almost intimate, and the focus is not on the epic battles of good & evil, but the interior moral battle within these particular characters. The HP novels are fundamentally mysteries, and so the ultimate question is how "evil" or "good" an individual character is. Mystery-style, we won't really know until the end. Characters literally cross the line between good & evil often (Fake Moody, Sirius, Peter, etc.), and I think this is meant to symbolize the interior moral struggles within Harry & co. Have they crossed the moral line as well, without even knowing it? Did Dumbledore? It's about human nature, about how easy it is for people to cross theline between good & evil - as Barty Crouch Sr. did, and Snape did. In HP, morality is not really black & white, but an ever-shifting, changing blend of grays. Harry has constantly had to adjust to seeing "good" characters revealed to be evil & vice versa. Black might be white, good might be evil, & it's up the the reader to figure out the truth. Because just because a character seems to be on the "good side" does not mean his actions are always good. So, yes, IMO it would be totally within this theme if Harry learned that DD, the "epitome of goodness" actually used evil & immoral means to accomplish his goals. And this running theme makes me worry about Harry - because however devoted he is to the cause of good, he is swept up in the very emotions that led Snape to choose evil at the same age. This isn't a coincidence. JKR draws direct parallels between young Snape & young Harry - through the Potions book, the hatred & desire for revenge, & the use of Dark curses. I worry that Harry will cross the same line from good to evil himself. And part of the reason I loathe DD is because I just don't see him doing much to stop it. He almost seems to encourage it, because it serves his own purposes. Dana: > Canon never states anywhere that DD approved of having people killed > for the cause. .. I saw someone mention that DD > accepted Moody's killings of people but Moody did not kill as an > Order member but as an auror under MoM jurisdiction and always > brought in DEs alive if he could help it. lizzyben: DD encourages Harry to kill LV and as many Death Eaters as he can. That's canon. Dana: > What you are referring to with things not seeming to be as they seem > at first glance does not mean that all the books in their entire will > be turned upside down in DH and that DD will be the one that betrayed > everyone in his evil plan to take out LV. If DD as a character can't > be believed through out the entire books and not merely him making > one crucial mistake in believing someone to be trustworthy while that > person did not live up to that trust as canon stands now, then > nothing you have red in the books can be taken as truth. lizzyben: On the contrary, I think JKR has intentionally set up moral ambiguity in both Snape & DD's character from Book One. Snape is first presented as a mean, nasty person who wants to kill Harry, then it's later revealed that he tried to save Harry from danger. DD is presented as a kindly, caring mentor, but later implies that he deliberately placed Harry & co. in danger to "give him a chance" to fight LV. It's up to the reader to resolve these contradictions, & choose which view of the characters they prefer. JKR doesn't explain the ambiguity from the first novel, so up till now, it's still possible to think that Snape is a villain who wants to defeat Harry, & it's still possible to see DD as a calculating wizard who deliberately throws innocent people into danger & harm for his own ends. So, if that version of DD ends up being correct, it's not a sudden surprise, but simply a resolution of the ambiguity that DD has had from the first novel. Dana: > Peter is probably a spy for the Order too and he tricked Sirius in giving him > the SK job so he could on DD's orders betray the secret to LV. So > James, Lily died not because some evil overlord killed them but it > was all part of DD's plans to have them killed so LV would meet his > match some day with their only son. > > Lily's sacrifice was not something that happened by chance but was a > premeditated act and so was Peter's betrayal. James and Sirius lives > were both ruined for the cause without them knowing they were going > to be sacrificed. Makes Snape's actions in the shack and later in the > hospital wing even more nauseating then it already was because > everything was planned from the start and he brought the prophecy to > LV on purpose to have LV hunt down a baby boy so that baby boy could > one day defeat him and protecting the Potters had all been an act to > make sure LV chose them. Peter's betrayal was not an act of evil to > safe his own sorry ass but actually part of the plan to have LV mark > the baby boy as his equal. > lizzyben: Horror aside, you've presented a pretty coherent version of events. This explanation flows well, and explains a number of different plot holes. (Why didn't Lily apparate out? Why didn't DD save Sirius from Azkaban? etc.) It also explains most of DD's seemingly blatant mistakes, which are actually part of his sinister brilliant plan (letting Snape go w/the prophecy, imprisoning Sirius, not finding out Peter was the spy, letting "marked" Harry fight LV, etc.) Puppetmaster DD might be evil, but at least he's competent! I'd finally buy DD's reputation as a genius. So, IMO this is a possible interpretation. I don't ascribe to DD controlling everything, but I do believe he has controlled the leak of the prophecy, and used the prophecy to bait LV thereafter. Dana: > Sorry but if this will be the resolution of the series then I for one > will be very sorry to have financially supported a psychopathic > author. Luckily I am very sure that this will never be. Harry will > not learn that DD set it all up so he would be marked as LV's equal > and end up as an orphan, who could have had a great godfather but > sorry for him he needed to be taken care of as well or else he would > have messed up the plan. lizzyben: Well, here's hoping. I don't necessarily believe that DD controlled all these things, but IMO he did allow the prophecy loose, and engaged in other tactics that might shock some readers. That's not necessarily a bad thing. It's almost easy for Harry to believe that someone he hates did bad things; it would be more difficult for him to believe that someone he loves could do that. But IMO it would be a valuable lesson, because it shows that the distinction between "good" & "evil" is not as simple as Harry thinks right now. It would show that the distinction between good & evil can't be made based simply on House, or looks, or personal favoritism, or anything easy. It's based on the choices someone has made, and good people can make evil choices, and vice versa. > > > Dana: > It is canon that DD states he would never lie to Harry and that > should be enough evidence that DD did not tell a lie to Harry about > Snape and what DD believed Snape heard. Also why would Snape only > tell LV about the prophecy in part? Would that make Snape look > better? I think not because then he kept LV from the part that would > have prevented LV from waiting and learning more about why this boy > would become the one who could defeat him. It might actually have > prevented LV from ever acting on this prophecy because knowing it all > would probably have caused LV never to act on it at all because not > acting would have prevented this kid to be marked as his equal and > thus the kid never becoming the one with the power to vanquish the > Dark Lord. lizzyben: It is canon that DD *does* lie to protect his agents, so he could have lied to Harry as well in order to protect Snape. I don't see why people are so sure that DD would never lie to Harry, while admitting that he has misled, misdirected & failed to inform Harry at times. To me, the distinction is minimal. DD doesn't say in canon that he will never lie to Harry - he says that he will not lie during his explanation at the end of SS. And even in that book, Harry suspects that DD lied to him about the mirror. "Good" characters lie often in HP, and JKR doesn't always disapprove of that. If he heard the whole thing, why would Snape only report the first half? As you've stated, reporting only half of the prophecy kept LV from knowing the danger of acting on the prophecy, and ultimately ensured his defeat. A loyal DE would not do that. This is why, if Snape did hear the whole thing, IMO he was acting on DD's orders or a memory modification to only remember/report half of it. A better question, to me, is why DD would allow Snape to leave w/half of the prophecy, knowing that if LV learned this, he would probably try to attack the family. It makes sense if DD did this in order to force LV to act upon the prophecy. Dana: > You cannot use innocent people's lives just so you yourself can sleep > better at night. Who died and made you god to decide that their lives > are meaningless in light of the bigger picture? You can only decide > this about your own life if it is worth giving it up for the greater > good but you can never ever make a decision for someone else to do > so. In RL Presidents might make these decisions every day and not > lose one night sleep over who dies and who lives but that does not > make it okay. The people fighting for their cause are still human > beings that have to live with themselves killing other human beings > and most of them never recover from this. For some it is easier > because their canon meat never came close enough to actually be > recognized as human beings but this still does not make it okay. lizzyben: I totally agree. And this is why I can't stand DD, because IMO he does just that. We have a perfect right to sacrifice ourselves for a cause, but not to hurt or sacrifice others. And I see DD placing Harry, other Order members, even Hogwarts students into danger to further his noble cause. And I do not agree w/this, because he is in essence playing God w/people's lives; treating them like pawns & puppets instead of human beings. He maintains emotional distance from most people because that does make it easier for him to use people (as he thinks he must). But that all falls apart w/Harry. And good. DD loves him & is forced to see Harry as a "human being". But he still makes decisions that put Harry in danger. You might not like that, but that's part of DD's role as he sees it. Just like a president, a general, or anyone who must risk the lives of some in order to further a larger goal. Dana: > To me Snape's actions and his so-called remorse are therefore totally > false because he himself could after 20 years still not let bygone be > bygones because he was tricked in doing something that could have > gotten him killed and yet he expects everyone to forgive him > instantly because he got remorse about knowing the people LV was > planning to kill and actually did kill and if he told only part of > what he actually heard then he tricked LV in to doing something that > could have gotten him killed at the coast of a young boy and his > family and their friends. > > Don't do to others what you do not want other to do upon you. > > JMHO > > Dana lizzyben: And if DD leaked the prophecy, he is just as culpable as Snape, if not more so. Both allowed LV to hear the prophecy when it was a "nameless" person, but felt pain when it became a "real person" that they cared about. And I do believe that Snape desperately tried to protect the Potters once he realized who the targets were. In the same way, Harry mostly lived w/the fact that Snape was a DE, until he learned that Snape hurt his own parents. This doesn't mean Snape's remorse was fake, just that he didn't realize the consequences of his actions until it hurt someone he loved. Just as DD didn't realize the consequences of his schemes until it hurt Harry. The Trio also haven't felt remorse for their actions when it hurt a "nameless" person or an outsider, because they don't see them as real people. If Harry can manage to care about the consequences to all humanity, if he can learn that he does not have a right to choose other people's fates, he'll have shown himself to be more moral than either Snape or DD were. lizzyben From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 1 20:37:00 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 16:37:00 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny Message-ID: <380-2200770120370296@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171100 Magpie: > Actually, I've never heard anyone use McGonagall's statement as > proof there's more to DD's trust in Snape since, as you say, she > never suggests she knows what the reason was. They use Dumbledore's > own statements that he "trusts Snape completely" and point out that > he has never shared *why* he trusts him completely. At one point he > looks like he's going to, but he doesn't. It's an open question. > Whether his reason is "ironclad" or not there's no way to know, > because we don't know what the reason is. Dana: Then I suggest you search the list on the word ironclad and see what comes up but just too save you the trouble, here are just a handful of those the search came up with. (Just picked the first few the search came up) Magpie: Wow! Looks like I was totally wrong. When I tried to think about arguments on the list, I always thought it was Dumbledore's own behavior that made people believe that there was more to his trust in Harry. I see here you're right that people do refer to McGonagall's line a lot in talking about it. Though I don't think they're wrong--in many of these quotes it seems like people are using "ironclad reason" as shorthand for the unknown reason we see in scenes with Dumbledore. He *has* hinted that he has some reason for trusting Snape that he has not shared--though whether it's ironclad or not we don't know. McGonagall's line references that which we ourselves have seen. She agrees that he's hinted at having some mysterious reason for trusting Snape. So my bad for not remembering that this was used as proof--and as far as it goes, I think it holds up. That is, McGonagall's line doesn't prove Dumbledore's reason was really ironclad, but I disagree with what you also seem to be saying, which is that because Dumbledore only "hinted" to McG that he has a good reason and didn't actually say it, she's wrong to think it. That seems too much like lying on Dumbledore's part and also on JKR's for putting that line into the mouth of a trustworthy character. McGonagall is the kind of character who knows when she's being hinted to, and having seen Dumbledore hint myself I agree with what she's getting. He does have some reason for trusting Snape he has never shared with us or with her. It can't be something we know already, because he won't tell us. Dana: Draco tried to have DD killed by letting someone else bring him deathly objects and bringing DEs into the castle was not Draco's choice but he was ordered to get them in. So Draco's direct confrontation with DD was not a way Draco himself wanted to deal with it and he actually couldn't do it in this way while he had no problem sending the objects to DD. If DD had died from them then it would have been enough for Draco, he never wanted to have a face to face with DD. And to me his use of Madam Rosemerta clearly indicates to me that Draco thought about himself first as he did not want to be implicated in these attempts. Magpie: I was referring to Draco's decision once the DEs were there (which was his first choice for killing DD, implying a direct confrontation--he wasn't ordered to bring DEs into the castle, he was ordered to kill DD). Once they are there the way for him to save his own skin would be to kill Dumbledore, thus removing the immediate threat of punishment from LV and the DEs. He couldn't do that, even though the result of that was most likely Draco being killed himself. I do agree with your points on Gryffindors preferring direct confrontations to Slytherins seeming to prefer subterfuge. As it happens Draco's behavior, despite the B-movie sneaky murder attempts, doesn't quite follow those rules in this book, though I don't think that overturns everything. Magpie: > Although Peter does not act to save Harry in GoF (despite being > indebted to him), and Snape does not owe a life debt to Harry. > Snape's living on perfectly well having not saved James. Dumbledore > starts to say he believes his remorse over finding out who the > Prophecy targeted (and while yes, we shouldn't turn our ethics on > and off depending on if we know the people, most all our characters > do it all the time) was what caused him to return...(to something, > someplace or some state of mind), but Dumbledore knows about the > Life Debt too. He explicitly hints about its power to Harry re: > Peter. So I don't think we can assume that Dumbledore would be > tricked into thinking Life Debt-itis was true remorse. His take on > Snape's feelings towards James are more complex, even knowing their > history and how life debts work. Dana: Yes, Peter does, he tried to persuade LV to change his mind, even Snape, in Spinner's End, says he is not stupid enough to try. Magpie: That's a totally weak attempt, though, and it's months before Harry's in any danger. When Harry is tied up and actually about to die Peter doesn't act to save him. And Snape lives on fine after James' death. So it doesn't seem like OFH!Snape has to worry about his Life Debt much at all. Also, it seems like Peter's actually been very hidden about most of his attacks in canon-he made that one open, it seems to me, because he needed it public for his cover. I suspect most people probably have a mixture of things on their record, even if Gryffindors seem to far prefer an open fight where Slytherins prefer subterfuge. Dana: Another option and I think that is more likely is that you can't be the cause for someone's dead when you owe that person a debt. Snape would have been the cause for LV hunting the Potters and this would make him directly responsible for James's death but after he gave DD information and as a result they put the Magpie: I'd think Snape would still be the cause of their death in a big way, myself. Dana: DD knows about the debt and if it is as I suggest in the later option or a combination of the above then he at that time would not consider Snape's actions to be debt related because at that time LV was not hunting the Potters themselves yet. I believe that LV had not made his choice between the Potters and the Longbottoms when Snape went to DD and that Snape only knew at the time that it could involve the Potters when LV would make his final choice. Magpie: I have to say, that would make for a really lame answer in canon. I think Dumbledore's reason to trust Snape will be emotional and interesting and clear, not something that requires any explanation about the ins and outs of Life Debts and when they take effect and how to get around them by splitting hairs. Dumbledore has a reason to trust Snape. Dumbledore knows about everything Snape owes to James, and Snape's responsibility in the Potter's death. I see no way the Life Debt can be Dumbledore's reason for trusting Snape given everything we've seen. I know less about magic than DD does, and the Life Debt is obviously not able to prove anyone's loyalty even from where I sit. Dana: I totally agree that DD believed that Snape's feelings towards James were more complex and that he believed Snape truly had overcome these feelings because he suddenly realized that he what he had done. That he believed that Snape would always do the right thing because he was man enough to face is mistakes eventhough he hated the man it involved. DD misjudged Snape being far more calculated and sophisticated in shoving off responsibilities for his actions and that Snape would have never risked his own life to save James and he actually never did. Magpie: When does DD ever claim that he's thought Snape got over any feelings for James? Doesn't he say on at least two occasions that he hasn't, and even in OotP say that he overestimated Snape's ability to get over those feelings by giving him a much simpler task? I just don't think Dumbledore could ever base his entire trust in Snape on anything related to his getting over his hatred for James. -m From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 20:38:35 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 13:38:35 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40707011338l73ef4755ia73e29d5f345ff07@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171101 > This month features Godric [as JKR's wizard of the month]. > > Godric Gryffindor > Medieval (precise dates unknown) > One of the four famous Founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and > Wizardry, Godric Gryffindor was the most accomplished dueller of his > time, an enlightened fighter against Muggle-discrimination and the > first owner of the celebrated Sorting Hat. > Alla: > ... > But Dueller? If Godric Heir, be it Harry or not is revealed, will he > or she have fantastic, unmatched duelling skills? Kemper now: As Muggles duelled with swords in Gryffindor's time, I wonder what his sword can do. Hepzibah Smith claimed that Hufflepuff's cup possessed magical properties. Why not objects of other Founders as well? I do not have my book in front of me, but I think the blade is silver, not that silver means anything in the series as of yet even though it's mystical in folklore. Did the sword kill Slytherin's monster because of magical properties, or because the sword was long and pointy enough to pierce through the roof of its mouth and into its brain? I think it's odd that JKR would share the duelling part unless there's some connection to the final book. Or maybe that's just eagerness on my part for the books release. Kemper, 19 days... that's not too long From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 20:47:19 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 20:47:19 -0000 Subject: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707011017g4ef05768rbdce81a21c65df1d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171102 > >Casey: > > Wasn't Hagrid a Hufflepuff? I could never get this in the cannon, can a > > person who attended Hogwarts and was in one house, afterwards become head of > > some other? JW: In PS/SS, RH says he is a Gryffindor. I know of no reason to suspect his claim is not true. IIRC, there is no example in the first 6 books of a head of house not being an alumnus of that house. I have a vague recollection of JKR answering and confirming this in an interview. From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 20:55:33 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 20:55:33 -0000 Subject: Did Grindelwald create a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707011024qb5e6f20t6802e3357b024aba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171103 > > Cassy: > > I'm wondering if we know (or have a good idea) that Grindelwald created a > > horcrux... > > someone mentioned on here that one other wizard has created one... did JKR > > say that > > someone other than VD had created one? If so, I think the assumption that > > it was > > Grindelwald would be correct. > > > > Cassy: > I'm fairly sure that cannon does NOT mention any Grindewald horcruxes, or > actually anything about Grindewald, save the fact that Dumbledore defeted > him. Well, Slughorn was talking about how horcruxes are usually created, so, > naturally, *someone* had to create them before, but we don't know who > exactly. It could have been, say, Salazar. JW: In the cemetery scene, LV says words to the effect that he "has gone FURTHER than any other wizard has in achieving immortality." DD's interprestation is that LV is the first to create MULTIPLE horcruxes. I have a vague recollection that JKR has said that Grindelwald did indeed create a single horcrux. Presumably, either DD knew of this and destroyed it to defeat G, or else the existence of the horcrux did not prevent DD from defeating G. Please note that DD DEFEATED G. I assume this is different from KILLING him. So what ever happened to him? From harryp at stararcher.com Sun Jul 1 22:37:06 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:37:06 -0000 Subject: What Little Niggling Details will be left? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171104 > Siriusly Snapey Susan (cubfanbudwoman): > Just what do you all believe will > go UNANSWERED from among those things which are driving you nuts? Eddie: I want to know what would happen to a ghost who passed through the "Veil of Death" (at the MoM) that killed Sirius. Suppose Nearly-Headless Nick got tired of his current nearly-headless existence and decided to end it all. Could he this way? For reference, he might actually want to. It has been 500 years after all: Quote from OOTP, Chapter 38 The Second War Begins: 'I was afraid of death,' said Nick softly. 'I chose to remain behind. I sometimes wonder whether I oughtn't to have well, that is neither here nor there in fact, I am neither here nor there ' He gave a small sad chuckle." The only way I can imagine that the divine Ms. R would actually answer my question is if it were an integral part of the Deathly Hallows plot. Could he carry a horcrux with him? Or could he return? Perhaps he could be a message carrier? Eddie From harryp at stararcher.com Sun Jul 1 22:42:37 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:42:37 -0000 Subject: SnapeGag/HxHunt/Ginny/LND/LostMagic/Brave/MoreLND/PoA/SnapeHouse/More things In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171105 > Catlady: > Phoenixgod2000 wrote in > : > > << I've always been of the opinion that Harry losing his magic is > actually worse than him dying. (snip) If he flees the wizarding world, > he has to live in the muggle world and he is totally unprepared for > that considering his muggle education goes to about 5th grade. >> > > Between Harry having inherited enough money to live on, and most of > the subject material learned in school being useless, Muggle!Harry has > plenty of time to make up his missing Muggle education. If the WW > continues to exist, Muggle!Harry could go into the import-export > business, importing Muggle goods to the wizarding world and importing > wizarding products to the Muggle world. > > If the whole wizarding world is destroyed (some people survive but all > lose their magic), he would have to come up with a purely Muggle > career. Eddie: He's also a key investor in George & Fred's shop. If they keep going at their current rate, Harry could live on the returns from that investment. He could even work for G&F at the shop for a living. He could advertise (He IS the most famous face in the Wizarding World), "Lost your magic powers? Still want to jinx your friends? Weasley's Wizarding Wheezes are just the thing!" etc. Eddie From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 22:48:59 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:48:59 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171106 Dana wrote: Killing splits the soul (pg 465 UKed PB chapter "Horcruxes") that is what Slughorn stated and no where in canon, is it said that justified killing would not split the soul in the same way. It is not just murder that splits the soul, it is killing another human being. Sirius specifically stated that Barty's method of fighting the DEs with their own methods made him as bad as the DEs themselves. To Barty killing of a DE might have been justified and in any legal system in the world it might be but to DD it does not and therefore DD would never ask Snape to kill him and split his soul. DD would not sacrifice just his own life but Snape's soul which is a violation; it is against nature (same page as previous quote) vmonte; I agree with everything you've said. I've also said the same things time and again. I've said this before, but here I go again: I can't follow the logic of those that say that Dumbldore was asking Snape to murder him. So, the idea is that Dumbledore is trying to save Draco's soul and when he sees Snape he pleads with him via legimens/occlumens (whichever applies) to strike him down for Draco's sake? Why not just have Snape grab Draco by the scruff of his collar and drag his ass into hiding instead. Then get his mother and ship them off together. Who cares what Draco says--I mean your still keeping him from doing something that is wrong--right? So, instead, Dumbledore says: "I'm dying anyway, the best thing for you to do would be to kill me Snape---pleeeeease. I realize that I've not given you the job of DADA because I was afraid that you might go back to the dark side (and start killing again) but you know what? Forget what I said. JUST DO IT---PLEEEEASE." Doesn't it make more sense that Snape was forced to kill Dumbledore because he made a pact with Narcissa to finish the mission Voldemort set for Draco (since Draco wasn't able to do it). If Snape did not kill Dumbledore, Snape would die, no? Wasn't that the pact? It seems more in character to me that Snape felt he had to kill Dumbledore because there was no way he was going to die because of Draco's failure. Snape evens shoves Draco aside as he walks up to kill Dumbledore. He shows no tender compassion for Draco's struggle. Snape is not the kind of guy that would die for anyone---JMO. When he sees that Draco cannot kill, the only thing he can do is kill Dumbledore, grab Draco, and run the hell out of there before anyone can stop him. And what about Harry? A few months ago he watched Sirius die. And now he has to helplessly watch Dumbledore get murdered? Do you really think that Dumbledore would do that to Harry? That would be horribly cruel. Isn't Harry traumatized enough? There are clues to Snape's personality. He is very clever. He has the ability to talk himself out of anything. He has both Voldemort and Dumbledore believing that he is on their side. According to JKR it takes a certain sort of person to become a DE: _ It takes someone who is filled with hatred - Enjoys inflicting pain on those that are weak or helpless - Someone who can easily deny/suppress their emotions - Someone who is cruel - Can murder others... - Snape also mistreats those he feels are beneath him - He has delusions of grandeur - He changes his name like Tom Riddle and creates a new persona for himself--he reinvents himself: 'TA DAH I'm the Half-Blood-Prince!' (Is that his Super Villain name?) - He is obsessed with the dark arts--he even invents more killing curses (nice hobby) - He is rather sadistic and enjoys manipulating people with his words (He reminds me of Iago) - He holds grudges (the grudges are even against the children of the people he hates) - He is emotionally stunted - He has probably killed several (many?) people since his previous profession was being a DE - And he is so scary when he kills Dumbledore that even the baby eating werewolf steps away from him in fear---LOL! From jmestacio at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 19:52:46 2007 From: jmestacio at yahoo.com (-jme-) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 12:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <432170.43703.qm@web32505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171107 > SnapesSlytherin: > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > Patronus: I don't think he can...I don't think he has a happy enough memory to make a Patronus... Eddie: Maybe this is why he prefers a different way of fighting off Dementors than Harry. argentumangela: he does have a patronus. remember that the order communicates via patronus? and that each of them most likely has their own unique ones since they know who sent the message depending on the patroni "Fairytales are are more than real. Not because they tell us that dragons exist but because they tell us that they can be defeated." [GK Chesterton] --------------------------------- Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 1 21:27:46 2007 From: dragonkeeper012003 at yahoo.com (dragonkeeper) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:27:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <726950.96420.qm@web53301.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171108 Casey, I suspect Hogwarts is based on private school in Great Britain where the Head Master will place who they feel is most qualified for what position is needed and that would include Head of Houses regardless if they were alumni or not of that house. David: Flitwick could be appointed to Gryffindor if the new head master made the appointment such a measure. David From juli17 at aol.com Sun Jul 1 23:41:28 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 19:41:28 EDT Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171109 As some people are understandably eager to make their predictions known, here we go! Note *minor* question changes. RAYOR SPOILER ALERT: THESE RULES INCLUDE ONE VERY SMALL DH SPOILER GLEANED FROM AN INTERVIEW WITH DAVID YATES, THE OOTP MOVIE DIRECTOR AND REFERENCES TO THE RELEASED COVERS. Rules: Copy these questions and email your answers *both* to *tigerpatronus* *at* *yahoo* *dot* *com* and to the newsgroup. You must email your entry to TigerPatronus to be entered in the contest. You will receive an email confirmation of your entry. In the event of a dispute, the entry posted to the group will be your back-up. Deadline: Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 11:59 pm (midnight) EDT. (No Friday entries will be accepted.) Any details released by JKR or subsidiaries are worth no credit *after* they are released. Example: if you predict that "The trio will ride a dragon,'" it will be worth 0 points. However, if you make a prediction *and email your prediction to the list and to TigerPatronus* and *then* the detail is released, you will get full credit. If you are JKR, work at the publishing company, hacked Bloomsbury's computers, or have somehow else have already read the book, don't enter. We will find out, hunt you down, and give you a virtual thermonuclear wedgie. Specificity will be rewarded. Brevity is . . . wit. All decisions of the judges (TigerPatronus and her Minions) are arbitrary, ruthless, and final. (Minion recruitment will begin soon.) Prizes: Grand Prize (1): Bragging rights in perpetuity. All HPfGU members must address you as "Your Brilliance," "Leader of the Intelligentsia," "The HP-est," or another superlative title of your own choosing. A filk will be composed in your honor. A year's worth of free butterbeer. Honorable Mentions (10): Bragging rights in perpetuity. All HPfGU members must address you as "Pretty Smartie," "A Member of the Intelligentsia," "Quite HP-ish," or a subordinate title of your own choosing. A free case of butterbeer. Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? HAGRID. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? THE DARK MARK. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? BILL & FLEUR 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" ARABELLA FIGG 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? THEODORE NOTT b. Head Girl? HERMIONE GRANGER c. DADA Instructor? BILL WEASLEY d. Potions Master or Mistress? SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? MCGONAGALL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Albus Dumbledore and his cause to defeat Voldemort. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Voldemort has the "main" soul piece. b. The Diary (destroyed). c. The Ring (destroyed). d. Slytherin locket. e. Hufflepuff cup. f. The missing (Ravenclaw) wand from the window at Ollivander's. g. Harry's scar. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Not just any Phoenix--Fawkes. And it will be noted in DH that this is a *new* Patronus for Snape, the previous onehaving been something innocuous such as a bat or a spider. Boggart: A dead Harry Potter. Whatever his motivation, a promise to Dumbledore or to Lily, the life-debt to James, his own determination to atone for his sins, Snape fears most that Harry will die before he can fulfill his destiny and defeat Voldemort. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, specifically sacrificial love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Wormtail will kill Fenrir with his silver hand, repaying his debt to Harry. Unfortunately (or not) he will be mortally wounded in the process. 2. We will find out Snape has--or had--a son. 3. Harry will meet Sirius, Dumbledore and his parents again beyond the Veil. He will be tempted to remain with them, but upon their urging he will return to the living. 4. Snape will personally help Draco turn and escape to the good side, where Draco will assist Harry and the Order. 5. Regulus Black will make an appearance, and his knowledge will help Harry defeat the Dark Lord. 6. This one doesn't count I know, but if Snape lives he will never return to Hogwarts but will put his Potions and Dark Arts knowledge to use by concocting cures for various WW ailments, including werwolfism. 7. And one more...In the epilogue we will find that the student who has become a professor at Hogwarts is none other than Draco Malfoy. He will become the Potions professor, reflecting his gratitude to Severus Snape for saving him on the Tower and as noted in #4 above. Julie ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From alliethewizard at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 00:01:10 2007 From: alliethewizard at yahoo.com (Allie) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:01:10 -0000 Subject: Lifespans?... Phoenix in particular / Phoenix Symbolism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171110 Hi everyone, I'm Allie and I'm a student from New York, USA. This is my first message to this group, so please be gentle! I see that this topic has been inactive for a while (since before the HBP release, in fact), but I think some of the issues brought up here remain quite relevant to the outcome of DH and I'd like to try to resurrect the discussion. I've been interested in the concrete and symbolic roles of the phoenix for several years, and I hope no-one minds my briefly hijacking this thread to summarize my thoughts on the function of the phoenix to date, my interpretation of the implications for Book Seven, and some questions that I'm interested in discussing more over the next few weeks. I'd like to start out by listing the powers of the phoenix that Dumbledore described to Harry back in CoS: 1. "[They] burst into flame when it is time for them to die and are reborn from the ashes." 2. "[They] can carry immensely heavy loads." 3. "[Their] tears have healing powers." 4. "[They] make highly faithful pets." Bearing these qualities in mind, I have traced what I consider the most significant references to the phoenix throughout the series. I've done my best to substantiate my ideas with strong canon support, but of course deciding which scenes to highlight was a subjective process, so I'd like to hear whether there are any other excerpts that you feel deserve emphasis. 1. The phoenix is first mentioned in CoS. Harry enters Dumbledore's office because he has been witnessed near the scene of Justin Finch-Fletchley's petrification. He is very nervous, but the sight of the phoenix nonetheless mesmerizes him ("Harry stared at it and the bird looked balefully back. Harry had forgotten what he was there for," CoS, pp. 206-7). Harry is stunned when Fawkes bursts into flame, initially thinking him to be an ordinary bird ("Harry yelled in shock and backed away from the desk. He looked feverishly around in case there was a glass of water somewhere," CoS, pp. 207). Dumbledore enters and explains all the properties of the phoenix to Harry. 2. At the end of CoS, Fawkes carries the Sorting Hat into the Chamber of Secrets, where Harry is having his confrontation with Tom Riddle. In this scene, Fawkes demonstrates all of his powers and then some to save Harry. He comes when Harry shows loyalty to Dumbledore ("'He's not as gone as you might think!' Harry retorted," CoS, pp. 315), blinds the Basilisk ("Harry looked straight into its face and saw that its eyes, both its great, bulbous yellow eyes, had been punctured by the phoenix," CoS, pp. 319), sheds tears over Harry's wound to save his life ("A pearly patch of tears was shining all around the wound ? except that there was no wound," CoS, pp. 321), and carries Harry, Ron, Ginny, and Lockhart out of the Chamber of Secrets ("'He looks like he wants you to grab hold ' said Ron," CoS, pp. 325). In CoS, the reader is introduced to Fawkes and his powers in the most basic sense; Fawkes never bursts into flame in the heat of the action, for example. However, he proves to be a symbol of hope for Harry ("[The music] was eerie, spine-tingling, unearthly; it lifted the hair on Harry's scalp and made his heart feel as though it was swelling to twice its normal size," CoS, pp. 315), as well as a reminder of Dumbledore ("'This is what Dumbledore sends his defender! A songbird,'" CoS, pp. 316). When Harry hears the phoenix song, he immediately feels more secure and capable of taking on Riddle ("'Fawkes?' Harry breathed, and he felt the bird's golden claws squeeze his shoulder gently," CoS, pp. 315). The phoenix is mysteriously absent from PoA, but then again, most of the action is centered on the Marauders and Voldemort is basically absent as well. 3. In GoF, Fawkes never physically enters the graveyard where Harry is chained to Tom Riddle's headstone. During the priori incantato scene, however, Harry finds himself "speaking" with music that reminds him of phoenix song ("I know, Harry told the music, I know I mustn't," GoF, American paperback, pp. 664), and says that the music gives him a "fortified" and hopeful feeling, which leaves him better able to cope with Voldemort and the Death Eaters ("It was a sound Harry recognized, though he had heard it only once before in his life: phoenix song," GoF, pp. 664). 4. Fawkes heals Harry's injured leg back in Dumbledore's office after the graveyard scene at the end of GoF (" thick, pearly tears were falling from its eyes onto the wound left by the spider. The pain vanished. The skin mended. His leg was repaired," GoF, pp. 698). By this point, Harry has mentally established the association between "phoenix song" and "hope" and "Dumbledore" ("It was the sound of hope to Harry. It was the sound he connected with Dumbledore, and it was almost as though a friend were speaking in his ear," GoF, pp. 664). In CoS, he was simply glad to see another being in the Chamber besides himself, Riddle, the Basilisk, and unconscious Ginny Weasley. By GoF, he is consciously correlating phoenix song with hope even though a phoenix is not physically present in the action. Contrary to CoS, in which J. K. Rowling prolongs Harry's "dying moments" and Fawkes acts as a savior by healing Harry's Basilisk wound, in GoF, the fact that Fawkes heals Harry's leg is almost incidental to the phoenix symbolism that I am attempting to trace; Harry already knew of this property of the phoenix before Book Four began. 5. The most obvious phoenix symbolism comes in Book Five. To start, the name of the anti-Voldemort group: the Order of the Phoenix. 6. At the end of OotP when Dumbledore and Voldemort duel at the Ministry of Magic, Fawkes flies in front of Dumbledore and swallows an Avada Kedavra curse, thus saving his master ("Fawkes swooped down in front of Dumbledore, opened his beak wide, and swallowed the jet of green light whole," OotP, American hardcover, pp. 815). Fawkes bursts into flame and is reborn on the floor ("He burst into flame and fell to the floor, small, wrinkled, and flightless," OotP, pp. 815). John K said: "Incidentally, perhaps this has been discussed, but why was the Order of the Phoenix so named? Is Fawkes one of their methods of communication, or might this be of significance for future books?" Allie replies: At this point, we begin to consider the fourth and final property of the phoenix that Dumbledore explains in CoS. In addition to carrying heavy loads, having healing powers, and being faithful, the phoenix is able to swallow Killing Curses, die, and then reincarnate; in other words, the phoenix dies for new life to be born. This is exactly what the Order of the Phoenix does as well. As Sirius told Harry, Ron, Fred, George, and Ginny after Arthur Weasley was attacked by Nagini, "there are things worth dying for" (OotP, pp. 477). The members of the Order of the Phoenix have gone into service aware of the possibility of death, but they have done so to preserve lives that otherwise could have been lost to Voldemort. Fawkes also gave one of his incarnations to save Dumbledore's life. Therefore, we now see that in addition to functioning as a symbol of hope, the phoenix is the ultimate symbol of self-sacrifice. In a quick break from discussion of individual scenes, I would like to summarize the implications of the role of the phoenix in the first five books. If all of this logic proves to be correct, Dumbledore is bound to die. In an interview at the August 2004 Edinburgh Book Festival, J. K. Rowling stated that Dumbledore's patronus is a phoenix "for reasons that are quite obvious." A patronus represents a person's inner personality traits in the form of an animal. Therefore, if a phoenix represents hope and self-sacrifice for new life, we can make an analogy in which Dumbledore is the phoenix and Harry is the new life (as we know from the end of OotP how important Harry is to Dumbledore ? "'I cared about you too much,' said Dumbledore [ ] 'I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we fools who love to act,' OotP, pp. 838). This means that as a symbolic phoenix, Dumbledore will provide hope for Harry, which he already has (among other examples, Harry felt a new sense of hope when he saw Dumbledore arrive at the Department of Mysteries). It also seems to imply that Dumbledore will sacrifice his life to save Harry's. Similarly, other members of the Order of the Phoenix will die (this is obvious for reasons that extend beyond phoenix symbolism). Sirius has already died by this point, and he is not going to be the last to go. We move on to phoenix allusions in HBP 7. Fawkes himself ? exhibiting new properties and powers, at least ? is absent from HBP until the final chapters of the novel, when he then takes on arguably his most important symbolic role in the series thus far. After Snape kills Dumbledore, Fawkes sings his lament and disappears from Hogwarts ("Fawkes had stopped singing. And he knew, without knowing how he knew it, that the phoenix had gone," HBP, American hardcover, pp. 632). Whether Fawkes will return in DH remains unclear, although J. K. Rowling has told us that he was Dumbledore's pet ? not property of Hogwarts ? which suggests to me that Harry will be able to call him at some point in the future. 8. There is one other mention of the phoenix in Book Six which I, along with the rest of the Harry Potter fandom, consider particularly significant: "Then several people screamed. Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay: Higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White smoke spiraled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart-stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished. In its place was a white marble tomb, encasing Dumbledore's body and the table on which he had rested." I will address the significance of the "Phoenix Lament" and Fawkes's seeming immortality in the next paragraph, but it is the second passage from HBP that it is in my mind particularly important. I have ready a variety of theories concerning the phoenix that flew out of Dumbledore's grave ? Dumbledore is a phoenix Animagus and he didn't actually die, since Dumbledore sacrificed himself, a new phoenix was born from his grave, etc. ? but personally, I choose to interpret this scene as a confirmation of the "Dumbledore :: phoenix" analogy. His patronus is a phoenix, the smoke animal that flies out of his tomb is a phoenix; Dumbledore is The Phoenix of the Harry Potter series. He has made the ultimate sacrifice to protect Harry's life: as he said himself, "your blood is worth more than mine" (HBP, pp. 560). Chys said: "Also, can a phoenix ever die? I just got that newt scamander book and it said they have (i'm not quoting) an extensive lifespan so do they ever die, or do they just keep existing?" Allie replies: So now, like Chys, I wonder is there any way that a phoenix can be killed? In my view, if a phoenix could be killed, Voldemort would prevail. This is because the phoenix's first incarnation (Dumbledore and the generation of the Order of the Phoenix) would die and then the second incarnation (Harry and the generation of Dumbledore's Army) would die and never be reborn in the next generation (which would be their offspring, who would presumably pursue the struggle against Voldemort). If all those people die, and with them, the anti-Dark Side ideals, Voldemort will inevitably live. When you look at things this way, the matter of whether a phoenix can DIE die ? i.e., go away and never come back in a new incarnation or otherwise ? is one that cannot possibly be ignored. The answer may well be the solution to the question we're all wondering about: will Voldemort or Harry be the one to go at the end of Book Seven? Here I will turn to mythology beyond J. K. Rowling's invention. According to Egyptian, Chinese, and Japanese folklore, the phoenix holds most of the properties that J. K. Rowling has already introduced in Books 2 through 6 ? fidelity, virtue, grace, power, and seeming immortality. It is the characteristics of the phoenix in Arabian mythology, however, that interest me the most; the Arabian phoenix is characterized by its melodious cry and its very long lifespan (500 to 12,994 years), and the phoenix also takes three days before rising from its ashes to be fully reborn. All of these qualities, in my opinion, make enormous sense in the context of HBP, and since we already know that J. K. Rowling frequently makes allusions to astrology (get the whole Sirius, Andromeda, Regulus deal) and mythology (see Remus Lupin and Fenrir Greyback), I find it perfectly legitimate to draw conclusions about her books based on the Arabian definition, so to speak, of the phoenix. The "melodious song" is already accounted for in the Harry Potter books ? the "Phoenix Lament" at the end of HBP is described as "a stricken lament of terrible beauty" (HBP, pp. 615) ? and although Fawkes is reborn within minutes of his "death" in CoS, if we are looking at the phoenix from a purely symbolic perspective, I believe there is a valid argument that the "three days before rising from its ashes" represents Harry's emotional trauma in the immediate aftermath of Dumbledore's death in Book Six. At the end of HBP, he does not seem too eager to go hunting for Horcruxes ("He felt no curiosity at all about R.A.B.: He doubted that he would ever feel curious again," HBP, pp. 631); this indicates that although the first incarnation of the phoenix (Dumbledore) has died, the second incarnation (Harry) has yet to be fully "born," i.e., he is not yet ready to take up the war against Voldemort entirely on his own. The lifespan of "500 to 12,994 years" gave me some pause at first, although I have subsequently researched Arabian mythology and found that this is in reference to the lifespan of each incarnation, not the entire phoenix. This makes sense; we know that the lifespan of a wizard is long, too. We have yet to hear of one who has died of natural causes. Now I'm looking at the immortality (or mortality, as the case may be) of the phoenix as a major symbolic question in the series. There are others, too ? how the first incarnation of the phoenix is born, for instance ? but it is clear to me that if the phoenix can never be killed, the Dark Side will be vanquished and Harry will live; it means that Dumbledore and Harry's ideals will never be crushed. If the phoenix is mortal, however I fear things are looking rather grim for the Order. Mythology in conjunction with thematic evidence (a topic for a different discussion, perhaps), however, leads me to believe that Harry will survive and Voldemort will be killed. Perhaps this entire message was circuitous, in that I've arrived at the same question of the phoenix's mortality that other readers started out with two years ago, but I hope I have presented the question in an even more immediately significant context, and I am interested in hearing your thoughts. Thanks, Allie From juli17 at aol.com Mon Jul 2 01:38:59 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 01:38:59 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171111 > > Dana wrote: > Killing splits the soul (pg 465 UKed PB chapter "Horcruxes") that is > what Slughorn stated and no where in canon, is it said that justified > killing would not split the soul in the same way. It is not just > murder that splits the soul, it is killing another human being. > Sirius specifically stated that Barty's method of fighting the DEs > with their own methods made him as bad as the DEs themselves. To > Barty killing of a DE might have been justified and in any legal > system in the world it might be but to DD it does not and therefore > DD would never ask Snape to kill him and split his soul. DD would not > sacrifice just his own life but Snape's soul which is a violation; it > is against nature (same page as previous quote) > > vmonte; > I agree with everything you've said. I've also said the same things > time and again. > > > I've said this before, but here I go again: > > I can't follow the logic of those that say that Dumbldore was asking > Snape to murder him. > > So, the idea is that Dumbledore is trying to save Draco's soul and > when he sees Snape he pleads with him via legimens/occlumens > (whichever applies) to strike him down for Draco's sake? > > Why not just have Snape grab Draco by the scruff of his collar and > drag his ass into hiding instead. Then get his mother and ship them > off together. Who cares what Draco says--I mean your still keeping > him from doing something that is wrong--right? > > So, instead, Dumbledore says: "I'm dying anyway, the best thing for > you to do would be to kill me Snape---pleeeeease. I realize that I've > not given you the job of DADA because I was afraid that you might go > back to the dark side (and start killing again) but you know what? > Forget what I said. JUST DO IT---PLEEEEASE." Julie: And I guess I don't understand how anyone can't follow the logic. NOTE: I'm NOT saying you have to agree with the theory, just that the logic isn't difficult. Discerning whether one believes Snape or Dumbledore would act according to this logic is another matter. The logic according to the "Dumbledore asked Snape to deliver the final blow" theory (not the same as Dumbledore asking Snape to murder him, as while murder is always killing, killing is NOT always murder): 1. Dumbledore is dying from the Ring curse. Whether he lasts a few months or a year or more, he IS dying, and sooner rather than later. 2. Snape "stoppered" death (believed by some) or in some other manner halted the progression of the Ring curse, and this is what is buying Dumbledore time, albeit limited time. 2. The potion Harry forced down Dumbledore's throat affected the "remission" status of the Ring curse, whether it simply revived the curse's effects or removed the "stopper" Snape had put on the curse. 3. Before he saw the Dark Mark in the sky, Dumbledore demanded Harry fetch Severus Snape, NOT Madame Pomphrey, no one BUT Severus Snape, perhaps because there was still time for Snape to undo or halt the effects of the Cave potion. 4. By the time Dumbledore got to the Tower and proceeded to begin persuading Draco against killing him, he was experiencing increasingly debilitating effects of the Cave potion and/or the reactivated Ring curse. He continued to lose strength as Draco hesitated to carry out his action. 5 When Snape arrived at the Tower, Dumbledore said "Severus" in the pleading tone that so unnerved Harry *before* he even had eye contact with Snape, not because he had just come to a belated and totally unprompted realization that Snape was not trustworthy, but because he already knew it was too late to avoid his own death. 6. Dumbledore says "Severus" and then "Severus, please..." because he wants Snape to deliver the fatal blow (or appear to deliver the fatal blow, as it is debateable whether the AK killed him given the fresh blood when he is discovered at the bottom of the Tower later). Why, you ask? 7. Because Dumbledore is now dying at an accelerated rate, he believes (and has said) that Snape can be of more use to Harry than Dumbledore now can. If in fact there is no way Dumbledore can survive, or if upon surviving he knows he would be a mere shadow of himself (note his powers were so greatly diminished HE apparently couldn't save himself, and didn't bother to call Fawkes to save him either), then it's certainly a logical conclusion that an alive Snape, a DDM!Snape, his status now secured in the enemy camp, can give Harry and the Order far greater aid than Dumbledore can. 8. Dumbledore also is secure in the knowledge that Draco and Harry will be safe, as well as the rest of the students at Hogwarts, as he knows DDM!Snape will see to it that the Death Eaters are removed post-haste. 9. What's not to like? Dumbledore is dying anyway, and Snape remaining alive means Harry and Draco remain alive and safe. The alternative is to take the chance that Snape can defeat the assembled Death Eaters while keeping Draco out of the fight, all before the Unbreakable Vow kicks in, and *still* have time to save Dumbledore's rapidly fading life (if it is even remotely saveable) while keeping Harry in check. In Dumbledore's book that would be a huge risk, especially if he knows more than we do, such as that the UV will kick in before Snape can act in direct opposition to it, or that nothing will save his (Dumbledore's) life at this point. 10. Okay, there IS one thing not to like. It's a horrible thing to ask of Snape. Thus the pleading. Killing splits the soul. The problem is, this concept remains a bit vague. Is it all killing, or just murder that splits the soul? Do different kinds of killing split the soul differently, i.e., justified killing for a good cause splits it in a smaller or less permanent way than cold-blooded murder? Additionally, is Snape's soul already split from his DE activities? If so, will it split *more* if he kills again? And finally, *did* Snape kill Dumbledore with the AK, or did he throw some other, nonverbal spell that knocked Dumbledore off the Tower still alive, and Dumbledore subsequently expired from the Ring curse/Cave potion once on the ground? As you see, there are so many uncertainties, so many variables that JKR can pin down in a dozen different ways to send the story where she chooses (has already chosen!), that we are all able to put those variables together in different but equally valid ways as far as potentially logical outcomes. So there is almost NO theory about what happened on the Tower that we can really call impossible. Or illogical. vmonte: > Doesn't it make more sense that Snape was forced to kill Dumbledore > because he made a pact with Narcissa to finish the mission Voldemort > set for Draco (since Draco wasn't able to do it). > > If Snape did not kill Dumbledore, Snape would die, no? Wasn't that > the pact? It seems more in character to me that Snape felt he had to > kill Dumbledore because there was no way he was going to die because > of Draco's failure. Snape evens shoves Draco aside as he walks up to > kill Dumbledore. He shows no tender compassion for Draco's struggle. > > Snape is not the kind of guy that would die for anyone---JMO. > > When he sees that Draco cannot kill, the only thing he can do is > kill Dumbledore, grab Draco, and run the hell out of there > before anyone can stop him. Julie: See, your theory is valid. It *could* have happened that way, and maybe the variables will fall into place so that it did happen exactly that way. But the DDM!Snape theory is just as valid *if* the variable fall into place in the way I outlined above. vmonte: > And what about Harry? A few months ago he watched Sirius die. And > now he has to helplessly watch Dumbledore get murdered? Do you > really think that Dumbledore would do that to Harry? That would be > horribly cruel. Isn't Harry traumatized enough? Julie: Life sucks sometimes. Dumbledore was 150 years old and he wasn't going to last forever. We certainly have plenty of canon that Dumbledore will do what is necessary to bring about Voldemort's defeat. If he's dying anyway, there's no way he can spare Harry that loss. It's no doubt unfortunate that events fell into place at a moment when Dumbledore had little choice but to let Harry observe (as opposed to letting him interfere, or he would have had no reason to freeze a boy who'd already fought Death Eaters and Voldemort more than once). It's not about being cruel, it's about events tying your hands. Whatever Dumbledore says, you can't always choose the course your life takes ;-) vmonte: > There are clues to Snape's personality. He is very clever. He has > the ability to talk himself out of anything. He has both Voldemort > and Dumbledore believing that he is on their side. Julie: Agreed on points one and three. I'm not sure about two, as I don't know when Snape has talked himself out of doing something he didn't want to do. (Though certainly that would make him no different than the rest of humanity!) vmonte: > According to JKR it takes a certain sort of person to become a DE: > _ It takes someone who is filled with hatred > - Enjoys inflicting pain on those that are weak or helpless > - Someone who can easily deny/suppress their emotions > - Someone who is cruel > - Can murder others... Julie: I don't know about enjoying inflicting pain, but certainly a person choosing to become a DE would have to be able to watch the pain of others without balking or interfering. Which is all part of the denying and suppressing of emotions I guess. Your points don't address why one QUITS being a DE. Apparently Regulus decided he wasn't the right DE material (presumably his conscience got the better of him once he realized the full meaning of being a DE), and at some point a DDM!Snape made that call also. They either went in fooling themselves that they didn't care about the suffering and murder of innocents, or once they experienced this suffering they *changed* their minds. I.e., they repented. vmonte: > - Snape also mistreats those he feels are beneath him > - He has delusions of grandeur > - He changes his name like Tom Riddle and creates a new persona for > himself--he reinvents himself: 'TA DAH I'm the Half-Blood-Prince!' > (Is that his Super Villain name?) > - He is obsessed with the dark arts--he even invents more killing > curses (nice hobby) > - He is rather sadistic and enjoys manipulating people with his > words (He reminds me of Iago) > - He holds grudges (the grudges are even against the children of the > people he hates) > - He is emotionally stunted > - He has probably killed several (many?) people since his previous > profession was being a DE > - And he is so scary when he kills Dumbledore that even the baby > eating werewolf steps away from him in fear---LOL! Julie: I don't think we know enough about the inner workings of Snape's mind to know if he has delusions of grandeur (he is correct about his prodigious talents at Potions and DADA--no false modesty there, but no delusions either). We also don't know if he has killed several people since he was a DE, since we only see the one instance (Dumbledore) and even that instance has some reasonable room for doubt. His other "persona" was something he adopted as a teenager, not something we have any evidence he considers relevant as an adult (other than to let Harry know the spells in the Potions book were his). And however mean, emotionally stunted, and grudge-holding Snape is, that still doesn't preclude that him having a moral code that pits him against torture, murder, or yes, even prejudicial treatment of Muggle-borns. My main point is that there is still plenty of wiggle room when it comes to pinning down Snape's character. There are theories from ESE! to DDM! to everything inbetween which are all perfectly logical given the sparse facts we have in our possession right now (and I mean facts that *cannot* change, not suppositions like "Dumbledore was killed by an AK" that *do* have to potential to change with new information). Julie, hoping I made sense From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 01:39:55 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:39:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: <726950.96420.qm@web53301.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <311661.30534.qm@web55709.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171112 dragonkeeper wrote: 74Casey, I suspect Hogwarts is based on private school in Great Britain where the Head Master will place who they feel is most qualified for what position is needed and that would include Head of Houses regardless if they were alumni or not of that house. David: Flitwick could be appointed to Gryffindor if the new head master made the appointment such a measure. David ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Chancie: Erm...isn't Flitwick already Head of Ravenclaw House? Are you saying that you think he could be head of BOTH Gryffindor and Ravenclaw? I don't believe that would be advisable, simply because it would cause a conflict of intrest. I think the most likely choice for GHOH would be Hagrid. Unless of course the Minstry interfers in the school, and causes McGonagall to not become Head mistress. If that happens then I think pretty much anything is possible. src="'>http://lilypie.com"> src="http://lilypie.com/pic/070627/lpQp.jpg" alt="Lilypie 4th Birthday Pic" width="77" height="80" border="0" />http://b4.lilypie.com/2FWdm5.png" alt="Lilypie 4th Birthday Ticker" border="0" width="400" height="80" /> http://lilypie.com"> src="http://lilypie.com/pic/070627/RpCw.jpg" alt="Lilypie 1st Birthday Pic" width="89" height="80" border="0" />http://b1.lilypie.com/iptVm5.png" alt="Lilypie 1st Birthday Ticker" border="0" width="400" height="80" /> --------------------------------- Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Mon Jul 2 01:46:46 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:46:46 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: <311661.30534.qm@web55709.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <726950.96420.qm@web53301.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <311661.30534.qm@web55709.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707011846w2c4fefbay71c5ddbd7eae3db@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171113 dragonkeeper > wrote: 74Casey, I suspect Hogwarts is based on private school in Great Britain where the Head Master will place who they feel is most qualified for what position is needed and that would include Head of Houses regardless if they were alumni or not of that house. Lynda: I think that McGonagall had it in mind to appoint Hagrid as head of Gryffindor. If not him, and if as many are predicting, Bill Weasley is addded to the faculty as DADA instructor, it could be him. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 01:49:13 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What Little Niggling Details will be left? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <945473.29139.qm@web55703.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171114 Eddie wrote: > Siriusly Snapey Susan (cubfanbudwoman): > Just what do you all believe will > go UNANSWERED from among those things which are driving you nuts? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Chancie: Things I think most likely to be left out: Why is The Bloody Barron the only one who can control Peeves? How did Salazar Slytherin create the COS without the other founder's knowledge? When did it become customary for each of the 4 houses to aquire their own ghosts, and how/why? Where they the first 4 or did they have predecessors? How did the ROR come to be, and whose idea was it? (Hmm... makes me wonder, did each of the 4 founders get to make their own "secret room"? Could their be 2 more we have yet to discover??) How did a Giant Squid end up in a Lake? Well that's all I can think of at the moment...although I know there are more. Chancie Recent Activity 58 New Members 2 New Photos 2 New Files Visit Your Group SPONSORED LINKS Harry potter spoiler Harry potter Harry potter birthday party Harry potter collectible Harry potter hat Yahoo! News Get it all here Breaking news to entertainment news Yahoo! TV Love TV? Listings, picks news and gossip. Moderator Central An online resource for moderators of Yahoo! Groups. . src="'>http://lilypie.com"> src="http://lilypie.com/pic/070627/lpQp.jpg" alt="Lilypie 4th Birthday Pic" width="77" height="80" border="0" />http://b4.lilypie.com/2FWdm5.png" alt="Lilypie 4th Birthday Ticker" border="0" width="400" height="80" /> http://lilypie.com"> src="http://lilypie.com/pic/070627/RpCw.jpg" alt="Lilypie 1st Birthday Pic" width="89" height="80" border="0" />http://b1.lilypie.com/iptVm5.png" alt="Lilypie 1st Birthday Ticker" border="0" width="400" height="80" /> --------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sunnylove0 at aol.com Mon Jul 2 04:17:51 2007 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 00:17:51 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171115 In a message dated 6/29/2007 8:48:29 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, tigerpatronus at yahoo.com writes: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Bellatrix. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Probably the Dark Mark, but irrelevant at this point. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): Hogwarts will not reopen, so no to all. a. Harry? b. Draco? c. Hermione? d. Luna? e. Ron? f. Neville? g. Ginny? 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Argus Filch. It would do wonders for his personality. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: What is the point? Who will be there? a. Head Boy? b. Head Girl? c. DADA Instructor? d. Potions Master or Mistress? e. Headmaster or -mistress? 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? To destroying Voldemort. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. Diary (destroyed) c. Locket d. Hufflepuff cup e. Ring (destroyed) f. Voldemort's wand g. Harry's scar (unintentional) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Phoenix, Boggart: Dumbledore jeering at him. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Enough love to destroy the Dementors and cripple Voldemort. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Snape was not in love with Lily. 2. Lily was a researcher on the locked door in the DOM. 3. Dumbledore leaked the prophecy through Snape. 4. When Lily and James ignored his warnings and did the Fidelius Charm themselves, he warned Petunia that Lily might die and she would need to take Harry in. (" These wizards murdered my sister!") 5. When Voldemort is dead, Snape will commit suicide. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 04:53:12 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 04:53:12 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?What=92s_going_to_happen_in_the_end=85.(kinda_long)_?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171116 Ok, so after reading a lot of threads like this (one that I'm sure I started lol) I have changed my mind on a couple of things so here's where I see most of the characters ending up when all is said and done at the end of book 7: Harry: OK, so after reading A LOT of Harry isn't going to die responses, I've decided that yes, he is still going to die. The only difference now, is I don't think it will be in the battle with LV. I think it'll be in the epilogue telling us all about the rest of their lives. Ron: I think he's definitely gonna die. I can't shake the scene in the first book where he sacrifices himself for Harry to go on and face Quirrell. If that isn't foreshadowing then I don't know what is. :-) Hermione: I think her and Ron will finally have a "moment" of some sort in the last book. She is going to live and play a large part in Harry's last throw down with LV. (just for the sake of the he hates muggle-borns and wouldn't it be fitting that one helped to take him down) DD: I think he will have a role in the last book through his portraits at Hogwarts and other places. Maybe they will put one up at 12 Grimmauld Place. LV: without a doubt he's going down lol It'll be a combo of things that lead to this Harry will have help but in the end it'll come down to just the two of them. Ginny: She may be used as bait at some point in the book. I think she's going to survive the 7th book as well. Hopefully her and Harry have a happy life together. (if not maybe her and Neville?) Snape: As much as I don't want to admit it I think he is going to end up being on the good side. He's still going to be a jerk, but on the good side nonetheless. McGonagall: She'll survive the book as well and stay headmistress for many many years. I can't figure out who she will appoint to be the new transfiguration teacher, DADA, or the new head of Gryffindor maybe Tonks, and Bill respectively? Draco Malfoy: I feel he's going to come over to the good side to the dismay of his parents, but I'm not holding my breath for a scene where he hugs Hermione or anything :-) Sirius: I've seen people say he's going to come back from behind the veil. I'm not all too sure of that. Maybe he'll make appearances in dreams or something definitely in flashbacks though. Hagrid: I agree with others that he might be die in the last book. Maybe he'll be the new head of Gryffindor. Though I doubt it as most of the students in the house don't like or respect him :-\ Bellatrix Lestrange: She might just die, I think that her and Neville will face off and he will either defeat her and she will end up in Azkaban (maybe even get the kiss) or he might kill her in battle (in a long shot idea, his parents will turn back into their regular selves) Fred and George: I don't want to say it but one of them might die. The Weasley family is just too big to not have a fatality or two in this war. Sadly it might be one or both of the twins. People have said it might be Percy, but that death wouldn't be felt as hard as the other members of the family. Molly Weasley: She is another guess on which one of the Weasley clan that might not make it. She will put up a good fight but might go down in the end. That is a death that would be felt very deeply by the readers. Arthur Weasley: I like someone's idea that he will become MoM when all is said and done. :-) Luna Lovegood: The only interesting thing I can think of with her is that her and Harry end up together when it doesn't work out with Ginny and she ends up with Neville lol Lupin: For those who haven't seen my other post, I think he might turn on the Order when LV catches him at a weak moment when he is sick and tired of being sick and tired. But that he'll see the error of his ways and go back to the good side. Peter Pettigrew: He still owes Harry for sparing his life. I think he might leak some info to Harry/the Order, or in some way get in the way of something LV has planned that ends up saving Harry's life. Neville: He is going to help Harry in a huge way. Not all throughout the book, but being as the prophecy could have been about him too (yes I know LV MADE it about Harry by marking him as his equal) but I think that Neville will still play an important part. and possibly end up with Ginny or maybe Luna? (oh romance, yes I have to mention it...lol) The Dursleys: I like to think that Dudders will be the one to do magic. It would be kind of funny. Considering there is obviously magic in Lilly's family what's to say IF it skipped Petunia that is wouldn't go to her lovely son? I think it will be one of them nonetheless. Which I think will prove interesting. Charlie Weasley: I don't really have any idea of what role he will play He'll prob be a part of the war, but I don't think he'll die, again his death just wouldn't hurt as much as other members of the family. Bill Weasley: He'll be the new DADA teacher and possibly head of Gryffindor. And we'll see his wedding to Fleur in the book (one of the happy parts of the book) Percy Weasley: He will come around and realize he was being a big jerk to his family. He will join the Order and fight with them. He might die, but I doubt it. They'll be all hugs and kisses when all is said and done (you kinda have to be like that at a funeral ) Yes, I had A LOT of time on my hands, feel free to pick it all apart :-) If I left anyone out please add them happy discussing. TKJ :-) From toonmili at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 03:48:04 2007 From: toonmili at yahoo.com (toonmili) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 03:48:04 -0000 Subject: How well does Snape know Tonks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171117 I brought this up elsewhere and I got an interesting reply. The one time we see Snape and Tonks interact, he is (pardon the slang) all up in her business. At first I thought this was a potential ship but I was wrong. It was brought to my attention that Snape is friends with Narcissa and knows Bellatrix. We know that these women are the sisters of Andromeda Black, Tonk's mother. If Snape was friends with Bella when he was younger (so Sirius says) we can assume that he also knew Andromeda (similar to Harry knowing Fred and George). It was said that Andromeda went to school with Sirius (therefore Snape) and we know from Slughorn that Sirius was the only Black that wasn't in Slytherin. Therefore we now know that it is not only likely that Snape knew Andromeda personally but it is also likely that they were well acquainted. When she married Ted, a muggleborn, she was blasted off the the Black family tree. It is possible that she lost contact with her sisters. I believe this because Tonks never acknowledges that Bellatrix is her aunt or Draco is her cousin. But is it possible that after Snape switched sides that he would have gotten back in contact with Andromeda? If this is so, then he would have known Tonks since she was a child (7,8,9). If Andromeda knew Snape and she was friendly with him then Snape would be like an uncle to Tonks (no relation just a sort of polite title). This could explain two things. Why someone who is clumsy would be so good in potions to get an 'O' at owls and at least an E at NEWT level, the grades required to become an Auror. Neville is sort of clumsy and he is awful at potions. If Snape knew Tonks' mother personally, he would try harder with her. And secondly, it would also explain why it was okay for him to make comments on her love life and for her not to respond. Another question I think this could answer is Who recruited Tonks into the Order? It was never said and when something is not said most of the times it has something to do with Snape. Further, Tonks has a family and in OOTP around Christmas she is not at Grimmauld Place which means she is most likely with her family (mom and dad) who are very much alive. Yet in HBP she is invited to spend Christmas with the Weasleys. And Molly makes a comment about it being Lupin's fault. So is it possible that her family is angry with her because she is in love with a werewolf? Could that be why Snape was angry with her as well? There isn't any evidence besides Logic to prove that Tonks knows Snape better than we think. Except maybe the use of her first name. The only people Snape calls by their first name are Death Eaters. Which brings me to my other point. I believe that Tonks (if it was planned for Snape to kill DD)is in on the secret. I believe she might act as a go between Harry and Snape. She might be giving Harry info without letting him know where it's coming from. JK Rowling said that she used the Tonks and Lupin relationship as a red herring. Could it be that it was meant to distract us from the fact that we don't know what Tonks does for the Order and we don't know Tonks at all? All we know is that she likes Lupin and that's enough. Could JK be playing our affection for Lupin, so we could ignore a character who is so poweful that she really shouldn't be ignored? toonmili From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jul 2 06:38:46 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 06:38:46 -0000 Subject: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: <726950.96420.qm@web53301.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171119 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, dragonkeeper wrote: > > Casey, > I suspect Hogwarts is based on private school in Great Britain where the Head Master will place who they feel is most qualified for what position is needed and that would include Head of Houses regardless if they were alumni or not of that house. > > David: > Flitwick could be appointed to Gryffindor if the new head master made the appointment such a measure. Geoff: Following on Casey's observation, there would be a strong likelihood that any new member of staff would not be an ex-pupil of the school but would have been appointed by the governors and the headteacher after replying to an advertisement in the educational press. From ida3 at planet.nl Mon Jul 2 06:57:05 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 06:57:05 -0000 Subject: How well does Snape know Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171120 Toonmili: > If Snape was friends with Bella when he was younger (so Sirius > says) we can assume that he also knew Andromeda (similar to Harry > knowing Fred and George). It was said that Andromeda went to > school with Sirius (therefore Snape) and we know from Slughorn > that Sirius was the only Black that wasn't in Slytherin. > Therefore we now know that it is not only likely that Snape knew > Andromeda personally but it is also likely that they were well > acquainted. Dana: Snape might have known Andromeda from school but I do not think that there is any link between them after that and there is no hint in canon that he had any association with her. I think Snape was once Tonks potions teacher. According to Lexicon Tonks is born in 1973 and Snape started teaching in September 1981 so when Tonks turned 11, Snape was already a teacher at Hogwarts. JMHO Dana From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Mon Jul 2 09:38:12 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 09:38:12 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171121 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "julie" wrote: > > > > > > Dana wrote: > > Killing splits the soul (pg 465 UKed PB chapter "Horcruxes") that is > > what Slughorn stated and no where in canon, is it said that > justified > > killing would not split the soul in the same way. It is not just > > murder that splits the soul, it is killing another human being. > > Sirius specifically stated that Barty's method of fighting the DEs > > with their own methods made him as bad as the DEs themselves. To > > Barty killing of a DE might have been justified and in any legal > > system in the world it might be but to DD it does not and therefore > > DD would never ask Snape to kill him and split his soul. DD would > not > > sacrifice just his own life but Snape's soul which is a violation; > it > > is against nature (same page as previous quote) > > > > vmonte; > > I agree with everything you've said. I've also said the same things > > time and again. > > > > > > I've said this before, but here I go again: > > > > I can't follow the logic of those that say that Dumbldore was > asking > > Snape to murder him. > > > > So, the idea is that Dumbledore is trying to save Draco's soul and > > when he sees Snape he pleads with him via legimens/occlumens > > (whichever applies) to strike him down for Draco's sake? > > > > Why not just have Snape grab Draco by the scruff of his collar and > > drag his ass into hiding instead. Then get his mother and ship them > > off together. Who cares what Draco says--I mean your still keeping > > him from doing something that is wrong--right? > > > > So, instead, Dumbledore says: "I'm dying anyway, the best thing for > > you to do would be to kill me Snape---pleeeeease. I realize that > I've > > not given you the job of DADA because I was afraid that you might go > > back to the dark side (and start killing again) but you know what? > > Forget what I said. JUST DO IT---PLEEEEASE." > > > Julie: > And I guess I don't understand how anyone can't follow the > logic. NOTE: I'm NOT saying you have to agree with the theory, > just that the logic isn't difficult. Discerning whether one > believes Snape or Dumbledore would act according to this logic > is another matter. > > The logic according to the "Dumbledore asked Snape to deliver > the final blow" theory (not the same as Dumbledore asking Snape > to murder him, as while murder is always killing, killing is NOT > always murder): > > 1. Dumbledore is dying from the Ring curse. Whether he lasts a > few months or a year or more, he IS dying, and sooner rather than > later. > > 2. Snape "stoppered" death (believed by some) or in some other > manner halted the progression of the Ring curse, and this is what > is buying Dumbledore time, albeit limited time. > > 2. The potion Harry forced down Dumbledore's throat affected > the "remission" status of the Ring curse, whether it simply > revived the curse's effects or removed the "stopper" Snape had > put on the curse. > > 3. Before he saw the Dark Mark in the sky, Dumbledore demanded > Harry fetch Severus Snape, NOT Madame Pomphrey, no one BUT > Severus Snape, perhaps because there was still time for Snape > to undo or halt the effects of the Cave potion. > > 4. By the time Dumbledore got to the Tower and proceeded to > begin persuading Draco against killing him, he was experiencing > increasingly debilitating effects of the Cave potion and/or the > reactivated Ring curse. He continued to lose strength as Draco > hesitated to carry out his action. > > 5 When Snape arrived at the Tower, Dumbledore said "Severus" > in the pleading tone that so unnerved Harry *before* he even > had eye contact with Snape, not because he had just come to > a belated and totally unprompted realization that Snape was > not trustworthy, but because he already knew it was too late > to avoid his own death. > > 6. Dumbledore says "Severus" and then "Severus, please..." > because he wants Snape to deliver the fatal blow (or appear > to deliver the fatal blow, as it is debateable whether the > AK killed him given the fresh blood when he is discovered at > the bottom of the Tower later). Why, you ask? > > 7. Because Dumbledore is now dying at an accelerated rate, > he believes (and has said) that Snape can be of more use > to Harry than Dumbledore now can. If in fact there is no way > Dumbledore can survive, or if upon surviving he knows he would > be a mere shadow of himself (note his powers were so greatly > diminished HE apparently couldn't save himself, and didn't > bother to call Fawkes to save him either), then it's certainly > a logical conclusion that an alive Snape, a DDM!Snape, his > status now secured in the enemy camp, can give Harry and the > Order far greater aid than Dumbledore can. > > 8. Dumbledore also is secure in the knowledge that Draco and > Harry will be safe, as well as the rest of the students at > Hogwarts, as he knows DDM!Snape will see to it that the Death > Eaters are removed post-haste. > > 9. What's not to like? Dumbledore is dying anyway, and Snape > remaining alive means Harry and Draco remain alive and safe. > The alternative is to take the chance that Snape can defeat > the assembled Death Eaters while keeping Draco out of the > fight, all before the Unbreakable Vow kicks in, and *still* > have time to save Dumbledore's rapidly fading life (if it is > even remotely saveable) while keeping Harry in check. In > Dumbledore's book that would be a huge risk, especially if > he knows more than we do, such as that the UV will kick in > before Snape can act in direct opposition to it, or that > nothing will save his (Dumbledore's) life at this point. > > 10. Okay, there IS one thing not to like. It's a horrible > thing to ask of Snape. Thus the pleading. Killing splits the > soul. The problem is, this concept remains a bit vague. Is it > all killing, or just murder that splits the soul? Do different > kinds of killing split the soul differently, i.e., justified > killing for a good cause splits it in a smaller or less > permanent way than cold-blooded murder? Additionally, is > Snape's soul already split from his DE activities? If so, will > it split *more* if he kills again? And finally, *did* Snape > kill Dumbledore with the AK, or did he throw some other, > nonverbal spell that knocked Dumbledore off the Tower still > alive, and Dumbledore subsequently expired from the Ring > curse/Cave potion once on the ground? > Brothergib; IMO, a very accurate summary of the most likely explanation for the chain of events on the tower. And just to add my own thoughts, this would also place Snape in the ideal position to hunt and destroy Horcruxes. He now has LV's complete faith. Just a couple of additional questions that I have never answered completely to my own satisfaction; 1. Why make the UV? Snape is pledging his life that he will kill DD to protect Draco. OK, the evidence is there that DD was already mortally wounded. But surely DD & Snape could not forsee that Narcissa would make such a request. That suggests that Snape made a judgement call at the time - but this doesn't really tally with DD's request on the tower i.e. if Snape did not want to AK DD, but acted on DD's orders, then why would he voluntarily make the UV without checking with DD first (hope that makes sense)? 2. Slightly off the point - Why did DD offer Snape a job in the first place? It's clear that DD was aware Snape was a DE. Snape didn't change sides (if he did at all) until after his recruitment (probably when Harry was identified as the threat). I don't believe that DD could forsee Snape's change in allegiance - so why place a DE within Hogwarts, where he could spy, influence the children etc. Is it simply the case that DD knew he could 'turn' Snape? Brothergib From muellem at bc.edu Mon Jul 2 10:32:51 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 10:32:51 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171122 > Brothergib; > checking with DD first (hope that makes sense)? > 2. Slightly off the point - Why did DD offer Snape a job in the first > place? It's clear that DD was aware Snape was a DE. Snape didn't > change sides (if he did at all) until after his recruitment (probably > when Harry was identified as the threat). I don't believe that DD > could forsee Snape's change in allegiance - so why place a DE within > Hogwarts, where he could spy, influence the children etc. Is it > simply the case that DD knew he could 'turn' Snape? colebiancardi: well, I am not sure that DD offered Snape the job at Hogwarts when Snape was a DE. We don't know the exact timeline at this point, but I am pretty sure it was after Snape turned. Remember, by 10/31/1981, Snape was already on DD's side, according to Dumbledore in GoF. Snape started teaching on 9/1/1981. I will go out on a limb and predict that Snape was already spying on LV for Dumbledore for several months, if not longer, when DD gave him a job at Hogwarts colebiancardi From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 12:38:42 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 12:38:42 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171123 Julie wrote: Dumbledore also is secure in the knowledge that Draco and Harry will be safe, as well as the rest of the students at Hogwarts, as he knows DDM!Snape will see to it that the Death Eaters are removed post-haste. ...I don't think we know enough about the inner workings of Snape's mind to know if he has delusions of grandeur (he is correct about his prodigious talents at Potions and DADA--no false modesty there, but no delusions either). We also don't know if he has killed several people since he was a DE, since we only see the one instance (Dumbledore) and even that instance has some reasonable room for doubt. vmonte responds: Why would Dumbledore go through the trouble of having himself be dramatically murdered (to keep Draco safe) only to then have Snape take Draco back with him to Voldemort? I'm not sure Draco is going to be safe with Voldy, especially since he failed in his task. >From what we have seen of Death Eater action in the books I think I can safely assume that part the modus operandi of a DE includes murdering or at least torturing people. Julie wrote: His other "persona" was something he adopted as a teenager, not something we have any evidence he considers relevant as an adult (other than to let Harry know the spells in the Potions book were his). vmonte responds: I think I remember Snape bragging to Harry that he was the Half- Blood Prince in book 6. According to what we do know about Snape he told Dumbledore about the prophecy once he realized that the prophecy was going to target Harry's family. But doesn't that also imply that if it turned out to be some other shmucks family that he would have been okay with it? From ida3 at planet.nl Mon Jul 2 12:57:55 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 12:57:55 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: <380-2200770120370296@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171124 Magpie: > That is, McGonagall's line doesn't prove > Dumbledore's reason was really ironclad, but I disagree with what > you also seem to be saying, which is that because Dumbledore > only "hinted" to McG that he has a good reason and didn't actually > say it, she's wrong to think it. That seems too much like lying on > Dumbledore's part and also on JKR's for putting that line into the > mouth of a trustworthy character. McGonagall is the kind of > character who knows when she's being hinted to, and having > seen Dumbledore hint myself I agree with what she's getting. He > does have some reason for trusting Snape he has never shared with > us or with her. It can't be something we know already, because he > won't tell us. Dana: Actually I was not trying to imply that McGonagall is therefore wrong, what I meant is that it was never DD that said that his trust in Snape was ironclad. The way McGonagall expressed herself on how she perceived DD's trust in Snape is her own assessment of DD's behaviour about that trust issue. And although it is therefore not by definition that there can't be anything more to DD's trust then we currently know. it is definitely not proof that there was either. Which was actually the point I was trying to make. I asked myself this question, would DD say the same thing about the other people working for him if it was constantly put into question? Yes, he would and we see he did when Snape nagged to him about Lupin in PoA. He did not want to hear another word about it. The only reason DD constantly repeats his trust in Snape is because people question Snape's trustworthiness over and over again. This does not have to mean that DD's trust in Snape is therefore somehow more special then the trust he has for the other people working for him and we actually do not see that DD gives Snape any kind of special treatment at all. I myself never made Snape's trustworthiness dependent on DD's trust in him. I never looked at it that way because no matter how much DD trusts him, it does not make Snape more or less trustworthy. So unless DD had something that he could blackmail Snape with, I'd say that it doesn't really matter why DD trusted Snape because if Snape does not honour that trust for whatever reason then it is still Snape's decision to make and not DD's. JKR cleverly pulled the wool over people's eyes with DD's continuous declaration of trust in Severus Snape because trust in someone can never control the behaviour of that person. DD could not keep Snape out of jail because he was a former DE but DD could keep Snape out of jail because Snape had been working for DD. We see that DD's influence doesn't go that far when it comes to proving people innocent of what they are accused of without any proof, DD could not do that for Sirius. DD was Snape's proof not Snape's remorse. To me it is just opinion that DD never told why he trusted Snape because I believe he did. I believe he trusted Snape because he believed Snape's story of remorse. He believed that because Snape declared that it was the biggest regret of his life and that he made a terrible mistake, that Snape deserved a second chance and DD gave it to him. DD gave Snape a second chance and wiped his DE record clean because Snape could not be implicated in any other type of DE activity other then his spying on DD. As DD declared in GoF, Snape is now no more a DE then I am. DD did not accept people questioning Snape because of his past because second chances mean that you end the past and start anew. That is why he did not want to hear anything about it, just like he did not want to hear about Snape questioning Lupin's trustworthiness because of what happened in the past. It was not up to DD to proof Snape was truly remorseful, he just gave Snape the chance to do so. Therefore I do not understand DD must be a fool if Snape turns out to be untrustworthy. If you give someone your trust and a chance to make wrongs right and that person messes it up or never had the intention to live up to it, then to me that says more about that person then about the person who gave the second chance. It takes great courage to give your trust to someone that once made the wrong choices but DD was not afraid to give it anyway. To see if Snape was really trustworthy then one should look at Snape for answers to these questions and not to the reasons for DD's trust in Snape. And if you do that then you will see that Snape betrayed that trust several times by lying and these lies are directly linked to the faith of people's lives and therefore to me I do not believe that Snape was truly remorseful about what he had done but that he did everything in his power to get from under that pesky life-debt he owed James. And lying to me needs thinking about what kind of story you want to present. Lying needs calculation and is therefore a conscious decision to bend the truth because this alternative truth serves you better. Therefore to me Snape is not DDM and DD's trust, although should have meant a lot to the person he gave it to, can not be used to determine Snape's loyalty. Magpie: > I was referring to Draco's decision once the DEs were there (which > was his first choice for killing DD, implying a direct > confrontation--he wasn't ordered to bring DEs into the castle, he > was ordered to kill DD). Once they are there the way for him to > save his own skin would be to kill Dumbledore, thus removing the > immediate threat of punishment from LV and the DEs. He couldn't do > that, even though the result of that was most likely Draco being > killed himself. I do agree with your points on Gryffindors > preferring direct confrontations to Slytherins seeming to prefer > subterfuge. As it happens Draco's behavior, despite the B-movie > sneaky murder attempts, doesn't quite follow those rules in this > book, though I don't think that overturns everything. Dana: Well to me the bathroom scene where Draco is crying that he can't do it and the need for the cabinet to be fixed is to me and indication that bringing DEs into the castle was part of Draco's orders. Also Draco specifically states that he was supposed to wait on the tower and although I understand that did can be interpreted as a plan Draco himself concocted, I red it as Draco having given the assignment to wait on the tower till the other DEs had set the trap for DD. Also Draco specifically stating to DD that he did not invite Fenrir seems to me that he actually did not have any choice in the matter at all. Also I do not see Draco giving up as a true conscious choice he made but merely something he could not make himself do and gave up. To me Draco proved he was not capable of murder and not that he chose to spare DD's life. To me there is a difference. Draco did not make a choice that he would spare DD's life at the coast of his own. He did not sacrifice himself so DD could live. Although I am truly glad that Draco could not kill DD, he did not do some type of heroic deed on the tower. He was to cowardly to take someone's life and it was not him deciding that he would not kill DD even though he could if he wanted too. He couldn't, even though there was probably nothing in the world that he wished at that moment then DD to just drop death and get it over with. If Draco would have had the courage to save his own skin then he would have but the essence of Draco's story is that he was not as tuff as he presented himself to be and that talking about doing things is a lot easier then having to actually do it. Magpie: > That's a totally weak attempt, though, and it's months before > Harry's in any danger. When Harry is tied up and actually about to > die Peter doesn't act to save him. And Snape lives on fine after > James' death. So it doesn't seem like OFH!Snape has to worry about > his Life Debt much at all. Also, it seems like Peter's actually > been very hidden about most of his attacks in canon-he made that > one open, it seems to me, because he needed it public for his > cover. I suspect most people probably have a mixture of things on > their record, even if Gryffindors seem to far prefer an open fight > where Slytherins prefer subterfuge. Dana: Although I agree that Peter made a weak attempt he nevertheless did something Snape was not willing to do for Draco. Just because you do not see Snape jump through hoops to safe James life doesn't mean that Snape would not think about wanting to get rid of that debt before it could hurt him indefinitely. What if LV had ordered Snape to tag along with him the night he went to GH then Snape would have been forced to act and it would have meant he would have had to die for James because LV would not accept an excuse "sorry master you can't kill this man today because I owe this man a debt." Well let me help you get rid of it Severus, you will have not to worry about it any longer" and a flash over green light is all it would have taken. So Snape would have had to worry about what the debt could mean to his own safety because he does not want to have to give up his own life for someone he hated with all his might. Magpie: > I'd think Snape would still be the cause of their death in a big > way, myself. Dana: Well that is my opinion too ;o) but anyway I should have restrained myself from speculating about how the life-debt works because essentially there is to little in canon to support any theory in that direction one way or the other but there is something in canon that makes the debt something very important for Snape to consider and that is DD telling Harry that one day he will be grateful that he saved Peter's life (not direct quote) and this would mean the reverse for Snape. DD already stated in PS/ SS that James did something that Snape could never forgive and that was saving his life. Whatever the life-debt magically means does not really matter in the sense of detail because essentially the debt is something that Harry will be one day be grateful for and this means that Peter will one day do something as a result of the debt he owes Harry. This is enough information you actually need to be able to conclude that Snape could end up in a situation where the debt makes him do what he doesn't really wants to do, in relation to James and because I believe Snape is a very calculated man that thinks far more about the consequence and the way he can get out of them I believe Snape indeed took precautionary actions to prevent himself from ever having to end up honouring that life-debt if the worst case scenario would ever present itself as a result of LV interpreting the prophecy to include James. Magpie: > I have to say, that would make for a really lame answer in canon. > I think Dumbledore's reason to trust Snape will be emotional and > interesting and clear, not something that requires any explanation > about the ins and outs of Life Debts and when they take effect and > how to get around them by splitting hairs. Dana: I think the betrayal of Snape will be emotional and interesting and clear. That Snape could betray a man that stood out for him that accepted him for who he was, instead of what he pretended to be. That took Snape for Snape with all his flaws and all his misfortunes and gave him a chance to be all he could be as a human being. Snape never saw this but he will. Magpie: > Dumbledore has a reason to trust Snape. Dumbledore knows about > everything Snape owes to James, and Snape's responsibility in the > Potter's death. I see no way the Life Debt can be Dumbledore's > reason for trusting Snape given everything we've seen. I know less > about magic than DD does, and the Life Debt is obviously not able > to prove anyone's loyalty even from where I sit. Dana: I think the betrayal of Snape will be emotional and interesting and clear. That Snape could betray a man that stood out for him that accepted him for who he was instead of he pretended to be. That took Snape for Snape with all his flaws and all his misfortunes and gave him a chance to be all he could be as a human being. Snape never saw this but he will. You never no what you lost until it is gone, will be the phrase most fitting for Snape. The life-debt that Snape experienced as the most awful thing in his life was actually the best thing that ever happened to him if he only had recognized it as such. When the debt made him go to DD (in my opinion) and DD reached out to him, Snape should have understood the gesture DD was making but he did not he was to busy trying to avoid the consequences of what a debt could mean to him personally. That it could possibly mean the end of him. Snape, too hung up for being recognized for his abilities instead of the human being Severus Snape that also lived in that head somewhere, did not see that DD tried to give that person a chance. I believe Snape meant what he said in Spinner's End that he considered DD a fool for believing his story of remorse because I truly believe Snape could never see that his story of remorse had nothing to do with it. DD trusted Snape's willingness to chance his life to do what is right instead of what is easy. Changing once life is the hardest thing to do and most people never get the hang of it and make many mistakes in the process. The most precious thing a person can receive when he has done something wrong, is someone trusts and commitment so you can have a new beginning so you can make a fresh start. Therefore it doesn't matter why DD trusted Snape because Snape betrayed that trust, the trust of the only man that believed in Severus Snape completely. And that will be the most emotional thing you ever red when Severus Snape suddenly realises what DD really did for him. DD would accepted Snape back even if Snape would not have been able to work as a spy for him. He would have made the same decisions regardless of Snape's abilities. He kept Snape from the DADA job not because he was worried Snape would fall back into his old habits but because he wanted to show Snape that you do not have to do what you are good at to be respected as a human being. Snape if he never had bullied on single student would have been a respected as a teacher and he probably would have inspired people to learn from his extended knowledge but he never got it. He resented having to be the potions master but learned as much as he could about it so he could never be outwitted by another student and why he made the stakes so high for students to reach. Snape wasted his second chance with living his life in the most superficial way possible because he expected that one day LV might be back and everything he did would then be used against him. Snape never got that if he had made the effort to be friends that they would have fought for him till the end that they WOULD have died for him. But now with Harry witnessing him killing DD and there being no way back he will no what it is to stand alone and then Harry will safe his butt. Magpie: > When does DD ever claim that he's thought Snape got over any > feelings for James? Doesn't he say on at least two occasions that > he hasn't, and even in OotP say that he overestimated Snape's > ability to get over those feelings by giving him a much simpler > task? I just don't think Dumbledore could ever base his entire > trust in Snape on anything related to his getting over his hatred > for James. Dana: I don't think that I expressed myself clearly because I meant it the other way around. DD trusted Snape BECAUSE Snape hated James but did the right thing regardless. It is not about getting over these feelings, it is doing the right thing despite of these feelings. DD made a mistake because Severus Snape never forgives people that challenge him in life and he will get back at them and he'll do it without ever getting his own hands dirty. Well at least until HBP where he made a mistake of committing himself to a vow with no other choice then to do it himself if Draco fails. DD was not a fool to believe that a person like Snape deserved a chance to make something of his life after he made some mistakes but Snape was the fool who did not recognize what was given to him. Yes, DD paid for his mistake with his life but it is Snape who will have to live with the consequences. (Yes, he'll live through book 7). Maybe it is wishful thinking on my part but if JKR would indeed go this way I trust it will be anything but lame and it would be very satisfying ending for me. JMHO Dana From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Mon Jul 2 13:39:46 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 09:39:46 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights In-Reply-To: <432170.43703.qm@web32505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8C98AC596CDCA14-1698-DA97@webmail-de03.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171125 > SnapesSlytherin: > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > Patronus: I don't think he can...I don't think he has a happy enough memory to make a Patronus... Eddie: Maybe this is why he prefers a different way of fighting off Dementors than Harry. argentumangela: he does have a patronus. remember that the order communicates via patronus? and that each of them most likely has their own unique ones since they know who sent the message depending on the patroni Oryomai (SnapesSlytherin): I stand by my assertion.? Are we ever given an example of him using a Patronus?? I vaguely remember him contacting someone, but it was just a silver flash, not any specific shape. Are we also assuming that there's only one way to communicate with the Order?? All they have are Patronuses?? That seems a little faulty to me.? I?think that his mocking of Tonks' Patronus was more of a jab at her and Remus than anything else.? I'm sure Severus had something to say about Harry's Patronus being Prongs. Also, on the subject of Harry's OWL patronus, I didn't like that whole scene.? It seemed off to me: Harry is using hate as a happy memory?? I know other listees will aruge that she is evil and terrible and her being sacked *would* be a good thing, but I don't think hatred of someone should be able to produce a protector. Oryomai . ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zuhm at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 13:01:45 2007 From: zuhm at yahoo.com (zuhm) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 13:01:45 -0000 Subject: Apparating at Hogwarts => Dobby has done it twice? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171126 I thought apparating was impossible at Hogwarts. Is it only restricted to wizards and witches? Dobby the house elf, apparated with a 'crack' shortly after Harry tricked Lucius into freeing Dobby. Also, Dobby apparated into and out of the Hospital wing when he visted Harry. Am I missing something? -zuhm From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 14:41:52 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 14:41:52 -0000 Subject: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171127 > > Geoff: > Following on Casey's observation, there would be a strong likelihood > that any new member of staff would not be an ex-pupil of the school > but would have been appointed by the governors and the headteacher > after replying to an advertisement in the educational press. > TKJ: Isn't there a decent number of the staff that are former students? Hagrid, DD, McGonagall(sp) just to name a few have made reference to when they were students there... TKJ :-) From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 15:02:43 2007 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (rsteph1981 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 08:02:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: <252305.47899.qm@web56803.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171128 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? A WEASLEY TWIN. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? THE DARK MARK. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? YES b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? BILL & FLEUR 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" PETUNIA 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? NEVILLE b. Head Girl? HERMIONE GRANGER c. DADA Instructor? BILL WEASLEY d. Potions Master or Mistress? NEW CHARACTER (Order Member) e. Headmaster or -mistress? MCGONAGALL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? WITH DUMBLEDORE 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Gryffindor's sword (believe memory of DD's to be altered) b. The Diary (destroyed). c. The Ring (destroyed). d. Slytherin locket. e. Hufflepuff cup. f. The missing (Ravenclaw) wand from the window at Ollivander's. g. Harry's scar. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: None - don't think he has it in him to have that. May develop a Patronus for the first time in DH, but does not have one currently. Boggart: His father. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): I've never been very good at predictions. 1. No muggles involved in the battle with Voldie ::sad sigh:: 2. Harry and Ginny reconcile romantically 3. We will learn about baby Harry's "missing" day. 4. At least one Slytherin will be involved in the battles against Voldemort 5. The house system will either be changed or abolished. The Sorting Hat fears the sorting will bring the end of Hogwarts. I trust the Hat. So if the school survives, I think the sorting will either be done differently or the houses will be abolished. Rebecca ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 2 15:06:50 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:06:50 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171129 tigerpatronus at yahoo.com asked: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? No. d. Luna? No. e. Ron? No, f. Neville? No. g. Ginny? No. Hogwarts will not reopen for students although some teachers will still be there and some scenes in the book will take part in the nearly deserted school. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Harry and Ginny. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Petunia, if anyone. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Nobody. b. Head Girl? Nobody. c. DADA Instructor? Nobody. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn. e. Headmaster or -mistress? Professor McGonagall. 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Out for himself at least originally, however over the years he may have mellowed a little, but only a little. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes a. Diary (destroyed) b. Ring (destroyed) c. Locket d. Cup e. Snake f. In Dumbledore (destroyed) g. In Voldemort Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? A bat and a Phoenix. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The simple answer is love, a more complete answer is The Right Stuff (see Tom Wolf). Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1) Percy will become A Death Eater and betray Harry; he will be killed by a member of his own family. 2) Harry's Patronus will change from a stag to a Phoenix. 3) Regardless of whether he is one or not at some point Harry will think he's a Horcrux. 4) Snape will turn out to be a much better person than Snape haters like me once thought him to be, but not quite as good as the Snape lovers think he is. For example, years ago Snape made an unbreakable vow to save the life of Harry Potter, but he did it for his own less than noble reasons. 5) Harry will produce with Ginny Harry Potter Junior, although he will not live to see the child. 6) Regardless of whether he is good or evil at some point Harry and Snape will have a duel and Harry will knock him on his ass. Eggplant From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 15:09:02 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:09:02 -0000 Subject: 17 days left, and the Minion of the Spoilers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171130 Hello Friends, 17 days left to enter The Last and Ultimate Predictions Contest for Bragging Rights In Perpetuity. See Post #170980 for details. "Chancie" is now the Minion of the Spoilers. She will post which spoilers are now officially off limits within the contest. TK -- TigerPatronus! *STARRED REVIEW* for *RABID: A Novel* by TK Kenyon: A priest, a professor, the professor's wife, and his mistress--it sounds like the set-up for a dirty joke, but debut novelist Kenyon isn't fooling around. What begins as a riff on Peyton Place (salacious small-town intrigue) smoothly metamorphoses into a philosophical battle between science and religion. You would think that in attempting to deal with so many different themes-- shady clergy, top-secret scientific research, marital infidelity, lust, love, honor, faith-- Kenyon would run the risk of overwhelming readers. But, and this is why Kenyon is definitely an author to watch, she juggles all of her story's elements without dropping any of them--and, let's not forget, creates four very subtle and intriguing central characters. This is a novel quite unlike most standard commercial fare, a genre- bending story--part thriller, part literary slapdown with dialogue as the weapon of choice (think Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf)-- that makes us laugh, wince, and reflect all at the same time. Kenyon is definitely a keeper. -- David Pitt, Booklist, December 1, 2006 From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Mon Jul 2 15:36:36 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:36:36 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's trust (wasQuestion about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171131 Dana: > Actually I was not trying to imply that McGonagall is therefore > wrong, what I meant is that it was never DD that said that his trust > in Snape was ironclad. > The way McGonagall expressed herself on how she perceived DD's trust > in Snape is her own assessment of DD's behaviour about that trust > issue. And although it is therefore not by definition that there > can't be anything more to DD's trust then we currently know. it is > definitely not proof that there was either. Which was actually the > point I was trying to make. Magpie: Yes, I didn't get that the first time, but when I read your response I understood that was what you meant. I think we *do* know that there is more to Dumbledore's trust than what we know, not because of what McGonagall says but because of what Dumbledore says. He doesn't tell Harry why he trusts Snape, but he does tell him certain other things. The reason that Dumbledore trusts Snape, to me, seems explicitly unknown at this point. Whether it's ironclad, of course, remains to be seen. Dana: > I asked myself this question, would DD say the same thing about the > other people working for him if it was constantly put into question? > Yes, he would and we see he did when Snape nagged to him about Lupin > in PoA. He did not want to hear another word about it. > The only reason DD constantly repeats his trust in Snape is because > people question Snape's trustworthiness over and over again. Magpie: I don't think Dumbledore lies about how much he trusts people just because he's nagged. Sure Dumbledore repeats his trust in Snape because people ask him, but he doesn't seem to be lying or just defending his own ego. He's perfectly candid about telling Harry to watch out for Slughorn. Dana: This > does not have to mean that DD's trust in Snape is therefore somehow > more special then the trust he has for the other people working for > him and we actually do not see that DD gives Snape any kind of > special treatment at all. Magpie: I don't think it's more special, but I take Dumbledore at his word that he believes he can trust him to the extent that he does--and therefore others should not worry about it. Dana: > I myself never made Snape's trustworthiness dependent on DD's trust > in him. I never looked at it that way because no matter how much DD > trusts him, it does not make Snape more or less trustworthy. So > unless DD had something that he could blackmail Snape with, I'd say > that it doesn't really matter why DD trusted Snape because if Snape > does not honour that trust for whatever reason then it is still > Snape's decision to make and not DD's. Magpie: I don't think you have to base your trust in Snape on Dumbledore's, but I do think you have to consider Dumbledore as a character and what he means. I think Dumbledore's trust in Snape is very important thematically. He's a successful example of a second chance. I think that the reason Dumbledore trusts Snape is ultimately important to the story because presumably when we hear it we can judge it for ourselves. And I suspect even if Dumbledore turned out to be wrong, the reason would be believable. Dana: JKR cleverly pulled the wool > over people's eyes with DD's continuous declaration of trust in > Severus Snape because trust in someone can never control the > behaviour of that person. DD could not keep Snape out of jail > because he was a former DE but DD could keep Snape out of jail > because Snape had been working for DD. We see that DD's influence > doesn't go that far when it comes to proving people innocent of what > they are accused of without any proof, DD could not do that for > Sirius. DD was Snape's proof not Snape's remorse. Magpie: Hmmm...I don't think so, exactly. First, Dumbledore has never pulled the wool over Harry's eyes with his trust in Snape, so she has never entirely pulled the wool over the readers eyes either. There's no big revelation for Harry if Snape is evil--in fact, the whole thing is a dud because his big moment of revealing his evil, instead of playing as a big shock, left a lot of the audience unconvinced, while Harry himself would have expected nothing less. Since we've never been told why Dumbledore trusted Snape we never had any reason to believe it except Dumbledore's own character, which is why JKR has to be careful about making Dumbledore wrong there, because it will be hard to say he was tricked without saying DEs have better ideas about these things. It's not because Dumbledore can't ever be wrong--he was tricked plenty of times. But in this case it seems like she's set up trusting Snape as more central to what Dumbledore's about. Dana: > To me it is just opinion that DD never told why he trusted Snape > because I believe he did. I believe he trusted Snape because he > believed Snape's story of remorse. Magpie: Dumbledore tries to tell Harry how he thinks Snape had great remorse, blah blah blah. Harry jeers at him and won't listen. He keeps interrupting. Dumbledore says, "Harry....Please listen to me." And later he says, "Please let me finish." But Harry continues interrupting. Dumbledore is trying to tell him all this stuff and it's Harry who won't listen. But then, Harry says, "Professor...how can you be *sure* Snape's on our side?" And then "Dumbledore did not speak for a moment; he looked as though he was trying to make up his mind about something. At last he said, "I am sure. I trust Severus Snape completely." Dumbledore *wanted* to tell Harry the story of Snape's remorse and Harry didn't want to hear it. But when Harry asks why he trusts him, Dumbledore clams up. Dana: He believed that because Snape > declared that it was the biggest regret of his life and that he made > a terrible mistake, that Snape deserved a second chance and DD gave > it to him. DD gave Snape a second chance and wiped his DE record > clean because Snape could not be implicated in any other type of DE > activity other then his spying on DD. As DD declared in GoF, Snape > is now no more a DE then I am. DD did not accept people questioning > Snape because of his past because second chances mean that you end > the past and start anew. That is why he did not want to hear > anything about it, just like he did not want to hear about Snape > questioning Lupin's trustworthiness because of what happened in the > past. Magpie: So Bellatrix Lestrange was right, as are the other DEs with their cynical, small-hearted DE view of life--that's validated at every turn in this version. Sure Dumbledore gets a pat on the head and one day Snape will realize the great thing Dumbledore was trying to give him--but of course he didn't take it, because Snape's a bad guy who of course didn't change. Just like Draco can't have changed or understood anything about Dumbledore in the Tower. It still sounds like the difference is whether one actually has faith in what Dumbledore seems to really be trying to say or one doesn't. I do-- not because I think Dumbledore's a nice guy, but because I think a lot of his judgements about this stuff (not all stuff) are sound and smarter than the DEs (who wouldn't recognize real remorse). In this version Dumbledore seems to be a much nicer person, but therefore too good for this world. Certainly too good for low-lifes like Snape and Draco, who validate Harry's knee-jerk reactions. This is where Harry comfortably is now, believing these guys are not worth sacrificing for, while defending Dumbledore for martyring himself to prove it. Harry will therefore improve on Dumbledore by knowing gestures like his are nice if you're going for sainthood, but not very practical. Dana: It was not up to DD to proof Snape was truly remorseful, he > just gave Snape the chance to do so. Therefore I do not understand > DD must be a fool if Snape turns out to be untrustworthy. If you > give someone your trust and a chance to make wrongs right and that > person messes it up or never had the intention to live up to it, > then to me that says more about that person then about the person > who gave the second chance. It takes great courage to give your > trust to someone that once made the wrong choices but DD was not > afraid to give it anyway. Magpie: It's stated by the DEs why it makes him a fool. He's tricked by Snape putting on an act of remorse. Snape, of all people, whose hatred and anger is easily seen by an 11-year-old boy. Dumbledore does not just give Snape his trust and allow him to prove him right or wrong. He bases strategy on his trust in Snape and tells other people to trust him and rely on him, and although he never tells them why he gives the impression of having a good reason. Dumbledore is doing more than just giving Snape a chance to prove remorseful-- and if he's giving him the chance to prove he's really remorseful it suggests he doesn't yet believe it himself. Dana: > To see if Snape was really trustworthy then one should look at Snape > for answers to these questions and not to the reasons for DD's trust > in Snape. And if you do that then you will see that Snape betrayed > that trust several times by lying and these lies are directly linked > to the faith of people's lives and therefore to me I do not believe > that Snape was truly remorseful about what he had done but that he > did everything in his power to get from under that pesky life-debt > he owed James. Magpie: But the two things are linked together--Dumbledore's reasons for trusting Snape and Snape himself. We don't yet understand everything that went on with Snape and who Snape is so of course we need that information. And Dumbledore is one of the few people who knew about the Life Debt. Would he really not recognize that this was a reason for Snape to feel remorseful or do the right thing? That's like being impressed at someone telling the truth even though it hurts their own case when you know they're under Veritaserum. > Dana: > Well to me the bathroom scene where Draco is crying that he can't do > it and the need for the cabinet to be fixed is to me and indication > that bringing DEs into the castle was part of Draco's orders. Also > Draco specifically states that he was supposed to wait on the tower > and although I understand that did can be interpreted as a plan > Draco himself concocted, I red it as Draco having given the > assignment to wait on the tower till the other DEs had set the trap > for DD. Also Draco specifically stating to DD that he did not invite > Fenrir seems to me that he actually did not have any choice in the > matter at all. Magpie: No, it's not part of his orders. If it were part of his orders he wouldn't send poison or a cursed necklace instead when he can't fix it quickly. Draco is crying that he "can't do it" because the Cabinet is the one method he himself has set all his sights on--if he wanted to, he could have tried another method again like he did before. It's entirely Draco's plan to open the doorway to Hogwarts. That doesn't mean he's entirely in charge of the DEs when they get there--he's explicitly not. The DEs can help come up with a plan for how best for Draco to be waiting for DD without Draco being ordered to bring the Death Eaters. He proves that he isn't ordered to kill Dumbledore via the Cabinets when he sends the mead and the necklace instead. If Dumbledore had died either of those ways he wouldn't have had to fix the Cabinets at all. The Cabinets are entirely Draco's idea--that they bring in things beyond his control is what one would expect with Death Eaters. Draco's orders are to kill Dumbledore, period. (Which is also why Snape doesn't have to help him with them or fix them either.) Dana: > > Also I do not see Draco giving up as a true conscious choice he made > but merely something he could not make himself do and gave up. To me > Draco proved he was not capable of murder and not that he chose to > spare DD's life. To me there is a difference. Draco did not make a > choice that he would spare DD's life at the coast of his own. He did > not sacrifice himself so DD could live. Although I am truly glad > that Draco could not kill DD, he did not do some type of heroic deed > on the tower. Magpie: It is a true conscious choice when Draco starts to lower his wand. JKR even has him verbally go over what he's giving up before he does it. He knows what he's doing. That's the one time Draco is going to make a true choice--though it's taken away. (Even Harry remembers it later.) And what's the important difference between Draco realizing he's can can't murder and sparing DD's life? What's keeping him from pointing a wand at Dumbledore and saying two words that he must give up? What keeps Harry from killing Sirius in PoA? Because I'd suggest the two things are probably similar and are both positive things. I did not imply that Draco did any kind of heroic deed on the tower. I said Draco's not killing Dumbledore meant his own death and he knew it. He was not declaring his intention to sacrifice himself, no, but he was also not crossing the line into taking action to save himself. (I'd say he was quite literally living out his name there-- bad faith--and we'll see if in the next book this experience makes him able to make a true choice later.) It turns out it's not in his nature to always choose to save his own skin. In fact, it hasn't been throughout the book when he doesn't go to Snape for help. Draco's not a hero in HBP, but other things motivate him more than just saving his own skin. Unlike Peter, who is motivated more by that. ana: He was to cowardly to take someone's life and it was > not him deciding that he would not kill DD even though he could if > he wanted too. He couldn't, even though there was probably nothing > in the world that he wished at that moment then DD to just drop > death and get it over with. Magpie: Not killing a defenseless old man because a scary monster man tells you too is "cowardly" when Draco does it? I don't agree at all with your speculation that Draco wanted DD to drop dead. I actually like Draco's story in HBP. I think it goes to the heart of what Dumbledore is about and is a great story about a not admirable, previously weak kid learning the reality of death--so I don't dismiss it at every turn with "Draco's just a big coward either way." That, in fact, sounds like the interpretation Draco himself would have had before he grew up in HBP and killing was just something any tough guy did. He tried it out by distant means, and even found himself almost dying himself (mortality becoming more real being the first step to throwing off "bad faith")so that by the end of the year he's not able to even go through the motions like he could at the beginning of the year. I don't think Draco wanted Dumbledore to die *at all* at the end of HBP. He does not just go back to his old self when the DEs arrived and side with them and deny the connection he just made with Dumbledore because they were stronger. His eyes are on Dumbledore throughout the scene once they arrive, and his last line in canon is to agree with Dumbledore that he did not intentionally bring Fenrir into the castle. (I think that's possibly the first Draco's ever made that kind of confession about his actions as that line about Fenrir.) Draco hasn't become strong by the end of HBP, but I think he's figuring out what true strength is--and on the Tower it's Dumbledore, not the DEs. I think Dumbledore won him over--and he did it by understanding Draco, not being suckered or wanting to see the good in him. Dana: > If Draco would have had the courage to save his own skin then he > would have but the essence of Draco's story is that he was not as > tuff as he presented himself to be and that talking about doing > things is a lot easier then having to actually do it. Magpie: So you basically get to have it both ways--Draco is condemned as a murderer but also condemned as not being able to murder. Even if he didn't choose to save his own skin he chose to save his own skin, because he wanted to kill Dumbledore but couldn't try. Nope, not buying it. I'm with Dumbledore. Draco not being a killer does not make him a coward, but it does say something about his character, and while he's not a hero on the Tower, he's stronger than he was when he got up there, and stronger than he was when he was talking big at the start of the year. And I look to that Dumbledore/Draco scene for some clues about Snape's own defection actually. Dana: > Although I agree that Peter made a weak attempt he nevertheless did > something Snape was not willing to do for Draco. > Just because you do not see Snape jump through hoops to safe James > life doesn't mean that Snape would not think about wanting to get > rid of that debt before it could hurt him indefinitely. Magpie: Sure, we know he wants to get rid of it. I'm not convinced that Snape was not doing as much for Draco as Peter did for Harry--Peter vaguely suggests an alternate plan (and I agree it's possibly due to his being indebted to Harry) and then backs down immediately. Snape linked his life to Draco's. We don't know if he didn't suggest any alternatives to Voldemort at any time, since we didn't see Voldemort telling Snape about the plan to get Draco killed,and Snape would hardly tell Narcissa and Bellatrix about it if he did. If his suggestion was as weak as Peter's it wouldn't show any results. Dana: > What if LV had ordered Snape to tag along with him the night he went > to GH then Snape would have been forced to act and it would have > meant he would have had to die for James because LV would not accept > an excuse "sorry master you can't kill this man today because I owe > this man a debt." Well let me help you get rid of it Severus, you > will have not to worry about it any longer" and a flash over green > light is all it would have taken. > > So Snape would have had to worry about what the debt could mean to > his own safety because he does not want to have to give up his own > life for someone he hated with all his might. > Magpie: Maybe Snape would have just killed James and lived with the Life Debt, which is what he's doing now, fairly successfully. (Proving that Snape isn't too "cowardly" to kill James to save his own skin, at least.) > Magpie: > > I have to say, that would make for a really lame answer in canon. > > I think Dumbledore's reason to trust Snape will be emotional and > > interesting and clear, not something that requires any explanation > > about the ins and outs of Life Debts and when they take effect and > > how to get around them by splitting hairs. > > > Dana: > I think the betrayal of Snape will be emotional and interesting and > clear. That Snape could betray a man that stood out for him that > accepted him for who he was, instead of what he pretended to be. > That took Snape for Snape with all his flaws and all his misfortunes > and gave him a chance to be all he could be as a human being. Snape > never saw this but he will. Magpie: If that's what he did he's already done it and all that's left is the explanation--which I hope will be good enough to make up for us not all getting it the first time. Unfortunately, I'm still seeing Pollyanna!Dumbledore here. He offered Snape all this love even with all his flaws and gave him a chance to be all he could be, and Snape betrayed him...which isn't too surprising. No more surprising than Hagrid adopting a baby dragon and getting his house burned down for his trouble. Dumbledore still comes across as sentimental in ways I don't think it's IC for him to be. Yes, Dumbledore seems to want to give people the chance to be the best he can be, but this usually goes along with understanding the person. I think Dumbledore would have given this Snape the chance he gave young Tom Riddle--one that had little to do with trusting him. Dana: > You never no what you lost until it is gone, will be the phrase most > fitting for Snape. The life-debt that Snape experienced as the most > awful thing in his life was actually the best thing that ever > happened to him if he only had recognized it as such. When the debt > made him go to DD (in my opinion) and DD reached out to him, Snape > should have understood the gesture DD was making but he did not he > was to busy trying to avoid the consequences of what a debt could > mean to him personally. That it could possibly mean the end of him. > Snape, too hung up for being recognized for his abilities instead of > the human being Severus Snape that also lived in that head > somewhere, did not see that DD tried to give that person a chance. Magpie: And Dumbledore doesn't realize that the person to whom he's offering his trust, and relying on to keep his people safe, can't even comprehend the gesture or understand he's being given a chance? That doesn't sound like Dumbledore to me. He's a little more wiley than that. Dana: > I believe Snape meant what he said in Spinner's End that he > considered DD a fool for believing his story of remorse because I > truly believe Snape could never see that his story of remorse had > nothing to do with it. DD trusted Snape's willingness to chance his > life to do what is right instead of what is easy. Changing once life > is the hardest thing to do and most people never get the hang of it > and make many mistakes in the process. Magpie: Snape says that Dumbledore was suckered by his tale of remorse. Are you now saying that although you earlier said that Snape's remorse was what Dumbledore claimed was the reason for his trust, Dumbledore wasn't suckered by it, he was rather making a gesture and extending his trust and the trust of his people on faith to give Snape a second chance even though Snape could never take it? Dana: The most precious thing a > person can receive when he has done something wrong, is someone > trusts and commitment so you can have a new beginning so you can > make a fresh start. Therefore it doesn't matter why DD trusted Snape > because Snape betrayed that trust, the trust of the only man that > believed in Severus Snape completely. Magpie: I think for many of us it does matter because we know Dumbledore's character and he doesn't just hand out second chances of this type. He's shrewd and calculating and has an irritating habit of explaining peoples' own motives to them because he understands them better than they do. Dana: > And that will be the most emotional thing you ever red when Severus > Snape suddenly realises what DD really did for him. Magpie: I wonder, after all this time, exactly what would make the scales suddenly fall from Snape's eyes. If he didn't get it when Dumbledore actually gave him the second chance, why would he suddenly now realize that Dumbledore was offering him a second chance now that Dumbledore's dead? Snape's beginning to sound like the grinch here, suddenly finding his heart growing two sizes bigger. If only he hadn't been such a gloomy gus and made friends they would have fought for him...more than they already did fight for him. (I assume by friends here we mean the right kind of friends, of course.) > Dana: > > I don't think that I expressed myself clearly because I meant it the > other way around. DD trusted Snape BECAUSE Snape hated James but did > the right thing regardless. Magpie: Because of the Life Debt, which Dumbledore knows about. Yet he doesn't seem to trust Peter due to his Life Debt or have any illusions that it's going to make him "do the right thing." He thinks it might make him do something that helps their side, but it doesn't make him trustworthy. It just undercuts his ability to be as untrustworthy as he could be--which is exactly what's going on with Snape in this scenario. Dana: DD made a mistake because Severus > Snape never forgives people that challenge him in life and he will > get back at them and he'll do it without ever getting his own hands > dirty. Well at least until HBP where he made a mistake of committing > himself to a vow with no other choice then to do it himself if Draco > fails. Magpie: Strange thing to do, actually, if you're trying not to get your hands dirty. Dana: > > DD was not a fool to believe that a person like Snape deserved a > chance to make something of his life after he made some mistakes but > Snape was the fool who did not recognize what was given to him. Yes, > DD paid for his mistake with his life but it is Snape who will have > to live with the consequences. (Yes, he'll live through book 7). Magpie: I think he was a fool to believe Snape deserved the trust he was given, and reckless to tell others to trust him. He knows Snape owes James a Life Debt, and that the Life Debt would compel him to want to save James' life. Is it really a shock that Snape was never really on his side? And is there really any reason to believe that a Snape who never changed in all those years will suddenly, after he's knocked Dumbledore off, suddenly get it? What would make him do that? -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 17:00:02 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 17:00:02 -0000 Subject: What Little Niggling Details will be left? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171132 Mike wrote: > > 6. Is that house in Spinner's End the Prince family home? TKJ replied: > I think the house has to be the Snape family home because doesn't Narcissa claim the "none of our kind has been here." or "we must be the first of our kind in this place." I don't have my book in front of me but that leads me to believe that it is the Snape family house and not his mother's (Prince) family house. Carol responds: While it's possible that the house at Spinner's End was the Snape family home, it's hard to explain how little Severus could have come to school knowing more curses than half the seventh-years if he grew up in a Muggle neighborhood. (I can't imagine him attending a Muggle school, either.) I tend to think that his father died or walked out on the family when Severus was small, perhaps as a result of the argument involving a hook-nosed man shouting at a cowering woman, if the man in the memory was Tobias and not Grandpa Prince. (I think it was Grandpa Prince because even Harry would have noticed if the shouting man was dressed as a Muggle and because I can't imagine sullen-faced Gobstones champion Eileen Prince intimidated by a Muggle. All she'd have to do is cast a Silencio--or turn him into a table.) IMO, Severus's self-imposed nickname, *the* Half-Blood Prince, suggests that he was the one half-blood in a family of "pure-blood Princes." IOW, it implies that he was brought up by the Princes (his mother and her parents) rather than by his parents together (and rather neglected, given his appearance in SWM, perhaps the consequence of being regarded as a "filthy little half-blood" by pure-blood supremacist relatives). It's possible that Spinner's End, with its walls full of leather-bound books (on spells and potions and WW history, I imagine, certainly not Muggle novels or Muggle science or history, leather-bound books having gone out of fashion in the Muggle world long before Sevvy's childhood in the 1960s), and its sliding bookcases and candelabras instead of electricity, was the Prince family home, protected by anti-Muggle charms like those placed by Sirius Black's father on 12 GP--another "Muggle dungheap," Bellatrix! Bellatrix's remark that she and Narcissa must be the first of their kind ever to come there is unanswered by Narcissa (who may have been there before or may simply have been given the address by Lucius[?]) and merely indicates that Bellatrix herself was unaware that Snape lives in a "Muggle dungheap," meaning the mostly deserted neighborhood rather than the specific house, which she has not yet seen when she makes that remark. Alternatively, the house may be Snape's own, bought with his salary as a teacher and fitted up as a wizard house (though the air of neglect indicates that he doesn't spend much time there--how hard could it be for a wizard of Snape's caliber to fix a rickety table?). Maybe he bought it quite recently as a place to hide out once he became an active double agent again. Narcissa knows more or less where to find him (presumably anti-Apparition charms prevent her from Apparating there directly), but Bellatrix is surprised to find him there. Possibly, when they knew him at school, he lived somewhere else. Either that or, being older than he was, they never visited him during their school days or his, or even his days as a novice DE in his late teens or early twenties. Obviously, I'm only speculating, but I'd like to know how Snape came by the house at Spinner's End (Spinner's End being a street name, not the name of the house) and whether he's still there. Can he safely hide there? Won't the Aurors question Narcissa, who could be forced through Veritaserum or a spell to tell everything she knows, including his address? What protective spells could he place on the house to keep from being found? (And while I'm at it, what about that secret chamber under the Malfoy's drawing room, which Ron and Harry forgot to tell Mr. Weasley about, and which he's searched their manor twice without finding? Is Bellatrix hiding there? And how the heck did she follow Narcissa when she didn't know where Narcissa was going?) Carol, who also wants to know what's going on in the bucking broom memory and who the laughing girl is (and whic other memories Snape placed in the Pensieve to prevent Harry from seeing) From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 17:10:05 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 17:10:05 -0000 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171133 > Geoff:<<<<<>>> > Katie, > feeling frustrated that people tend to bring the discussion round > to religion every few months. > > Geoff: > That is strange. I would have thought that as a Catholic, prepared > to express your views as you did above, you would have wanted to > see faith expressed in discussion. > <<<>>> ******************* katie responds: The reason I don't want to discuss faith/religion here is because I don't feel that it has any bearing on HP. I don't have a problem with religion in general, and I have been fascinated by many different religions. I went to 12 years of Catholic school and was raised Catholic (although never baptised, I must say), and I consider myself a Catholic. However, I think HP is NOT a religious work and it definitly doesn't need religion to make it meaningful. There are all kinds of faith, and the most stressed kind of faith in HP is faith in oneself and one's friends. HP is menaingful and profound in a philosophical and social context, without using religion, and I think it's frustrating to see the conversation brought back to religion because I don't feel the story is LACKING anything. Why do we HAVE to give it a religious meaning? It's not lacking a meaning or a profundity. I just think forcing religion down the proverbial throat of the books diminishes the actual story, which does not lack in meaning. Sorry I've been a bit redundant - I'm at work and trying to think too hard. KATIE From xellina at gmail.com Mon Jul 2 17:20:05 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 21:20:05 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707021020u35f89df4yd23930d07084b3e4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171134 > > Alla: > > I wonder whether the fact that Godric was the most accomplished > dueller of his time can give us any hints about DH? I mean, the fact > that he was an enlightened fighter against Muggle discrimination while > pleases me a lot to hear it again, nothing new, no? > > But Dueller? If Godric Heir, be it Harry or not is revealed, will he > or she have fantastic, unmatched duelling skills? > Cassy: Well, we know that Flitwick was a dueling champion when he was younger. How would you like him as a heir of Griffindor? ^_~ From xellina at gmail.com Mon Jul 2 17:26:29 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 21:26:29 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Grindelwald create a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: References: <463f9ec00707011024qb5e6f20t6802e3357b024aba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <463f9ec00707021026i38dd46b9mefc6221c91759cf0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171135 2007/7/2, jmwcfo : > Please note that DD DEFEATED G. I assume this is different from > KILLING him. So what ever happened to him? > Cassy: I wonder if there's a spell or a portion that deprives wizard of his magical powers? Like, permanently. Because,IMO, it would be a very nice way to deal with a dark wizard, who is too powerful to be simply kept prisoner, but whom we don't want to kill (beacuse we're too noble, right?). Imagine, Grindewald living somewhere in post-war Germany as a muggle and simply diying of an old age. From thubanofllanmoel at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jul 2 16:45:42 2007 From: thubanofllanmoel at yahoo.co.uk (simon harris) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 17:45:42 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Apparating at Hogwarts => Dobby has done it twice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <146906.72653.qm@web27310.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171136 zuhm: > I thought apparating was impossible at Hogwarts. Dobby the house elf, > apparated with a 'crack' shortly after Harry tricked Lucius into > freeing Dobby. Also, Dobby apparated into and out of the Hospital > wing when he visted Harry. > > Am I missing something? "House Elves" have their own type of magic. Si From toonmili at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 17:12:12 2007 From: toonmili at yahoo.com (toonmili) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 17:12:12 -0000 Subject: How well does Snape know Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171137 > Dana: > > Snape might have known Andromeda from school but I do not think that > there is any link between them after that and there is no hint in > canon that he had any association with her. I think Snape was once > Tonks potions teacher. According to Lexicon Tonks is born in 1973 > and Snape started teaching in September 1981 so when Tonks turned > 11, Snape was already a teacher at Hogwarts. > > JMHO Toonmili: I agree that there isn't anything plain and bold in canon that says that Snape knows Andromeda but we can assume that he did from the infomation given about her and the Blacks. They were in the same house so it's not a stretch to imagine that he knew her. As for Tonks beign taught by Snape, that's not speculation, that's fact. Unless Snape took a 7 year vaction. I think this will come into play at some point. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 17:52:36 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 17:52:36 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171138 Eggplant wrote: > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > > Yes. > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? > > Harry and Ginny. Neri: That's an interesting combination. The obvious question is: do you predict he'll at least get a wedding night before he buys it? From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 18:05:55 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 18:05:55 -0000 Subject: Did Grindelwald create a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707021026i38dd46b9mefc6221c91759cf0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171139 > Cassy: > > I wonder if there's a spell or a portion that deprives wizard of his > magical powers? Like, permanently. Because,IMO, it would be a very > nice way to deal with a dark wizard, who is too powerful to be simply > kept prisoner, but whom we don't want to kill (beacuse we're too > noble, right?). JW: I doubt that such a spell exists - it would become very well known, and ultimately used extensively by the MoM to punish bad guys, and by dark wizards against their enemies. One could envision it being added to the list of Unforgiveables. OTOH, we do not know the purpose of the spell from DD that LV deflected at the MoM in OotP From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 18:55:21 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 18:55:21 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707021020u35f89df4yd23930d07084b3e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171140 Alla wrote: > > I wonder whether the fact that Godric was the most accomplished dueller of his time can give us any hints about DH? I mean, the fact that he was an enlightened fighter against Muggle discrimination while pleases me a lot to hear it again, nothing new, no? > > > > But Dueller? If Godric Heir, be it Harry or not is revealed, will he or she have fantastic, unmatched duelling skills? Cassy responded: > > Well, we know that Flitwick was a dueling champion when he was younger. How would you like him as a heir of Griffindor? ^_~ > Carol responds: Do we "know" that? Hermione states it in CoS as a rumor she's heard, and rumors around Hogwarts aren't necessarily true. I keep thinking of Flitwick sent flying in his own class by misfired Banishing spells. I can't imagine him as a dueling champion. It sounds like some student's idea of a joke to me. Certainly, Flitwick has never been proposed as DADA teacher, and I don't see how the DADA curse could hurt him except by revealing his unsuitability for that post. (Maybe he'd be hit by simultaneous Stunning Spells from his own students and hospitalized.) At any rate, McGonagall sent *him*, not some other teacher, to fetch snape. If Flitwick were a duelling champion, surely she'd have wanted him to stay there and fight off the DEs rather than acting as messenger. Nor would they have so urgently needed Snape's help if Flitwick were a dueling champion. (That Snape didn't provide the help is beside the point.) Also, I can't imagine the Heir of Gryffindor (if there is one) being anyone other than a Gryffindor, and IMO the most likely candidate is the owner of Godric Gryffindor's sword and the Gryffindor-colored Phoenix, Fawkes--Albus Dumbledore. (JKR has stated that DD's family would be a profitable line of inquiry.) I also think that he owned the house in Godric's Hollow that the Potters used as a hiding place and that they were already hiding there before DD suggested the Fidelius Charm. (With Albus dead, the mantle of Heir of Gryffindor would pass to his presumably younger brother, Aberforth.) Regarding the suggestion made elsewhere on this list that Flitwick could be given the post of Head of Gryffindor House, I can't imagine even a fair-minded Ravenclaw like Flitwick (already Head of that House) as head of a rival House (Gryffindor or any other). Look how biased McGonagall is toward Gryffindor and how badly she wants the Quidditch Cup! She's not going to appoint a (former) Ravenclaw as Head of Gryffindor anymore than she'd appoint a (former) Hufflepuff or Slytherin for that post. The HoH has to be temperamentally suited to the House he or she heads (and have at least an affection for that House, as Sprout does for Hufflepuff). Most likely, IMO, the new Transfiguration teacher will be both a (former) Gryffindor and the new HoH of Gryffindor. I think that Dumbledore held both positions as McGonagall certainly did. It would be nice, however, if Flitwick were promoted to assistant headmaster, with McG as Headmistress. His mild and objective temperament would balance her strict efficiency (and partiality) beautifully, IMO. It seems to me, that with the exception of Snape as DADA teacher and HoH of slytherin in HBP (obviously a temporary arrangement, as both he and DD must have known), the Heads of Houses are matched up with the core curriculum, the required classes other than the cursed DADA position, as follows: Gryffindor: Transfiguration; Slytherin: Potions; Ravenclaw: Charms; Hufflepuff: Herbology. It could well be that the four Founders taught those particular classes, though Gryffindor, as a dueling champion, could well have taught DADA, too, while the other teachers perhaps divided the other classes among them (Muggle Studies to Hufflepuff, for example). I doubt that we'll learn such things unless JKR publishes "Hogwarts: A History," but it's fun to speculate. At any rate, I think that Hogwarts under McGonagall will go back to the normal course/HoH arrangement, with Slughorn already positioned to take over Snape's role as HoH of Slytherin as well as the Potions position he's already assumed, Flitwick and Sprout where they are (with Flitwick possibly taking on the assistant headmastership as well), and a new (former) Gryffindor as Transfiguration teacher and HoH of Gryffindor. If I'm right that Gryffindor and Transfiguration go together, Bill Weasley would be a good choice. He's not too young to be HoH. Snape was only twenty-two when he was hired, and he probably became HoH of Slytherin as well as Potions Master at that time, Slughorn having conveniently retired (quite a vote of confidence in the young man who had been sent by Voldemort to apply for the DADA position!). Tonks, a Hufflepuff, could become the new DADA teacher, if her Auror duties permit it. Carol, just speculating and not committing herself to these suggestions From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 2 19:03:21 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 19:03:21 -0000 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171141 Katie: Also, may I beg to point out that Evangelical Christianity is incredibly different from mainstream Christian religions, and quite disturbing to a lot of us (Catholic here). I was unaware that JKR WAS an Evangelical Christian...where is this public knowledge? I would really be disappointed if 6 wonderful and creative books turned out to be a vehicle for some kind of religious message. YUCK. Ken: I think that you should know that you are being deeply offensive here. Perhaps you don't intend to be but you are. You seem to be buying into the common secular American demonization of Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christianity which I struggle to comprehend because it is propagated by those who apparently think of themselves as tolerant and open minded. Tolerant and open minded towards everyone but me, I suppose. I think that its twin sources are the decision made by the media a decade or two ago to label radical Islamists as "fundamentalist" for lack of a better word and the distress that it has caused in some circles when conservative Christians began to assert themselves politically in this country. There is absolutely no connection and no similarity I can see between "fundamentalist" Islam and "fundamentalist" Christianity. And conservative Christians have as much right as anyone to exercise their votes. We are a minority, if you are afraid of us all you have to do is vote and you will win. I strongly recommend that you do that anyway, every chance you get. But somehow we have become everyone's favorite whipping post and it is amazing how quickly all these kind, gentle liberal people have become experts at wielding the lash. I am a little curious as to what you perceive as the incredible differences between evangelical and other Christians. I've spent a fair amount of time worshiping with a local Missouri Synod Lutheran Church and I can tell you that I felt 100% comfortable there. As far as I could tell the only thing we differed on was the nature of the communion elements. Hardly an incredible difference. I presume you consider Lutherans "mainstream"? If not them then who? All Christians have the same core theology and evangelical/fundamentalist Christians have very little beyond that core theology. There is nothing in our Bible that isn't in yours. I am not aware of *anything* which your local Baptist church teaches that your local Catholic church does not teach except that you restrict to your hierarchy things we allow laity and local ministers to perform. We have very spare worship services compared to most other denominations. We do evangelize more than most but I am not sure that the Catholic Church gives up anything to us on that front. I think it is mostly in our political and social stands that evangelical Christians differ from other protestants and very often then we find our closest ally is your Pope! You have nothing to fear from us and no reason to be upset if JKR were one of us. But I am quite sure she is not. I don't see Harry Potter as a manual for the faith. I have trouble seeing how Harry could become Christ without becoming blasphemous instead. He is a decent kid and if I had any I would not be concerned if my children adopted him as a role model. But Spotless Lamb of God he is not. To have this series suddenly revealed as a massive Christian allegory is something that I think would upset most readers. It certainly would upset me, simply because it would have to come completely out of left field. At this point the insertion of any significant, direct Christian message would be horribly out of place. I don't expect it to happen. I think you have nothing to worry about there and also absolutely no reason to be disturbed by your Evangelical Christian neighbors and friends. Ken From fairwynn at hotmail.com Mon Jul 2 19:39:07 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 19:39:07 -0000 Subject: Snape as lone crusader against Voldemort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171142 wynnleaf A recent comment of Carol's reminded me of an interesting theory some of us developed on the Lexicon Forum that Snape had never been a true servant of Voldemort and had instead entered Voldemort's "employment" (to use Dumbledore's term), as a way of infilterating Voldemort's Death Eaters with the goal of destroying Voldemort. Sounds way out on a limb? First consider Dumbledore's words when describing Snape's turning from Voldemort. Dumbledore never says Snape "turned" from Voldemort. Dumbledore, in GOF, says that "Severus Snape was indeed a Death Eater. However, he rejoined our side before Lord Voldemort's downfall and turned spy for us, at great personal risk." We might assume that JKR simply misused a word when she chose to have Dumbledore say "rejoined" instead of "joined," except that Dumbledore then uses very similar language in HBP when he said, "I believe it to be the greatest regret of his life and the reason that he returned ?" "Rejoined" and "returned?" Why is Dumbledore using such language? That implies that Snape was on the good side to begin with. And then there's Dumbledore's reference to Snape's service with Voldemort about which he never refers to as Snape "serving" Voldemort, but instead said, "He was still in Lord Voldemort's employ on the night he heard the first half of Professor Trelawney's prophecy." Snape was in Voldemort's *employ?* How odd. I can't recall another reference to Voldemort hiring people. And then we have Sirius comment in GOF, where Sirius said that he simply couldn't believe that Dumbledore would ever have hired Snape if he'd been a Death Eater. Of course, Sirius can be wrong about Snape and Dumbledore. Nevertheless, it's a suggestive comment. Okay, let's set aside those oddities for the moment. Now we have the peculiarities of Snape's motives for following Voldemort. We've never been told what they were. Aside from one "mudblood" comment, in which we could easily argue he made under great provocation, we have no evidence that Snape hated muggleborns or was in any way interested in a pureblood agenda. Neither Sirius, Lupin nor James speak of this as a fault of Snape's. In fact, the only real evidence we have about that is that he *did* join up. But while we know Voldemort is himself a half-blood, it does seem odd that a half-blood would join what is in essence a pureblood movement. Then we've got Sirius' comments that Snape was into the Dark Arts, but we don't get any objective evidence of that and it rather looks more like Sirius was simply very biased and put the worst possible spin on Snape's knowledge of spells. Sure we've got plenty of evidence that Snape knew lots of magic above his level and created lots of spells. But in a potions notebook with every margin literally filled with notes, we only find one "dark" spell amidst lots of the typical jokey sorts of spells that all the students seemed to get into. Certainly not what we'd expect from a kid supposedly "up to his eyeballs" in the Dark Arts. Then we've got JKR drawing parallels between Harry and Snape. Yes, she *could* be drawing parallels to show us two people who have similarities, but make very different choices. But it's just as possible that she'll have those parallels go even deeper than we can currently see. At this point, we see Harry and Snape, both half-bloods, both bullied, both pretty snarky with those who bully them, both marked by Voldemort (albeit for different reasons), both trusted by Dumbledore, both pushed by Dumbledore to agree to do something against their wishes (Dumbledore makes Harry agree to give him the Cave potions regardless how it seems to hurt him). And Harry even *likes* Snape in the form of the Half Blood Prince. There's more. But suppose it goes far deeper? Here's Carol's comment from the Niggling Details thread: < Message-ID: <602634.85056.qm@web31501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171143 --- Ken Hutchinson wrote: > Katie: > > Also, may I beg to point out that Evangelical > Christianity is > incredibly different from mainstream Christian > religions, and quite > disturbing to a lot of us (Catholic here). I was > unaware that JKR WAS > an Evangelical Christian...where is this public > knowledge? I would > really be disappointed if 6 wonderful and creative > books turned out > to be a vehicle for some kind of religious message. > YUCK. > > Ken: > > I think that you should know that you are being > deeply offensive here. > Perhaps you don't intend to be but you are. You seem > to be buying into > the common secular American demonization of > Evangelical and > Fundamentalist Christianity which I struggle to > comprehend because it > is propagated by those who apparently think of > themselves as tolerant > and open minded. Tolerant and open minded towards > everyone but me, I > suppose. > Ken bamf: While many of the Christian religions have the same core, many of them go about them in different ways. Evangelical is a way many groups describe themselves. (I have also had my head chewed off my Evangelical Lutherans for saying that all Christians believe the same thing. Their argument was simply they were right and I was wrong.) Evangelicals tend to be those that want to thrust their religion on everyone. My opinion. I do not believe it is a media bias towards many of the Evangelical groups - they have a 'bad rep' among more main stream religions. They tend to be louder, and have much more of a conservative opinion of things that bothers many main stream people. In my area, they protest in front of stores (not protesting the stores, but along the highway in front of them) which does cause a severe drop in business to those stores, even though the stores have nothing to do with the protesters. I also tend to agree about the HP books NOT being a tool for evangelizing, proselytizing, or advocation of any one religion. I simply think that JKR's comment of so many years ago means that if we knew her religion, we would know what values she has. In the Christian religion, forgiveness is a huge value as is treating other people decently. Both of which also seem to be huge parts of HP (the hat singing about getting along and ignoring house boundaries, treatment of Lupin and Hagrid, the whole pureblood vs. halfblood vs. mudblood vs. squib, etc.) But, to say that HP is a Christian allegory, does cheapen the books. To me, they have many Heathen aspects to them. To others, it maybe Pagan. But that does not mean I'm going to advocate them as Heathen, just that they demonstrate a lot of Heathen qualities. And I agree with Katie. I, too, get sick of seeing the argument of HP as a Christian book come up again and again. Faith is deeply personal, and people will take from the books what they want. Not what others think they should. Heathenly, bamf, Recovering Catholic There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ From random832 at fastmail.us Mon Jul 2 20:47:15 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (random832 at fastmail.us) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:47:15 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1183409235.13934.1198169393@webmail.messagingengine.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171144 > vmonte : > According to what we do know about Snape he told Dumbledore about > the prophecy once he realized that the prophecy was going to target > Harry's family. But doesn't that also imply that if it turned out to > be some other shmucks family that he would have been okay with it? A credible argument has been raised that he would have been unaware the prophecy referred to a baby at all. -- Random832 From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 21:14:08 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 21:14:08 -0000 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171145 > ******************* > katie responds: The reason I don't want to discuss faith/religion > Why do we HAVE to give it a > religious meaning? It's not lacking a meaning or a profundity. I > just think forcing religion down the proverbial throat of the books > diminishes the actual story, which does not lack in meaning. Sorry > I've been a bit redundant - I'm at work and trying to think too > hard. KATIE zgirnius: If you do not wish to consider the possibility that there is religious meaning or religious sensibility in the books, that is naturally your privilege. Others, however, may feel that discussing the books in these terms adds to their understanding of and appreciation for the books. I would say canon definitely gives us license to consider the influence of Rowling's Christianity on her works, and such consideration is in no way 'forcing' religion onto/into the books. Specifically, here is what Rowling has to say on the subject, in an interview she granted The Vancouver Sun in 2000: http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm > Is she a Christian? > ''Yes, I am,'' she says. ''Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.'' zgirnius: If the author herself considers her views on religion spoilerish, the accusation that religion is being 'forced' onto the books is groundless. This does not mean the books are a heavy handed allegory in which Harry is Christ (I certainly do not buy this idea, for reasons that have been well-expressed by others upthread.) But there is a lot of room on the continuum between such a work and one utterly free from any religious content or influence. From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 21:07:57 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (Andrew Snee) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 14:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <465315.53548.qm@web45312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171146 Dana: The only reason DD constantly repeats his trust in Snape is because people question Snape's trustworthiness over and over again. This does not have to mean that DD's trust in Snape is therefore somehow more special then the trust he has for the other people working for him and we actually do not see that DD gives Snape any kind of special treatment at all. Sneeboy2: I'll just jump in here and say that DD confiding any information to Snape requires a different level of trust, because he knows that Snape is also has Voldemort's confidence. Sending one of your own into the enemy camp indicates a pretty high level of trust. If Snape is the one who healed DD's hand, and the one he wanted to see after he'd drunk the potion, then Snape's knowledge of DD's actions outside Hogwart's could be second only to Harry's. DD told McGonagall nothing about his actions outside Hogwarts. That's some pretty special trust. Dana: I believe he trusted Snape because he believed Snape's story of remorse. He believed that because Snape declared that it was the biggest regret of his life and that he made a terrible mistake, that Snape deserved a second chance and DD gave it to him. Sneeboy2: That's certainly part of it, but something tells me there's more to the story, and we'll find out what in DH. One thing is certain: if Snape is a spy for DD, he must be giving him some information about Voldemort. We don't know the quality of that information, but if it was always wrong, I'd think DD would get suspicious. IF some of it turned out to be right, and aided DD, that in itself would be a cause for trust. This is speculation, but it's part of the definition of spying to bring back info about the enemy, so I don't think it's wild speculation. Dana: Draco proved he was not capable of murder and not that he chose to spare DD's life. To me there is a difference. Draco did not make a choice that he would spare DD's life at the coast of his own. He did not sacrifice himself so DD could live. Although I am truly glad that Draco could not kill DD, he did not do some type of heroic deed on the tower. Sneeboy2: I don't disagree, but to be fair, his actions, or lack thereof, went against everything he'd been raised to believe from birth. It also put his life and his family's lives in danger. To me, having qualms about committing murder in a situation like that is not a sign of someone who's lacking guts, but of someone who has a heart. Dana: He kept Snape from the DADA job not because he was worried Snape would fall back into his old habits but because he wanted to show Snape that you do not have to do what you are good at to be respected as a human being. Sneeboy2: Something I find interesting about Snape's desire to teach DADA is that he must be aware of the curse on the position. He might believe that the curse won't befall him because he's loyal to LV, or because LV believes that Snape is loyal to him. Or he might want to tackle the curse head on. Or he might want to pass on his depth of knowledge about the subject. Hermione compares his style of teaching DADA to Harry's. Sneeboy2 From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 21:30:32 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 21:30:32 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Discussing Religion on the List Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171147 Greetings from Hexquarters! Noticing a bit of a ruckus on the list about the boundaries of religious discussion, the elves thought this might be a good time to remind everyone of what's on topic and what's not: Discussion of religion is permitted on this list if the poster is expressly relating the discussion to the HP books. So, it's ok to discuss the extent to which you believe the books bear the stamp of JKR's religious beliefs, but when the topic shifts to what is an Evangelical Christian, it's time to take the discussion to HPFGU- OTChatter. (Even if your post is still somewhat on-topic, if you think it's starting to stray, you can offer to take it there yourself.) This is a very diverse group, encompassing a wide range of beliefs. We know that some of you would rather that religion not be mentioned at all. To others the religious context is very important. Please don't complain on-list about a topic; instead, drop a note to the elves at hpforgrownups-owner @yahoogroups. com (without the spaces). Finally, to borrow some excellent advice from a listmember, if you are annoyed by a thread, regardless of the source of annoyance, "make some hot chocolate, and avoid the posts with the offending subject head." Betsy Hp aka Oopsie Elf for the List Elves From peckham at cyberramp.net Mon Jul 2 21:34:52 2007 From: peckham at cyberramp.net (luna_loco) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 21:34:52 -0000 Subject: Apparating at Hogwarts => Dobby has done it twice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171148 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zuhm" wrote: > > I thought apparating was impossible at Hogwarts. Is it only restricted > to wizards and witches? Dobby the house elf, apparated with a 'crack' > shortly after Harry tricked Lucius into freeing Dobby. Also, Dobby > apparated into and out of the Hospital wing when he visted Harry. > > Am I missing something? > > -zuhm While house elves are able to transport themselves using apparation-like magic, there is nothing in canon that says that house elves can apparate. Instead, as house elves have there own type of magic, they use a different form of magic that produces similar results. Allen From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jul 2 21:45:54 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 21:45:54 -0000 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: <602634.85056.qm@web31501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171149 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Metylda wrote: bamf: > While many of the Christian religions have the same > core, many of them go about them in different ways. > Evangelical is a way many groups describe themselves. > (I have also had my head chewed off my Evangelical > Lutherans for saying that all Christians believe the > same thing. Their argument was simply they were right > and I was wrong.) Evangelicals tend to be those that > want to thrust their religion on everyone. My > opinion. > > I do not believe it is a media bias towards many of > the Evangelical groups - they have a 'bad rep' among > more main stream religions. They tend to be louder, > and have much more of a conservative opinion of things > that bothers many main stream people. Geoff: As I said in message 171060, there seems to be a very different meaning attached to "evangelical" in the UK judging by the points bamf has made. To repeat myself, I am an evangelical Christian and also a member of a mainstream Free Church (the Baptist Church) and would view the dictionary definition of the word which I quoted in that message as being a fair description of the meaning certainly accepted by individual UK Christians. Most Protestant churches and a fair number of Anglican churches would subscribe to this view as congregations. bamf: > But, to say that HP is a Christian allegory, does > cheapen the books. To me, they have many Heathen > aspects to them. To others, it maybe Pagan. > > But that does not mean I'm going to advocate them as > Heathen, just that they demonstrate a lot of Heathen > qualities. > > And I agree with Katie. I, too, get sick of seeing > the argument of HP as a Christian book come up again > and again. Faith is deeply personal, and people will > take from the books what they want. Not what others > think they should. Geoff: I agree that faith is deeply personal. I also see a difference between "religion" and "faith". Being religious can mean going through the activities and motions of a bellief system without actually seeing the real meaning. There are many people in the UK who have grown up in the church and go through the rituals and services because they have always done so - what George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury once called "Churchianity". I even have a cousin who has changed his religion three times in the last 25 years so that it satisfies his life style and I do not jest. Faith - whether Christian - or otherwise - means really accepting the belief and building your life round it at the deepest level. Coming back to the books and JKR's approach, which is what we should really be considering, you may get sick of the fact that people bring up the argument that the HP books are Christian but we have to take on board that we need to consider what the *author* may have said or done in the writing - not what we *want* them to do or say. JKR has referred to her faith. I have said previously, that if she has a real Christian faith which is an integral part of her life and not just lip service paid on a Sunday, that will reveal itself in her writing - not in hitting her readers over the head with it - but in the subtle ways in which she develops her story. Of course, readers of different faiths and persuasions will read things differently but to throw JKR's Christian views out of the window and rubbish them because she does not apparently agree with you seems. to me at least, to constitute something of an insult to her as the creator of Harry Potter and his world. From alliethewizard at yahoo.com Mon Jul 2 22:32:05 2007 From: alliethewizard at yahoo.com (Allie) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 22:32:05 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171150 Allie: First off, props to you, Julie, for a thought-provoking post. I've been participating in debates over Snape's loyalties on several forums since the day after the HBP release, and to be honest, I'd never given the "Dumbledore asked Snape to deal the final blow" theory the time of day up until this point. Your logic seems to hold together well, and it does indeed present a plausible version of events leading up to Dumbledore's death. However (of course there always has to be a "however" where Snape is concerned), there's still one point that gives me pause: how could Dumbledore have expected Harry to accept help from Snape in the future after witnessing what he witnessed at the Astronomy Tower? Julie said: "7. Because Dumbledore is now dying at an accelerated rate, he believes (and has said) that Snape can be of more use to Harry than Dumbledore now can. If in fact there is no way Dumbledore can survive, or if upon surviving he knows he would be a mere shadow of himself (note his powers were so greatly diminished HE apparently couldn't save himself, and didn't bother to call Fawkes to save him either), then it's certainly a logical conclusion that an alive Snape, a DDM!Snape, his status now secured in the enemy camp, can give Harry and the Order far greater aid than Dumbledore can." Allie replies: In order for Snape to give Harry and the Order greater aid, it would be prerequisite for Harry and the Order to acknowledge that Dumbledore did in fact ask Snape to kill him. Based on Harry and Snape's history, I just can't imagine this happening, and I'd have thought both Dumbledore and Snape would foresee this problem in the process of developing their secret plans. (And if we assume that Snape is loyal to the Order, the circumstances of Dumbledore's death must have been planned well in advance, immediately after Snape told his mentor that he had made the Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa, as opposed to a spur-of-the-moment self-sacrifice in the face of Death Eaters at Dumbledore's beloved school.) Harry has indicated his dislike and distrust of Snape numerous times throughout the series. In his third year, for instance, he attacked Snape for his narrow-minded determination to turn Sirius over to the dementors, shouting "You're pathetic! Just because they made a fool of you at school you won't even listen!" (PoA, American paperback, pp. 361). Two years later, he declared to himself that "whatever Dumbledore said, he would never forgive Snape" and this was before he even found out about Snape's Unbreakable Vow and realized that it was Snape who overheard the prophecy midway through his sixth year (OotP, American paperback, pp. 851). Dumbledore, of course, knew all this. As recently as the end of OotP, Harry told him point-blank that "Snape made it worse, my scar always hurt worse after lessons with him [ ] How do you know he wasn't trying to soften me up for Voldemort, make it easier for him to get inside my [mind]?" (OotP, pp. 833). Dumbledore has also informed Harry that "I have watched you more closely than you can have imagined" and it would not have taken much in the way of fancy magical spying devices for Dumbledore to notice that Harry and Snape openly loathed each other (OotP, pp. 839). He himself acknowledged the fifth-year Occlumency lessons (the only time he asked Harry and Snape to work together as allies against the Dark Side) as a "fiasco" (HBP, American hardcover, pp. 79). In short, Harry has always hated and will always hate Snape, Dumbledore was aware of Harry and Snape's mutual enmity, and Dumbledore would have had better judgment than to create a plan that hinged on Harry overcoming his past and learning to trust his least favorite teacher, his father's childhood enemy, his headmaster's murderer, and the man responsible for his marking as "the Chosen One." For Dumbledore to believe that Harry would sit still to listen to any advice from Snape without jinxing his former teacher silly, in my view, defies logic. Therefore, my only conclusion can be that Snape's apparent murder of Dumbledore was not the brainchild of Dumbledore himself, but of a different master. Time for a couple pre-emptive defenses. It is true that Harry has believed seemingly impossible stories of innocence before. Sirius's explanation of the change in Secret-Keeper, the illegal Animagi, and so forth, initially appeared to be just as farfetched as the proposed theory that Snape killed Dumbledore on his victim's orders. However, Sirius's story had one crucial element that Snape's never had: evidence. He waited until he had Pettigrew cornered, until he could force the rat to transform to human, until he had a guilty culprit who could say "'He was taking over everywhere! What was there to be gained by refusing him?'" before he even approached Harry (PoA, pp. 374). Snape could lay down claims that he acted on Dumbledore's wishes 'til the cows came home, but he would never have proof that he did it out of interest in Harry's well-being, not Voldemort's. He could whip out a Pensieve and show a flood of memories of his instructions from Dumbledore, but how would Harry know that even as he received these orders, Snape wasn't thinking "how convenient, now I have a handy cover-up for the death the Dark Lord so desperately wants"? A portrait, which according to J. K. Rowling only speaks "catch phrases" from the subject's lifetime, can offer no substantive evidence that Dumbledore really intended these events to be. Furthermore, at the age of sixteen, Harry is much less na?ve than the thirteen-year-old who rescued Sirius from the clutches of the Ministry. He has seen three people, including a fellow student and two of his closest friends, die at the hand of Voldemort and his servants. He is suspicious of the government, he has to watch all the people he trusts for signs of the Imperius Curse, he has witnessed Voldemort's return, and he is burdened by the knowledge that he must destroy the most powerful wizard of all time or else be destroyed himself. It would take a lot to make him trust a man who was effectively responsible for his parents' deaths and may or may not be a Death Eater, and frankly, I don't blame Harry. I would tend to be wary of a man who is very good at breaking into other people's minds and very good at keeping them out of his own, myself. Finally, having said all this, I'd like to take a moment to put forward my own views on Snape, because I'm concerned that I've slightly misrepresented myself in this post. Do I believe that Snape was working for Voldemort throughout HBP? Not necessarily. Do I think his entire role in the war against Voldemort thus far has taken place by Dumbledore's design? Most likely not. To me, Snape's loyalties until the final chapters of Book Six were highly, highly ambiguous; if an objective observer had witnessed every second of Snape's life from the moment he went to the Hog's Head to overhear Trelawney's prophecy to the moment of Dumbledore's death, I doubt even he would be able to tell us which side Snape was on. From the beginning, I believe Snape was a man out for himself, playing spy for whichever side seemed to be winning at the moment. In killing Dumbledore and forfeiting Harry's trust, however, he appears to have made his choice; until new canon, I consider him a servant of Voldemort. Allie From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Mon Jul 2 23:22:50 2007 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 01:22:50 +0200 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? References: Message-ID: <024501c7bcff$e89a09c0$15b2a8c0@miles> No: HPFGUIDX 171151 Geoff Bannister wrote: > As I said in message 171060, there seems to be a very > different meaning attached to "evangelical" in the UK > judging by the points bamf has made. > > To repeat myself, I am an evangelical Christian and also > a member of a mainstream Free Church (the Baptist > Church) and would view the dictionary definition of > the word which I quoted in that message as being a > fair description of the meaning certainly accepted by > individual UK Christians. Most Protestant churches > and a fair number of Anglican churches would > subscribe to this view as congregations. Miles I agree with Geoff that obviously people speak of different things here. In German, there is the distinction between the words "evangelisch" (which means "based on the Gospels"), including all Lutheran/protestant churches in distinction to the Catholic church, and "evangelikal" in the meaning of fanatic/fundamentalist Protestants. "Evangelisch" seems to be what Geoff talks about, "evangelikal" seems to be the understanding of bamf and of the essay in question. Based on this different understanding of a word - another one for the UK vs US discussion? - the reaction to "Christian allegory" may be different. Since Christian fundamentalists are not strong here, I have no problem with Christian influences in a work of fiction. If I would live in the US, I might object stronger, knowing the everyday propaganda broadcasted and printed all over the country. > bamf: >> But, to say that HP is a Christian allegory, does >> cheapen the books. To me, they have many Heathen >> aspects to them. To others, it maybe Pagan. > Geoff: > Coming back to the books and JKR's approach, which is what > we should really be considering, you may get sick of the fact that > people bring up the argument that the HP books are Christian but > we have to take on board that we need to consider what the *author* > may have said or done in the writing - not what we *want* them to > do or say. JKR has referred to her faith. (snip) > Of course, readers of different faiths and persuasions will read > things differently but to throw JKR's Christian views out of the > window and rubbish them because she does not apparently > agree with you seems. to me at least, to constitute something > of an insult to her as the creator of Harry Potter and his world. Miles I think you both would agree with me, that JKR didn't write an piece of Christian propaganda, and that her intention is not to evangelise people without any or with a different faith than her's? Obviously the books are about general problems of right and wrong. That means JKR will put in her moral virtues, which are based in her own faith which she claimed as being Christian. So, I agree with Geoff, that there is no point in denying the Christian underlying of the book, but certainly not in the very crude way the essay's title that started the discussion here assumes. Let me quote an older post of myself to make my own position clear (Message #143684): "As far as I remember, there is not a single piece of any specific religion mentioned (apart from more or less folkloristic items) concerning the entire Harry Potter series. We can assume, that there is a more or less Christian background within the British wizard community. But we learn about wizards in Uganda, Africa in general and all over the world, so we can assume other religious backgrounds for wizards e.g. in India, Arabia, or Australia. Rowling does not mention the role of religion in wizards' world, but she deals with basic ethical questions, which matter in any religion as well as for atheists, agnostics a.s.o. (...) I do not know whether this undetermined position towards religious aspects is taken intentionally by Rowling. We could discuss this, there are some hints in interviews. But the outcome of this position is a big part of the "mystery" about the world wide success of Harry Potter. You do not need much religious background to understand the questions which are important in the story. It is about good and bad, about love and hatred, about to be true or untruthful, about friendship and care. To understand this, you have to be a human being - not more. (...) When reading about Christian fundamentalists condemn Harry Potter as unholy, and I bet Islamic or Hindu fundamentalists would join their choir, I just think: well done, Joanne K. Rowling." From jenzajlp at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 00:00:31 2007 From: jenzajlp at hotmail.com (Jennefer Pizza) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 20:00:31 -0400 Subject: Revised: DH Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for Bragging Rights Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171153 Coming out of lurkdom to join in the fun! (Revised, because I don't know what I'm doing since I rarely post - I hope this one is right). Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Order: Hagrid (and sadly, probably more, but I think Hagrid will be one of, if not the most, prominent of them) DEs: Bellatrix 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes I think H, R, G will do so begrudgingly. Ginny will go at her Mother's insistence. R & H at Harry's. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg, during the inevitable attack on Privet Drive once Harry turns 17. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley, much to his newlywed bride's chagrin d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall (leaving open a Transfiguration post to be filled byTonks?) 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Ring b. Locket (12 GP) c. Diary d. Hufflepuff Cup e. Ravenclaw Wand (the one in the window at Ollivander's) f. Tom Riddle's award for service to the school g. in Voldemort This one was incredibly difficult, but I'm guessing Voldie never got his hands on a Gryffindor artifact. And I just have a feeling about that service award. Plus, having a horcrux in Hogwarts helps along the narrative; Harry can finally make his way back to Hogwarts to reunite with Ron, Hermione, and Ginny prior to the penultimate battle (I think there will be a big battle of Order vs. DEs at Hogwarts, but it will end with Harry vs. Voldemort one-on-one in another locale probably the MoM). In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: I'm torn between a lily and a phoenix, but I'll go with phoenix (what better way to prove his allegiance to DD?) Boggart: DD's death Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Like everyone else, I too believe it is Love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Snape was the "awful boy" Petunia was referring to. This will most likely be revealed by Petunia when she tells all to Harry post- Privet Drive battle. 2. Snape and Lily definitely had some kind of past, but if romantic, it was completely one-sided. 3. Neville will be the one to do in Bellatrix. 4. Dumbledore did not die of an AK. 5. Charlie and his dragons, including Norbert, will arrive to help fight in the penultimate battle. For the marveling (or, at least, the contemplating): 6. Harry will inherit some useful, never-before-seen (to us), item (s) from Dumbledore that will assist him in Voldie's downfall. 7. Percy will try to make amends with his family, but will be killed battling with the Order before getting forgiveness from all of the Weasleys (see: Fred & George). 8. Dobby knows more about Voldie than he's told Harry. He hasn't told Harry because he doesn't realize how valuable his information is, but once revealed it will greatly assist Harry in his horcrux hunt. 9. There was more going on with Tonks' strange behavior in HBP than her love of Lupin. 10. Ginny will become an animagus (something feline note the frequent cat-like descriptions of her), a power she may stealthily use to help Harry with his horcrux search, or possibly to keep tabs on him without his knowledge. Other Theories I have read in this contest that I agree with but are so original, I didn't dare use them in my own top 5: 1. The Potter family is a descended from Bowman Wright, the inventor of the golden snitch. (Kelly) 2. The centaurs will join the OOP at a crucial moment, thereby recreating the members of good forces as depicted in the brethern fountain at MOM (Colwilrin) 3. Snape will save Ginny's life. (M. Clifford) _________________________________________________________________ http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507 From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 00:23:47 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 00:23:47 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171154 > > Carol responds: > agree with> > > She's [McGonagall] not going to appoint a (former) Ravenclaw as > Head of Gryffindor anymore than she'd appoint a (former) Hufflepuff > or Slytherin for that post. The HoH has to be temperamentally > suited to the House he or she heads (and have at least an affection > for that House, as Sprout does for Hufflepuff). Mike: Not to mention, which iirc JKR did, all the HoH's were former members of that house. Meaning Flitwick was a Ravenclaw and would not qualify in the Potterverse for Gryffindor HoH. > Carol: > Most likely, IMO, the new Transfiguration teacher will be both a > (former) Gryffindor and the new HoH of Gryffindor. I think that > Dumbledore held both positions as McGonagall certainly did. It would > be nice, however, if Flitwick were promoted to assistant headmaster, > with McG as Headmistress. His mild and objective temperament would > balance her strict efficiency (and partiality) beautifully, IMO. Mike: I like the idea of Sprout being the new asst Headmistress. I like her temperament, no-nonsense, fair, but not harsh. I like the idea that these kind of things go in cycles. Dumbledore seemed to run things kind of loosy-goosy, giving his teachers and HoH's a lot of free reign. So McGonnagall comes in and tightens up those reigns. And Sprout, though less strict than McG, would appreciate and follow that approach. I agree Flitwick would better "balance" McG, but I'm more fond of things leaning more towards the strict side all around. > Carol: > It seems to me, that with the exception of Snape as DADA teacher > and HoH of Slytherin in HBP the Heads of Houses are matched up > with the core curriculum, the required classes other than the > cursed DADA position, as follows: > Gryffindor: Transfiguration; Slytherin: Potions; > Ravenclaw: Charms; Hufflepuff: Herbology. It could well be that the > four Founders taught those particular classes, though Gryffindor, > as a dueling champion, could well have taught DADA, too, while the > other teachers perhaps divided the other classes among them. Mike: I like your speculation matching the founders with core courses. And for reasons that will become obvious below, I like matching Gryffindor with DADA. Yet, I wonder if in their day DADA was instead some form of dueling or just magical fighting in general. IOW, I can't see the Dark Arts being either that well defined or looked down upon. We are talking about emergence from the Dark Ages, so I'd imagine that much of what present day WW calls *dark* was the order of the day back then. I'd also speculate that many of the present day *dark spells* were developed subsequent to Hogwarts opening. And that magic in those days wasn't advanced well enough to easily delineate between *light* and *dark* magic. > Carol: > At any rate, I think that Hogwarts under McGonagall will go back to > the normal course/HoH arrangement, with Slughorn already positioned > to take over Snape's role as HoH of Slytherin as well as the Potions > position he's already assumed, Flitwick and Sprout where they are > (with Flitwick possibly taking on the assistant headmastership as > well), and a new (former) Gryffindor as Transfiguration teacher and > HoH of Gryffindor. If I'm right that Gryffindor and Transfiguration > go together, Bill Weasley would be a good choice. Mike: Ah, here's that part below. ;) I like Bill Weasley taking over an unjinxed DADA post (as well as becoming Gryffindor HoH). Following in the Godric's speculated footsteps. His curse breaking skills should translate well to DADA. Obviously, I'd like to think the jinx would be lifted with Voldemort's demise, allowing some continuity in DADA instruction. So now I need a Transfiguration professor. I know Tonks would seem like a natural for that position, being a metamorphmagus. But I'd like to see Hogwarts broaden her horizons and hire Fleur as Transfiguration teacher. I can't say what her skills are in this discipline, but neither do I know any of the others. If she has any of her grandmother's Veela abilities, possibly she too could metamorph. I also like having a married couple teaching at Hogwarts (at least we don't know of any at this time). And, I'd imagine Fleur could at least keep the boys attention . The one problem with Bill getting hired on at this time is that he would have his sister as both a student and a member of his house. I wonder if that might be a situation that McGonnagall might avoid on principle. > Carol, just speculating and not committing herself to these suggestions Mike, enjoying your speculation and some of his own. From kimbroughr at verizon.net Tue Jul 3 01:39:55 2007 From: kimbroughr at verizon.net (Kim) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 20:39:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thoughts Regarding Snape References: Message-ID: <002201c7bd13$0fd1bb60$2f01a8c0@kim> No: HPFGUIDX 171155 LLL>Allie: >First off, props to you, Julie, for a thought->provoking post. I've >>been participating in debates over Snape's >>loyalties on several forums >since the day after the HBP release, and to be >honest, I'd never given the "Dumbledore asked Snape to deal the final blow" theory the time of day up until this point. Your logic seems to hold together well, and it does indeed present a plausible version of events leading up to Dumbledore's death. However (of course there always has to be a "however" where Snape is concerned), there's still one point that gives me pause: how could Dumbledore have expected Harry to accept help from Snape in the future after witnessing what he witnessed at the Astronomy Tower? >>>>>> Kim: I've been lurking here for a long time, but until now I've never had the nerve to post. However, I do have some thoughts about this question. I do not think that Dumbledore expected Harry to witness his death at Snape's hands. After drinking the poison, Dumbledore tells Harry repeatedly to take him to see Snape, even though Harry wants to take him to Madame Pomfrey. I think Dumbledore wanted to get Harry and Snape together, before he died from the poison, in order to work things out between the pair. I do not think there was enough time for even Snape to make an antidote for the poison, especially since there was no sample of it. So, this seems like the most logical thing to me. I don't think Dumbledore had a clue that Draco was going to let anyone into the castle that night. After all, the boy's other attempts were all failures. I think the invasion was a surprise to everyone and it forced Dumbledore and Snape to carry out a plan sooner than they expected or put one in action that they had hoped to avoid. altogether. Kim (Who will now go back to hiding.:) From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 3 01:51:41 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 21:51:41 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: <002201c7bd13$0fd1bb60$2f01a8c0@kim> References: <002201c7bd13$0fd1bb60$2f01a8c0@kim> Message-ID: <4689ABAD.4050204@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171156 Kim wrote: > I think Dumbledore wanted to get Harry and Snape together, before > he died from the poison, in order to work things out between the pair. I > do not think there was enough time for even Snape to make an antidote for > the poison, especially since there was no sample of it. Bart: Actually, believe it or not, I do not believe I have seen anybody else come out with that particular twist. It certainly would be a valid form of the so-called DDM!Snape (Dumbledore's Man) theory. Interestingly enough, in the last month or so, I've seen, twice, on TV series, the idea of someone saving someone else's life several times, so that the person could die at a time when his death will do the most good. I, like many others, believe that Dumbledore was dying, but that, with Snape's help, he was able to arrange for his death to do the most possible good. Certainly, the theory that things ARE what they seem to be on the surface is a valid one, in terms of "real life". Literarily speaking, however, I don't like it. The reason is the number of times Dumbledore makes it clear that he trusts Snape, completely. It looks, in HPD, after Harry informs DD that Harry has found out that Snape was the informer, that DD was about to tell Harry why he trusted Snape, but then decided not to. I just can't see something emphasized that strongly being a red herring. Bart From navarlane at comcast.net Tue Jul 3 01:21:10 2007 From: navarlane at comcast.net (NavarLane) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 21:21:10 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: <002201c7bd13$0fd1bb60$2f01a8c0@kim> Message-ID: <012f01c7bd10$73808f40$6501a8c0@DELL1109> No: HPFGUIDX 171157 Kim: I do not think that Dumbledore expected Harry to witness his death at Snape's hands. After drinking the poison, Dumbledore tells Harry repeatedly to take him to see Snape, even though Harry wants to take him to Madame Pomfrey. I think Dumbledore wanted to get Harry and Snape together, before he died from the poison, in order to work things out between the pair. I do not think there was enough time for even Snape to make an antidote for the poison, especially since there was no sample of it. So, this seems like the most logical thing to me. I don't think Dumbledore had a clue that Draco was going to let anyone into the castle that night. After all, the boy's other attempts were all failures. I think the invasion was a surprise to everyone and it forced Dumbledore and Snape to carry out a plan sooner than they expected or put one in action that they had hoped to avoid altogether. Mark: Kim, I too have been a lurker for some time. I agree that no one was expecting the attack and it changed everything. I think Dumbledore asked for Snape's help when he returned because he truly trusted Snape, although Harry and everyone else never have. I don't think Dumbledore planned on having Harry see him AK'd, as I don't believe he thought that would ever happen. I think his plea was for him to not do it as he saw at that moment what was about to happen. I think Book 7 will show us that this was one of Dumbledore's huge mistakes in trust (that he himself describes as possible when he makes a mistake) that manifests when the DEs break in to Hogwarts and Snape returns to Voldemort's service when Draco is unable to AK him. I think another key in this is when Dumbledore didn't know about the Unbreakable Vow when Draco informed him of this when discussing Snape's loyalties. I think Voldemort did order them to not kill Harry because I think he found out when he possessed Harry that he was a Horcrux and now does not want him dead. There were no attacks on Harry in HBP or no plans to kill him as had always been the case before. Dumbledore always said when he made mistakes they were usually huger because he was (humbly) smarter than most others. His greatest weakness (and strength) is love and trust and Snape has never shown one redeeming quality throughout the series and is accomplished at Occluemency. I think Snape was upset he didn't get the recognition as a hero in the first war, didn't get recognized for capturing Sirius Black, and was second fiddle to Harry when he arrived on the scene and his personality is one that is spiteful and self-interest driven. He saw Dumbledore as weak in the end and returned to where he thought the true power remained. I think Dumbledore believed Snape would help Harry, but that was one of the huge mistake DD said he was capable of committing. I think Snape will be a key player for Voldemort in Book 7 during his war. Sorry for the babbling, it is my first post and opportunity to share my belief. Mark From celizwh at intergate.com Tue Jul 3 03:22:26 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 03:22:26 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171158 Carol: > > At any rate, I think that Hogwarts under McGonagall > > will go back to the normal course/HoH arrangement, > > with Slughorn already positioned to take over Snape's > > role as HoH of Slytherin as well as the Potions > > position he's already assumed, Flitwick and Sprout > > where they are (with Flitwick possibly taking on the > > assistant headmastership as well), and a new (former) > > Gryffindor as Transfiguration teacher and HoH of > > Gryffindor. If I'm right that Gryffindor and > > Transfiguration go together, Bill Weasley would be > > a good choice. Mike: > Ah, here's that part below. ;) I like Bill Weasley > taking over an unjinxed DADA post (as well as becoming > Gryffindor HoH). Following in the Godric's speculated > footsteps. His curse breaking skills should translate > well to DADA. Obviously, I'd like to think the jinx > would be lifted with Voldemort's demise, allowing > some continuity in DADA instruction. > So now I need a Transfiguration professor. I know > Tonks would seem like a natural for that position, > being a metamorphmagus. But I'd like to see Hogwarts > broaden her horizons and hire Fleur as Transfiguration > teacher. I can't say what her skills are in this > discipline, but neither do I know any of the others. houyhnhnm: I like the idea that Bill will contribute to the fight against Voldemort by breaking the DADA curse. That's why I chose him for new DADA professor in my last will and testament. Tonks would be a good choice too, though. As an Auror, Tonks would be a good choice for DADA or transfiguration (or charms or potions). I'm not sure about Fleur for transfiguration. She pretty much stuck to charms in the TWT. And the Beauxbatons students, as a group, seemed to be most comfortable with Ravenclaw out of all the Hogwarts Houses, which also ties her to charms. However, I like to think of Fleur (aka Phlegm) as an individual, as Slytherinesque (Beauxbatons must surely have it's own Houses. They can't all be cut from the same stamp). "Phlegm" could not help but be good at potions, therefore I see her taking over from Slughorn, who will certainly be ready to retire for good if he makes it through VWII (although I think Draco will end up in that position someday). Cedric and Viktor were the only ones to use transfiguration as a tactic during the TWT. Cedric, alas, is dead. So, why not Krum for Transfiguration? Rowling has hinted that he will come back into the story, I believe. And *he* was drawn to Gryffindor (or at least one particular Gryffindor). houyhnhnm, who thinks Hogwarts might benefit by doing some out-of-the-box hiring. (I wouldn't want to call them parochial, but ....) From juli17 at aol.com Tue Jul 3 03:42:56 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:42:56 EDT Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171159 vmonte responds: Why would Dumbledore go through the trouble of having himself be dramatically murdered (to keep Draco safe) only to then have Snape take Draco back with him to Voldemort? I'm not sure Draco is going to be safe with Voldy, especially since he failed in his task. >From what we have seen of Death Eater action in the books I think I can safely assume that part the modus operandi of a DE includes murdering or at least torturing people. Julie: I don't think Dumbledore went to any "trouble" to get himself dramatically murdered. I'm sure he went to a good deal of trouble trying to *avoid* just such a scenario. But it didn't work in the end, partly because he couldn't or didn't foresee Draco ever managing to get the DEs into Hogwarts. As for "having" Snape take Draco back to Voldemort, again I don't think this was planned. It was simply the end effect once the action was set in motion. All Dumbledore could do was keep Draco alive and his soul whole *at the moment*, by trying to convince Draco that he isn't a killer and hoping Snape shows up before the DEs lose patience with Draco and likely kill him as well as Dumbledore. (Remember, Dumbledore never once tried to save himself. Either he was truly unable to do so, or he knew that buying a bit more time for himself would not aid the ultimate goal of Harry defeating Voldemort. Especially not if he truly believed a whole and healthy Snape could do more toward achieving that goal. Which is presumably also why he didn't summon Fawkes. He can't or doesn't want to be "saved." But he *is* determined to defeat Voldemort, whatever the cost. Certainly his own life, one lived long and productively, is a small price in his mind.) Dumbledore does relinquish control of Draco's future, not because he wants to, but because the events give him no choice. Or they do give him a choice between taking Draco down with him, if he was going to die no matter what, and turning Draco over to Snape, who even within Voldemort's camp would have *some* chance of keeping Draco alive and in possession of an intact soul. And some is better than none. Julie wrote: His other "persona" was something he adopted as a teenager, not something we have any evidence he considers relevant as an adult (other than to let Harry know the spells in the Potions book were his). vmonte responds: I think I remember Snape bragging to Harry that he was the Half- Blood Prince in book 6. Julie now: I guess it's all in how you interpret it. I got the impression Snape was not bragging so much as furious that Harry was using the HBP spells without even realizing it was his despised Potions professor who'd invented them. And while he may be proud of his teenage ingenuity, I still didn't get any impression Snape currently sees himself in those terms (Half-Blood Prince). Though since we aren't in Snape's mind, I'll admit that we can't really know ;-) vmonte: According to what we do know about Snape he told Dumbledore about the prophecy once he realized that the prophecy was going to target Harry's family. But doesn't that also imply that if it turned out to be some other shmucks family that he would have been okay with it? Julie: Actually I don't think that is implied at all. Certainly finding out that it was the Potters Voldemort ultimately decided to target was a wake up call. But we don't know enough about Snape's state of mind at the time to know if Voldemort's reign of torture and murder had already pushed at Snape's conscience (for instance, if he was affected by Regulus's death), and targeting the Potters was the final "straw" that toppled Snape's tower of justification built upon his anger and resentment, or if Snape was fine and dandy with Voldemort's terror tactics and only balked when the family of the man to whom he owed a life debt was targeted. (And that's only two of a dozen possible theories for Snape's decision to defect at that time.) Like everything else connected to Snape, until we know more about him, we are left guessing at his motives. And one guess has pretty much the same amount of factual canon to support it as another (which is practically none). Excluding the truly unlikely of course, such as Snape having faked all his meanness and being truly fond of Harry underneath ;-) Julie ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jr_pumpkin at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 04:03:04 2007 From: jr_pumpkin at yahoo.com (jr_pumpkin) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 04:03:04 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171160 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > This month features Godric. > jr_pumpkin: Did anyone else notice that Godric has red hair and green eyes? hmmmmmm....Lily-like? Come to think of it, wasn't Dumbledore a red head too? Okay, maybe I am totally reaching here!!!! ;) Is it the 21st yet? From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Tue Jul 3 04:47:07 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 00:47:07 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: <024501c7bcff$e89a09c0$15b2a8c0@miles> References: <024501c7bcff$e89a09c0$15b2a8c0@miles> Message-ID: <8C98B44586D41B6-1774-260B@WEBMAIL-RB02.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171161 On the topic of Harry as the son of God, wouldn't that whole virgin birth be a wonderful plot twist?? Maybe James and Lily aren't as...hm...involved as we all thought. :-) On a more serious note, I've read all the posts on this idea, and I truly cannot see where it's coming from.? I don't see Harry as the son of God or any kind of Christ figure.? I think it makes the series more powerful if he's just a regular boy who happened to have extraordinary circumstances.? He wasn't destined to this from birth, it was thrust upon him by some vague prophect.? IMVHO, I like Harry as just the kid next door (or under the stairs). Oryomai Who could be totally missing a Christ reference in Harry because she's an atheist. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 04:47:36 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 04:47:36 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171162 Me: > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > > > > Yes. > > > > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? > > > > Harry and Ginny. "Neri" wrote: > That's an interesting combination. The obvious question is: do you > predict he'll at least get a wedding night before he buys it? As I said "Harry will produce with Ginny Harry Potter Junior, although he will not live to see the child" so you figure it out. Egggplant From juli17 at aol.com Tue Jul 3 05:02:35 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 05:02:35 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171163 > > Allie replies: > > In order for Snape to give Harry and the Order greater aid, it would > be prerequisite for Harry and the Order to acknowledge that Dumbledore > did in fact ask Snape to kill him. Julie: I don't think this would be a prerequisite, certainly not at the beginning. In order for Snape to aid Harry and the Order, there are only two prerequisites, that he *is* on their side, and that he remain alive. He doesn't have to have any contact at all with them to assist them. He can weaken Voldemort's position from the inside, by destroying Horcruxes, by setting up Death Eaters to be killed or captured, by sowing dissention among a select few (the Malfoys would be one obvious target, after Voldemort essentially set Draco up to get revenge against Lucius), by messing with Nagini (certain potions perhaps), etc, etc. And if he has even one person who knows his true allegiance (Aberforth, perhaps?) he can indeed relay critical information to the Order through that person without his identity being known. Allie: Based on Harry and Snape's > history, I just can't imagine this happening, and I'd have thought > both Dumbledore and Snape would foresee this problem in the process of > developing their secret plans. (And if we assume that Snape is loyal > to the Order, the circumstances of Dumbledore's death must have been > planned well in advance, immediately after Snape told his mentor that > he had made the Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa, as opposed to a > spur-of-the-moment self-sacrifice in the face of Death Eaters at > Dumbledore's beloved school.) Julie: I do believe a there were contingency plans made in advance. Certainly if Dumbledore was fatally cursed when he destroyed the Ring Horcrux, then he knew it was a downhill ride, however much time Snape's intervention may have bought him. And he knows the war will come to a head once he does go. So he installed Snape as the DADA teacher. I also agree that one contingency plan Dumbledore would have set in place is making Snape promise to kill him if it came to that. I don't think it was the Plan, but more of a worst case scenario. The evidence in fact points to Dumbledore and Snape trying to avoid this scenario, with Snape doing his best to get concrete information from Draco about his plans. Unfortunately it doesn't work. Allie: > Harry has indicated his dislike and distrust of Snape numerous times > throughout the series. In his third year, for instance, he attacked > Snape for his narrow-minded determination to turn Sirius over to the > dementors, shouting "You're pathetic! Just because they made a fool > of you at school you won't even listen!" (PoA, American paperback, pp. > 361). Two years later, he declared to himself that "whatever > Dumbledore said, he would never forgive Snape" and this was before > he even found out about Snape's Unbreakable Vow and realized that it > was Snape who overheard the prophecy midway through his sixth year > (OotP, American paperback, pp. 851). > > Dumbledore, of course, knew all this. As recently as the end of OotP, > Harry told him point-blank that "Snape made it worse, my scar always > hurt worse after lessons with him [ ] How do you know he wasn't trying > to soften me up for Voldemort, make it easier for him to get inside my > [mind]?" (OotP, pp. 833). Dumbledore has also informed Harry that "I > have watched you more closely than you can have imagined" and it would > not have taken much in the way of fancy magical spying devices for > Dumbledore to notice that Harry and Snape openly loathed each other > (OotP, pp. 839). He himself acknowledged the fifth-year Occlumency > lessons (the only time he asked Harry and Snape to work together as > allies against the Dark Side) as a "fiasco" (HBP, American hardcover, > pp. 79). > > In short, Harry has always hated and will always hate Snape, > Dumbledore was aware of Harry and Snape's mutual enmity, and > Dumbledore would have had better judgment than to create a plan that > hinged on Harry overcoming his past and learning to trust his least > favorite teacher, his father's childhood enemy, his headmaster's > murderer, and the man responsible for his marking as "the Chosen One." Julie: Again, what happened on the Tower wasn't a set plan. The only "plan" was that Snape would kill Dumbledore if it came to that, rather than succumbing to the UV. And probably that they would do everything they could to save Draco's soul. They had no way of knowing about the cabinet, that the DEs would find a way into Hogwarts, that Harry would be present when Draco finally confronted Dumbledore. That part just "happened." As things do. Even the great Albus Dumbledore can only control so much ;-) Allie: > For Dumbledore to believe that Harry would sit still to listen to any > advice from Snape without jinxing his former teacher silly, in my > view, defies logic. Therefore, my only conclusion can be that Snape's > apparent murder of Dumbledore was not the brainchild of Dumbledore > himself, but of a different master. Julie: I agree that Harry listening to advice from Snape as things stand now does defy logic. But Snape doesn't have to talk directly to Harry to pass on information, or to do things that will actively help Harry defeat Voldemort. And again, there was no brainchild plan IMO only broad consistencies that could be applied to any number of eventualities, the specifics of which neither Dumbledore nor Snape could foresee. Allie: > > Time for a couple pre-emptive defenses. It is true that Harry has > believed seemingly impossible stories of innocence before. Sirius's > explanation of the change in Secret-Keeper, the illegal Animagi, and > so forth, initially appeared to be just as farfetched as the proposed > theory that Snape killed Dumbledore on his victim's orders. However, > Sirius's story had one crucial element that Snape's never had: > evidence. He waited until he had Pettigrew cornered, until he could > force the rat to transform to human, until he had a guilty culprit who > could say "'He was taking over everywhere! What was there to be > gained by refusing him?'" before he even approached Harry (PoA, pp. 374). > > Snape could lay down claims that he acted on Dumbledore's wishes 'til > the cows came home, but he would never have proof that he did it out > of interest in Harry's well-being, not Voldemort's. He could whip out > a Pensieve and show a flood of memories of his instructions from > Dumbledore, but how would Harry know that even as he received these > orders, Snape wasn't thinking "how convenient, now I have a handy > cover-up for the death the Dark Lord so desperately wants"? A > portrait, which according to J. K. Rowling only speaks "catch phrases" > from the subject's lifetime, can offer no substantive evidence that > Dumbledore really intended these events to be. > > Furthermore, at the age of sixteen, Harry is much less na?ve than the > thirteen-year-old who rescued Sirius from the clutches of the > Ministry. He has seen three people, including a fellow student and > two of his closest friends, die at the hand of Voldemort and his > servants. He is suspicious of the government, he has to watch all the > people he trusts for signs of the Imperius Curse, he has witnessed > Voldemort's return, and he is burdened by the knowledge that he must > destroy the most powerful wizard of all time or else be destroyed > himself. It would take a lot to make him trust a man who was > effectively responsible for his parents' deaths and may or may not be > a Death Eater, and frankly, I don't blame Harry. I would tend to be > wary of a man who is very good at breaking into other people's minds > and very good at keeping them out of his own, myself. Julie: I agree it would take a lot for Harry to trust Snape again. Not only a lot, but some time. Harry was presented evidence about Sirius's innocence and all but immediately went from hating him to trusting him. Granted Sirius was more of a figurehead to Harry than a real person, while Snape is a very real person in Harry's life. That does make Snape's road a great deal more difficult, if he is to gain Harry's trust (and who's to say Snape won't just show up at the end, save Harry before Harry can say yea or nea, and only after Snape's demise might Harry slowly realize Dumbledore had in fact been right in trusting Snape?). That said, I believe there are some startling revelations to be had in DH. I also believe Harry can and will *change* internally, and see the world and others in less black and white than he does at the moment. (While I agree he is no longer naive, he is still young and hotheaded.) Any change in his view of Snape will be partly due to any revelations he receives, be they from pensieves, portraits, time travel, or what have you, and partly from his own internal growth and maturity. IMO anyway. Allie: > Finally, having said all this, I'd like to take a moment to put > forward my own views on Snape, because I'm concerned that I've > slightly misrepresented myself in this post. Do I believe that Snape > was working for Voldemort throughout HBP? Not necessarily. Do I > think his entire role in the war against Voldemort thus far has taken > place by Dumbledore's design? Most likely not. To me, Snape's > loyalties until the final chapters of Book Six were highly, highly > ambiguous; if an objective observer had witnessed every second of > Snape's life from the moment he went to the Hog's Head to overhear > Trelawney's prophecy to the moment of Dumbledore's death, I doubt even > he would be able to tell us which side Snape was on. From the > beginning, I believe Snape was a man out for himself, playing spy for > whichever side seemed to be winning at the moment. In killing > Dumbledore and forfeiting Harry's trust, however, he appears to have > made his choice; until new canon, I consider him a servant of Voldemort. Julie: Fair enough. I agree that based on the canon of six books an objective observer couldn't tell us which side Snape is on. That was obviously deliberate on JKR's part, as was the appearance of Snape as a servant of Voldemort after the Tower scene. Appearances are so often deceiving in the HP books though, and we *do* have new canon coming in just 18 days(!). So I'm going with my gut (and with my hope) and considering Snape Dumbledore's man (not in servitude, but by free choice) until that new canon proves otherwise ;-) Julie From Meliss9900 at aol.com Tue Jul 3 05:22:57 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 01:22:57 EDT Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging rights by TigerPatronous Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171164 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Ron. (just a bad feeling I have) 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The dark mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? Yes c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Vernon Dursley (I just love the irony of that possibility) 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry Potter (Offered but might not be accepted) b. Head Girl? HERMIONE (Offered but not be accepted) c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Albus Dumbledore and to a lesser degree The Order 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort. b. The Diary (destroyed). c. The Ring (destroyed). d. Slytherin locket. e. Hufflepuff cup. f. The missing wand from Ollivander's. g. Riddle's Award for Special Services at Hogwarts. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Dumbledore. . (1st person to have faith in Snape) Boggart: Dead Dumbledore . Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Wormtail will honor his life debt to Harry. 2. Ollivander was kidnapped in order to force him to create a new wand for Voldemort. . one that will not "interact" with Harry's wand) 3. Neville will be a Hogwart's professor in the epilogue. 4. Harry's scar will disappear when Voldemort is killed. 5. Harry will not AK Voldemort. He will some how trick him through The Veil Melissa ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ida3 at planet.nl Tue Jul 3 05:28:52 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 05:28:52 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: <465315.53548.qm@web45312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171165 Sneeboy2: > I'll just jump in here and say that DD confiding any information to > Snape requires a different level of trust, because he knows that > Snape is also has Voldemort's confidence. Sending one of your own > into the enemy camp indicates a pretty high level of trust. If > Snape is the one who healed DD's hand, and the one he wanted to see > after he'd drunk the potion, then Snape's knowledge of DD's actions > outside Hogwart's could be second only to Harry's. DD told > McGonagall nothing about his actions outside Hogwarts. That's some > pretty special trust. Dana: Sorry but that is assuming without any canon proof that Snape knew what DD was doing when he injured his hand and that DD told Snape what he was doing that night. Canon actually indicates that he did not tell Snape what he was doing. Why? Well first of all Snape tells both Bella and Narcissa in Spinner's End that DD had sustained a serious injury to his hand, that DD is getting old and that his reflexes are slower. This might not be of real importance to them but Snape is telling it like it hasn't much importance at all, as if it isn't crucial information the enemy could use. Telling them makes me think he told LV too and it makes me think that Snape didn't know what had injured DD's hand and why it would be important to keep this information from the enemy. Telling your enemy that the one LV ever feared is weak and injured is a big no no but besides that LV would know what would cause such an injury. Just like Snape knew instantly what hurt Draco in the bathroom as he recognized the effects of his own curse and so would LV. I am pretty confident about my theory that it was Snape's information that made LV chance his mind about going after Harry and why he changed directive to take DD out first. Snape might not have known he was giving LV more information then he actually should because he didn't know that it would tip LV off that DD was on to his horcruxes and therefore I do not believe Snape knows anything about it. DD as he explains about the diary tells Harry that Lucius did not know the diary contained a soul piece of his master and that he just thought LV had put some real dark magic into it. There is no support in canon that DD shared his suspicion about the diary with Snape. Also DD believed Snape to be asleep when he and Harry got to the tower. That is a pretty strange assumption if you would have that person on alert in case you need him to cure you for whatever you were to encounter in the cave. DD trusted Snape to have returned to the side of good and just like Lupin, he truly trusted Snape would only go back to LV to pretend he was on their side. Only problem for me is Snape's actions, in OotP, do not support this idea because Snape lost Harry out of his sight for more then 5 hours before he alerted the Order and Snape did not claim to DD that he thought Harry to be safe in Umbridge care and therefore could not get to the DoM, he did not state that he had no way of knowing that Harry would find a way to the DoM. No, he actually tells DD that he had no way of knowing Harry would still believe Sirius to be in danger. Do you really believe this to be true? With everything that happened between Snape and Harry that year? Snape refused to help Harry further to learn occlumency but Harry somehow should still believe that Snape WOULD help him if he asked for his help? Or that Snape without any feedback indeed checked out that Sirius was safe? How would Harry know Sirius was safe without Snape ever telling him? Even if he believed Snape would check it out without any feedback Harry would not know Snape would have been successful in contacting Sirius. So to me that was a lie. Snape lied about why it took him so long to respond after Harry had giving him the warning. And if Harry had not stalled Lucius and his gang as they did, then the Order had arrived to late and this while Snape knew about LV's plan being set into action before Harry ever left for the DoM. Also isn't it strange that Snape is assumed to have alerted the Order to thwart Lucius from succeeding but just a few weeks later he takes a vow to protect his only son? And he tells the wife of the person he helped put in Azkaban in short that he helped putting him there and therefore was the real cause for LV's anger when he makes his claim about helping dispose of Black? Are we to believe Snape is really that stupid to give up his cover because he just wants to take some pride in helping to kill Sirius by telling them a lie that could expose him as a traitor? I think not. Also althroughout HBP DD was counting on Snape to take care of things concerning Draco as he tells Draco that he had given Snape the order to watch him but Snape failed to follow this order because there was that pesky vow that prevented Snape from taking real actions against Draco. DD indeed trusted Snape and why he gave him specific assignments and Snape failed him three times. Sneeboy2: That's certainly part of it, but something tells me there's more to the story, and we'll find out what in DH. One thing is certain: if Snape is a spy for DD, he must be giving him some information about Voldemort. We don't know the quality of that information, but if it was always wrong, I'd think DD would get suspicious. IF some of it turned out to be right, and aided DD, that in itself would be a cause for trust. This is speculation, but it's part of the definition of spying to bring back info about the enemy, so I don't think it's wild speculation. Dana: The only reason that there seems to be more to the story is DD's determination when he declares his trust in Snape. It is just, to me, the unwillingness to believe that it was only Snape's story of remorse that made DD trust Snape had returned to the right side. But DD specifically states in HBP that he believed that Snape's remorse WAS the reason for his return. Wanting to believe that there is more to it is in my opinion wanting there to be a bigger reason for Snape's return and his remorse and therefore more to DD's trust in Snape. Canon only tells us this and DD is no longer here to support any other type of version of why Snape returned and it was Snape's return that initiated DD's trust. The one thing you call certain isn't certain at all because in OotP DD never claims to Harry that he knew what LV was up to because of information Snape got from LV or that any type of information coming from Snape came directly from LV. DD only tells Harry about the information that Snape found out through Harry. Wouldn't it have been a great way for DD to proof Snape was on their side by stating Snape was working tirelessly to help the Order? Everyone knew Snape was so-called pretending to still be a DE. Snape's information did not help the Order to keep one step ahead of LV neither in OotP or HBP. The Order was running after the facts and therefore there is no proof in canon that Snape did anything other then confirm what the Order already knew. If the Order would have know that LV was still after the prophecy and was going to use Harry to get it, instead of them believing LV would have no way of getting to Harry and was not going to get it himself then there would have been someone guarding the MoM as a precaution. More Order Members would have guarded the premises of Hogwarts to make sure Harry would not get out. But there was no Order activity anywhere, why? Because I believe DD trusted Snape to secure Harry's safety and he didn't. Sneeboy2: > I don't disagree, but to be fair, his actions, or lack thereof, went against everything he'd been raised to believe from birth. It also put his life and his family's lives in danger. To me, having qualms about committing murder in a situation like that is not a sign of someone who's lacking guts, but of someone who has a heart. Dana: If Draco was showing compassion in that moment then why did he not react at all when Snape kills DD? Why did he not try to stop Snape killing DD but let himself be shoved out of the way. Why did he not start yelling that it would be wrong to kill? Because Draco was scared that the DEs would kill him on sight. Draco did not care if DD died he just could not do it himself. Sure that is a good thing that you can't take another humans life for your own personal gain but it doesn't proof Draco did not kill DD out of the goodness of his heart. Proofs indeed Draco's heart is not truly ever so evil. But where is Draco compassion in feeling sorry he almost killed two students? Draco failed his mission because he did not have the nerve to kill another human being not because he did no longer want DD death. That is a good thing don't get me wrong but it was not because Draco realized what he was doing was wrong. JMHO Dana From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 05:57:34 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 05:57:34 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171166 I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! If so then if Harry lives I guess I'll be condemned to be known as the town dunce in these parts; but if he really does die you must bow down before my brilliance. If you do agree with me please speak up now, I'd hate to be the only dumbbell. Eggplant From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 06:48:59 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 06:48:59 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171167 "eggplant107"wrote: > > I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that > matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But > can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! > > If so then if Harry lives I guess I'll be condemned to be known as the > town dunce in these parts; but if he really does die you must bow down > before my brilliance. > > If you do agree with me please speak up now, I'd hate to be the only > dumbbell. > > Eggplant > TKJ: I wrote a couple of posts about Harry dying. I put one up yesterday night (about Harry and all the main characters in the books) where I changed my mind about Harry dying during battle with LV to maybe his death being in the epilogue that tells us all about what everyone does after the war. But we shall all see in a few days. TKJ :-) From xellina at gmail.com Tue Jul 3 06:53:51 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 10:53:51 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Am I unique? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707022353w14add103rd1761990021dce08@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171168 2007/7/3, eggplant107 : > > I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that > matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But > can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! > Cassy: Well, I think that Harry SHOULD die in the last book and it would be a very proper epic ending, but I fear that he will not, due to marketing reasons. Surely, JRK doesn't want to loose all that future readers in years to come? I mean,who would buy their kid Philosopher's stone, knowing that the main character is going to kick the bucket eventually. Not to mention that there's 2 more movies to sell as well. So, I'm afraid that Harry's death is just wishful thinking on our part. :( [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 08:18:30 2007 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:18:30 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171169 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? SNAPE (BECAUSE HE'S THE MOST PROMINENT CHARACTER LEFT ASIDE FROM HARRY AND VOLDEMORT) 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? HIS DARK MARK 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? NO d. Luna? YES e. Ron? NO f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? REMUS AND TONKS (SO FAR MORE PROMINENT THAN BILL AND FLEUR) 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" ARABELLA FIGG 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? ERNIE MACMILLAN b. Head Girl? PANSY PARKINSON c. DADA Instructor? NO ONE BEFORE THE EPILOGUE d. Potions Master or Mistress? SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? MCGONAGALL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? WITH HARRY 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. IN VOLDEMORT b. RIDDLE'S DIARY c. MARVOLO'S RING d. SLYTHERIN'S LOCKET e. HUFFLEPUFF'S CUP f. RAVENCLAW'S WAND g. A RELIC OF GRYFFINDOR--SWORD/DAGGER/KNIFE In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS: STAG; BOGGERT: DEAD POTTERS Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? LOVE Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape's connection to Harry will be one of obligation and debt (real or assumed). We will not find out that DD cut a deal with Snape to have Snape kill him. This is a vote against ESE/Snape, out for himself Snape or Utilitarian Snape/DD (Snape killed DD because he and DD thought it would have the happiest results). This is a vote for deontological Snape. Not that I would vote for him. 2. Ginny will be an animagus. 3. Hermione's eventual career will involve the wizarding version of jurisprudence. Goodness knows, the wizarding world needs a decent legal system. 4. The giants, which are already critically endangered, will sustain such losses that their extinction will be assured. 5. Harry will "tame" a Gringotts dragon by speaking to it in parseltongue. Predictions just for fun, because I think they are even less likely: 6. We'll see Snape cry. 7. Luna will become a wandmaker. mz_annethrope From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 10:18:01 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 10:18:01 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707022353w14add103rd1761990021dce08@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171170 > > Eggplant: > > I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group > > for that matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in > > the last book. But can that really be true? Nobody agrees > > with me? Nobody?! > Cassy: > I mean,who would buy their kid Philosopher's Stone, knowing > that the main character is going to kick the bucket eventually. > Not to mention that there's 2 more movies to sell as well. So, > I'm afraid that Harry's death is just wishful thinking on our > part. :( Goddlefrood: There are plenty of indicia in interviews that Harry will die. I was at one time going to write up a theory that he would, but am kind of all theoried out, as 'twere. A sudden burst of realisation, such as there are only 17 days until release, may bring me out of this torpor, but then again it may not. Ah, that's actually the case in Fiji, only 17 days to go. The books began first off for JKR writing for herself. She says she had a plan and despite the odd tweak she's stuck to it. If Harry was slated to die he will die. No matter what other pressure might be brought to bear either from the publishing industry or the industry that shall not be named or elsewhere. For what it's worth Harry has probably already died several thousand times during the course of gaming by those who want to see him die, and in the computer games no doubt he can. JKR does not seem to be someone who would bow to pressure in other words and I, therefore, disagree with Cassy. Here are some interview quotes with links as I'd compiled them dated between just 1999 and 2001. There are many more later than that. The nearest JKR came to letting slip slip that Harry would die was reported in an article in The Scotsman (Number 4 below). She withdrew the comment wuickly apparently but had been taken at first as being serious (and when is she ever, at least until after DH is released?) This is all pasted from my file: ************************ (1) Barnes and Noble interview, March 19, 1999 With the huge success of the first three books and your seemingly endless imagination, do you think that you might (please, oh please) consider continuing the story past the originally planned seven books? Maybe continuing with Harry as an adult or books about his children? So you're convinced I'm not going to kill Harry??!! I try never to say never, because it seems that every time I do I end up by doing the thing I've forsworn. So, there is a remote possibility that there will another Harry book, but at the present time I am planning only seven. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/0999-barnesnoble-staff.htm (2) Davies, Frank. "Joanne Kathleen Rowling, creator of the Harry Potter," Sunday Gazette-Mail (Charleston, SC), 14 November 1999 - On Harry's fate: "I know what will happen to Harry in book seven, but I'm not going to tell you - he's got quite a full agenda coming up, poor boy." http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/1199-gazettemail-davies.html (3) Carabine, Michelle. "As Happy as Harry in the Cafe Society," Evening News (Edinburgh), December 7, 1999 So what will life without Harry be like? "It will be like someone died," she confessed. "There are things about the Harry phenomenon that I won't miss much but Harry himself and the writing . . . it is going to be like someone died." http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/1299-eveningnews-carabine.htm (4) Miller, Phil. "Writer gives hint of grim fate for Potter in last book," The Scotsman, 21 July 2000 She said: "I always planned seven [Potter books], I never said I would do another one, but at the moment there will be just the seven. I've got it planned, and Harry dies obviously." Perhaps to the relief of Potter followers, she quickly added: "But that's just a joke - or is it?" http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0700-scotsman-miller.html (5) "About the Books: transcript of J.K. Rowling's live interview on Scholastic.com," Scholastic.com, 16 October 2000 Question: Is it true that since Voldemort took Harry's blood by force, that Harry can kill Voldemort, but Voldemort can't kill Harry? J.K. Rowling responds: It's an interesting theory, but I wouldn't trust it too much! http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-scholastic-chat.htm (6) America Online chat transcript, AOL.com, 19 October 2000 Why stop at seven books when you could make up Harry's whole life? I notice you're very confident that he's not going to die! http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-aol-chat.htm (7) Barnes and Noble & Yahoo! chat with J.K. Rowling, barnesandnoble.com, 20 October, 2000 What are you plans after you have finished the Harry Potter series? Are you considering writing a sequel series with Harry's own children, or other characters we have met? jkrowling_bn: Harry's own children? Are you sure he's going to survive to have children?! http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat- barnesnoble.html (8) Couric, Katie. Interview of J.K. Rowling, NBC Today Show, 20 October 2000 J.K. Rowling: I'm intrigued because everyone seems very confident I'm not going to kill him. Katie Couric: Well good! I hope you're not! (Both laugh.) J.K. Rowling: I'm not saying either way. Katie Couric: That would make big news here this morning. J.K. Rowling: Everyone assumes that there will be an adult life and maybe they're right. But no, I think I'm going to stop at seven. I'm not going to say "never another one." If I had a burning desire to do another one, I'd do it. But at the moment, I'm planning to stop at seven. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-nbc-couric.htm (9) Comic Relief live chat transcript, 12th March 2001 I love the Idea of Harry getting older, do you think you might be tempted to write books about Harry when he is working and has a family of his own? Hmmmmmm... yet another person who is convinced I'm not going to kill him off! Where you people get the idea I'm soft-hearted, I don't know. I'm joking. Or am I? http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2001/0301-comicrelief-staff.htm (10) Interview transcript (partial), Blue Peter (cBBC), 12 March, 2001 When Harry leaves Hogwarts will he return as a teacher? JKR: How do know I'm not going to kill him off in book 7? (Gasps and smiles from children and presenters) JKR: Erm, I'm not telling you, I know, I know what's going to happen to all of them after Hogwarts ... the people who survive ... what's coming. So, erm, but I'm not going to tell you http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/JKR%20Chats/ ******************** Back to Goddlefrood: She may not be joking, but I think she is. I would not be surprised if Harry died, however I don't think he will. Having said that if he does die he would be able to rejoin all his loved ones and that would be a happy ending of sorts for Harry after all his suffering. SPOILERS FOR NARNIA SERIES AND MAYOR OF CASTERBRIDGE FOLLOW * * * * * * * * * * One other point, addressed to Cassy - people still buy the Narnia books in large numbers and all the characters die in a train crash. It's never stopped many other books continuing to be popular either. Michael Henchard, perhaps my favourite character in fiction, dies in The Mayor of Casterbridge (he's also the title character). That hasn't stopped many including me from enjoying that work over and over again. If Harry's death occurs some may not read the books in the future. They would be, IMO, in a small minority. As to the last two other media thingummies being less popular, *if* JKR has decided Harry will die no media that shall remain nameless's executives are going to persuade her otherwise Goddlefrood From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 10:40:01 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 10:40:01 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171171 > Eggplant: > As I said "Harry will produce with Ginny Harry Potter Junior, although > he will not live to see the child" so you figure it out. Neri: I have no special problem with predicting that Harry will die (although my own prediction is that he won't). I'm just want to be sure I understand your scenario. Do you predict that Harry and Ginny will produce Junior when they are 17 years old, or that DH will stretch over more than one year? Neri From xellina at gmail.com Tue Jul 3 10:49:08 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 14:49:08 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: References: <463f9ec00707022353w14add103rd1761990021dce08@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <463f9ec00707030349t2b9c1d13nd8c422529e6e6e4b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171172 First of all, I'd like to thank Goddlefrood for all JRK quotes provided. Great work! 2007/7/3, Goddlefrood : > JKR does not seem to be someone who would bow to pressure in other > words and I, therefore, disagree with Cassy. Well, I'm not really thinking that SOMEONE will MAKE JRK do something, just that she herself might consider point I mentioned. JRK quote: > (3) Carabine, Michelle. "As Happy as Harry in the Cafe Society," > Evening News (Edinburgh), December 7, 1999 > > So what will life without Harry be like? > > "It will be like someone died," she confessed. "There are things > about the Harry phenomenon that I won't miss much but Harry > himself and the writing . . . it is going to be like someone > died." > One of the reasons against Harry's death, IMHO, is that JRK is quite attached to him. If she cried when killing Sirius, it just might be too hard for her to kill Harry. Then again, maybe not. >Having said that if he does die he would be able to rejoin >all his loved ones and that would be a happy ending of sorts >for Harry after all his suffering. Actually, I'm not sure if staying alive will be a better option for him. After all, will he be able to have any kind of normal life? As for Narnia: you're right, Goddlefrood, my bad. I just never read the series completely and didn't know the ending. By the way, in LOTR Frodo doesn't exactly lives happily ever after as well, even though he survives. And I recall one Astrid Lingren children story (Lionheart brothers, if I'm not much mistaken), which STARTS with the death of the main character. From xellina at gmail.com Tue Jul 3 10:56:52 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 14:56:52 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Grindelwald create a Horcrux? In-Reply-To: References: <463f9ec00707021026i38dd46b9mefc6221c91759cf0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <463f9ec00707030356y6b551b0eq2636a8a00ca1401@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171173 2007/7/2, jmwcfo : > I doubt that such a spell exists - it would become very well known, and > ultimately used extensively by the MoM to punish bad guys, and by dark > wizards against their enemies. One could envision it being added to > the list of Unforgiveables. > > OTOH, we do not know the purpose of the spell from DD that LV deflected > at the MoM in OotP > Well, there's plenty of little known advance magic around. Like in the PS Dumbledore tells McGonagall that Voldy uses certain kinds of magic, that Dumbledore himself does not known (sorry, can't give a direct quote). Horcruxes are not exactly household spells either. The green portion in the basin in HBP might be quite exquisite as well. Besides, such a spell might be a very difficult one, only used by extremely powerful wizards. From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 11:31:30 2007 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (constancevigilance) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 11:31:30 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171174 mz_annethrope guessed: > g. A RELIC OF GRYFFINDOR--SWORD/DAGGER/KNIFE > CV: I believe you are the first one to guess the sword, although you craftily hedged your bet with other Gryffindor pointy things. There is a very good indicator why the sword is likely. On JKR's website, the last three months' Wizard of the Month have been founders. Each founder has been shown with a twinkly artifact. Helga Hufflepuff has a twinkly cup, Salazar Slytherin has a twinkly locket. Both are highly likely to be horcruxes. Gryffindor's twinkly object is his sword. Why are we all rejecting the sword, anyway? I did not choose it myself, instead guessing the house at Godric's Hollow. I think it is significant that JKR has shown us only three founders before book publication. Perhaps the Ravenclaw artifact is the most important one. She has said somewhere that Ravenclaws, whose house has been sort of ignored in canon, to have their day. Luna and Ernie MacMillan to be the heroes of Book 7? CV From dejjfan368 at aol.com Tue Jul 3 11:56:32 2007 From: dejjfan368 at aol.com (ebennet68) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 11:56:32 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171175 After mostly lurking, I had to take part in this discussion. Here are my predictions. (I hope that I'm not too far off.) Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Severus Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? death eater's mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Bill and Fleur, Tonks and Lupin Epilogue: Ron and Hermione as well as Harry and Ginny 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Argus Filch, in some odd twist of fate fighting along side the twins 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley (and he'll stay in the position once the curse is broken) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore, the first person to believe in him 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. Diary (destroyed) c. Slytherin's Locket d. the cup (destroyed) e. Nagini f. That wand featured in the window of Olilvanders g. the ring (destroyed) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Phoenix (why Snape was trusted by DD) Boggart: His father Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? It's where Lily worked and it's where they study the power of love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. I believe Harry will get something he needs to defeat Voldy from the Room of Requirement 2. Harry will indeed talk to Sirius again, through a portrait or beyond the veil 3. Aberforth Dumbledore will play a part in helping Harry defeat Voldemort. 4. I think the reason why Harry inherited so much from his parents is that James' family is descended from the man who invented the Golden Snitch, which so happens to have taken place in Godric's Hollow. Godric's Hollow was where the Potter family home was. 5. Petunia will support Harry in such a way that he will be incredibly surprised by how kind she is. and one more for good luck: 6.Neville's parents will have their minds restored . (Whether during the course of DH or the epilogue, I'd like to think it could happen.) Sarah O (ebennet68) From dougsamu at golden.net Tue Jul 3 12:29:43 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 08:29:43 -0400 Subject: Did Grindelwald create a Horcrux? Message-ID: <3ED2F826-440B-4A39-9965-65D6059154D1@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171176 On Jul-3-07, at 7:04 AM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com wrote: > Cassy Ferris: > Well, there's plenty of little known advance magic around. doug: In the context of the books, in which the reader travels in the epic company of the two most advanced and renowned wizards of the age, as opposed to following the more mundane stories of the greater mass of common wizards, well, yes, there seems to be plenty of advanced magic around. ___ __ From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 12:49:07 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:49:07 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171177 > zgirnius: > Here, in gory detail and chronological order, is a series of events > as they *might* have happened, that contradict neither account. > > 1) Snape starts to listen at the door to the conversation of > Dumbledore and Trelawney. > 2) Dumbledore feels around for a way to tell Trelawney he has decided > not to hire her. > (1 and 2 might be switched, only Snape really knows when he started > listening, and we do not have his version). > 3) Trelawney begins the prophecy. > 4) The barman sees Snape and pulls him away from the door before the > prophecy is complete, so Snape does not hear the rest. > 5) Snape offers his lame excuse of being lost, the barman scoffs at > it, as Trelawney wraps up her Prophecy and begins to come out of her > trance. > 6) The volume of the discussion/struggle between the barman and Snape > intensifies, to the point where it can now be heard by Dumbledore and > Trelawney (this is the 'scuffle' she refers to) > 7) The barman drags Snape in to show to Dumbledore. > 8) Snape is thrown from the building. lizzyben: Well, this is a pretty good reconstruction, but it still doesn't resolve a number of contradictions. First, DD says that he had already turned to leave the room when the prophecy occurred, while T says that Snape "interrupted" in the middle of the interview. Second, DD implies that the spy was detected & "thrown from the building" before the full prophecy was given, but T says that Snape was outside the door the entire time. Finally, I have to ask why it is even necessary to jump through hoops trying to resolve the conflicting versions. Why do they conflict at all? JKR wasn't making a mistake here; by relating T's version of events, she's highlighting all the things that D "misrepresented", failed to mention, or mis-characterized in his earlier rendition. Why? IMO the conflict is meant to suggest that DD wasn't telling the entire truth about his role in the prophecy. DD isn't just covering up for Snape, he's covering up for himself as well. Even if you believe that Snape only heard the first half, you still have to wonder why DD allowed him to leave w/that vital information after being presented w/the eavesdropper. > zgirnius: > I find it more sensible to believe that the Marauders and Dumbledore > formed different impressions of young Snape. We lack any accounts > from a neutral third party about their schooldays. (I am not denying > Snape may have seemed friendly with older Slytherins as a > first/second year, or that he may have been a top student in DADA, I > am proposing that the Marauders may have put a different construction on these disparate facts than Dumbledore did). lizzyben: I'm sure that Snape isn't as bad as Sirius said, but my point was simply that Snape was in a position to have contact w/known Death Eaters. And, more than that, Snape's *behavior* was extremely suspicious. He was blatantly listening at a door, spying on a resistance leader, during a time of war. And his excuse was lame & unbelievable - he went up the wrong stairs? Pfft. That behavior alone should have raised red flags, regardless of who the person is. The HP novels have demonstrated over & over again that you can't trust appearances. Supposedly loyal people have turned traitor, moles & spies abound. DD says that the Hog's Head was crawling w/spies & shady characters. Even if DD liked Snape, his eavesdropping should have inspired enough suspicion to take further action. DD thought the prophecy was so important, he sheltered Trelawney for 16 years to keep it from LV. Yet he innocently let Snape trot out w/o ever taking similar steps to prevent him from revealing this information? Pardon me if I don't believe that for a second. > > lizzyben: > > "My - our - one stroke of good fortune was that the eavesdropper was > > detected only a short way into the prophecy and thrown from the > > building... > > DD first says it was "his" good fortune that VD only heard the first > > half of the prophecy, then swiftly changes that to "our". > > zgirnius: > I don't understand. You think Dumbledore deliberately let a likely > Death Eater who may have heard the whole prophecy go to Voldemort, > right? And he learned later which part Snape had actually heard. If > he thought it was undesirable for Voldemort to know the whole thing, > why would he let Snape go? That could make it worse, I presume. If it > could not, then why is this a stroke of good fortune? > > On the other hand, if I am misunderstanding and the puppetmaster idea > you support is that Snape heard it all and Dumbledore *told* him to > tell only the first part, how is this a telling slip up? The whole > statament is a bold-faced lie, regardless of what pronoun one uses in > the subject. lizzyben: What I'm drawing attention to is the fact that DD refers to it as a "stroke of good fortune" that LV heard the first half of the prophecy. Now, why would he say this if he never wanted LV to know this information? If Snape told LV half of the prophecy, wouldn't that be a stroke of "bad fortune" instead? DD doesn't seem to think so. He states that it was "good fortune", because it inspired LV to act upon the prophecy & attack Harry. If LV had heard the entire prophecy, he would have known the danger in attacking Harry, and waited. If he hadn't heard any part of the prophecy, he wouldn't have personally targeted the Potters at all. Instead, LV decides to personally attack the Potters immediately, and is defeated in the process. Just as DD planned. Because LV knew only the first half, he was 1.) now aware of the prophecy of his defeat, 2.) inspired to immediately attack the prophesied vanquisher - thus ensuring LV's destruction & also creating a "chosen one" w/equal power to defeat LV. 3.) obsessed w/hearing the second half, which allows DD to use the full prophecy as LV-bait. All accomplished w/one small action. Pretty effective work on DD's part. He's pretty proud of his brilliant plan. And this is where the second slip, DD's use of pronouns, comes in. We hardly ever hear DD stutter, or rephrase something mid-sentence. So IMO DD's decision to stop mid-sentence & change the pronoun here is significant. I think, in the first moment, DD is only thinking about himself. He's inwardly gloating at how he trapped LV, smug at how his "brilliant plan" worked - who knows, maybe there's even a "gleam of triumph" in his eyes. He starts to say it was "*my* stroke of good fortune" that LV only heard the first half of the prophecy. But then he remembers that that "stroke of good fortune" killed the parents of the boy he is talking to. He considers that Harry might not approve. And he rephrases to - *our* good fortune, as if he was thinking about Harry all along. But he wasn't. HOW was it fortunate, for Harry, that LV only heard the first half of the prophecy? DD himself says that LV wouldn't have attacked the Potters if he'd heard the whole prophecy. Meaning, the fact that LV heard only half the prophecy was a stroke of very BAD fortune for Harry & his parents. But DD just quickly rephrases the sentence to include Harry & trusts that Harry won't realize this contradiction. Of course, Harry doesn't. He never does. Now, a truly tactful man would've just taken out the "good fortune" phrase altogether, & simply reported what happened to the prophecy. But DD isn't tactful, or compassionate, & he cannot resist a momentary egotistical pat on the back for his brilliance. Blecch. > zgirnius: > If he wanted the Potters to actually be attacked, as it seems you > propose above, why did he offer to be the Secret Keeper? Are you > suggesting he planned to Owl Voldemort with the location once the > charm was cast? lizzyben: Oh, DD is more subtle than that. He could've found a way to leak the SK location w/o it being blamed on him, the same way that he used a third party to leak the prophecy. And maybe he already did. Maybe DD was the one who got Peter to convince the Potters to use him, instead of Sirius as the SK. I want to know why the Potters didn't accept DD's offer to be SK. Wouldn't he be the best, safest choice? Did they have a reason to mistrust DD, or think that he might not work in their own best interests? Did they suspect he had leaked the prophecy? That would help explain a decision that otherwise seems somewhat reckless. As to whether DD specifically wanted the Potters to be attacked - I can see a couple different scenarios. You don't have to believe that DD wanted them to be attacked in order to believe that DD leaked the prophecy. He may have leaked the first half of the prophecy only as bait & distraction for LV, w/o thinking that LV would act upon it by attacking a child. (The Nice Puppetmaster DD version) Or, he might have thought that it would only endanger a "nameless" unknown person, w/o realizing the targets would be. (Not-so-nice PM) But, the more I think about it, the more I have to conclude that DD knew who the targets would probably be when he leaked the prophecy. (Dark!PM) He knew the Potters & Longbottoms had thrice-defied LV. & knew both women were pregnant. He may have thought his protection & charms would be sufficient to save both families, and he could somehow lure LV into a trap. He could've worked w/Lily on the "ancient magic" protection as a possible Plan B if the Fidelius Charm failed; while intending to protect both families from harm. But in this scenario, LV is still alive, still killing hundreds of people, still winning the war. In order for LV to be defeated, he has to attempt to attack the prophesied person. DD leaked only the first half of the prophecy, ensuring that LV didn't know the possible danger of such an attack. So, IMO, DD did want the attack to occur. He knew Peter was a LV spy, so manipulated events so that the Potters chose him as SK, helped Lily w/the ancient magic protection, and waited. Horrible, I know. But in the long run, it saved the Wizarding World & DD would consider that to be a noble reason for his actions. And I'm not even sure he would see it as a betrayal of the Potters. Both of them were in the Order, an organization that asks members to be willing to sacrifice their lives in the cause of duty. DD would consider this to be a supreme sacrifice for the cause of good; a sacrifice they agreed to by joining the Order. Of course, this also makes DD the ultimate arbiter of right & wrong, but he's used to that. > zgirnius: > It is not lost, as we, with Harry, learn in the chapter. Harry > considers his loss of that prophecy one of his failures as the > chapter begins. I think this is an example of a chapter title which > encapsulates a view held by the Harry-centric narrator. Like "The > Letters from Noone", PS/SS, which were actually from Professor > McGonagall. And, a propos of nothing, "Snape's Worst Memory". lizzyben: The chapter titles often have double meanings - eg "The Man With Two Faces" refers to both Quirrell & Snape; "The Seer Overheard" refers to Harry overhearing Trelawney in the hallway, and Snape overhearing her 16 years ago, etc. So, I think this chapter title also has a double meaning - encapsulating the POV of both Harry & DD. Harry thinks the prophecy was "lost" when he broke the orb. But DD knows that the prophecy was actually "lost" to LV many years ago. lizzyben: I will agree that in all these instances, DD is lying to protect an Order agent or Harry. So, to me, it is perfectly within character for DD to lie to Harry about the prophecy in order to protect Snape, or to protect Harry himself from the pain that knowledge would bring. Indeed, we already know that DD *did* mislead Harry in how he characterized the prophecy in OOTP & HBP. This is at least a lie by omission. > zgirnius: > I thought the point of that was that Dumbledore would not see much of > interest in the Mirror. He does not ardently desire anything he does > not already have, though on a chilly day he might wish for a warm > pair of socks. lizzyben: DD knows & expects that LV will rise again. He doesn't desire the ultimate defeat of LV? He doesn't desire a happy, normal life for Harry? Or himself? Or peace for the Wizarding World? The deepest, most desperate desire of DD's heart is - socks? If you believe that, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn you may be interested in. :) Even 11-year-old Harry doesn't buy it. > zgirnius: > Dumbledore does not say he never lies, he promises to Harry he will > never lie *to him*, though he is quite open about his feeling that > there are things he does not want Harry to know. Had Harry asked, in > OOtP, who the eavesdropper was, I would expect that Dumbledore would > either tell him, or tell him he was not willing to part with that > information, as he has done on other occasions. Until I get canon > that can be interpreted in no other way, I will continue to believe > he was true to his word. lizzyben: Well, if you're willing to split hairs (and DD is), DD only promises that he will not lie to Harry during that specific conversation. Harry suspects that DD lied to him earlier about the mirror. And why wouldn't DD lie to Harry during OOTP? Harry is a direct pipeline to LV at that time. I just don't see why people are *so* sure DD wouldn't lie to Harry, when there's lots of evidence that DD does just that. I guess it's because people consider DD to be the moral compass of the series. You can propose any wild theory - is Hermione ESE? Did Lupin betray the Potters? etc., and people will say, hey, maybe & consider it. But proposing that DD acts immorally seems to inspire real outrage. If things go the way I think they will w/DD, there'll be mass riots in fandom. Maybe that's what the support line is for! > zgirnius: > This is certainly *not* how I see him. But I think there are things > he is "too noble" to do to win, and I think what you propose is one > of them. It goes well beyond a lack of kindness. lizzyben: We'll see, I guess. It would put a special irony on the opening scene, in which McGonegal gushes about just how *noble* DD is because he wouldn't use Dark (immoral) means to achieve his goal - as DD abandons the child of his supporters at an abusive home for eleven years, having played a role in the parents' deaths. *shudder* It would certainly create an interesting examination of Utilitarian vs. Kantian ethics. DD, in my mind, is the ultimate Utilitarian. To him, the ends always justify the means. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 13:35:29 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:35:29 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights -- EMAIL TO TIGER TO ENTER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171178 YOU MUST EMAIL YOUR ANSWERS TO TIGER TO BE ENTERED IN THE CONTEST. 16 days left to enter the contest. Copy the questions and email your answers *both* to *tigerpatronus* *at* *yahoo* *dot* *com* and to the newsgroup. You must email your entry to TigerPatronus to be entered in the contest. You will receive an email confirmation of your entry. In the event of a dispute, the entry posted to the group will be your back-up. Deadline: Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 11:59 pm (midnight) EDT. (No Friday entries will be accepted.) --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TK Kenyon" wrote: > > As some people are understandably eager to make their predictions > known, here we go! Note *minor* question changes. > > > RAYOR SPOILER ALERT: THESE RULES INCLUDE ONE VERY SMALL DH SPOILER > GLEANED FROM AN INTERVIEW WITH DAVID YATES, THE OOTP MOVIE DIRECTOR > AND REFERENCES TO THE RELEASED COVERS. From mrsjuliesmith at gmail.com Tue Jul 3 14:23:47 2007 From: mrsjuliesmith at gmail.com (Boolean) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:23:47 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171179 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): I do not think that Hogwarts will re-open at the start of term, but will at some point during the year. But if it does... a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Neville b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? One of the Order. I'll go for Tonks. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagal 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore/the Order, in defeating Voldemort. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's diary b. The Gaunt ring c. Slytherin's locket d. Hufflepuff's cup e. In Voldemort f. Gryffindor's sword g. Harry's scar h. Ravenclaw's wand Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? A bat (Patronus) / Lily laughing at him (Boggart) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Room of Love Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Wormtail will repay his debt to Harry in the ultimate way, by sacrificing himself, during a duel/battle involving Voldemort and Harry. 2. Dobby will lead the House Elves into the Final Battle. 3. Harry will use Dumbeldore's Pensieve to extract his own memory from when he was a baby and they were attacked by Voldemort to identify that the final Horcrux is his scar. 4. Hermione will work out what one or more of the Horcruxes are, possibly at a point at which it looks like it's all going tits up. 5. A Weasley will die and Percy and Mrs Weasley will be reunited in their grief. And just one additional hopeful one... 6. Madam Rosmerta will find love. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 14:51:24 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:51:24 -0000 Subject: Narnia, LOTR, and Harry's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171180 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Goddlefrood" wrote: > > > SPOILERS FOR NARNIA SERIES AND MAYOR OF CASTERBRIDGE FOLLOW > * > > One other point, addressed to Cassy - people still buy the > Narnia books in large numbers and all the characters die in > a train crash. It's never stopped many other books continuing > to be popular either. Michael Henchard, perhaps my favourite > character in fiction, dies in The Mayor of Casterbridge (he's > also the title character). That hasn't stopped many including > me from enjoying that work over and over again. Never have understood why anybody likes, or ever liked, Thomas Hardy. As I recall, my reaction to "Tess of the D'Urbervilles" was "Well, I'm glad we have medication (antidepressants) for that now." But, there's no accounting, as the saying goes, :-). Anyway, Hardy is certainly not what one would call a popular or widely read (outside of required lit classes) author, these days. C.S. Lewis is both, but I don't know that Narnia is really a fair example. It's true that the earthly existance of most of the main characters comes to an end, but they don't *die* in the way that is normally (i.e. in secular discourse) understood as dieing. In fact, they proceed to live forever with Aslan and their loved ones in a realm that, per the kind of Christian theology Lewis favored, is actually more real and alive than the one they left. As I recall, they don't even have any clear memories of their "deaths," but only realize what's up when they start running into long-departed loved ones. For that matter, the end of LOTR, mentioned by Cassie, is a version of this as well, Tolkien being a good Catholic, in which Frodo, Bilbo, and the rest depart a land of strife and sickness for the undying realm of light and happiness where they will wait with the elves and angelic beings until summoned to attend the Supreme Being of the Tolkien cosmos -- once again not precisely *dieing* as understood in secular terms. Now, JKR being Christian, it is plausible we could get something like that (i.e. Harry's existance in material terms comes to an end but he ends up whiling away his time merrily behind the veil in the company of DD and Sirius and his parents while waiting for Ron and Hermione to join him). But we also have JKR's insistance that she isn't going to use the kind of heavy overtones that Lewis used. So, Harry dieing would have to be something different, and once again I don't think Narnia and its continuing popularity, or LOTR and its popularity, is a good example for that kind of dieing. Having said all that, you're right that JKR can do whatever she wishes. But if she IS concerned about the continuing popularity of the books and movies, and if she doesn't want to worry about Warner Bros sending a former KGB agent after her with a radioactive cocktail, well.... Lupinlore From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 15:43:58 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:43:58 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior (was: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171181 "Neri" wrote: > I'm just want to be sure I understand > your scenario. Do you predict that Harry > and Ginny will produce Junior when they > are 17 years old Yes. Harry will legally be an adult but Ginny will need permission from her parents to marry so young; I think she will get it. Remember, Molly Weasley said the last time Voldemort was powerful people were getting married very young because they knew it's now or never, and she couldn't wish for a better son in law than Harry. Eggplant From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 16:09:04 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:09:04 -0000 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171182 Lots of people: > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > > a. Harry? No > b. Draco? No > c. Hermione? Yes > d. Luna? Yes > e. Ron? Yes > f. Neville? Yes > g. Ginny? Yes Dungrollin: I've noticed a lot of people suggesting that Harry won't return to school, but that Ron and Hermione will. Given their insistence at the end of HBP that they're with him for the long haul, I'm surprised so many think that they'll change their minds, and I'm curious as to why. Is it because two of the pieces of cover art show them in robes while Harry's in muggle clothes, or is there another clue that I've missed? Any thoughts gratefully received. From celizwh at intergate.com Tue Jul 3 16:13:20 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:13:20 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171183 Boolean: > And just one additional hopeful one... > 6. Madam Rosmerta will find love. houyhnhnm: Respectable love you mean? Marriage? Perhaps with Tom the barman from the Leaky Cauldron. Well, good for her. I suspect she's had plenty of lovers in her time, though, her and her high-heeled fluffy slippers and flapping silk kimono, all the way from frustrated bachelor professors at Hogwarts to the Minister of Magic. I'm not necessarily alleging commercial transactions, you understand. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 16:16:39 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:16:39 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171184 > Goddlefrood: > The nearest JKR came to letting slip slip that Harry would > die was reported in an article in The Scotsman (Number 4 below). > She withdrew the comment wuickly apparently but had been taken > at first as being serious (and when is she ever, at least until > after DH is released?) This is all pasted from my file: > > ************************ > > (1) Barnes and Noble interview, March 19, 1999 > > With the huge success of the first three books and your seemingly > endless imagination, do you think that you might (please, oh > please) consider continuing the story past the originally planned > seven books? Maybe continuing with Harry as an adult or books > about his children? > > So you're convinced I'm not going to kill Harry??!! I try never > to say never, because it seems that every time I do I end up by > doing the thing I've forsworn. So, there is a remote possibility > that there will another Harry book, but at the present time I am > planning only seven. > (4) Miller, Phil. "Writer gives hint of grim fate for Potter in > last book," The Scotsman, 21 July 2000 > > She said: "I always planned seven [Potter books], I never said > I would do another one, but at the moment there will be just > the seven. I've got it planned, and Harry dies obviously." > > Perhaps to the relief of Potter followers, she quickly added: > "But that's just a joke - or is it?" zgirnius: I can take or leave (4), without seeing it myself I don't think I have any way of judging whether the initial comment was a joke, or whether both comments were premeditated, as a pair, to be her usual waffle on the subject, or whether she slipped up and then tried to fix it with the claim it might have been a joke. (1), however, (thanks for posting it) tends to reassure me that Harry lives on, just as I would wish. It seems clear to me from context that the thing she has forsworn is not killing Harry, but writing Potter Book #8. (Which I believe she won't do.) I don't take her constant reminder that she *might* kill Harry as an indication that she will. She often does that when asked questions by people who seem to be assuming she will not. Answering without addressing the underlying assumption would, to my mind, be confirming Harry's survival, something I don't think she would want to do even if Harry is slated to live. From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 3 16:52:23 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:52:23 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that > matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But > can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! > > If so then if Harry lives I guess I'll be condemned to be known as the > town dunce in these parts; but if he really does die you must bow down > before my brilliance. > > If you do agree with me please speak up now, I'd hate to be the only > dumbbell. > First of all, of course you are unique, we all are ;-) Second, dumbbell? Not hardly! This is one of the most closely guarded secrets in Potterdom. Harry's fate has been extremely well camouflaged and there is no shame in getting it wrong. You were willing to go into the ring and test your strength against a wily opponent. Even if you come out bloody and defeated Teddy Roosevelt would be proud of you. I suspect that most of us don't want Harry to die and so would rather not agree with you. I think most would agree that Harry might die. The author has made the apparent odds as close to 50-50 as she humanly could so most of us are going with our hearts and saying he won't die. I'm not sure what to make of you lot who have your treacle tarts, butterbeer, and crackers ready for the big party on poor Harry's grave.... Ken ;-) From fairwynn at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 16:53:29 2007 From: fairwynn at hotmail.com (wynnleaf) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:53:29 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171186 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? no b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? yes f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Argus Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Neville b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Snape is Dumbledore's man, through and through 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Voldemort b. Riddle's Diary c. The Ring d. The Locket that was at Grimmauld Place in OOTP e.Ravenclaw's wand f. Hufflepuff's Cup g. Harry's scar In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: the Augurey Phoenix which is green and black, thin and mournful, and resembles a vulture. Boggart: Harry dead Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, the greatest power Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Lupin betrays the Order and Dumbledore (intentionally or inadvertently doesn't matter) 2. Snape was never a *true* (sincere) follower of Voldemort. He joined the Death Eaters for reasons of his own, and not to serve Voldemort's purposes. This is one reason why Dumbledore trusts him, because he knows Snape has never been a true follower of Voldemort. 3. Madam Pince is really Eileen Prince 4. Snape did not kill Dumbledore with the Avada Kedavra (Dumbledore died from something else). 5. There was at least one *other* person at Godric's Hollow the night the Potter's died, in addition to Voldemort, the Potters, and possibly Peter. This person saw Voldemort kill Lily and heard Voldemort give her the "choice" to live. wynnleaf From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 17:08:11 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:08:11 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171187 mz_annethrope wrote: > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > PATRONUS: STAG; BOGGERT: DEAD POTTERS Snape's Patronus a Stag, meaning that *James* is his spirit guardian (as he is Harry's)? I must say that seems to me most unlikely. Can you explain your thinking here? As for the Boggart, would his greatest fear be something that had already happened? I think he most fears *Harry's* death, but I'm not sure whether we can argue for our responses in this thread (appeals to TigerPatronus for an answer), so I'm just asking you to explain yours (assuming that's allowed). BTW, there's no "e" in "Boggart." I like to capitalize it, but that's just me. > 1. Snape's connection to Harry will be one of obligation and debt > (real or assumed). We will not find out that DD cut a deal with > Snape to have Snape kill him. This is a vote against ESE/Snape, out > for himself Snape or Utilitarian Snape/DD (Snape killed DD because > he and DD thought it would have the happiest results). This is a > vote for deontological Snape. Not that I would vote for him. Carol: Again, can you explain what you mean here, especially "deontological Snape"?) If I understand your terminology correctly, I believe in what you're calling Utilitarian Snape--that is, his actions on the tower, particularly sending DD over the battlement (whether or not the AK was real--and, yes, of course, I know that DD is dead) allowed Snape not only to live and go underground as a saboteur against Voldemort but to save Harry and Draco from the DEs and get the DEs out of Hogwarts. (There was, IMO, no saving Dumbledore.) So is that what you mean by Utilitarian Snape? If not, can you clarify? And can you explain your alternative view (deontological Snape)? mz_annethrope > 6. We'll see Snape cry. Carol responds: Interesting! I wonder if I could bear that. As long as he lives and Harry forgives him, I suppose I could endure it, as long as it's from remorse or grief or anguish and not weakness. (I *hate* the nickname Snivellus, which is one reason I can't endure Harry's dear godfather.) mz_annethrope: > 7. Luna will become a wandmaker. Carol responds: If she lives, poor girl! Is it those silvery, Ollivanderlike eyes that make you think so? (Alternatively, she might become a true Seer.) Carol, who found these responses intriguing but isn't sure how much discssion is allowed in this thread From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 17:30:36 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:30:36 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171188 > Contest Questions: > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? zgirnius: Nope! > > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yup! > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Severus Snape (*sob*) > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? His Dark Mark. > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? No > b. Draco? No > c. Hermione? yes > d. Luna? yes > e. Ron? yes > f. Neville? yes > g. Ginny? yes > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill Weasley and Fleur Delacour > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Argus Filch > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? Nymphadora Tonks d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? He's on the 'good side'. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldy b. Riddle's Diary c. Peverell ring d. Slytherin's locket e. Hufflepuff's cup f. The wand at Ollivander's, which was Ravenclaw's g. Harry/his scar h. Nagini > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus - If it appears in DH, it will be a Phoenix Boggart - Failure, in other words, Voldemort victorious, though I'd have trouble deciding what form this Boggart would take - a dead Harry? A gloating Voldemort? > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? "Love" > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Lily Evans was once friendly with Severus Snape, and this mattered/matters to him. 2. Some action taken by Peter Pettigrew for his own purposes will prove very helpful to Harry in some way. 3. Harry will make a decision to sacrifice his life at some point. 4. Draco Malfoy will make a key contribution to the good side, without necessarily joining it. 5. Harry and Ginny, and Hermione and Ron, will live on and be couples in the epilogue. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 3 18:19:54 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:19:54 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171189 Dana: Also isn't it strange that Snape is assumed to have alerted > the Order to thwart Lucius from succeeding but just a few weeks later > he takes a vow to protect his only son? And he tells the wife of the > person he helped put in Azkaban in short that he helped putting him > there and therefore was the real cause for LV's anger when he makes > his claim about helping dispose of Black? Magpie: I don't understand--why should it be strange that Snape did that? Dumbledore was happy to put Lucius in jail but protected Draco the following year. Snape doesn't tell Narcissa that he helped put Lucius in jail. He doesn't tell her he sent the Order to the MoM. He claims information he gave to the Order contributed to Black's death, which is vague. Dana: > Also althroughout HBP DD was counting on Snape to take care of things > concerning Draco as he tells Draco that he had given Snape the order > to watch him but Snape failed to follow this order because there was > that pesky vow that prevented Snape from taking real actions against > Draco. DD indeed trusted Snape and why he gave him specific > assignments and Snape failed him three times. Magpie: No, Dumbledore himself knew what Draco was doing and also failed to take real actions against him because his plan was to *not* take actions against him. We see Snape trying to find out what Draco is planning ahead of time (which doesn't set off the Vow) but Draco isn't talking. There's no indication that Snape is not following and order of Dumbledore's order to stop Draco--he hardly needed Snape to do that for him anyway. He himself could have taken action against him. Heck, Harry tells Dumbledore information to help him head Draco off and Dumbledore tells him to lay off. Dana: > The only reason that there seems to be more to the story is DD's > determination when he declares his trust in Snape. It is just, to me, > the unwillingness to believe that it was only Snape's story of > remorse that made DD trust Snape had returned to the right side. But > DD specifically states in HBP that he believed that Snape's remorse > WAS the reason for his return. Wanting to believe that there is more > to it is in my opinion wanting there to be a bigger reason for > Snape's return and his remorse and therefore more to DD's trust in > Snape. Magpie: I don't think that's the logic. One *can* believe that DD believes that Snape's remorse was the sole reason for his return. The reason for DD's trust in him is presented as a separate question, one that Dumbledore doesn't answer. Dumbledore has no issues about talking about his feelings on Snape's remorse, but does not give that for the reason he thinks he can trust Snape. Dana: > DD only tells Harry about the information that Snape found out > through Harry. Wouldn't it have been a great way for DD to proof > Snape was on their side by stating Snape was working tirelessly to > help the Order? Magpie: Harry already knows that Snape is a spy, and that this implies danger--obviously he also knows Snape is a double agent so could be risking himself on the other side instead. > Dana: > If Draco was showing compassion in that moment then why did he not > react at all when Snape kills DD? Why did he not try to stop Snape > killing DD but let himself be shoved out of the way. Why did he not > start yelling that it would be wrong to kill? Because Draco was > scared that the DEs would kill him on sight. Draco did not care if DD > died he just could not do it himself. Magpie: Rather than analyzing and appreciating the text that's there, you seem to be making a demand about what scene you need to see and assume that any deviation proves your point. Both with Draco and Snape unless the two of them declare for Dumbledore in front of DEs and die for it they can't possibly be anything but bad guys. One obvious reason Draco doesn't do those things is that JKR is a competent writer. Of course Draco was scared the DEs would kill him. He's scared of just about everything in that scene. Nor can he kill DD himself. He's in the process of having everything he's ever believed begin to shift. He hasn't turned into Harry in the split second Snape arrives, or a Quaker ready to start lecturing Death Eaters about how it's wrong to kill--he's just beginning to even understand that himself based on his own instincts. That doesn't mean he must be just unable to say a spell at that moment for some reason. Snape walks in and acts almost immediately--there's not even anything in the scene to signal anyone to what Snape's going to do exactly. Everyone in the scene is frozen (except Snape and Dumbledore), including Harry. Dana: Sure that is a good thing that > you can't take another humans life for your own personal gain but it > doesn't proof Draco did not kill DD out of the goodness of his heart. > Proofs indeed Draco's heart is not truly ever so evil. But where is > Draco compassion in feeling sorry he almost killed two students? Magpie: I would say his feeling sorry he almost killed two students would be contributing to why Draco arrives on the Tower already unable to kill and not needing to discover it up there, only admit it. The whole year is an education to Draco, and everything that happens is part of getting him to the point where he can begin to understand what Dumbledore wants to tell him in that last scene. Any compassion or remorse he felt would of course be firmly hidden under his unconvincing protests that he is a killer based on the things he's done--that's another thing he's got to fear given his perspective, after all, is his compassion. Must be repressed. (If he had no remorse, I don't think his claims would have been so unconvincing. And this even after both kids are all right--most people in canon lack remorse when everyone turns out to be all right. I believe you yourself pointed that out regarding Sirius and the Prank.) If he's already almost killed without remorse I'd think it would be that much easier. Dana: > Draco failed his mission because he did not have the nerve to kill > another human being not because he did no longer want DD death. That > is a good thing don't get me wrong but it was not because Draco > realized what he was doing was wrong. Magpie: Not having 'the nerve' slides over the whole question of why people don't kill other human beings. Killing DD is supposed to be a glorious act for Draco, and at the beginning of the year, before he knows what death means, Draco does have the nerve. He has no reason to ever want DD dead personally, it's just a task he's been given. Throughout the beginning of Tower scene he thinks he should be able to kill him to save himself, but he can't. When Dumbledore offers him protection he starts to lower his wand, a considered decision. He spends the rest of the scene with his eyes locked on Dumbledore, and his last line in canon is to say something that would make him look better in Dumbledore's eyes...he doesn't seem like he wants Dumbledore to die to me. Seems to me JKR would be perfectly capable of putting across the scenario you're describing if she wanted to, but instead she arranged things differently. She has Draco start to lower his wand *from a position of strength* after going over all the reasons he doesn't have to lower his wand (he got farther than anyone thought, he didn't fail, he's the one with the power) to show that he's not just backing down because he's been defeated. She surrounds him with people threatening him if he doesn't kill Dumbledore, and yet he doesn't even try to say the words. Which doesn't make him a hero, no, but I think is clearly showing us that he's not just a guy who wants to kill, really, but lacks some sort of vague "nerve." His fear of the DEs killing him is used against him when he doesn't start speechifying about the sanctity of life, but for some reason isn't counted for him when he doesn't kill even though that's what the DEs are there to make him do. They're there to give him any nerve he lacks with physical threats, so if all he were lacking was nerve, he'd be pointing his wand. I think at the end of HBP Draco's a wild card, and that's what makes it interesting. He's not what he's always been, but we can't know what he'll be yet. When people talk about him actually switching sides I think they usually do it in the future tense, acknowledging that this hasn't happened yet. But just as I don't think we can count him as having completely transformed at the end of HBP, I don't think we can just write him off as not having changed or done anything of note. Even Harry's own thoughts start to point things in a way that suggests the unknown. -m From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue Jul 3 18:30:34 2007 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 11:30:34 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1121906429.20070703113034@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171190 Goddlefrood: G> For what it's worth Harry has probably already died several G> thousand times during the course of gaming by those who want to G> see him die, and in the computer games no doubt he can. Dave: Actually no -- In the computer games he just "faints". Dave From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 18:39:08 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:39:08 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior (was: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171191 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "Neri" wrote: > > > I'm just want to be sure I understand > > your scenario. Do you predict that Harry > > and Ginny will produce Junior when they > > are 17 years old > > Eggplant: > Yes. Harry will legally be an adult but Ginny will need permission > from her parents to marry so young; I think she will get it. Remember, > Molly Weasley said the last time Voldemort was powerful people were > getting married very young because they knew it's now or never, and > she couldn't wish for a better son in law than Harry. Neri: Actually Molly didn't say that people were getting married "very young". She said that they were "eloping left right and center" but she didn't mention anything about age (the discussion was about whether Bill and Fleur knew each other long enough, not if they were old enough). It was probably a hint for Lupin and Tonks, but I doubt it was a hint for Harry and Ginny marrying at 17, not to mention producing a child at that age. Neri From xellina at gmail.com Tue Jul 3 18:57:15 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:57:15 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Junior (was: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707031157s223c4492q5900d4b03a925d67@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171192 2007/7/3, Neri : > > > Neri: > > I doubt > it was a hint for Harry and Ginny marrying at 17, not to mention > producing a child at that age. > Cassy: I agree that it seems highly unlikely turn of events. After all, would JRK, a mother herself? send this kind of message to her readers? Like, have kids at 17? I don't think so. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sweetophelia4u at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 18:58:37 2007 From: sweetophelia4u at yahoo.com (Dondee Gorski) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:58:37 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171193 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that > matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But > can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! Dondee: I think many of us in are heart of hearts believe Harry is going to die but we are in denial. We certainly fear it, but we hope that if enough of us proclaim "He is not going to die!" out loud then it won't happen. I have not gotten to the plug-my-ears-and-hum-loudly point yet but I may. I remember discussing the series with friends once and during a heated moment in the conversation blurting out "Harry better die!" My meaning behind that statement, I explained to my shocked friends, was that I would not be satisfied with Harry living and none of us being able to continue the journey with him because JKR said she would stop at seven. I have very similar feelings towards Ayla in the Earth's Children series by Jean Auel. I don't wish Harry or Ayla any ill but I have gotten to intertwined in their stories and I am a very selfish reader and the only way I will be satisfied with the ends of their stories is if they are truly gone. A big part of me wants Harry to live because I love Harry and I want him to be happy and safe and whole. But another part of me, the selfish reader in me, wants to see his end with the end of book seven, either at age 17 or, preferably, at some later date in the epilogue. Either way I will grieve because it is the last book, but I will find greater emotional closure in laying Harry to rest. I voted that Harry would not die in the Bragging thread because I believe Harry's story has more coming-of-age genre elements in it than tragedy elements. I know that that is no guarantee though because the Potter books seem to transcend genre just as they do age and culture. I do think (dare I say hope) that if Harry does not meet his end in the conflict with Voldy that we will learn of Harry's demise in the epilogue. Just my two cents worth. Cheers, Dondee From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 19:17:37 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:17:37 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: <1183409235.13934.1198169393@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171194 Random832 wrote: A credible argument has been raised that he would have been unaware the prophecy referred to a baby at all. vmonte: So it's okay to kill as long as it is not a baby? Snape knew someone was being targeted in the prophecy. He gave it to his master knowing full well that he would act upon that info. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 19:25:58 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:25:58 -0000 Subject: Puppetmaster DD (Was: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171195 lizzyben wrote: > Well, this is a pretty good reconstruction, but it still doesn't resolve a number of contradictions. First, DD says that he had already turned to leave the room when the prophecy occurred, while T says that Snape "interrupted" in the middle of the interview. Second, DD implies that the spy was detected & "thrown from the building" before the full prophecy was given, but T says that Snape was outside the door the entire time. Finally, I have to ask why it is even necessary to jump through hoops trying to resolve the conflicting versions. Why do they conflict at all? JKR wasn't making a mistake here; by relating T's version of events, she's highlighting all the things that D "misrepresented", failed to mention, or mis-characterized in his earlier rendition. Why? IMO the conflict is meant to suggest that DD wasn't telling the entire truth about his role in the prophecy. DD isn't just covering up for Snape, he's covering up for himself as well. Even if you believe that Snape only heard the first half, you still have to wonder why DD allowed him to leave w/that vital information after being presented w/the eavesdropper. Carol responds: I agree with you that the two versions are contradictory and I'm also not satisfied with reconstructions that attempt to reconcile them. But I'm not so sure that Trelawney's view is the accurate one. For one thing, she's obviously unaware of her own Prophecy, but, more important, IMO, she attributes a motive to Snape that we know is inaccurate: whatever he was doing (and I'm assuming that he was a loyal DE spying on DD because that's the closest we have to a canonical explanation) he wasn't listening for job interview tips or even looking for a job at the time: It was at least the end of October (Harry and Neville would have been conceived around Halloween) and perhaps as late as April--a cold, rainy night, according to Dumbledore and not at all the usual time for job interviews (the divination professor must have died suddenly and created a vacancy). Moreover, young Snape didn't apply for the DADA position and receive the Potions job instead until almost two years later (Snape has been teaching for fourteen years as of OoP, Trelawney for "almost sixteen"). So, like Hagrid overhearing the argument between Snape and DD in the forest and assuming that Snape is just overworked (and at least a dozen other instances of characters mistakenly explaining each other's behavior), she's providing an explanation that she considers plausible. (Obviously, she still doesn't know that Snape was ever a Death Eater; to her, he's just a pushy young man whereas she's a consummate professional.) At any rate, I'm not sure that Trelawney's version is any more accurate than DD's (though I'm pretty sure based on what DD chose to show Harry of Trelawney rising out of the Pensieve that the Prophecy itself was not interrupted). And given the fairly numerous inconsistencies in her books (for example, Ron's somehow knowing that Draco has a Hand of Glory, which Harry only saw him look at in CoS or Lupin's transformation when the moon comes out from behind a cloud in PoA, which means that he only needs to stay indoors and he won't transform), I don't discount the possibility that JKR herself is inadvertently responsible for the inconsistencies. Her point in having Trelawney innocently recount her version of events is to reveal to Harry that Snape was the eavesdropper (funny how he didn't think the eavesdropper's identity was important until he found out that it was Snape) and, IMO, prepare him to see the events on the tower in the worst possible light. But to privilege Trelawney's version over DD's is like believing Snape's halr-truths in "Spinner's End"--JKR is *not* giving us the full truth in HBP, IMO. She's saving the revelations (and reversals) for DH, the denouement of the series. lizzyben wrote: > > What I'm drawing attention to is the fact that DD refers to it as a "stroke of good fortune" that LV heard the first half of the prophecy. Now, why would he say this if he never wanted LV to know this information? If Snape told LV half of the prophecy, wouldn't that be a stroke of "bad fortune" instead? DD doesn't seem to think so. He states that it was "good fortune", because it inspired LV to act upon the prophecy & attack Harry. If LV had heard the entire prophecy, he would have known the danger in attacking Harry, and waited. If he hadn't heard any part of the prophecy, he wouldn't have personally targeted the Potters at all. Instead, LV decides to personally attack the Potters immediately, and is defeated in the process. Just as DD planned. > > Because LV knew only the first half, he was 1.) now aware of the prophecy of his defeat, 2.) inspired to immediately attack the prophesied vanquisher - thus ensuring LV's destruction & also creating a "chosen one" w/equal power to defeat LV. 3.) obsessed w/hearing the second half, which allows DD to use the full prophecy as LV-bait. All accomplished w/one small action. Pretty effective work on DD's part. He's pretty proud of his brilliant plan. > > And this is where the second slip, DD's use of pronouns, comes in. We hardly ever hear DD stutter, or rephrase something mid-sentence. So IMO DD's decision to stop mid-sentence & change the pronoun here is significant. I think, in the first moment, DD is only thinking about himself. He's inwardly gloating at how he trapped LV, smug at how his "brilliant plan" worked - who knows, maybe there's even a "gleam of triumph" in his eyes. He starts to say it was "*my* stroke of good fortune" that LV only heard the first half of the prophecy. > > But then he remembers that that "stroke of good fortune" killed the parents of the boy he is talking to. He considers that Harry might not approve. And he rephrases to - *our* good fortune, as if he was thinking about Harry all along. But he wasn't. HOW was it fortunate, for Harry, that LV only heard the first half of the prophecy? DD himself says that LV wouldn't have attacked the Potters if he'd heard the whole prophecy. Meaning, the fact that LV heard only half the prophecy was a stroke of very BAD fortune for Harry & his parents. Carol responds: First, my apologies for not snipping more, but everything I've left here seems important to Lizzyben's argument. Second, I, too, am disturbed by DD's unDumbledorean behavior in HBP, praising his own brilliance and seeming to encourage Harry's desire for vengeance against Voldemort when at other times he implies that Harry's weapons are a pure soul and the superpowerful magic of Love. (I have no problems with DD's trust in Snape, but I wish he'd done more than credit him with "timely action" in treating the ring curse. We never get to hear that exciting story.) I can only account for his behavior as being prompted by the knowledge that he has only a short time to live and being in a hurry to educate Harry on Horcruxes and Riddle/Voldemort without undermining his plans for Snape, who will surely be "outed" as a DE by the DADA curse. I also agree that from the perspective of the WW (which celebrated Voldie's first downfall with wand sparks and parties without much concern for the murdered Potters), the events at Godric's Hollow were a Good Bad Thing (as the authors of "1066 and All That" would say), or perhaps a felix culpa (fortunate fall), however sad for the Potters and for Harry. It's certainly true that they resulted in eleven years of peace for the WW, the vaporization of Voldemort and the arrest of most of his followers (and the deaths of at least three), and the creation of the one with the power to defeat him. We are led to believe that these events result from a particular sequence of events, most notably: Snape's revelation of the partial Prophecy to Voldemort, Voldemort's interpretation of the Prophecy, Peter Pettigrew's betrayal of the Potters, Lily's sacrifice, and Voldemort's failed attempt to kill Harry, which simultaneously vaporized him and gave Harry the power(s) enabling him to vanquish Voldemort later. The entire sequence, along with the Potters' refusal to choose DD as their SK and the later SK switch, leads to the inevitable confrontation between Harry and Voldemort which will, presumably, be the climax of the entire series. While we will certainly learn more about these events (for example, how DD knew to send Hagrid to Godric's Hollow to rescue Harry and how anyone knew that Voldemort was vanquished but not dead), I doubt that we'll find that the wise old mentor, for all his emotional mistakes, engineered those events. At least I hope not. I'll send my books to Lupinlore to be mulched if it turns out to be true. :-) Regarding the change in pronouns and your explanation: It makes no sense to me that DD would switch from "my" to "our" out of a sudden realization that the death of the Potters and his own selection as the Chosen One was *Harry's* good fortune as well as Dumbledore's. Surely not. Nor was it the Potters' good fortune. "Our" must refer, IMO, either to DD and the Order or to the WW as a whole, not to Harry and DD. The quote again (taken from one of your posts upthread, with your ellipses) is "My - our - one stroke of good fortune was that the eavesdropper was detected only a short way into the prophecy and thrown from the building... Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you. So Voldemort never knew that there might be danger in attacking you." So the good fortune is not that Harry's parents were attacked but that the eavesdropper heard and related only part of the Prophecy, so that neither he nor Voldemort knew that to attack Harry was to create his own Nemesis. Had he heard the whole Prophecy, the Potters might not have died (but as members of the Order, they would still have been on his hit list and Harry might still have been orphaned or lost at least one parent), but the WW would have had no respite and no Chosen One who could ultimately vanquish Voldemort. But I very much doubt that Dumbledore knew at the time what would happen if Voldemort heard all or part of the Prophecy. He had no more idea than Snape did who would be involved or how Voldemort would interpret the Prophecy (or even that Snape was a DE who would report it to LV). I very much doubt that he expected Voldemort to attack a baby; he seems to have taken action only when Snape reported to him "how Voldemort interpreted the Prophecy." And his hands were tied by what Snape calls James Potter's "arrogance" in trusting Sirius Black over Dumbledore. Had DD been able to protect the Potters (and the Longbottoms?), Harry would (possibly) have grown up with his parents as an ordinary wizard boy with a talent for Quidditch but no extraordinary powers or destiny, but the WW would be a much worse place to live, especially for Muggleborns and House-Elves and the dwindling number of Order members, with no hope for the defeat of the apparently immortal LV. Fortunately for DD and the WW at large (though not for the Potters or Harry or Voldie or the DEs), matters were taken out of Dumbledore's (and DDM!Snape's) hands by the choices of other people--the Potters, Sirius Black, Peter Pettigrew, and Voldemort all contributed in one way or another to the "Good Bad Thing" that occurred at Godric's Hollow. Carol, vaguely recalling that "Good Bad Thing" in "1066 and All That" refers primarily to the Battle of Hastings, which was a Bad Thing for poor Harold the Saxon and his army but a Good Thing for England, which became a part of Europe rather than a Saxon backwater (Please correct me offlist if I'm misremembering!) From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 19:28:27 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:28:27 -0000 Subject: What Little Niggling Details will be left? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171196 > SSSusan: > So what say ye? What Little Niggling Details do you fear will be > left unanswered at the end? zgirnius: Here's one we debated not too long ago...which of the Marauder Era characters were members of the Slug Club? I bet we can argue this one forever. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 19:31:37 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:31:37 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171197 Julie wrote: Dumbledore does relinquish control of Draco's future, not because he wants to, but because the events give him no choice. Or they do give him a choice between taking Draco down with him, if he was going to die no matter what, and turning Draco over to Snape, who even within Voldemort's camp would have *some* chance of keeping Draco alive and in possession of an intact soul. And some is better than none. vmonte responds: Hmmm. Am I right in thinking that the "Snape is Dumbledore's Man" supporters believe that Snape knew Draco's plan and told Dumbledore about the plan before school started? I wonder why Dumbledore didn't approach Draco earlier in the school year? If Dumbledore knew what was going on with Draco you would think that he would have at least approached Draco after he was almost killed in the bathroom. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 19:59:49 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:59:49 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707031157s223c4492q5900d4b03a925d67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171198 "Cassy Ferris" wrote: > would JRK, a mother herself? send > this kind of message to her readers? JKR has said that having children was the greatest joy in her life, even more than getting her book published. It seems to me that if she has decided to whack Harry she might want to give him just a little bit of happiness first. Also, if I were her I wouldn't want to burn my bridges; she's still a young woman, in 20 or 30 years she may change her mind and want to reenter the Potter universe, and then she can write about Harry Junior. And I don't think JKR is interested in sending messages in her books, she has Email for that, she just wants to tell a good story, and she has. > Like, have kids at 17? I don't think so. Under normal circumstance I would certainly agree, but things are far from normal. If you were 17 but knew there was an excellent chance you'd never see your 18'Th birthday it might be wise to do things now that in normal circumstance should be postponed for a few years. I believe Molly understands this and the horrible danger they are all in, and that is why she will give her approval for Ginny and Harry to marry. Eggplant From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Tue Jul 3 20:08:22 2007 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:08:22 +0200 Subject: Harry Junior (was: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest) References: Message-ID: <009301c7bdad$e8a09b60$15b2a8c0@miles> No: HPFGUIDX 171199 Eggplant wrote > Yes. Harry will legally be an adult but Ginny will need permission > from her parents to marry so young; I think she will get it. Remember, > Molly Weasley said the last time Voldemort was powerful people were > getting married very young because they knew it's now or never, and > she couldn't wish for a better son in law than Harry. Miles: Well, I really doubt JKR will let anyone have children, since she would have to explain how this can happen by only snogging... But apart from this, why should it be necessary for them to marry to have a child? Again, JKR won't touch this topic, but we don't know about sexual morale in Potterverse since sexuality is not mentioned. So, why should we assume that this morale is to be one that is retreating in our world? From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 3 20:16:41 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:16:41 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171200 > vmonte responds: > Hmmm. Am I right in thinking that the "Snape is Dumbledore's Man" > supporters believe that Snape knew Draco's plan and told Dumbledore > about the plan before school started? > > I wonder why Dumbledore didn't approach Draco earlier in the school > year? > > If Dumbledore knew what was going on with Draco you would think that > he would have at least approached Draco after he was almost killed > in the bathroom. Magpie: It's canon that Dumbledore knew what was going on with Draco. He tells him he knew what he was doing, and earlier tells Harry he knows more about what's up with Draco than Harry does. He tells Draco that the reason he did not confront him before the tower (though he did have Snape tailing him to try to head off any of his murder attempts, which didn't work because Draco wouldn't open up to Snape) was that he knew Draco would have been murdered if Lord Voldemort realised Dumbledore suspected him (Draco). He says he did not dare speak to him of the mission with which he knew he'd been entrusted in case LV used Legilimency against him. -m From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 20:30:48 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:30:48 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171201 > vmonte responds: > Hmmm. Am I right in thinking that the "Snape is Dumbledore's Man" > supporters believe that Snape knew Draco's plan and told Dumbledore > about the plan before school started? zgirnius: Why yes, you are! (For some of us, anyway. There is the other idea that Snape was bluffing - in which case he could not tell Dumbledore what he himself did not know!) "The plan" here meaning, 'to assassinate Albus Dumbledore', not 'to poison Slughorn's mead', 'to Imperius Katie Bell to give DD a cursed necklace', 'to bring Death Eaters into the school by repairing a Vanishing Cabinet', or any other specific steps to achieve the above-mentioned end. > vmonte: > I wonder why Dumbledore didn't approach Draco earlier in the school > year? > Albus Dumbledore: > (HBP, "The Lightning-Struck Tower", addressed at Draco Malfoy) > "I appreciate the difficulty of your position. Why else do you think I have not confronted you before now? Because I knew you would have been murdered if Lord Voldemort realized that I suspected you." zgirnius: Thank you, Professor, I could not have said it better myself. Snape, on the other hand, has the perfect excuse for his curiosity about Draco's activities - if Draco messes up badly enough, this could kill Snape. > Random832 wrote: > A credible argument has been raised that he would have been unaware the > prophecy referred to a baby at all. > > vmonte: > So it's okay to kill as long as it is not a baby? zgirnius: Of course not. It's not OK to be a Death Eater at all! Noone is saying reporting the prophecy, joining the DEs, etc. was OK. If we DDM! folks are right, Snape least of all, since this action was 'the greatest regret of his life'. War involves killing people. There is a widely held notion, which you may or may not share, that there is a code of war, a 'proper' way to conduct it, which includes the distinction of innocent civilians vs. enemy combatants. The former should be left alone, the latter are legitimate targets. An adult, possessed of the power to vanquish the Dark Lord and having the intent to do so, would be a member of the latter category. A baby is certainly in the former category. Even if the One was an adult, Snape would still be furthering the wrong cause by reporting the prophecy - but his learning that the leader of his cause was willing to kill a baby certainly seems to me a possible basis for Snape's decision that his side was in fact the wrong one to be on. It's not the reason I believe, but it is certainly plausible. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 20:35:54 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:35:54 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: <009301c7bdad$e8a09b60$15b2a8c0@miles> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171202 "Miles" wrote: > I really doubt JKR will let > anyone have children I don't believe it is cannon that witches and wizards reproduce asexually like bacteria, seems to me they all have parents. And I'm not talking about anything sordid; we won't get a blow by blow description of Harry's wedding night, we didn't even get a blow by blow description of his first kiss. > why should it be necessary for them > to marry to have a child? Because JKR doesn't want to write anything sordid nor do we readers want to read it. Eggplant From random832 at fastmail.us Tue Jul 3 20:41:28 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (random832 at fastmail.us) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:41:28 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1183495288.25276.1198366301@webmail.messagingengine.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171203 On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:17:37 -0000, "vmonte" said: > Random832 wrote: > A credible argument has been raised that he would have been unaware the > prophecy referred to a baby at all. > > vmonte: > So it's okay to kill as long as it is not a baby? It's a war. People die on both sides. Would you be OK with your commander being "vanquished" and having to "die at the hand of the other"? I think Snape's part in this is certainly a lot _less_ horrible if we assume Snape's interpretation was more along the lines of "Some [adult] 'hero' is going to come riding into town any minute now to get rid of you" than "someone who will eventually defeat you is going to be born, best kill them as soon as possible". Especially if we assume by extension that he didn't _know_ yet that Voldemort was all that evil [i.e. doesn't know he's willing to kill a baby] -- Random832 From cheresherri at adelphia.net Tue Jul 3 19:54:27 2007 From: cheresherri at adelphia.net (cheresherri) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:54:27 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171204 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? DUMBLEDORE 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? HIS DARK MARK 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? NO e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? REMUS AND TONKS 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" ARGUS FILCH 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? RON WEASLEY b. Head Girl? HERMOINE GRANGER c. DADA Instructor? TONKS d. Potions Master or Mistress? SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? MCGONAGALL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? VOLDEMORT 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. HARRY'S SCAR b. RIDDLE'S DIARY c. MARVOLO'S RING d. SLYTHERIN'S LOCKET e. HUFFLEPUFF'S CUP f. RAVENCLAW'S WAND g. GRYFFINDOR'S SWORD In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS: SNAKE; BOGGART: HIS WORST MEMORY-BEING LEVICORPUSED Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? LOVE Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. SNAPE KILLED DUMBLEDORE AGAINST DUMBLEDORE'S WISHES 2. HARRY WILL BECOME AN AUROR. 3. HERMOINE WILL BECOME A TEACHER AT HOGWARTS, AND EVENTUALLY HEADMISTRESS. 4. SNAPE WILL BE CAPTURED AND THROWN INTO AZKABAN. 5. BELLATRIX WILL LEARN HER LOYALTY FOR VOLDEMORT WAS ALL FOR NAUGHT AND WILL DIE FOR HIM. cheresherri From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 20:53:13 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:53:13 -0000 Subject: What Little Niggling Details will be left? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171205 > So what say ye? What Little Niggling Details do you fear will be > left unanswered at the end? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan - Who was kissing Florence when Bertha Jorkins found them? - What grade did Harry get on the Dementor essay? - How could Montague apparate inside Hogwarts? (I'm semi-obsessed w/this useless detail). - What is Andromeda Tonks like? Why did she marry a Muggle? - Where is Dumstrang located? Inquiring minds want to know! lizzyben From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 20:57:28 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:57:28 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171206 vmonte wrote: > Hmmm. Am I right in thinking that the "Snape is Dumbledore's Man" supporters believe that Snape knew Draco's plan and told Dumbledore about the plan before school started? > > I wonder why Dumbledore didn't approach Draco earlier in the school year? > > If Dumbledore knew what was going on with Draco you would think that he would have at least approached Draco after he was almost killed in the bathroom. Carol responds: Speaking only for myself and not for DDM!Snapers in general, whose interpretations of Snape's motives and the events on the tower are quite diverse, I believe that Snape told Dumbledore about both Draco's assignment to kill DD and about all three provisions of the Unbreakable Vow. That's different from either of them knowing about Draco's *plan*, however. It seems quite clear from the conversation between Draco and Snape that Harry partially overheard that Snape is trying to find out exactly what Draco is up to (and to prevent him from any further dangerous tactics like the opal necklace). Draco, suspecting Snape of trying to "steal his glory" (surely an idea planted in his mind by Aunt Bellatrix), refuses to cooperate with Snape and even blocks Snape's Legilimency with his easily detectable Occlumency (in contrast to Snape's more sophisticated version, which I believe allows him to "hoodwink" the Dark Lord). IOW, while I think that *Voldemort* not only knows about Draco's plan to repair the Vanishing Cabinet and let the DEs into Hogwarts as backup but expects him to use that method, not desperation measures like the necklace and poisoned mead, to attempt to kill DD, I don't think that DD or snape knows about the cabinet. They have, together, taken measures to find out as much as they can (I'd be surprised if they don't know, without Harry's help, that Draco is up to something in the RoR and Polyjuicing his cronies Crabbe and Goyle to act as watchmen), and DD has placed as many protections on the castle as possible, but I don't think either of them suspects that Draco has found a way to let DEs into the castle despite all those extra precautions. BTW, I realize that DD's words to Draco on the tower, "Of course that is what he would tell you Draco, but--" have been used to suggest that snape didn't tell DD about the Unbreakable Vow, but he seems completely unsurprised by Harry's story of what he overheard between Draco and Snape, and I believe that he's right when he implies to Harry that he knows more about the matter than Harry does. And *of course* Snape *would* tell Draco that he was protecting him and watching over him at Draco's mother's request. He's not going to tell him that he's doing it out of loyalty to Dumbledore. As for why Dumbledore didn't approach Draco after Draco was placed in the hospital wing, I suspect that he was trying to protect both Draco (in danger of being murdered by LV for failure to carry out his mission) and Snape (in danger of being killed by the UV). I don't know whether visiting Draco in the hospital wing, where he couldn't possibly carry out his task of killing DD (who could easily disarm him if he reached for his wand), would trigger the UV or not, but probably DD didn't want to take any chances. Nor would hae want to place Draco in the position of having failed to kill him even without the Vow and its consequences for Snape. I believe that part of DD's and Snape's plan was to make sure that DD and Draco were never alone together. Needless to say, DD's decision to fly to the Astronomy Tower and await the DEs (not to mention his weakened condition and Harry's presence on the tower) changed the circumstances drastically from what either Snape or DD could have anticipated. (BTW, unlike DDM!Snapers who are sure that Snape and DD had a definite plan, I'm still not sure why DD chose to fly to the Astronomy Tower, where he must have known he'd encounter DES thanks to the Dark Mark set above it.) Carol, noting that knowing Draco's task (to kill DD) and knowing his plan for carrying it out (the Vanishing Cabinet) are two different things From rvink7 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 21:16:03 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:16:03 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171207 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "Miles" wrote: > > > > why should it be necessary for them > > to marry to have a child? > Eggplant > > > Because JKR doesn't want to write anything sordid nor do we readers > want to read it. > Renee: Well, I don't want to read about a young man who is selfish enough to reproduce, whilst knowing he may be dead by the time the child is born. Harry grew up without parents. If he willingly takes the risk of producing a child that may grow up fatherless, he's not a good guy - not in my book. But I'm confident that he won't. Harry dumped Ginny because by remaining her boyfriend he'd put her at risk. And then you would have him suddenly decide to add to the risk by marrying her and getting her pregnant - making her *more* vulnerable than she'd be if she merely was his girlfriend? I prefer to think JKR will show a minimum of consistency in her story. Renee From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jul 3 21:43:41 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:43:41 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171208 > lizzyben: > > Well, this is a pretty good reconstruction, but it still doesn't > resolve a number of contradictions. First, DD says that he had already > turned to leave the room when the prophecy occurred, while T says that > Snape "interrupted" in the middle of the interview. Pippin: As far as Trelawney recollects it probably *wasn't* the end of the interview. Trelawney wouldn't remember everything up to the exact moment she went into her trance. People who have lost consciousness generally don't recollect what happened just before because their short term memories don't get transferred to long term memory. Harry has turned to go when she starts spouting off in PoA. She apparently doesn't remember that she's already dismissed him, because she apologizes to him for drifting off instead of wondering what he's still doing there. Lizzyben: Second, DD implies > that the spy was detected & "thrown from the building" before the full > prophecy was given, but T says that Snape was outside the door the > entire time. Finally, I have to ask why it is even necessary to jump > through hoops trying to resolve the conflicting versions. Why do they > conflict at all? Pippin: Dumbledore obviously didn't want to reveal that he knew the identity of the eavesdropper, and meant to head off any questions about it. I'm sure we'll hear more about JKR's rationale for this, but it parallels DD's not telling anyone what he'd learned about Riddle, and not wanting Harry to let on that he'd heard what happened to Neville's parents. "[Neville] has the right to let people know, when he is ready." Lizzyben: Even if you believe that Snape only heard the first half, you > still have to wonder why DD allowed him to leave w/that vital > information after being presented w/the eavesdropper. > I'm sure that Snape isn't as bad as Sirius said, but my point was > simply that Snape was in a position to have contact w/known Death > Eaters. Pippin: If Snape's old gang had been known Death Eaters at the time of the Prophecy, they'd've been in Azkaban already. In fact many of us think they were exposed because of Snape's defection. Lizzyben: And, more than that, Snape's *behavior* was extremely > suspicious. He was blatantly listening at a door, spying on a > resistance leader, during a time of war. And his excuse was lame & > unbelievable - he went up the wrong stairs? Pippin: Snape was undoubtedly already a skilled occlumens, since Voldemort would not be so foolish as to send someone to spy on Dumbledore without this skill. Telling an obvious lie and then making it appear sincere through occlumency would be a bit of a give away. But if Dumbledore discovered through legilimency the more plausible story that Snape was hoping for a job at Hogwarts, he'd have little reason to doubt it. Lizzyben: DD thought the prophecy was so important, he sheltered Trelawney for 16 years to keep it from LV. Pippin: I thought he sheltered her to keep her from ending up like Bertha Jorkins or the Longbottoms. > > > lizzyben: > > > "My - our - one stroke of good fortune was that the eavesdropper was detected only a short way into the prophecy a nd thrown from the building... DD first says it was "his" good fortune that VD only heard the first half of the prophecy, then swiftly changes that to "our". > What I'm drawing attention to is the fact that DD refers to it as a > "stroke of good fortune" that LV heard the first half of the prophecy. > Now, why would he say this if he never wanted LV to know this > information? Pippin: It's his *one* stroke of good fortune, the only good thing about a bad business. It's good that Voldemort heard the first half and not the whole thing, because otherwise he might not have done the things that gave Harry the power to defeat him. In that case, Voldemort would be in a far stronger position. He might already be ruling the wizarding world, and Harry would not be better off even if he and his parents had somehow managed to survive so far. I think Dumbledore's rephrase points up the fact that he has never shared this information with anyone before. No one else can know what a stroke of good fortune it is that Voldemort didn't hear the rest of the prophecy because no one else knows what it was. Lizzyben: Both of > them were in the Order, an organization that asks members to be > willing to sacrifice their lives in the cause of duty. DD would > consider this to be a supreme sacrifice for the cause of good; a > sacrifice they agreed to by joining the Order. Of course, this also > makes DD the ultimate arbiter of right & wrong, but he's used to that. Pippin: If Dumbledore considered that he did a good and noble thing (by supposedly leaking this information on purpose to LV) as well as a highly clever one, why would he keep it secret from Harry? He wants Harry to share his values, and he has never been shy about insisting on his own POV when they differ. If he was worried about alienating Harry, would he have criticized Sirius, or defended Snape, much less Petunia? > > lizzyben: > > DD knows & expects that LV will rise again. He doesn't desire the > ultimate defeat of LV? He doesn't desire a happy, normal life for > Harry? Or himself? Or peace for the Wizarding World? The deepest, most > desperate desire of DD's heart is - socks? If you believe that, I've > got a bridge in Brooklyn you may be interested in. :) Even 11-year-old > Harry doesn't buy it. Pippin: I'm sure Dumbledore is good enough at occlumency to fool the mirror, if he wishes. It will show him only those desires he thinks too trivial to suppress. Pippin From kathrin.p at gmail.com Tue Jul 3 22:15:39 2007 From: kathrin.p at gmail.com (Kathrin P) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 00:15:39 +0200 Subject: HPfGUs: DH Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for Bragging Rights in Perpetuity In-Reply-To: <525408.51836.qm@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> References: <525408.51836.qm@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4e2ac800707031515g44892089u14a442a6e82106da@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171209 Predictions Contest Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes & no (Id hate to see Harry gone forever, I can't write yes for both!) 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes and yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid, I can't believe I'm saying this! 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? yes b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? no f. Neville? no g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, *excluding any epilogue*? Bill Weasley & Fleur Delacour 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Uncle Vernon (just to piss off Aunt Petunia even more) *eg* 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan for Hufflepuff b. Head Girl? Hermoine for Gryffindor, Padma Partil for Ravenclaw, Pansy Parkinson for Slytherin c. DADA Instructor? Alastor Moody d. Potions Master or Mistress? a new character, we haven't met yet, with tight links to the MoM and possibly Evil Doloris Umbridge e. Headmaster or -mistress? Professor McGonagall at least for a part of DH 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore - and without the "till death do us part" - part! 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Tom Riddle's diary b. Marvolo Gaunt's ring c. Salazar Slytherin's locket d. Helga Hufflepuff's cup e. the Sorting Hat (Voldy somehow managed to get hold of it while Dumbledore was out of his office) f. Harry himself g. in Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus: a tiger, because they both walk smooth, without making a noise and are dark boggart: James Potter Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? There's a prophecy of some form behind the locked door - Im just not sure whether it is in a non-human form or whether it is a human... Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape will help Harry fighting Voldemort and play a significant role in it all 2. we will meet Dumbledore again 3. information about the magical world will leak out into the muggle world 4. the Weasleys will play a big role 5. we will find out more about Snape and the Potters and their friends Kathrin (oisec) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jul 3 22:32:02 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:32:02 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171210 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol; (BTW, unlike DDM!Snapers who are > sure that Snape and DD had a definite plan, I'm still not sure why DD > chose to fly to the Astronomy Tower, where he must have known he'd > encounter DES thanks to the Dark Mark set above it.) > Pippin: Well, of course he did. But the question was how they had gotten into the school, since Dumbledore thought it was impossible. Obviously the best people to answer that question were the DE's themselves, and Dumbledore, as the most skilled legilimens available, was in the best position to get it out of them. Without that answer, Hogwarts would be lost even if the raiding party was driven off without casualties. Pippin From wrexx at hotmail.com Tue Jul 3 22:09:14 2007 From: wrexx at hotmail.com (wrexx1) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:09:14 -0000 Subject: The voice inside Harry Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171211 Wrexx wrote: Having read the series more times than I care to admit, one of the (many) curiosities I vacillate on is the occasional voice Harry seems to hear at opportune moments. For example, when his instructor is trying to overpower him with a spell, Harry's inner voice says, "Nope, not gonna do that", or words to that effect, and Harry resists bending as the students before him had done. Sometimes, "The voice" impresses me as coming from his mother, other times I'd swear I hear Dumbledore or Peter or even Voldemort in there, giving Harry courage, or solutions to the problem at hand. Has anyone in the group already analyzed this quirk? It seems that knowing whichever consciousness is drifting around inside Harry would be of great assistance in solving the whole Harry Potter riddle. Scratch 'riddle'-- make that puzzle. From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 3 23:28:21 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (Andrew Snee) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 16:28:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <322410.50431.qm@web45315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171212 eggplant107 wrote: If you were 17 but knew there was an excellent chance you'd never see your 18'Th birthday it might be wise to do things now that in normal circumstance should be postponed for a few years. I believe Molly understands this and the horrible danger they are all in, and that is why she will give her approval for Ginny and Harry to marry. Sneeboy2: Arguments about whether JKR would want to tackle teen marriage and pregnancy aside, wouldn't this be a complete 180 from Harry's stance at the end of HBP? He seems primarily concerned with keeping Ginny and finding the horcruxes as soon as possible. Would he suddenly think, "To heck with the mission and Ginny's saftey, I need to preserve my bloodline"? Which is not to say that I think marriage and family are out of the question for Harry. I just think it will be mentioned in the epilogue, if at all. Sneeboy2 From ida3 at planet.nl Wed Jul 4 00:16:13 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:16:13 -0000 Subject: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171213 Magpie: > I don't think that's the logic. One *can* believe that DD believes > that Snape's remorse was the sole reason for his return. The reason > for DD's trust in him is presented as a separate question, one that > Dumbledore doesn't answer. Dumbledore has no issues about talking > about his feelings on Snape's remorse, but does not give that for > the reason he thinks he can trust Snape. Dana: I'm just going to respond to this bit not because the rest is not worth responding to but I have to admit that I'm suffering from discussion fatigue and I just want that darn book to come out and release us from our delusion that we are able to interpret JKR's intentions and motivations for her characters correctly. This is my opinion and my personal interpretation. I do not expect to convince you to see it my way I just want to explain why and how I came to my conclusions. I'll ask you this, how do you know that DD was thinking about telling Harry his reason for his trust and that he did not need a moment to make up his mind if he still was sure Snape was indeed on their side still? Because Harry is not asking why DD trusts Snape, what Harry is asking is how DD can be sure that Snape is on their side. Especially because Voldemort is convinced Snape is on his (pg 513 UKed PB chapter "The Seer Overheard"). And then DD takes a moment as if he was trying to make up his mind. If he was sure without a shadow of a doubt that Snape is on his side, wouldn't you have expected DD to respond immediately to Harry's question? Because Harry is not asking an explanation for DD's trust in Snape. He only wants to know *how* DD can be sure Snape is truly loyal to him and DD's reason for trusting Snape will not provide an answer to this question for the simple fact that DD's trust will not keep Snape loyal if Snape decides not to be and neither will the reason for his trust. If DD had no issues about talking about Snape's remorse and the reason for his return then why does no one know that it was Snape that brought the prophecy to LV? Why does DD not allow people to make up their own minds about Snape and if they still would want to work with Snape if they had this information? Because DD does not trust that people could ever forgive Snape for what he has done no matter how truly sorry he was for it. DD does the same thing that readers condemn Lupin of doing in PoA. DD does not trust people to be able to handle the truth and then still have faith in him for giving Snape a chance. He does not trust people to see it his way. He does not trust they believe enough in him to follow him and trust his judgment if they know the truth about Snape. He made the decision for them and took away there ability to decide for themselves if Snape was trustworthy enough with vital information about their safety. Especially because Snape is working as a spy supposedly pretending to be a DE and this requires trusting that this person will not sell you out to the enemy to keep his own cover believable. People should have been allowed to know why DD trusted Snape and make up their own minds if they then would still want to put their faith in DD's judgment. We have seen various people in canon that are loyal to DD and DD trusting them and all of them have to some point done something that could be defined as betrayal of that trust but for some reason with Snape, DD's trust in Snape is somehow so binding that Snape could never betray DD's trust because DD must have a good reason to trust Snape and it needs to be bigger then Snape's story of remorse. That is defining logic to me. JKR might indeed have intertwined Snape's loyalty and DD's trust in Snape because that is what makes Snape ambiguous. She forces the reader to make a distinction between DD's judgment and Snape's loyalties and most people fail to do so (IMO) because she uses the support of other characters in canon to define that trusting DD's judgment is trusting Snape. She cleverly distracts the reader from the option that Harry might in this case be the only one who is right. Especially because she laid down the cards that Harry has been wrong so many times about Snape that the reader expects him to be wrong again. And she certainly makes the reader believe that Harry would never be able to judge Snape's character better then DD himself because of Snape's history with both James and Sirius. So Harry must hate Snape for the simple fact that he inherited a prejudice from both his father and his godfather as she makes Lupin remind us during Christmas in HBP and therefore Harry can't be considered a reliable judge of character. But you know what, he will be right and the revelation Harry will have in DH will not be about Snape being secretly loyal to DD and them together having concocted DD's murder. The revelation will be from a totally different kind because Snape was the true villain in HBP as LV will be the true villain in DH and the turn around that readers still expect to happen will not be Snape's but Kreacher's. JMHO What Harry ends up doing will not have anything to do with him being proven wrong but everything with him being proven right and then make the only right decision that it is not up to him to make Snape pay for his mistakes and disloyalty and that believing in DD is not dependent on if he was right or wrong about Snape but about what DD has meant to each individual personally and the rest of the WW. Just because a person makes a mistake doesn't mean you should no longer believe anything about that person. That is what JKR showed us with Lupin. Yes, he was wrong about not telling DD about Sirius being an animagus but this still doesn't mean that the person Lupin therefore stands for nothing. If he had not acted that night then Harry would still not have known what he and his father meant to Sirius and DD would not have known the truth about who the real traitor was. Therefore I stand until proven otherwise with my so-called illogical assessment that DD's trust in Snape or his reason for it has nothing to do with Snape's loyalty and neither are DD's judgment skills dependent on being right about Snape. It is Snape that should have lived up to the trust given to him and it was Snape's choice to betray that trust. And nothing in canon supports that DD included Snape in everything he did and that he thought Snape was important enough for the cause that he could be excused murdering the person that stood up for him. DD would never ask Snape to make an evil packed to murder him to safe a student. DD would not have tried to help Draco if one of his clumsy murder attempts had led to the death of a student. To me Snape taking that vow will never be proof that Snape did it all for Draco and not to make himself more believable in the eyes of his fellow DEs because he was accused of being a traitor for living in DD's pocket. To help Draco he would not need to take a vow and if he was loyal to DD he would never agree to become his murderer. To me DD's hesitation and the argument in the forest where Hagrid specifically states that DD was angry with Snape is an indication that DD already had his suspicions about Snape. And I believe DD did not tell Snape where he was going that night and that Snape did not know Harry was a witness to the events on the tower until Harry revealed it to him later. Snape was caught in his own web of lies and his spun himself into a death end. And if we have to add a prediction of what Snape's patronus is then I would say a spy ? spider. Magpie: > Rather than analyzing and appreciating the text that's there, you > seem to be making a demand about what scene you need to see and > assume that any deviation proves your point. > Both with Draco and Snape unless the two of them declare for > Dumbledore in front of DEs > and die for it they can't possibly be anything but bad guys. One > obvious reason Draco doesn't do those things is that JKR is a > competent writer. Dana: I am not really sure what you wanted to achieve with adding this to your post because I do not really believe that you know me well enough to be a judge on how I analyze or appreciate the text. It sounds really condescending to me. But tell me do you really believe that a person is actually a good guy if he kills, tries to kill or let someone be killed to safe his own life? That it is proof that these people have a strong moral value of doing the right thing? That they are actually the good guys because they put more then just one person into mortal danger just so they could themselves be saved? That JKR wanted to show that you can still be good if you sacrifice the life of someone else to safe that of your own? Or that it is okay to sacrifice the life of someone without that person knowing you have gambled his or her life? And that Draco therefore really can be relieved of the responsibility he had in almost getting two students killed, letting a murderous bunch of lunatics into the castle and then have them kill another person to serve as decoy to lure DD to the tower so he again could make an attempt to kill him, because he could not go through with killing DD himself? Or that Snape can be excused that he could do nothing about it because the vow prevented him from doing so. That the entire climax on the tower was not a direct result of the choices Snape made at the beginning of the year? Of course I know that you believe that Snape put his own life at risk with taking the vow and that he did it all to help Draco but to me it is forgetting that he sacrificed another man's life to do so. And to me this can never be good. And I know that half of fandom believes that Snape told DD all about the vow or that DD ordered or asked Snape to kill him or that Snape knew what DD was doing or that he knew that DD was dying but the text, that I do not seem able to analyze and appreciate, does not support any of these claims. They are all assumptions because if you really analyze the text and watch the little things then it actually supports the opposite. Not that I'm going to convince anyone that already fitted the text to support their own opinion but let's be fair shall we your opinion is as good as mine even if we disagree. Magpie: > I believe you yourself pointed that out regarding Sirius and the > Prank.) If he's already almost killed without remorse I'd think it > would be that much easier. Dana: First of all that is still assuming that Sirius ever had the intention of killing Snape and canon never states this. Lupin states that Sirius found it amusing to tell Snape how to get passed the willow. It was still Snape's choice to do so. I know your view about being played a trick on so no need to rehearse it again. Snape never had to go to St. Mungo's to recover from a werewolf attack. There were no consequences because James prevented it. Because you do not know if Sirius would have had any remorse if things had turned out differently and looking at Sirius character I have no problem to believe that he would. Draco imperio'd Rosemerta (which is forbidden by law) to give a deathly necklace to an innocent girl (who alsmost died and not just could have) so she could deliver it to DD. He let Rosmerta send poisoned meat without ever knowing in whose hands (Ron almost died again not just could have) it would end up. He let in DEs without ever being able to control their behavior. It was even part of the plan to have someone killed (who could have died but still got hurt badly) to use as decoy to lure DD to the tower. So I'd say it is pretty much comparing apples with oranges. Draco never came to a resolution he would have stood there indefinitely if he would not have been shoved out of the way by Snape. I totally agree with you that Draco will learn something from it but he has not come to this point yet. The only thing that played a role at that point in time is that he could not do it. That he was too scared to just take someone's life. He then still has to take the responsibility that his choices caused someone his life. So Draco not being able to kill when he is faced with his intended victim face to face does not make him a good guy all of a sudden. Draco had many choices during the entire year and he still chose to try to do as ordered. Although it might be a lot to ask of a 16 year old to go against a Dark Wizard's orders and sacrifice himself for it, he could have gone to DD or he could have let Snape help him (well not that it would have gotten him very far but anyway) The same goes for Snape. Some might see it as a noble deed that Snape took a vow to help Draco but I do not because essentially if Draco had made a choice halfway through the year that he could not kill DD then Snape still would have needed to complete the task given to him. And Snape by taking the vow made himself incapable of helping DD. Snape with taking the vow did not help Draco because Snape with his action made sure that Draco is still on the wrong side of the fence. And because Snape was incapable of preventing Draco in trying to perform his task he willingly put other people at risk. It is not for nothing that people want to include DD in the killing scheme because as canon stands now it does not support Snape as one of the good guys. Magpie: > Not having 'the nerve' slides over the whole question of why people > don't kill other human beings. Dana: Really, I though respecting other people's lives is why people do not go around killing other people and because in most cases when the stakes are high enough people mostly overcome their anxiety pretty darn quick. Hiring someone to have someone killed is still being guilty of attempted murder or murder and to me Draco did cross that line. It remains to be seen if he takes responsibility for his actions but indeed he probably will. Dana From quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca Wed Jul 4 00:48:30 2007 From: quick_silver71 at yahoo.ca (quick_silver71) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:48:30 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights -- EMAIL TO TIGER TO ENTER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171214 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TK Kenyon" wrote: > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > > If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, > write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters > or characteristics of new character for full credit. Quick_Silver: Hope that I'm doing this right. > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Neville > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark > > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Harry with Aberforth subbing in when Harry can't teach d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. The Diary c. The Ring d. The Cup e. The Locket f. The cursed Necklace g. Nagini > > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Himself Boggart: Himself lying dead > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Power of Love > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > > Current Off-Limit Spoilers: > -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points > unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. > -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: > because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least > somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a > cover will also be worth 0 points.) > -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR > during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. > -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will > laugh at you when they're wrong. > -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and > Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) > will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. > -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come > skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no > credit. > -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in > your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be > scored. Quick_Silver: To defeat Voldemort Harry must arrive at an understanding of the true nature of the DADA curse and use that understanding to foil the curse. Defeat the curse, defeat Voldemort. Harry will be severely hurt retrieving one of the Horcruxs and during the time that he is injured Neville will polyjuice himself into Harry and try to defeat Voldemort resulting in the death of Neville. Draco will reveal the location of Nagini to Harry and will be grievously injured trying to capture her only the arrival of Harry will save him. Harry's wand will be destroyed partway through the year leading to a quest to find Fawkes and Ollivander. Voldemort will eventually attack Hogwarts to lure Harry into a duel Harry will let the school fall to the force of Darkness and lure Voldemort to the Ministry. Quick_Silver From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 02:07:45 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:07:45 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171215 zgirnius wrote: Albus Dumbledore: (HBP, "The Lightning-Struck Tower", addressed at Draco Malfoy) "I appreciate the difficulty of your position. Why else do you think I have not confronted you before now? Because I knew you would have been murdered if Lord Voldemort realized that I suspected you." Thank you, Professor, I could not have said it better myself. vmonte wrote: That quote says that Dumbledore suspected, not that he was sure. That does not say that Snape told Dumbledore anything. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 02:09:34 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:09:34 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: <322410.50431.qm@web45315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171216 JKR seems to allude, often, to WWII and England's experience using HP as a metaphor. There were a lot of war brides who married very young to boys who had been drafted and were going to the German front. re: Pink Floyd, The Wall. It's possible. I like the possibilities. JM2c, TK--TigerPatronus! --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Andrew Snee wrote: > > eggplant107 wrote: > If you were 17 but knew there was an excellent chance you'd never see your 18'Th birthday it might be wise to do things now that in normal circumstance should be postponed for a few years. I believe Molly understands this and the horrible danger they are all in, and that is why she will give her approval for Ginny and Harry to marry. > > > Sneeboy2: > Arguments about whether JKR would want to tackle teen marriage and pregnancy aside, wouldn't this be a complete 180 "To heck with the mission and Ginny's saftey, I need to preserve my bloodline"? From bawilson at citynet.net Wed Jul 4 02:06:12 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:06:12 -0400 Subject: Who will be the new head of Gryffindor? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171217 JKR has said that the Head of a given House was an alumnus/a of that House. We don't know what House Sinestra, Vector, Trelawny, Grubbly-Plank or Binns graduated from. Hagrid never finished his Hogwarts diploma, so I think he's out of the running 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 kathrin.p at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 02:24:04 2007 From: kathrin.p at gmail.com (Kathrin P) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 04:24:04 +0200 Subject: HPfGUs: DH Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for Bragging Rights in Perpetuity - Revised Message-ID: <4e2ac800707031924n2f0a790eu3a7667501082b5e3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171218 Thanks TK for letting me know I forgot to answer #4. Must have skipped it while thinking about a possible answer. Predictions Contest Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes & no (Id hate to see Harry gone forever, I can't write yes for both!) 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes and yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid, I can't believe I'm saying this! 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Draco showed Borgin his Death Mark on his arm. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? yes b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? no f. Neville? no g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill Weasley & Fleur Delacour 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Uncle Vernon (just to piss off Aunt Petunia even more) *eg* 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan for Hufflepuff b. Head Girl? Hermoine for Gryffindor, Padma Partil for Ravenclaw, Pansy Parkinson for Slytherin c. DADA Instructor? Alastor Moody d. Potions Master or Mistress? a new character, we haven't met yet, with tight links to the MoM and possibly Evil Doloris Umbridge e. Headmaster or -mistress? Professor McGonagall at least for a part of DH 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore - and without the "till death do us part" - part! 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Tom Riddle's diary b. Marvolo Gaunt's ring c. Salazar Slytherin's locket d. Helga Hufflepuff's cup e. the Sorting Hat (Voldy somehow managed to get hold of it while Dumbledore was out of his office) f. Harry himself g. in Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus: a tiger, because they both walk smooth, without making a noise and are dark boggart: James Potter Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? There's a prophecy of some form behind the locked door - Im just not sure whether it is in a non-human form or whether it is a human... Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape will help Harry fighting Voldemort and play a significant role in it all 2. we will meet Dumbledore again 3. information about the magical world will leak out into the muggle world 4. the Weasleys will play a big role 5. we will find out more about Snape and the Potters and their friends Kathrin (oisec) From bawilson at citynet.net Wed Jul 4 02:10:37 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:10:37 -0400 Subject: What's going to happen in the end..(kinda long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171219 TKG: "The Dursleys: I like to think that Dudders will be the one to do magic. It would be kind of funny. Considering there is obviously magic in Lily's family what's to say IF it skipped Petunia that is wouldn't go to her lovely son? I think it will be one of them nonetheless. Which I think will prove interesting." JKR says that it won't happen. I think that if any of the Dursleys, it will be Uncle Vernon, if only because it would be such a kick in the pants that the Muggle who hates and fears magic the most will turn out to have mageblood in him. I can just see him inspecting most carefully the genealogies of Dudley's girlfriends. 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 From muellem at bc.edu Wed Jul 4 02:26:09 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:26:09 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171220 > zgirnius wrote: > Albus Dumbledore: > (HBP, "The Lightning-Struck Tower", addressed at Draco Malfoy) > "I appreciate the difficulty of your position. Why else do you > think I have not confronted you before now? Because I knew you would > have been murdered if Lord Voldemort realized that I suspected you." > > Thank you, Professor, I could not have said it better myself. > > > vmonte wrote: > That quote says that Dumbledore suspected, not that he was sure. That > does not say that Snape told Dumbledore anything. > colebiancardi: I read that line to be that DD knew ("I knew you would have been murdered") and the suspected bit was on LV's side, not DD's side. I think that Snape told DD about Draco - afterall, Snape was investigating his house and then we have the argument in the forest that Hagrid overheard. also, in "A Sluggish Memory", when Harry tells DD about the conversation with Snape & Draco, DD tells Harry "..I understand everything you told me....I think you might even consider the possibility that I understood more than you did. Again, I am glad that you have confided in me, but let me reassure you that you have not told me anything that causes me disquiet" p. 358-359 HBP Am Ed Hardcover Harry begins to think that either a) DD ordered Snape to find out what Draco was up to and that DD already knows this from Snape or b) that DD was really worried but was pretending not to be...(of course, Harry would think that, knowning how he feels about Snape) If Snape is DDM, most likely it is option a - that DD already knew about Draco way before the events in the tower. colebiancardi From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 02:32:32 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:32:32 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171221 > vmonte wrote: > That quote says that Dumbledore suspected, not that he was sure. That > does not say that Snape told Dumbledore anything. zgirnius: He claims to know. Dumbledore: (HBP, "The Lightning-Struck Tower", to Draco Malfoy) "You almost killed Katie Bell and Ronald Weasley. You have been trying, with increasing desperation, to kill me all year." zgirnius: It is true he does not claim to Draco that Snape told him. However, he knows from Harry that Snape knows about Draco's task. That there was a task Voldemort assigned to Draco, was part of the discussion Harry overheard in "The Unbreakable Vow" and reported to Dumbledore in "A Sluggish Memory". If Snape did not tell him, and he nonetheless continued to trust Snape, he was being rather foolish. Especially once he somehow came across the knowledge of what the task was from some alternative source, as you propose. (What source might that be, I wonder?) From muellem at bc.edu Wed Jul 4 02:33:34 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:33:34 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171222 > > vmonte wrote: > > That quote says that Dumbledore suspected, not that he was sure. That > > does not say that Snape told Dumbledore anything. colebiancardi: an addition to my previous post. "Why didn't you stop me, then" Malfoy demanded "I tried, Draco. Professor Snape has been keeping watch over you on my orders ---" "He hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother --" "Of course that is what he would tell you Draco, but --" "He's a double agent, you stupid old man, he isn't working for you, you just think he is!" "We must agree to differ on that, Draco. It so happens that I trust Professor Snape --" p. 588 HBP, Am Ed Hardcover I find it hard to believe that Snape would not have told DD anything, but DD has Snape keeping watch over Draco. It seems to me that goes hand-in-hand with reporting back to DD about the going-on's, as DD told Harry back in "A Sluggish Memory" colebiancardi (lots of stuff in that chapter - forgot most of it....) From puppylove at telus.net Wed Jul 4 02:34:11 2007 From: puppylove at telus.net (Kim) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 19:34:11 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Am I unique? References: <463f9ec00707022353w14add103rd1761990021dce08@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <005f01c7bde3$ce2d4e50$4001a8c0@your4f6988d827> No: HPFGUIDX 171223 2007/7/3, eggplant107 : >> >> I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that >> matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But > >can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! > >Cassy: >Well, I think that Harry SHOULD die in the last book and it would be a >very proper epic ending, but I fear that he will not, due to marketing >reasons. Surely, JRK doesn't want to loose all that future readers in >years to come? ::snipped:: Kas: (My first post - please be gentle :) I've been thinking about this a while, and I fall squarely on the "Harry will live" team - for several reasons. While it's true that a Harry sacrifice might illustrate the power of love for others, and would make sense to those looking for overt Christian symbolism in the fanale, I believe it will do more harm than good. JKR set out of make a children's story. However rich, layered, and detailed they are, at their core the books detail the battle of good and evil. Harry, as human as he is, is JKR's symbol for good. And I can't believe that she would have evil triumph over good - not in a children's story. I realize that the Lion sacrifices himself to save the children in the Chronicles of Narnia. But I see his role as different from Harry's. And I admit I never read the books - knowing they were a Christian allegory, I wasn't interested... Others may see him differently... I've considered how good can still triumph over evil even with the sacrifice of the hero. How it might be determined that Harry could die for the Greater Good. Yep - one could argue that. But I keep coming back to the fact that these books were created for kids. Maybe I'm being too simplistic, but I just can't see JKR killing her hero. I know there will be sacrifices - but not Harry. From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 02:38:29 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:38:29 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: <1183495288.25276.1198366301@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171224 Random832 wrote: It's a war. People die on both sides. Would you be OK with your commander being "vanquished" and having to "die at the hand of the other"? I think Snape's part in this is certainly a lot _less_ horrible if we assume Snape's interpretation was more along the lines of "Some [adult] 'hero' is going to come riding into town any minute now to get rid of you" than "someone who will eventually defeat you is going to be born, best kill them as soon as possible". Especially if we assume by extension that he didn't _know_ yet that Voldemort was all that evil [i.e. doesn't know he's willing to kill a baby] vmonte responds: JKR said that the Death Eaters are like how the Nazis were. The Nazis believed in the superiority of an Aryan master race, and through Hitler exterminated everyone that was not one of their own. The Death Eaters harbour a genocidal hatred of humans without magic. The Nazis killed off whole families, not just their parents. I'm pretty sure the DEs are doing the same. From bawilson at citynet.net Wed Jul 4 02:18:33 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:18:33 -0400 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171225 "Oryomai Who could be totally missing a Christ reference in Harry because she's an atheist." Well, let's see. Harry's house is Gryffindor. A gryphon is a cross between a lion and an eagle. The lion is king of beasts, the eagle is king of birds. So, we have a being who is of two natures united in one entity, and king of earth and sky. Christ dies, descends to the underworld, and is reborn--which is pretty much what happens to Harry, one way or another, in each book. In Christian symbolism, Satan, the Devil, the Great Deceiver, is symbolized by a giant snake. A Christian symbol of Christ, who is eternally slain and eternally overcomes Death, is a Phoenix. Certainly "Chamber of Secrets" follows thispattern. Those are only the three which come most to mind. 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 From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed Jul 4 02:51:40 2007 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 19:51:40 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171226 I'm just doing this for fun, and as I won't be able to come up with answers to all the questions, it won't count toward the contest. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. I hope. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? HIS DARK MARK 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? no d. Luna? yes e. Ron? no f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES However, I am not sure that the ones who do go to Hogwarts will be there for the entire year. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? I don't think we'll be given that information b. Head Girl? We won't know. c. DADA Instructor? a new character, if we are told d. Potions Master or Mistress? SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? MCGONAGALL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? with himself. Though his desires may lie in the defeat of Voldemort, his ultimate loyalty is to himself. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. something of Gryffindor's b. RIDDLE'S DIARY c. MARVOLO'S RING d. SLYTHERIN'S LOCKET e. HUFFLEPUFF'S CUP f. RAVENCLAW'S WAND g. in Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS: have no clue and even less interest, so I'll have to pass on that one. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? LOVE Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Sirius will come back from behind the veil! (Hey, I can dream, can't I?) 2. Arthur will become Minister of Magic. 3. Trelawney will be right and Harry and Ginny will marry and have 12 kids. That will be in the epilog! (Yeah, I did love fairy tale endings once upon a time, and Harry deserves one for sure!) And, um, I don't think I really have any other predictions. Sherry From neumannm9 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 02:49:13 2007 From: neumannm9 at yahoo.com (mary neumann) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 19:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: <005f01c7bde3$ce2d4e50$4001a8c0@your4f6988d827> Message-ID: <949701.16632.qm@web53310.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171227 Eggplant: >> I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that >> matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But > >can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! My opinion is that Harry will die. I think that the last horcrux is Harry. I think that he will defeat Voltamort and then realize that he is the last remaining horcrux. Just a thought. Mary From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 4 03:24:54 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 03:24:54 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171228 Andrew Snee Wrote: > wouldn't this be a complete 180 > from Harry's stance at the end of HBP? Yes it most certainly is! But is there a single person on planet Earth who really and truly believes the romance between Harry and Ginny is dead and we will not see a hint of it in the last book? Renee Wrote: > I don't want to read about a young man > who is selfish enough to reproduce, > whilst knowing he may be dead by the > time the child is born. As TigerPatronus pointed out, like it or not "war brides" is a very real phenomenon; and I just can't find it in my heart to criticize those who are about to die, after all they put their life on the line to protect me. As for being selfish, well, all I can say is that I'd be very pleased if Harry's genes remain in the pool. I hadn't noticed a connection between Pink Floyd's, The Wall and Harry Potter before TigerPatronus mentioned it, but now that I think about it I know exactly what he's talking about. Eggplant From neumannm9 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 03:19:26 2007 From: neumannm9 at yahoo.com (mary neumann) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 20:19:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: <448823.19678.qm@web53308.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171229 I hope that I am doing this right to enter this contest. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Ron- I think that he will die helping Harry fight. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His dark mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Lupin and Tonks 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Lupin (I think he come back) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore, however I do think that he hates Harry and would like to help get rid of him. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. something of Gryffindor's b. RIDDLE'S DIARY c. MARVOLO'S RING d. SLYTHERIN'S LOCKET e. HUFFLEPUFF'S CUP f. Harry himself g. in Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS: Wolf and James Potter 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Secrets to bringing the dead back to life, or being able to contact the dead. I dont think that we have heard the last of Sirius Black. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Sirius will come back from behind the veil! (Someone else wrote this, but I agree) 2. Harry will realize that he is the last horcrux, and therefore destroy himself. 3. Hermione and Ron will either get engaged, or get married. 4. Mrs. Dursley will do something great for Harry. (Something un-selfish) 5. I beleive that by Dumbledore being dead, he is a more powerful wizard and he will be able to help Harry more dead than alive. I also think that Fawks will have something to do with this and he will help Harry on his journey. Thanks for reading! Mary Rayner From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 4 03:57:42 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 03:57:42 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171230 > CV: I believe you are the first one to guess the sword, although you > craftily hedged your bet with other Gryffindor pointy things. > > ...Why are we all rejecting the sword, anyway? Eddie: Dumbledore rejected this theory, so we have too. Also, it doesn't quite seem consistent to me that Harry could have used it (a Voldemort horcrux) to kill the giant snake. Eddie From marshman1570 at mac.com Wed Jul 4 03:41:00 2007 From: marshman1570 at mac.com (marshman1570) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 03:41:00 -0000 Subject: The voice inside Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171231 > Wrexx wrote: > It seems that knowing whichever consciousness is drifting around > inside Harry would be of great assistance in solving the whole Harry > Potter riddle. Scratch 'riddle'-- make that puzzle. marshman: I've often wondered that myself. Before HBP came out my best guess was Lily but I was never really comforable with that all-too-easy answer. After thinking more on the nature of horcruxes, I came up with this. I agree that Harry does hold a horcrux within him. He's got a part that LV wanted out of himself because it was very inconvenient. Harry's got the "good" part of Tom Riddle's soul. So replace "puzzle" with "Riddle" again. From randy.Shepherd at hotmail.com Wed Jul 4 03:52:51 2007 From: randy.Shepherd at hotmail.com (gringots) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 03:52:51 -0000 Subject: some thoughts I had Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171232 I am listening to HBP on CD right now, and it has totally changed my views from when I first read and heard the book when it came out. There are clues that make me think Dumbledore did not die. In the beginning of the year there was a huge amount of Polyjuice Potion made, and some was stolen (Crabbe and Goyle use some to be 1st year girls to guard the Room of Requirement when Malfoy was in it). I don't think Dumbledore would leave the school so often at a time like this. Snape was to play a loyal Death Eater, so I think Snape and Dumbledore used the Polyjuice Potion to switch places, so Snape could leave the school (stop drinking potion while Dumbledore did). It was really Dumbledore teaching the Defense Against the Dark Arts(he never wanted Snape to do it). I think it was Snape in Dumbledore's form who took Harry to find the Horcrux, and it was the vile liquid that was one of the Horcruxes, and so Snape asked to be killed to destroy it. This is where I go back and forth wondering about other possible things. The locket was a fake, and the note in it was signed R.A.B. Sirus's brother was a Death Eater who changed his mind, and if his middle name began with an A then he would be R.A.B. Sirus says his parents were not proud of him or his brother, since being a Death Eater was going too far. I think it was because he defected, and destroyed the Horcrux. While cleaning Grimmauld Place, it mentions a golden locket on the fireplace mantle that no one can open, so they just leave it. I think it is the Horcrux of the Slitherin locket, but might not be destroyed. The other ideas I have are that a spider could have been on Dumbledore/Snape and it was the insect that got killed by the curse and Fawkes (can carry great weight) saved whoever it was from the fall. Also Dumbledore knew how to help protect Harry from the killing curse as a baby; there is no reason to think he couldn't do the same for himself. And perhaps Fawkes's tears can heal a person back to life, if done immediately after the curse is performed. I think they knew Snape would die from the Unbreakable Vow, so best to have Dumbledore kill him, as they are prepared to die for the Order. The HBP also mentions how Dumbledore seems to have much more strength than a man his age would appear to have, while at the cave at the seaside (again Snape??). One would also think that Dumbledore's portrait would have made some comment when it hung in the office after his "death", but it remained sleeping, while all the other portraits, and members of the Order talked about closing the school, and their suprise about Snape. No one even asked the portrait to wake up and ask him to explain what happened. I think it is a decoy painting. Dumbledore can come to Harry's aid if Voldermort thinks he is dead. Plus Voldermort has never wanted to fight Dumbledore, but has never been afraid of Harry, yet he used Harry's blood (his greatest enemy to return, which I think was a mistake, as Dumbledore is his greatest enemy. I think Harry's blood has some magical charm on it that will weaken Voldermort, because when Harry said to Dumbledore that Voldemort used his blood and showed the scar "he had a gleam in his eye, like triumph". I think Dumbledore know what kinds of ways he can come back, and has planned to foil them. I even wonder if Harry's mother is really dead, there is something very odd about Crookshanks (although it is a male cat). He followed Sirus (as a dog), like a friend, when all thought he was an evil escapee, and also attacked Wormtail (as a rat) whenever he had the chance. Book does not say Lily was an animagus, but I think she could have been, and perhaps feigned death. I think Aunt Petunia is also a witch, since she knew about Dementors and Azkaban, and was extremely afraid Voldermort was back. I think Dumbledore used that info to blackmail her into taking Harry in, since they never, ever wanted him. Well, that is a lot of rambling, and I can't wait to see if Dumbledore (and Snape) are both alive, or if only one, then which one is it. Oh, I would also like to see Harry go to Grimmauld Place, as I wonder if he really is Kreacher's master, or if Bellatrix is his owner now, and ordered him to pretend to be Harry's servant to get info. So many possible twists. gringots From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 4 04:40:36 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 04:40:36 -0000 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171233 > Dungrollin: > I've noticed a lot of people suggesting that Harry won't return to > school, but that Ron and Hermione will. Given their insistence at the > end of HBP that they're with him for the long haul, I'm surprised so > many think that they'll change their minds, and I'm curious as to why. > > Is it because two of the pieces of cover art show them in robes while > Harry's in muggle clothes, or is there another clue that I've missed? > Any thoughts gratefully received. Eddie: 1. R&H are not only in robes, but dress robes. I'm assuming this is because R&H were at some school function. Graduation? But I can imagine it being equally possible they are in dress robes because of Bill & Fleur's wedding. But then why isn't Harry in dress robes too? 2. I think R&H will be head boy & girl. Hermione will want to go with Harry, but will say something that sounds like, "mimble wimble." Ron will be speechless. Harry will realize that he cannot allow his friends to pass up their 7th year at Hogwarts, and will insist that they go back. Besides, he'll have something useful for them to do there. Horcrux hunting at school? Looking stuff up in the library? 3. I just think Harry needs to go on his hero's quest alone. That why (as a literary device) Sirius and Dumbledore had to die. Eddie, who thinks Bill & Fleur need to get somebody to de-jinx the presents before they touch them. One may be a portkey or a regurgitating waffle iron. From laurel.coates at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 04:46:18 2007 From: laurel.coates at gmail.com (Laurel Coates) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 21:46:18 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3cd952930707032146r4abcd474v80a62fa0c70f3939@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171234 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. He will go through the veil but come back. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Fleur and Bill 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Justin Finch-Fletchly b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? Lupin d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonnagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Snape is GOOD 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Ring b. Locket c. Diary d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaw's wand f. Nagini g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: bat Boggart: Lord Voldemort Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Power of Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. and survive. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Snape will sacrifice his life to save Harry 2. Kreacher helped Regulus and helped him drink the green potion in the cave 3. A dementor will provide the Dementor's Kiss to Voldemort after Harry has killed all the remaining horcruxes. 4. Harry will venture through the Veil and survive 5. Neville will kill Bellatrix Lestrange Laurel [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 04:56:56 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 04:56:56 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171235 > houyhnhnm: > > I like the idea that Bill will contribute to the > fight against Voldemort by breaking the DADA curse. > That's why I chose him for new DADA professor in my > last will and testament. Mike: I wasn't really thinking about Bill breaking the DADA curse, so you get the kudos for that idea. But that does remind of something. Dumbledore was Headmaster for 40 years with this curse hanging over that position for the whole time. Why couldn't this brilliant wizard figure out how to break that curse in all that time? I'm beginning to wonder if that curse served some purpose for DD. Though, for the life of me, I can't figure out what that would be. > houyhnhnm: > > Cedric and Viktor were the only ones to use > transfiguration as a tactic during the TWT. Cedric, > alas, is dead. So, why not Krum for Transfiguration? > Rowling has hinted that he will come back into the > story, I believe. And *he* was drawn to Gryffindor > (or at least one particular Gryffindor). Mike: Well spotted. Though, (you knew there was going to be a but here, didn't ya) Krum only tried once to transfigure himself and actually got marked down for his incomplete transfiguration. I do agree that Krum was a natural Gryff in the grand scheme of things. But the main problem is that I don't think Hogwarts can afford him. He's an international star athlete. His signing bonus alone would bankrupt the school. Look at how much Beckham got to sign with Los Angeles and he's arguably over the hill by now. Krum hasn't even reached his playing prime yet. ;) > houyhnhnm, who thinks Hogwarts might benefit by doing > some out-of-the-box hiring. (I wouldn't want to call them > parochial, but ....) Mike, who was going for that when he suggested Fleur for the transfiguration post, but could accept your option of her filling the Potions job when Sluggy re-retires :) From laurel.coates at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 05:11:58 2007 From: laurel.coates at gmail.com (Laurel Coates) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:11:58 -0700 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3cd952930707032211j6061f094w65ef1f27fa12acab@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171236 Dungrollin: I've noticed a lot of people suggesting that Harry won't return to school, but that Ron and Hermione will. Given their insistence at the end of HBP that they're with him for the long haul, I'm surprised so many think that they'll change their minds, and I'm curious as to why. Laurel: I think I am the only one who thinks Harry will return to Hogwarts. I think he is going to be encouraged to return by members of the Order and by Dumbledore (either by his talking portrait or a last will and testament). Harry's got to enroll; otherwise he will find it hard to access Hogwarts' records, halls, secrets, etc. Laurel From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 4 05:32:10 2007 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:32:10 -0000 Subject: some thoughts I had In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171237 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gringots" Message #171232 wrote: "gringots" >There are clues that make me think Dumbledore did not die. "K": Dumbledore is dead. ---------- But I see that I need to be a little more explicit and say that Dumbledore is definitely ... dead (crowd gasps). And I do know - I do know that there is an entire website out there that says - that's name is DumbledoreIsNotDead.com so umm, I'd imagine they're not pretty happy right now (crowd laughs). But I think I need - you need - all of you need to move through the five stages of grief (crowd laughs), and I'm just helping you get past denial. So, I can't remember what's next. It may be anger so I think we should stop it here. Thank you (crowd applauds). http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2006/0802-radiocityreading2.html Audience member question (paraphrased): Why did Dumbledore have to die [asked by TIME for Kids representative] Rowling: I did an interview last year in which I was asked this question. In the genre in which I'm writing, you usually find that the hero has to go on alone. There comes a point when his support falls away and to be truly heroic he has to act alone. Harry is not completely alone, he still has his two faithful sidekicks. This was summarized for me by the person who asked the question with, you mean the old wizard always gets it, and that fundamentally, that is what I was saying. I was as trying to dress it up a little better than that. So that's why. In these sort of epic sagas, the hero eventually has to fight alone. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2006/0801-radiocity-pressconf.html Rowling: (laughs) I think that there's ... I understand why an author would kill a character from a point of view of not allowing others to continue writing after the original author is dead. I don't always enjoy killing my characters. I didn't enjoy killing the character who died at the end of book six (I'm being discreet just in case any on hasn't finished the book). I really didn't enjoy doing that, but I had been planning that for years. As John [Irving] says it wasn't quite as poignant as you might imagine. I'd already done my grieving when it actually came to writing it. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2006/0801-radiocity-pressconf.html Cory Mayer: My name's Cory Mayer and I'm 9 years old and I'm from Bordentown, New Jersey. I absolutely love your books. I'm not a big reader but your books make me want to read and that makes my mom happy (crowd and JK Rowling laugh). She loves your books too. In a recent interview you hinted at two main characters dying and possibly Harry Potter too. Was Dumbledore considered one of the main characters or will we have the chance to see him in action once again? Since he is the most powerful wizard of all time and Harry Potter is so loyal to him, how could he really be dead? JK Rowling: Ohhhhhhhh (Jo puts her head in her arms and crowd cheers and applauds). I feel terrible (crowd laughs). The British writer Graham Green once said that every writer had to have a chip of ice in their heart. Oh no (Jo says half weeping while crowd laughs). I think you may just have ruined my career (crowd laughs). Umm, I really can't answer that question because the answer is in book seven but ... you shouldn't expect Dumbledore to do a Gandalf. Let me just put it that way. I'm sorry (crowd moans and applauds). http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2006/0802-radiocityreading2.html >"gringots" >I think they knew Snape would die from the Unbreakable Vow, so best >to have Dumbledore kill him, as they are prepared to die for the Order. "K": According to JKR, Snape is alive. ---------- JKR: Well, okay, I'm obviously ? Harry-Snape is now as personal, if not more so, than Harry-Voldemort. I can't answer that question because it's a spoiler, isn't it, whatever I say, and obviously, it has such a huge impact on what will happen when they meet again that I can't. And let's face it, it's going to launch 10,000 theories and I'm going to get a big kick out of reading them so [laughs] I'm evil but I just like the theories, I love the theories. The Leaky Cauldron and MuggleNet Interview Part 1 2005 http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm >"gringots" > Dumbledore can come to Harry's aid if Voldermort thinks he is dead. "K": Unfortunately, JKR believed Harry needed to go on alone. I listed this quote above but here it is again. ---------- Audience member question (paraphrased): Why did Dumbledore have to die [asked by TIME for Kids representative] Rowling: I did an interview last year in which I was asked this question. In the genre in which I'm writing, you usually find that the hero has to go on alone. There comes a point when his support falls away and to be truly heroic he has to act alone. Harry is not completely alone, he still has his two faithful sidekicks. This was summarized for me by the person who asked the question with, you mean the old wizard always gets it, and that fundamentally, that is what I was saying. I was as trying to dress it up a little better than that. So that's why. In these sort of epic sagas, the hero eventually has to fight alone. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2006/0801-radiocity-pressconf.html >"gringots" > I even wonder if Harry's mother is really dead, there is something >very odd about Crookshanks (although it is a male cat). He followed >Sirus (as a dog), like a friend, when all thought he was an evil >escapee, and also attacked Wormtail (as a rat) whenever he had the >chance. Book does not say Lily was an animagus, but I think she >could have been, and perhaps feigned death. "K": Well, there is that problem of Lily being a 'she' and Crookshanks being a male but in case that's not enough of a clue, let me point out that Lily is dead and Crookshanks is not an Animagus. ---------- ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book - why did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have let her live? JKR: Mmhm. ES: Why? JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely right. Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily and Harry? There's your answer, you've just answered your own question, because she could have lived and chose to die. James was going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice, so he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, I think there are distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the caliber of Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher because she could have saved herself. Now any mother, any normal mother would have done what Lily did. So in that sense her courage too was of an animal quality but she was given time to choose. James wasn't. It's like an intruder entering your house, isn't it? You would instinctively rush them. But if in cold blood you were told, "Get out of the way," you know, what would you do? I mean, I don't think any mother would stand aside from their child. But does that answer it? She did very consciously lay down her life. She had a clear choice - ES: And James didn't. JKR: Did he clearly die to try and protect Harry specifically given a clear choice? No. It's a subtle distinction and there's slightly more to it than that but that's most of the answer. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm "Of course it's been done before," she says, "but Harry HAD to be an orphan - so that he's a free agent, with no fear of letting down his parents, disappointing them? and Hogwarts HAS to be a boarding school - half the important stuff happens at night! http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/0299-guardian-carey.htm Peter: Er - I don't really know, but I'm guessing that maybe she is going to come back to life, maybe in the seventh book or something like that ... JKR: Well, it would be nice, but - I'll tell you something - you - you've raised a really interesting point there, Peter, because when I started writing the books, the first thing I had to decide was not what magic can do, but what it can't do. I had to set limits on it - immediately, and decide what the parameters are ... and one of the most important things I - I decided was that magic cannot bring dead people back to life; that' - that's one of the most profound things, the - the natural law of - of - of death applies to wizards as it applies to Muggles and there is no returning once you're properly dead, you know, they might be able to save very close-to-death people better than we can, by magic - that they - that they have certain knowledge we don't, but once you're dead, you're dead. So - erm - yeah, I'm afraid there will be no coming back fro- for Harry's parents http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0700-guardian-hattenstone.htm Perhaps two or three days after I had the idea for Harry, I disposed of his parents in a in quite a brutal way, not a cr -- not cru -- it didn't read in a cruel way, but I mean it was very cut and dry, nothing lingering, no debate about how it had happened or -- and at that stage no real discussion of how painful that was going to be. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2001/1201-bbc-hpandme.htm Section: F.A.Q. Did James and Lupin switch bodies before James was killed? An ingenious theory, but no; James would never have saved himself and left his wife and son to die. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=60 Section: Rumours Lily Potter is still alive No, afraid not. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=4 ---------- Crookshanks Section: Rumours Crookshanks is an Animagus No, he's not, but he's not pure cat either. If you buy Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (all royalties to Comic Relief, which means you're helping some of the poorest children around the world) you might just be able to work out what Crookshanks really is. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours_view.cfm?id=7 >"gringots" >So many possible twists. "K": So true but the end time is near. Finally. From moosiemlo at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 05:57:09 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:57:09 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The voice inside Harry In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707032257m37259673oad6612249ca40e20@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171238 Wrexx wrote: Having read the series more times than I care to admit, one of the (many) curiosities I vacillate on is the occasional voice Harry seems to hear at opportune moments. For example, when his instructor is trying to overpower him with a spell, Harry's inner voice says, "Nope, not gonna do that", or words to that effect, and Harry resists bending as the students before him had done. Sometimes, "The voice" impresses me as coming from his mother, other times I'd swear I hear Dumbledore or Peter or even Voldemort in there, giving Harry courage, or solutions to the problem at hand. Has anyone in the group already analyzed this quirk? It seems that knowing whichever consciousness is drifting around inside Harry would be of great assistance in solving the whole Harry Potter riddle. Scratch 'riddle'-- make that puzzle. Lynda: Yes, I've noticed the "voice" in Harry's head. Whatever it may be, part of his subconscious or something other (from somewhere/one else) there have been times it has been noticeable, although not as much as in the Belgariad, in which Garion has a "voice/presence " in his head throughout the series. Lynda (who will finish the Belgariad again before Deathly Hallows comes out). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 06:15:34 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 23:15:34 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: <3cd952930707032211j6061f094w65ef1f27fa12acab@mail.gmail.com> References: <3cd952930707032211j6061f094w65ef1f27fa12acab@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707032315t63bd2d0fxa23d8de23726a88@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171239 Laurel: I think I am the only one who thinks Harry will return to Hogwarts. Lynda: Nope! I think so too. And, by the way so do two good friends of mine (neither on this list) and my mother. And we all came to that conclusion/hope independently from our first (though far from last) readings of the books. And to show our lack of universal unanimity on HP issues I think Ron will die (lots of foreshadowing) One friend says she simply does not want to speculate because Ron is a favorite character of hers Another friend says Ron could die from the foreshadowing but JKR might be misleading us. My mother says "Foreshadowing?! Where do you see foreshadowing that Ron will die. That's nowhere in the text! My mother thinks that Snape is DD man I think Snape is out for himself, but has allied himself with the side of good for his own purposes. Both my friends to whom I am refering think that Snape is ESE Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xellina at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 07:30:03 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 11:30:03 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Am I unique? In-Reply-To: <005f01c7bde3$ce2d4e50$4001a8c0@your4f6988d827> References: <463f9ec00707022353w14add103rd1761990021dce08@mail.gmail.com> <005f01c7bde3$ce2d4e50$4001a8c0@your4f6988d827> Message-ID: <463f9ec00707040030y6fca4ddah677b0cb040487596@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171240 2007/7/4, Kim : > > > I realize that the Lion sacrifices himself to save the children in the > Chronicles of Narnia. But I see his role as different from Harry's. And I > admit I never read the books - knowing they were a Christian allegory, I > wasn't interested... Others may see him differently... > > > Cassy: A bit off-topical, sorry, but this thing always nugged me about Narnia - that Aslan KNEW beforehand that he will come back to life. Not much of a sacrifice, was it? I mean, dying is certainly not pleasant, but when you know for sure that it's not permanent and you'll be back alive and kicking soon, it can be endured. Thus all idea of a self-sacrifice seemed quite diminished to me in that book. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lauren1 at catliness.com Tue Jul 3 11:15:59 2007 From: lauren1 at catliness.com (Lauren Merryfield) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 04:15:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus References: Message-ID: <002601c7be0b$7baa6230$0200a8c0@laurenye0o5w8x> No: HPFGUIDX 171241 Carol: I predict a double wedding: Fleur/Bill and Tonks/Lupin (snip) I've thought of that, too. I hope it will happen. Thanks Lauren ----- Original Message ----- From: justcarol67 To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 12:30 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus Carol's responses: Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No! 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes! 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? I predict a double wedding: Fleur/Bill and Tonks/Lupin (the Ginny/Harry and Ron/Hermione weddings will be mentioned in the Epilogue and will not be part of the main story) 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg! 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? He's Dumbledore's Man through and through. > > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. Oops. There are six Horcruxes, according to Dumbledore (and I believe him). a. Riddle's diary b. The ring with the Peverell crest c. Hufflepuff's cup d. Slytherin's locket (the unopenable locket from OoP) e. Ravenclaw's wand (on the cushion in Ollivander's window) f. Nagini g. the last soul piece is in Voldemort (but he's not a Horcrux, anchoring his own soul to earth. The soul bit in him is what remains of the original soul, the part that's being anchored by the actual Horcruxes). FWIW, neither Harry nor his scar is a Horcrux, IMO. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's Boggart is Harry being killed by Voldemort, signifying Voldemort's inevitable reign over the WW. His (new) Patronus is a Phoenix symbolizing that Dumbledore is his guardian spirit. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Healer!Snape will save someone on the good side from Sectumsempra or another Dark curse. 2. Snape will release the DEs from Azkaban on Voldemort's orders and subvert Lucius Malfoy's loyalties to the good side in the process. 3. The goblin leader Ragnok will lead a rebellion. 4. One of Luna's seemingly absurd beliefs will turn out to be true. 5. Trelawney will make a third Prophecy, which will come true. Carol, hoping that she did this correctly! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/883 - Release Date: 7/1/2007 12:19 PM [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xellina at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 07:45:45 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 11:45:45 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707040045o3a8ef35dx4403ca969f6a6494@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171242 Renee Wrote: > I don't want to read about a young man > who is selfish enough to reproduce, > whilst knowing he may be dead by the > time the child is born. Eggplant Wrote: >As for being selfish, well, all I can say is that I'd >be very pleased if Harry's genes remain in the pool. Cassy: At first I agreed with Renee about it being a very selfish act on the Harry's part. But after thinking about poor Ginny, who would be left along to bring up the child, should Harry die, I decided that the baby might actually be a consolation for her, as it will have a "part of Harry" in it. So, maybe it will not be such a bad dead after all. Anyway, I don't think that we'll see any kids born, save in epilogue. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 4 07:52:03 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 07:52:03 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707040030y6fca4ddah677b0cb040487596@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171243 "Cassy Ferris" wrote: > this thing always nugged me about > Narnia - that Aslan KNEW beforehand > that he will come back to life. > Not much of a sacrifice, was it? That is a VERY good point! It is also part of the absurdity behind the entire antiquated Christian belief system. Eggplant From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 10:11:56 2007 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 10:11:56 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus (Snape ethics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171244 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > mz_annethrope wrote: > > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > > PATRONUS: STAG; BOGGERT: DEAD POTTERS > > Snape's Patronus a Stag, meaning that *James* is his spirit guardian > (as he is Harry's)? I must say that seems to me most unlikely. Can you > explain your thinking here? As for the Boggart, would his greatest > fear be something that had already happened? I think he most fears > *Harry's* death, but I'm not sure whether we can argue for our > responses in this thread (appeals to TigerPatronus for an answer), so > I'm just asking you to explain yours (assuming that's allowed). BTW, > there's no "e" in "Boggart." I like to capitalize it, but that's just me. mz_annethrope: I think of a patronus as an animal that protects the witch or wizard. It might be a representation of what actually protects the wizard: DD's phoenix or Harry's stag. It might be a personal attribute; this is what I take Cho's swan to be. Cho is graceful and elegant when she isn't crying. I think of Snape's protective attributes are thick skin (elephant? dragon?) and his inscrutability. But sometimes the patronus is the virtue opposite of the person casting the spell. I don't think Hermione resembles an otter, but she has occasional bouts of playfulness (and viciousness) that save her from her seriousness. Why did I choose stag for Snape's patronus? It was purely facetious. I think the boggart could be what Snape fears will happen, but I think it also could be what he fears about himself--say guilt or shame. I chose guilt. > > 1. Snape's connection to Harry will be one of obligation and debt > > (real or assumed). We will not find out that DD cut a deal with > > Snape to have Snape kill him. This is a vote against ESE/Snape, out > > for himself Snape or Utilitarian Snape/DD (Snape killed DD because > > he and DD thought it would have the happiest results). This is a > > vote for deontological Snape. Not that I would vote for him. > > > Carol: > Again, can you explain what you mean here, especially "deontological > Snape"?) If I understand your terminology correctly, I believe in what > you're calling Utilitarian Snape--that is, his actions on the tower, > particularly sending DD over the battlement (whether or not the AK was > real--and, yes, of course, I know that DD is dead) allowed Snape not > only to live and go underground as a saboteur against Voldemort but to > save Harry and Draco from the DEs and get the DEs out of Hogwarts. > (There was, IMO, no saving Dumbledore.) So is that what you mean by > Utilitarian Snape? If not, can you clarify? And can you explain your > alternative view (deontological Snape)? ms_annethrope: Let's see if I can be brief. I think there is a strong ethical dimension to the HP books and the key is DD's remark: "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." (CoS p.333, American edition)This seems to be an argument for virtue ethics or character ethics. Aristotle is the great proponent of virtue ethics. He thought that a person developed character through education and practice. I think JKR accepts this premise. The books are about the training of a young wizard, who sometimes makes good choices and sometimes makes appallingly bad choices. By book six he has learned a few things if not necessarily for the right reasons. But Aristotle also described a virtue as the mean between two opposite vices. In his analysis courage (Harry's attribute) is the virtue that lies between the vices of cowardice and foolhardiness (though more closely to foolhardiness). I dislike this part of Aristotelian ethics because it subjects virtue to vice and it assumes stasis as the goal. But I don't think that's where JKR goes anyway. I do think that she, or at least DD, advocates some sort of virtue ethics. It's not about one's choices per se, but that one's choices reveal who one truly is. I think DD advocates (represents?) some sort of virtue ethics because out of his sheer goodness--or foolhardiness--he is always giving people, and creatures, second chances. This is not ends based action because he does not expect people to be good in return for his kindness. Of course, there are times when DD acts in a different way. He had a plan for keeping Harry alive. And he chose not to divulge critical information to Harry, much to his later regret. But I think virtues are for the most part emblematic of DD. On to Snape. Some people think he is Machiavellian. That's Peter and Lucius. I think if Snape were Machiavellian he would not have worked nearly so hard to keep Harry alive in the first book. But I am troubled by the idea of DD cutting a deal with Snape to kill him so that some good may result. This I called Utilitarian for lack of a better word. By Utilitarian I mean the theory that action should be directed at the greatest possible happiness for the greatest number of people. I find this problematic, not just because it sacrifices the happiness of some for the happiness of others, but because I think any single perspective is limited and we cannot know if our chosen action will have the effects we anticipated. I find it difficult to think DD would cause Snape to kill for some good that might not happen. Of course, JKR might have set it up that way because SHE knows the answers. But DD doesn't. But deontological (ethics of moral obligation) Snape is a possibility. Snape has various obligations: to Draco, to Harry, to DD, etc., and he holds to them as tenaciously as a Saxon warrior to his oaths. Deonotological Snape allows Snape to be a moral, if flawed, person--perhaps a tragic figure such as Jeptha, who swore to sacrifice the first thing he saw upon arriving home from victory, but discovered that to be his daughter. Ok, I don't think Snape is like Jeptha, but you get the idea. And I suspect DD acted deontologically when he sent Harry to live with the Dursleys. He had to do what he could to keep Harry alive. Ok, I wasn't brief. mz_annethrope > > > 6. We'll see Snape cry. > > Carol responds: > > Interesting! I wonder if I could bear that. As long as he lives and > Harry forgives him, I suppose I could endure it, as long as it's from > remorse or grief or anguish and not weakness. (I *hate* the nickname > Snivellus, which is one reason I can't endure Harry's dear godfather.) mz_annethrope: This was also facetious. > mz_annethrope: > > 7. Luna will become a wandmaker. > > Carol responds: > If she lives, poor girl! Is it those silvery, Ollivanderlike eyes that > make you think so? (Alternatively, she might become a true Seer.) > > Carol, who found these responses intriguing but isn't sure how much > discssion is allowed in this thread mz_annethrope: Frankly, I think she's toast. But if she lives I can imagine her as a wand maker for two reasons. One is that she makes things with her hands such as ridiculous jewelry and roaring lions. Another is that she is adventerous enough to go chasing presumably non-existent beasts. And she's unafraid of scary creatures. So I think she may have the personality and perhaps the ability to be a wand maker. mz_annethrope, who is now exhausted and hasn't the time to check her spelling. From vinsri83 at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 10:34:07 2007 From: vinsri83 at gmail.com (Vinita Srivastava) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 16:04:07 +0530 Subject: Some Thoughts I had In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <754c449b0707040334s3142ae81k41f85965e608be26@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171245 On 7/4/07, gringots wrote: > I don't think Dumbledore would leave the school so often at a > time like this. Snape was to play a loyal Death Eater, so I > think Snape and Dumbledore used the Polyjuice Potion to switch > places, so Snape could leave the school (stop drinking potion > while Dumbledore did). It was really Dumbledore teaching the > Defense Against the Dark Arts(he never wanted Snape to do it). Hey Thanks for bringing up this topic I have been feeling the same way for quite a while. That Snape & Dumbledore have switched places using the polyjuice potion. To add to your observation I would also like to point out that in HBP when Harry after finding out from Trelawney that it was Snape who was listing to her while she made her prediction about Harry and Voldemort and also told him about the prediction. When he confronts Dumbledore with this reality he reacts in a weird manner and starts defending Snape as if his life depended on it. Vinita From jamess at climaxgroup.com Wed Jul 4 11:31:34 2007 From: jamess at climaxgroup.com (James Sharman) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 12:31:34 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Am I unique? Message-ID: <495A161B83F7544AA943600A98833B5308E3A0B9@mimas.fareham.climax.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171246 Eggplant Wrote: That is a VERY good point! It is also part of the absurdity behind the entire antiquated Christian belief system. James Writes: Can we keep comments like that off list please, there are people who will find that offensive. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From maidne at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 13:13:57 2007 From: maidne at yahoo.com (maidne) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:13:57 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171247 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "Cassy Ferris" wrote: > > > this thing always nugged me about > > Narnia - that Aslan KNEW beforehand > > that he will come back to life. > > Not much of a sacrifice, was it? > > That is a VERY good point! It is also part of the absurdity behind the > entire antiquated Christian belief system. > > Eggplant > But the death is only one part of the sacrifice. It also involves the willingness to die, the ability to *not die*, and the identity and character of the one who dies. Aslan could have chosen to let Edmund die, or he could have chosen overpower and kill his executioners. He chose to die because he knew that *his* death (not Edmund's) would fulfill the Ancient Magic and cause death to "work backward". Aslan died a "substitutionary death", which is what Christ did. This is similar to a point made by JKR in an interview -- she said that there was a difference between Lily's death and James' death. Lily's death provided a type of protection for Harry that James' did not. It had to do with the fact that Lily did not *have* to die, but chose to die herself to save her son. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jul 4 13:45:38 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:45:38 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: <005f01c7bde3$ce2d4e50$4001a8c0@your4f6988d827> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171248 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kas wrote: > (My first post - please be gentle :) I've been thinking about this a while, > and I fall squarely on the "Harry will live" team - for several reasons. Geoff: Welcome to the IWHTLC (I want Harry to live Club)!! Kas: > While it's true that a Harry sacrifice might illustrate the power of love > for others, and would make sense to those looking for overt Christian > symbolism in the finale, I believe it will do more harm than good. > > JKR set out of make a children's story. However rich, layered, and detailed > they are, at their core the books detail the battle of good and evil. > Harry, as human as he is, is JKR's symbol for good. And I can't believe > that she would have evil triumph over good - not in a children's story. > > I realize that the Lion sacrifices himself to save the children in the > Chronicles of Narnia. But I see his role as different from Harry's. And I > admit I never read the books - knowing they were a Christian allegory, I > wasn't interested... Others may see him differently... Geoff: We have touched on this question several times before and, usually, three authors come into the frame ? JK Rowling, JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis. However, these authors further subdivide into two groups, The first two authors as one and Lewis in the other. Both JKR and JRRT are Christians but choose to let their view of life speak subliminally rather than overtly. The stories do not demand that a Christian message takes centre stage; there is also room for people who hold different views to identify with the characters which they have created. CSL, on the other hand, quite openly wrote "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" as a vehicle to teach children about the central truths of the Christian faith. In it, Aslan represents Jesus Christ. He is a heavenly being and, in fact, is referred to as the son of the Great Emperor over Sea ? God as he is seen in Narnia. IN the context of the HP books, I have said in the past that I do not believe that Harry can ever be considered a Christ figure. To a Christian, Jesus is God in human form. He is sinless which is why he can go to the Cross and carry the punishment for the wrongdoing of humans and rise from the dead to prove that. No human can do that. Harry ? and the rest of us also ? are not divine; we are not sinless. Harry can be considered an Everyman. Like anyone, he does things wrong, either deliberately or by accident; he gets angry; he gets revengeful. But he also shows courage, sympathy, altruism.He /cannot/ make a sacrifice for love which "would make sense to those looking for overt Christian symbolism in the finale" because, although folk do make that sort of decision in the real world, it does not equate to the burden carried by Christ. Turning to another matter, the following is quoted from message 171243: Cassy Ferris wrote: > > this thing always nugged me about Narnia - that Aslan KNEW > > beforehand that he will come back to life. > > Not much of a sacrifice, was it? Eggplant: > That is a VERY good point! It is also part of the absurdity behind > the entire antiquated Christian belief system. Geoff: Eggplant, I know from what you have posted in the past that you are something of a maverick and an iconoclast since you have, inter alia, expressed a wish for there to be blood, mayhem and bodies strewn across Book 7 for it to satisfy you. But, I must take issue with over the sentence quoted above. I am a Christian, one of many millions throughout the world. Real Christians believe that they have experienced the presence of God and that the risen Christ lives in their lives. Even today on 04/07/07, somewhere in the world, believers will be imprisoned, discriminated against, even killed because of their belief. So it is more than an antiquated system I quite accept that you are not a Christian. You have every right to that view; that is your privilege, But... What you have said in your comment above is, at least, insensitive and, at worst, insulting. From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 13:55:10 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 06:55:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Current Off Limit Spoilers for the ULTIMATE BRAGGING RIGHTS CONTEST!!!! Message-ID: <374768.9060.qm@web55701.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171249 Chancie "Minion of Spoilers" In reading many of the answers in the Prediction section of the contest, I thought it might be a good idea to more clearly specify what is off limits.... TK wrote : > Current Off-Limit Spoilers: > -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points > unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. > -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: > because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least > somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a > cover will also be worth 0 points.) > -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR > during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. > -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will > laugh at you when they're wrong. > -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and > Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) > will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. > -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come > skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no > credit. > -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in > your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be > scored. Chancie again: In addition to these, you should also be aware that any predictions stating that : Wormtail will repay his lifedebt, spoken about by Author Levine. Godric Gryffindor was a "muggle advocate" or a great dueller... Will recieve NO points (unless as stated below, you add details HOW do you think Wormtail will pay his life debt?) And as TK stated originally, NEGATIVE predicitons will not recieve points. The exception to this is that if you're suggesting that something that is assumed to have/will happen will not, and you add additonal information on what you think WILL happen instead. I would also suggest that you add as much detail as you can. Even if your main idea is wrong, if some of your details do happen you can gain some points that way. Hope That Helps, Chancie "Minion of Spoilers" Have A Great Day! Chancie --------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 4 14:19:40 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 10:19:40 -0400 Subject: Who will save Harry? In-Reply-To: <949701.16632.qm@web53310.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <949701.16632.qm@web53310.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <468BAC7C.1060103@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171250 Mary: > My opinion is that Harry will die. I think that the last horcrux is > Harry. I think that he will defeat Voltamort and then realize that > he is the last remaining horcrux. Just a thought. Bart: I'm pretty sure that Harry will die. But he'll get better (hey, at least he won't get turned into a newt!). More seriously, I see Harry sacrificing himself to destroy Morty, but someone else is going to sacrifice him/herself to save him: 1) Wormtail will pull a Gollum, accidentally sacrificing himself in Harry's stead, thus fulfilling his life debt. 2) Snape will, at the last second, switch sides, as the whole killing DD thing was to plant Snape for Harry to have as an "ace in the hole", sacrificing himself to save Harry, thus making up for his part in Harry's parents' deaths. I even predict his last words would be on the order of, "I wouldn't have had to die if you had done your homework, Potter!" 3) (this is my favorite): Harry will drag Voldemort into the Veil. Sirius, who is still there, will give up his body (and chance to get out) to push Harry out and drag Voldemort the rest of the way. 4) (REALLLLLL longshot) It will turn out that Luna Lovegood was right all along, and she will bring out a posse of her "mythical monsters" to save Harry. Actually, less of a longshot if it isn't the final victory. OK, the first three are based on the fact that all three of them had screwed up, badly, along the course of the novels, and this allows Harry to make the sacrifice and still live, and redeems one of them in the process; in other words, they fit in thematically. The last, well, it would be cute, but it would not fit in the theme as a final sacrifice; that's why I put it in as a possibility for a more minor plot point. Bart From rvink7 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 4 15:15:13 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:15:13 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707040045o3a8ef35dx4403ca969f6a6494@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171251 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cassy Ferris" wrote: > > Renee Wrote: > > > I don't want to read about a young man > > who is selfish enough to reproduce, > > whilst knowing he may be dead by the > > time the child is born. > > Eggplant Wrote: > > >As for being selfish, well, all I can say is that I'd > >be very pleased if Harry's genes remain in the pool. > > Cassy: > > At first I agreed with Renee about it being a very selfish act on the > Harry's part. But after thinking about poor Ginny, who would be left along > to bring up the child, should Harry die, I decided that the baby > might actually be a consolation for her, as it will have a "part of > Harry" in it. So, maybe it will not be such a bad dead after all. > Anyway, I don't think that we'll see any kids born, save in epilogue. > > Renee: >From Ginny's point of view, it would be a good thing, yes. But not for the child, and this consideration should prevail. But as I said, it would be very inconsistent on Harry's part if he suddenly decided to marry Ginny while he still considered himself a danger to her. From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 15:24:14 2007 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (constancevigilance) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:24:14 -0000 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171252 Dungrollin: [T]wo of the pieces of [the Scholastic] cover art show [Hermione and Ron] in robes while Harry's in muggle clothes, or is there another clue that I've missed? Eddie: 1. R&H are not only in robes, but dress robes. I'm assuming this is because R&H were at some school function. Graduation? But I can imagine it being equally possible they are in dress robes because of Bill & Fleur's wedding. But then why isn't Harry in dress robes too? CV: How do you know they are dress robes? I've examined the screen with the magnifying glass here and they look torn, but otherwise normal. And it appears as if Hermione is wearing a shirt and pants under her robes. Is that what someone would wear under dress robes? Or do you have another reason to believe they are in dress robes? I like how Hermione, who never liked to fly, is looking decidedly uncomfortable on the dragon. And I *still* think that dragon is Norbert. Pearly eyes be damned, those are *ridges* on his back. Thank you, Quirrell, for bringing Norbert into the story. There. I've managed to mention Quirrell in a completely unrelated post. CV From vinsri83 at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 05:51:22 2007 From: vinsri83 at gmail.com (Vinita Srivastava) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 11:21:22 +0530 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707021020u35f89df4yd23930d07084b3e4@mail.gmail.com> References: <463f9ec00707021020u35f89df4yd23930d07084b3e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <754c449b0707032251g53f70c42mc2031c86bcfc4023@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171253 > Alla: > I wonder whether the fact that Godric was the most accomplished > dueller of his time can give us any hints about DH? > Cassy: > Well, we know that Flitwick was a dueling champion when he was > younger. How would you like him as a heir of Griffindor? ^_~ Vinita: Hi I was just going through the diary section on JKR's site and she has made an interesting comment which I cannot seem to get over. The statement made is as follows: " - even if somebody discovers the giant squid is actually the world's largest animagus, which rises from the lake at the eleventh hour transforms into Godric Griffindor & well...I wouldn't like to spoil it." Please let me know what you think about it. I also do not know whether this has been disscused before. If it has been then I am sorrry to bring up the topic again. Vinita From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 15:49:10 2007 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (constancevigilance) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:49:10 -0000 Subject: A basilisk in the final book? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171254 OK. Here is an off-the-wall prediction for DH. I'm thinking we might see another basilisk. Here's what I found while researching mythical creatures in Europe at this link: http://www.pantheon.org/areas/bestiary/articles.html [T]he basilisk has natural enemies. The weasel is immune to its glance and if it gets bitten it withdraws from the fight to eat some rue, the only plant that does not wither, and returns with renewed strength. CV: What is rue, anyway? Brave Ron - or any of the Weasleys, for that matter - to the rescue when everyone is being threatened! I've always wondered why JKR was so determined that Ron's surname be Weasley. Such an odd name and she said it was the only one of her original surnames that was settled from the beginning. This could be an interesting reason why Tom Riddle only brought Ginny and his basilisk together when she was unconscious. From verosomm at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 15:54:15 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:54:15 -0000 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171255 > Eddie: > 1. R&H are not only in robes, but dress robes. I'm assuming this is > because R&H were at some school function. Graduation? But I can > imagine it being equally possible they are in dress robes because of > Bill & Fleur's wedding. But then why isn't Harry in dress robes > too? > CV: > How do you know they are dress robes? I've examined the screen with > the magnifying glass and they look torn, but > otherwise normal. And it appears as if Hermione is wearing a shirt > and pants under her robes. Is that what someone would wear under > dress robes? Or do you have another reason to believe they are in > dress robes? CV- When Eddie says they are in dress robes, I assume he is referring to the UK Children's book cover... you can view it on mugglenet (or about 100 other places) at http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/dhcovers/hp7childuk.jpg ... Hermione and Ron are wearing embellished, colored robes, while Harry's in plain, black ones. To me this means Harry gets a green light on one of the Horcruxes and has to go after a Horcrux it immediately, which means he misses the wedding, and Hermione and Ron rush after him immediately after the ceremony or something. Or maybe Harry is so heartbroken about Ginny that he gets to theBurrow, sees her beautiful and dressed in her gold bridesmaids' robes, and can't go through with staying, doesn't change into dress robes, and so starts the hunt early and Ron and Hermione come later but of course have no time to change out of their dress robes as Harry is now hours ahead of them. I know these are fairly silly theories, but the fact remains that Harry's not dressed up and RH are, and I think it has to do with the wedding because I'm of the belief that none of the trio return to Hogwarts in DH as students, rather have Ginny (and possibly Luna, Neville and others) as their contact(s) there. Of course, Harry didn't even tell McGonagall about the horcruxes as DD told him he could tell RH and Harry chose not to tell anyone else, so maybe he will stick with that and in order to have contacts who know the whole story, RH DO go back to Hogwarts while Harry goes on his quest. But I think the trio will go and the contacts at Hogwarts will remain uninformed about the horcruxes till they and VD are destroyed/ defeated, lest Harry take the chance that VD practices occlumency or another method on the Hogwarts contacts. Veronica From josturgess at eircom.net Wed Jul 4 16:29:23 2007 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 16:29:23 -0000 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171256 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > Lots of people: > > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > > > > a. Harry? No > > b. Draco? No > > c. Hermione? Yes > > d. Luna? Yes > > e. Ron? Yes > > f. Neville? Yes > > g. Ginny? Yes > > Dungrollin: > I've noticed a lot of people suggesting that Harry won't return to > school, but that Ron and Hermione will. Given their insistence at the > end of HBP that they're with him for the long haul, I'm surprised so > many think that they'll change their minds, and I'm curious as to why. > > Is it because two of the pieces of cover art show them in robes while > Harry's in muggle clothes, or is there another clue that I've missed? > Any thoughts gratefully received. > I opted for that combination because I thought the trio would need the freedom, security and resources of the school but that Harry would need greater autonomy than the school regime could offer. I do not envisage Harry ensconced in Grimmauld Place however, but based somewhere close to Ron and Hermione perhaps in the shrieking shack or at the Hog's Head or even in a comfy den in the chamber of secrets (catering courtesy of Dobby). That way they can still interact without having to rely on owl post, walkie-talkie mirrors or other somewhat creaking and cumbersome narrative ploys. The added advantage is that Ron can be Head Boy, quidditch captain and win the house cup, although how Hermione is going to cope with her NEWT final year revision whilst saving the world is beyond me! Regards Jo From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 4 17:01:42 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:01:42 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A basilisk in the final book? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <468BD276.6040907@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171257 constancevigilance wrote: > Brave Ron - or any of the Weasleys, for that matter - to the rescue > when everyone is being threatened! I've always wondered why JKR was so > determined that Ron's surname be Weasley. Such an odd name and she > said it was the only one of her original surnames that was settled > from the beginning. Bart: Weasels is CUTE!!! http://www.mishaspets.com/images/ferrets/ferretcl.jpg They are also intelligent, loyal, and curious (if you think curiosity killed the CAT, you should see the kind of trouble weasels can get into through curiosity). Also note that weasels have been domesticated as long as cats and dogs, and are much more commonly kept as pets in Great Britain than in the States, so JKR is probably more familiar with them. I can definitely see Ron as a Weasley, in the good sense. Bart From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 4 17:01:51 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 13:01:51 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny Message-ID: <380-2200773417151625@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171258 Magpie: > I don't think that's the logic. One *can* believe that DD believes > that Snape's remorse was the sole reason for his return. The reason > for DD's trust in him is presented as a separate question, one that > Dumbledore doesn't answer. Dumbledore has no issues about talking > about his feelings on Snape's remorse, but does not give that for > the reason he thinks he can trust Snape. Dana: I'm just going to respond to this bit not because the rest is not worth responding to Magpie: Oh well. I gave it a shot.:-) Dana: I'll ask you this, how do you know that DD was thinking about telling Harry his reason for his trust and that he did not need a moment to make up his mind if he still was sure Snape was indeed on their side still? Because Harry is not asking why DD trusts Snape, what Harry is asking is how DD can be sure that Snape is on their side. Especially because Voldemort is convinced Snape is on his (pg 513 UKed PB chapter "The Seer Overheard"). And then DD takes a moment as if he was trying to make up his mind. If he was sure without a shadow of a doubt that Snape is on his side, wouldn't you have expected DD to respond immediately to Harry's question? Because Harry is not asking an explanation for DD's trust in Snape. He only wants to know *how* DD can be sure Snape is truly loyal to him and DD's reason for trusting Snape will not provide an answer to this question for the simple fact that DD's trust will not keep Snape loyal if Snape decides not to be and neither will the reason for his trust. Magpie: I understand that view, and I think it's presented as one way of interpreting the text even in the text itself, particularly the part about Dumbledore's hesitation being about him wondering if he really did trust Snape 100%. I was just explaining that the view that Dumbledore didn't tell Harry why he trusted Snape (since he didn't answer the question when posed directly even if you believe that he just didn't have an answer) was for us a separate issue from why he thought Snape turned. It seemed like you'd assumed believing there was more to the trust meant there was more to the reason for why Snape turned. I do think that since, as you say, only Snape can decide who's side he's on, Harry might as well be asking Dumbledore why he trusts Snape. Asking him how he knows Snape's on their side seems to translate that way to me, despite Snape being the only one who can decide what side Snape is on. I don' t think Harry thinks he's asking Dumbledore how any of us can know other people--he's not so philosophical. As to whether Dumbledore would have responded immediately if he didn't have a shadow of a doubt, no, I don't see why he would. He claims that he doesn't have a shadow of a doubt by saying he trusts him completely, but I think the hesitation is about the "how" not whether he trusts him or not. Dana: If DD had no issues about talking about Snape's remorse and the reason for his return then why does no one know that it was Snape that brought the prophecy to LV? Why does DD not allow people to make up their own minds about Snape and if they still would want to work with Snape if they had this information? Because DD does not trust that people could ever forgive Snape for what he has done no matter how truly sorry he was for it. Magpie: I meant Dumbledore obviously has no issues talking about Snape's remorse *to Harry in the scene we are discussing.* Because he's doing it--he's begging Harry to let him keep doing it. Obviously he doesn't just spread it around to everyone. Few people even know about the Prophecy, I believe. To me, Dumbledore's hesitation reads as if he's considering telling Harry something new--but since I'm not in Dumbledore's mind I don't know if I'm right. Dumbledore's actions don't read to me like he's hestitaing because he's not sure if he can trust Snape or even that he's given up on Harry understanding about the remorse (though I suppose it could be that) because I think he'd seem more defeated if that was the case. Dana: We have seen various people in canon that are loyal to DD and DD trusting them and all of them have to some point done something that could be defined as betrayal of that trust but for some reason with Snape, DD's trust in Snape is somehow so binding that Snape could never betray DD's trust because DD must have a good reason to trust Snape and it needs to be bigger then Snape's story of remorse. That is defining logic to me. JKR might indeed have intertwined Snape's loyalty and DD's trust in Snape because that is what makes Snape ambiguous. She forces the reader to make a distinction between DD's judgment and Snape's loyalties and most people fail to do so (IMO) because she uses the support of other characters in canon to define that trusting DD's judgment is trusting Snape. She cleverly distracts the reader from the option that Harry might in this case be the only one who is right. Magpie: Yes, she does--I agree that she's laying out this possibility. The fact that other characters have only trusted Snape because Dumbledore said he did is highlighted in HBP, begging the question of whether they were right to do so, since we ourselves don't know why he trusted him. Your interpretation is given in the text as Harry's interpretation--he tells others DD only trusted Snape because he believed he was remorseful about the Prophecy. Snape also gives that same story to Bellatrix when he says Dumbledore just believed his tale of remorse (because he wants to see the good in people). On the other side, we've got those of us saying wait, Dumbledore *didn't* give the remorse answer to the question of why he trusted Snape, he was talking about that before Harry asked how he knew he could trust him. And McGonagall also obliquely references that same idea when she says she thought DD hinted at a true "ironclad reason" for trusting Snape. Both versions are therefore there in the story and we don't know which one is right yet. I prefer my own, and argued it. Dana: Especially because she laid down the cards that Harry has been wrong so many times about Snape that the reader expects him to be wrong again. And she certainly makes the reader believe that Harry would never be able to judge Snape's character better then DD himself because of Snape's history with both James and Sirius. So Harry must hate Snape for the simple fact that he inherited a prejudice from both his father and his godfather as she makes Lupin remind us during Christmas in HBP and therefore Harry can't be considered a reliable judge of character. Magpie: Yeah, I have heard this argument a lot, but it falls very flat to me, personally. The fact is, even if Harry is right about Snape being ESE, it's only because it happened to fit in with his biases. It doesn't really show Harry judging Snape's character better than Dumbledore did at all. Not even in HBP, where Harry thought Snape was a great guy and defended him as someone to be trusted in the form of the HBP. Harry hates Snape because Snape's a jerk to him--he's not a reliable judge of character on Snape, whether he happens to be right about his being a DE or not. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. This would be one of those moments for Harry, imo. And Harry is right about Snape a lot, imo. His expectations for Snape's behavior in class, for instance, are usually on the money. I have to say, I'm impressed with the way JKR manages to work with this kind of thing. Pre-HBP I remember people saying Draco would be the bad guy because of his threats at the end of OotP, but I thought, "How would that work when Harry always suspects Draco? It would be unrealistic for him to suddenly not suspect him." Instead JKR used that and still pulled a twist by having Draco being more "innocent" even while he was guilty. Dana: Therefore I stand until proven otherwise with my so-called illogical assessment that DD's trust in Snape or his reason for it has nothing to do with Snape's loyalty and neither are DD's judgment skills dependent on being right about Snape. Magpie: Are you suggesting I called your thinking illogical in general? Because I don't believe I did. I disagreed with your description of the logic behind the position of thinking DD had a reason for trusting Snape other than his remorse. I don't remember thinking you were illogical for thinking that DD's judgment skills are not entirely dependent on being right about Snape. I disagree with it in the context of the story, obviously--I think JKR's set it up so that a lot rides on Dumbledore's judgment of Snape not being what the DEs thought it was in HBP. But I didn't have trouble following your logic. If we should all just stand until prove otherwise why talk on the list at all? We could just all be waiting for DH. Dana: DD would not have tried to help Draco if one of his clumsy murder attempts had led to the death of a student. Magpie: I wouldn't say for sure, though it seems like that should be true. Dumbledore would have been somewhat complicit if Ron had died, for instance, since he knew what was going on, was not interfering and saw what almost happened to Katie Bell. Magpie: > Rather than analyzing and appreciating the text that's there, you > seem to be making a demand about what scene you need to see and > assume that any deviation proves your point. > Both with Draco and Snape unless the two of them declare for > Dumbledore in front of DEs > and die for it they can't possibly be anything but bad guys. One > obvious reason Draco doesn't do those things is that JKR is a > competent writer. Dana: I am not really sure what you wanted to achieve with adding this to your post because I do not really believe that you know me well enough to be a judge on how I analyze or appreciate the text. It sounds really condescending to me. Magpie: I thought it was clear what I wanted to achieve--it's not a personal attack, it's me trying to explain why your specific argument in that paragraph was frustrating. I didn't judge you personally on how you analyze or appreciated the text in general, I said that looking at the Tower scene and saying Draco couldn't feel killing was wrong because he didn't declare that killing was wrong or stop Snape was not an analysis or appreciation of the scene, it was making up an ideal scene and judging Draco against it. It was not meant to be condescending. It just seemed to be pushing things to extremes when they weren't, to me. Like if I argued the opposite way and said that Draco could not be said to have any bad intentions at all in HBP because if he did, why didn't he murder Dumbledore? Why didn't he look like he was enjoying himself during the year? Why wasn't he made happier by almost killing people and thrilled in the Tower where he could totally kill him? These questions have some limited merit, just as the ones you asked did, but they're more describing what didn't happen than what did, aren't they? All they establish is that Draco isn't enjoying himself during the year, just as your questions establish that Draco isn't a committed DDM--both of which I would think are obvious at the start. Imo, it's like saying, "If Ron really likes Hermione, why didn't he ask her out in the beginning of the year and tell Lavender he didn't want to see her because he liked someone else? Ron doesn't really like Hermione at all." Dana: But tell me do you really believe that a person is actually a good guy if he kills, tries to kill or let someone be killed to safe his own life? That it is proof that these people have a strong moral value of doing the right thing? Magpie: I don't really think that question is relevent. I didn't say Draco was "a good guy" or had a "strong moral value of doing the right thing." I described the transitional steps I think Draco was going through in HBP--whether those steps eventually lead him to being someone that could be described as a good guy or a guy with a strong value of doing the right thing remains to be seen. That Draco is trying to kill someone to save his own life, and that this is not a moral thing to do, I take as a given. It's the set up for the story that Draco is intending to do a bad thing. I can't think of any moral defense at all for Draco killing Dumbledore--if he's doing it for glory it's reprehensible, if he's doing it to save himself and his family it's more understandable, but still wrong and still murder. Dana: That JKR wanted to show that you can still be good if you sacrifice the life of someone else to safe that of your own? Or that it is okay to sacrifice the life of someone without that person knowing you have gambled his or her life? Magpie: Obviously JKR hasn't said yet, if she's going to at all, that you can still be good if you sacrifice the life of someone else to save that of your own--she didn't have Draco sacrifice Dumbledore's life. (She *did* have Dumbledore gamble with the lives of others without telling them with his hands-off policy over the year.) She has said, imo, that you can do the wrong thing and then realize you made a mistake and then change. In CoS Ginny makes choices that put other people in danger and could get them killed to protect herself and because she's afraid. I think she's still a good guy. Dana: And that Draco therefore really can be relieved of the responsibility he had in almost getting two students killed, letting a murderous bunch of lunatics into the castle and then have them kill another person to serve as decoy to lure DD to the tower so he again could make an attempt to kill him, because he could not go through with killing DD himself? Magpie: I didn't say anything about relieving Draco of responsibility. (Not sure who the decoy is here.) Draco set out to do a bad thing. He saw his actions directly lead to bad results even beyond what he intended. He eventually did not choose to do even the original bad act he wanted to commit. He saw that act committed anyway by someone else--which would not have happened without his actions either. It doesn't make him a good guy--it also doesn't mean he couldn't ever become a better person, or that he might as well have killed Dumbledore himself imo. Dana: Or that Snape can be excused that he could do nothing about it because the vow prevented him from doing so. That the entire climax on the tower was not a direct result of the choices Snape made at the beginning of the year? Magpie: I think Snape made the Vow of his own choice and that the climax on the Tower was a direct result of the choices he made in the beginning of the year. I didn't excuse him of anything. Dana: Of course I know that you believe that Snape put his own life at risk with taking the vow and that he did it all to help Draco but to me it is forgetting that he sacrificed another man's life to do so. Magpie: Snape did put his own life as risk by defintion with taking the Vow, but I'm not sure yet why he did it. It could be because of Draco, but we could learn other reasons. I did not forget he sacrificed another man's life to do so. The fact that Snape put his life at risk for the UV is, for me, a simple fact, not something that makes the Vow any less murderous. It was his choice to make his own life dependent on killing Dumbledore, so I don't think killing him can really be considered self-preservation. Dana; And I know that half of fandom believes that Snape told DD all about the vow or that DD ordered or asked Snape to kill him or that Snape knew what DD was doing or that he knew that DD was dying but the text, that I do not seem able to analyze and appreciate, does not support any of these claims. Magpie: You really seem really offended that I used those terms at all (I assume that explains the opening sentence of your post)--and like I said, I'm sorry, but it was not meant as some general dismissal of anything you said. It was referring to one paragraph of arguing a certain way that I described above, and that I found a frustrating way of arguing a point. I certainly wouldn't say not seeing how DD ordered Snape to kill him proves you can't appreciate or analyze the story--I don't see how that could work either. I don't think any of us will be able to until--and if--that turns out to be canon. Dana: Not that I'm going to convince anyone that already fitted the text to support their own opinion but let's be fair shall we your opinion is as good as mine even if we disagree. Magpie: On the question of whether Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him? Of course. (Though I feel compelled to point out, just in the abstract, that I don't think all opinions are equal, which is why I think it's worth arguing.) I would like to think I haven't already fitted the text to support my own opinion, personally, and that I'd be open to arguments that convinced me. It's happened before. Magpie: > I believe you yourself pointed that out regarding Sirius and the > Prank.) If he's already almost killed without remorse I'd think it > would be that much easier. Dana: First of all that is still assuming that Sirius ever had the intention of killing Snape and canon never states this. Magpie: I did not assume that Sirius ever had the intention of killing Snape--I don't believe he did and that's not what I was referring to. I remembered that you pointed out when Sirius was accused of not saying he was sorry about the Prank, that since nobody got hurt he had little reason to even worry about it--just as you went on to explain here. I was agreeing with your appreciation and analysis in this case and applying it to a different situation. You say it's apples and oranges--I don't see how it is. Draco's situation is nothing like Sirius' and vice versa (I don't know that I'd say one is obviously better--I don't know if I'd rather die because someone murdered me to save themselves or because they were Pranking me and it went wrong), but I only spoke about the way that people feel a different kind of remorse for things that have everlasting bad consequences than for things that could have had those consequences but didn't. This is also, I think, referred to by Dumbledore when he describes Draco's dangerous misadventures by saying "No real harm has been done." Dana: Draco never came to a resolution he would have stood there indefinitely if he would not have been shoved out of the way by Snape. I totally agree with you that Draco will learn something from it but he has not come to this point yet. The only thing that played a role at that point in time is that he could not do it. That he was too scared to just take someone's life. He then still has to take the responsibility that his choices caused someone his life. So Draco not being able to kill when he is faced with his intended victim face to face does not make him a good guy all of a sudden. Magpie: I agree with those whole paragraph, and that's why I stumble when I get to the last paragraph. I thought I stated flat-out that it *didn't* make him a good guy all of a sudden. I said it was a step in potentially learning and becoming better, not that it made him a good guy. Not taking the next step down the wrong path, but not putting a step onto the right path. But I think for those character especially not taking that next step down the wrong path is a change. Dana: Draco had many choices during the entire year and he still chose to try to do as ordered. Although it might be a lot to ask of a 16 year old to go against a Dark Wizard's orders and sacrifice himself for it, he could have gone to DD or he could have let Snape help him (well not that it would have gotten him very far but anyway) Magpie: He could have, but I don't think that would have been realistic or that it really matters that he didn't. He didn't, at any time during the year, transform into what we'd basically call "one of the good guys" and so start doing what they would do. I think his transformation, if he has one, is being done in a way that will ultimately be more believable. I mean, people are limited by many more things than what they could physically do. Harry could have let the Order take care of things in OotP and Sirius would have been saved; he could--and probably should--have told Dumbledore everything that was going on in CoS and so could Ginny. That doesn't mean they really wanted the Heir to win. They were working with what they had, including their own misunderstandings and personal issues. Dana: The same goes for Snape. Some might see it as a noble deed that Snape took a vow to help Draco but I do not because essentially if Draco had made a choice halfway through the year that he could not kill DD then Snape still would have needed to complete the task given to him. And Snape by taking the vow made himself incapable of helping DD. Snape with taking the vow did not help Draco because Snape with his action made sure that Draco is still on the wrong side of the fence. And because Snape was incapable of preventing Draco in trying to perform his task he willingly put other people at risk. It is not for nothing that people want to include DD in the killing scheme because as canon stands now it does not support Snape as one of the good guys. Magpie: Yeah, I pretty much agree. I don't get why he took the vow yet at all--no matter where he stands. It's a real WTF Snape? moment for me. Magpie: > Not having 'the nerve' slides over the whole question of why people > don't kill other human beings. Dana: Really, I though respecting other people's lives is why people do not go around killing other people and because in most cases when the stakes are high enough people mostly overcome their anxiety pretty darn quick. Hiring someone to have someone killed is still being guilty of attempted murder or murder and to me Draco did cross that line. It remains to be seen if he takes responsibility for his actions but indeed he probably will. Magpie: I don't quite follow what you mean. If respecting peoples' lives is the reason not to kill it seems to imply that Draco respects Dumbledore's life, which is a good thing for him to understand is a good thing. I don't know how high stakes have to be to overcome one's anxiety--the stakes are pretty high at the end there and Draco doesn't overcome his. (He has fewer anxieties when he doesn't really understand the reality of it and killing is just an abstract idea.) Draco doesn't hire anyone to have anyone killed, so he's not guilty of that. He is not guilty of murder because he doesn't kill anyone. He is guilty of attempted murder, and I think he does need to take responsibility for that, and understand how easily attempted murder could have been murder. (From his pov, it should be almost the same thing.) - From twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 18:20:22 2007 From: twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com (Jo (Joanna)) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 18:20:22 -0000 Subject: some thoughts I had In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171259 Gringots wrote: I am listening to HBP on CD right now, and it has totally changed my views from when I first read and heard the book when it came out. There are clues that make me think Dumbledore did not die. In the beginning of the year there was a huge amount of Polyjuice Potion made, and some was stolen I don't think Dumbledore would leave the school so often at a time like this. Snape was to play a loyal Death Eater, so I think Snape and Dumbledore used the Polyjuice Potion to switch places, so Snape could leave the school (stop drinking potion while Dumbledore did). It was really Dumbledore teaching the Defense Against the Dark Arts (he never wanted Snape to do it). I think it was Snape in Dumbledore's form who took Harry to find the Horcrux, and it was the vile liquid that was one of the Horcruxes, and so Snape asked to be killed to destroy it. Jo writes: When I first read HBP I felt like something was wrong with how Dumbledore was behaving at the Dursleys. In chapter three, "Will and Won't", when I was reading it I was convinced he was going to be someone else in disguise, especially when he said, "let us assume that you have invited me warmly into your house." I was reading this thinking maybe Voldemort needs an invite to be able to get into the house and so suggesting that he make the assumption that he was "invited in warmly" got over that problem. As I read the chapter I was waiting for an unveiling where someone like Voldemort suddenly showed who he was and there was another fight scene but I was wrong and it led to Harry leaving the house with Dumbledore. I carried on reading thinking maybe this was Voldemort's way of getting Harry out of the house but I was still wrong and obviously the book continues as we have all read. However, even when I have re-read the book, I still get the feeling that something isn't right about that scene / Dumbledore. Jo. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Jul 4 18:50:02 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 18:50:02 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171260 > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No, but he will have a near-death experience like he did in COS. > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Snape > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin > that scared him? Fake Dark Mark - hasn't earned the real one yet. > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Lupin & Tonks. > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Real Mad-Eye d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Snape's loyal to Dumbledore and working on his side. He returned to Dumbledore and opposes Voldemort for personal reasons. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Riddle's diary b. Gaunt/Slytherin ring c. Slytherin locket d. Hufflepuff cup e. Nagini f. Item of Ravenclaw's g. In Voldemort > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: phoenix Boggart: Voldemort saying, 'you betrayed me.' > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): 1. Harry having Lily's eyes will be central to DH as Harry learns more about Lily's life and how he shares his 'saving people thing' with her. He'll learn (via Lupin is my guess) that Lily worked at the DOM studying the locked room. Harry will be able to open the door at some critical moment when he learns to feel compassion toward his 'enemy', Snape. 2. Harry will have a soul piece that isn't a Horcrux because it doesn't anchor Voldemort to life. 3. Dumbledore is Heir of Gryffindor. Spending his life defeating Dark Lords will be rooted in his past, a trauma in his own family which he was replaying when he drank the potion in the cave. 4. Voldemort will attempt to lure Harry using his hatred of Snape against him, much as he used his love for Sirius in OOTP. It's just what the Dark Lord does! 5. Irma Pince is Eileen Prince, hidden at Hogwarts by Dumbledore. Two more for fun (because I'm attached to them): 1) Dobby's hand-made Snitch socks will help Harry at some pivotal moment and he will be oh-so-surprised Harry didn't realize they had magical powers! 2) Luna will prove to be related to Ollivander and apprentice in the family business making wands, discovering new wand cores from interestin' creatures. Jen, wishing she had good predictions for Snape's turn to Voldemort and return to Dumbledore but finding her tarot cards unreliable at the moment. From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 4 19:20:34 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:20:34 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171261 > > Carol: > > ... I'm still not sure why DD > > chose to fly to the Astronomy Tower, where he must have known he'd > > encounter DES thanks to the Dark Mark set above it.) > > Pippin: > Well, of course he did. But the question was how they had gotten into > the school, since Dumbledore thought it was impossible. Obviously the > best people to answer that question were the DE's themselves, and > Dumbledore, as the most skilled legilimens available, was in the best > position to get it out of them. Without that answer, Hogwarts would > be lost even if the raiding party was driven off without casualties. > > Pippin > Eddie: I assume he flew to the Astronomy Tower because (a) like most first-responders (firemen, police, etc) he goes *toward* the center of trouble where, perhaps, he can be helpful and (b) in a lesser degree, he was worried about Trelawney's safety. BTW, where *was* Trelawney during all the fight near her rooms? Eddie From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 4 19:39:11 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:39:11 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior, Ron Junior, and Hermione Junior In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707040045o3a8ef35dx4403ca969f6a6494@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171262 > Cassy: > > Anyway, I don't think that we'll see any kids born, save in epilogue. Eddie: Wherein I predict Ron and Hermione will have at least 3 kids, 2 of which are red-headed twins. Anyway, on topic: I don't think Harry will leave Ginny alone and pregnant. In fact, I've already predicted that I think Ginny will die before the last horcrux is destroyed, before Voldemort is dead, and before Harry is also dead. Eddie From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Jul 4 19:51:39 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:51:39 -0000 Subject: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171263 Carol > Needless to say, DD's decision to fly to the Astronomy Tower and await > the DEs (not to mention his weakened condition and Harry's presence on > the tower) changed the circumstances drastically from what either > Snape or DD could have anticipated. (BTW, unlike DDM!Snapers who are > sure that Snape and DD had a definite plan, I'm still not sure why DD > chose to fly to the Astronomy Tower, where he must have known he'd > encounter DES thanks to the Dark Mark set above it.) Jen: I thought that was rather the point of the entire sequence, that Dumbledore flew directly to the Astronomy Tower suspecting he was the one intended to die under the Dark Mark that night. He immediately attempted to get rid of Harry on what seemed like a futile errand: Harry and Snape weren't likely to make it back before events had played out on the tower in one way or another. Eddie: > BTW, where *was* Trelawney during all the fight near her rooms? Jen: Here's some speculation: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165257 From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 4 20:11:54 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 20:11:54 -0000 Subject: Voldemort kills self? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171264 Sorry if this has been asked before, but I haven't seen it and my search hasn't found it. So..... Suppose Voldemort gets a good solid taste of Love (from the locked room at the MoM) and finally realizes what a shmuck he's been and kills himself? Eddie From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 20:14:47 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 20:14:47 -0000 Subject: Of Basilisks and weasels and rue (Was: A basilisk in the final book?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171265 constancevigilance wrote: > > OK. Here is an off-the-wall prediction for DH. > > I'm thinking we might see another basilisk. Here's what I found while researching mythical creatures in Europe at this link: http://www.pantheon.org/areas/bestiary/articles.html > > [T]he basilisk has natural enemies. The weasel is immune to its glance and if it gets bitten it withdraws from the fight to eat some rue, the only plant that does not wither, and returns with renewed strength. > > CV: What is rue, anyway? > > Brave Ron - or any of the Weasleys, for that matter - to the rescue when everyone is being threatened! I've always wondered why JKR was so determined that Ron's surname be Weasley. Such an odd name and she said it was the only one of her original surnames that was settled from the beginning. > Carol responds: I'm not so sure about another Basilisk (who'd have hatched it and raised it?), but I'm pretty sure that Harry will use the Sword of Gryffindor (studded with symbolic and magically powerful rubies) to kill Nagini, another large and probably magical snake. His ability to speak Parseltongue will come in handy with her, too, no doubt. (I wonder if the weasel vs. Basilisk legend has its roots in mongooses killing snakes?) Regarding rue: As Snape (who knows about dittany and the properties of herbs, animals, and minerals in general) would know, as would Sprout and Madam Pomfrey, rue is an herb with healing properties. Botanical.com (a very interesting and informative website) describes it this way: "Rue, a hardy, evergreen, somewhat shrubby plant, is a native of Southern Europe. The stem is woody in the lower part, the leaves are alternate, bluish-green, . . . emit a powerful, disagreeable odour and have an exceedingly bitter, acrid and nauseous taste. The greenish-yellow flowers . . . blossom . . . from June to September. In England Rue is one of our oldest garden plants, cultivated for its use medicinally, having, together with other herbs, been introduced by the Romans, but it is not found in a wild state except rarely on the hills of Lancashire and Yorkshire. This wild form is even more vehement in smell than the garden Rue. The whole plant has a disagreeable and powerful odour. . . . "The name Ruta is from the Greek reuo (to set free), because this herb is so efficacious in various diseases. It was much used by the Ancients; Hippocrates specially commended it, and it constituted a chief ingredient of the famous antidote to poison used by Mithridates. The Greeks regarded it as an antimagical herb, because it served to remedy the nervous indigestion they suffered when eating before strangers, which they attributed to witchcraft. In the Middle Ages and later, it was considered - in many parts of Europe - a powerful defence against witches, and was used in many spells. It was also thought to bestow second sight." http://botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/r/rue---20.html Ophelia includes rue in the list of symbolic herbs that she imagines herself distributing in her mad scene in "Hamlet": "There's rue for you and here's some for me; we may call it herb of grace o' Sundays." The site explains Ophelia's meaning this way: "At one time the holy water was sprinkled from brushes made of Rue at the ceremony usually preceding the Sunday celebration of High Mass, for which reason it is supposed it was named the Herb of Repentance and the Herb of Grace." The site quotes someone named Gerard (a medieval authority on herbs?) as stating: "If a man be anointed with the juice of rue, the poison of wolf's bane, mushrooms, or todestooles, the biting of serpents, stinging of scorpions, spiders, bees, hornets and wasps will not hurt him." So, essentially, rue is a bad-smelling herb with healing properties, no doubt used by Snape and Slughorn in some of their antidotes. (The idea that it would be used by Muggles as a defense against witches is rather ironic but probably not applicable to HP.) Apparently, it serves as an antidote to protect the weasel from the Basilisk's poison. I agree that Ron's association with weasels relates to his courage, but I don't think he'll face a Basilisk (and if he takes part in the fight with Nagini, it seems unlikely that rue will be involved--unless Nagini bites him and Snape heals him with it, though surely the Healers at St. Mungo's would have tried a similar remedy on Mr. Weasley if the properties of rue as an antidote to snake venom were well-known(?), or Ron and Harry anoint themselves with rue as protection against Nagini's venom on the advice of the HBP, hardly likely now that Harry knows who the Prince is). at any rate, we do know from interviews that JKR is fond of weasels and the whole mustelid family. Draco is turned into a white ferret (does he realize that he's temporarily "weasely"?) and the Weasleys live in a "burrow" near the village of *Ottery* St. Catchpole. (I think that Hermione's otter Patronus indicates that her spirit guardian is Ron, the otter symbolizing his playful side rather than his occasional mean-spiritedness, which is IMO more like a weasel. The entire mustelid family is courageous, which also applies to Ron, as I noted earlier.) To return to "rue," the word, of course, also means "sorrow," and, as a verb, "to regret or to feel remorse" (the etymology of the plant name is different from that of "rue" meaning "sorrow" but I think they must have been associated in the medieval English mind considering the repentance symbolism alluded to by Ophelia). The whole idea of the plant--its unpleasantness, its medicinal uses, especially in antidotes, its association with remorse, makes me think of Snape. Carol, who thinks that Snape's saving Ron with rue would be a lovely way of proving to Harry which side he's on (foreshadowed by the Bezoar incident in HBP) but thinks it's unlikely to happen From laurel.coates at gmail.com Wed Jul 4 20:20:40 2007 From: laurel.coates at gmail.com (Laurel Coates) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 13:20:40 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort kills self? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3cd952930707041320v70988f9cnbba48d2db3e5503a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171266 Eddie wrote: Suppose Voldemort gets a good solid taste of Love (from the locked room at the MoM) and finally realizes what a shmuck he's been and kills himself? Laurel: I just find this highly unlikely. Voldemort is terrified of death. Why would he go there willingly? I do believe, however, that Love (disdained by Voldemort) will be his downfall in the end. And I predict that Voldemort will get the Dementor's Kiss (a fate worse than death). Laurel [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From random832 at fastmail.us Wed Jul 4 21:01:24 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Jordan Abel) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 17:01:24 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thoughts Regarding Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171267 On Jul 3, 2007, at 10:38 PM, vmonte wrote: > > vmonte responds: > JKR said that the Death Eaters are like how the Nazis were. [etc] But my point was, we don't know Snape realized that at that point. And, to take the Nazi Germany analogy at the risk of going off-topic - the average German on the street (or even in the army) didn't see, or at least didn't want to see, what was happening. From bawilson at citynet.net Wed Jul 4 21:05:12 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 17:05:12 -0400 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171268 Eddie signed off: "Eddie, who thinks Bill & Fleur need to get somebody to de-jinx the presents before they touch them. One may be a portkey or a regurgitating waffle iron." Bill's a professional curse-breaker, remember? 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 From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 4 21:57:27 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 21:57:27 -0000 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171269 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "constancevigilance" wrote: > > Dungrollin: > > [T]wo of the pieces of [the Scholastic] cover art show [Hermione and > Ron] in robes while Harry's in muggle clothes, or is there another > clue that I've missed? > > Eddie: > > 1. R&H are not only in robes, but dress robes. I'm assuming this is > because R&H were at some school function. Graduation? But I can > imagine it being equally possible they are in dress robes because of > Bill & Fleur's wedding. But then why isn't Harry in dress robes too? > > CV: > > How do you know they are dress robes? I've examined the screen with > the magnifying glass href="http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/books/covers/art7deluxe.htm">here > and they look torn, but otherwise normal. And it appears as if > Hermione is wearing a shirt and pants under her robes. Is that what > someone would wear under dress robes? Or do you have another reason to > believe they are in dress robes? > > CV Eddie: My bad. I hadn't noticed the original post was referring to the Scholastic cover. My "evidence" was taken from the Bloomsbury cover here (warning: it's a HUGE 8.7Mb image): http://www.bloomsbury.com/media/hp7childrens_high_complete.jpg Eddie From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 22:18:32 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 22:18:32 -0000 Subject: Deontological!Snape (Was: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171270 mz_annethrope wrote: > > I think of a patronus as an animal that protects the witch or wizard. It might be a representation of what actually protects the wizard: DD's phoenix or Harry's stag. It might be a personal attribute; this is what I take Cho's swan to be. Cho is graceful and elegant when she isn't crying. I think of Snape's protective attributes are thick skin (elephant? dragon?) and his inscrutability. But sometimes the patronus is the virtue opposite of the person casting the spell. I don't think Hermione resembles an otter, but she has occasional bouts of playfulness (and viciousness) that save her from her seriousness. Why did I choose stag for Snape's patronus? It was purely facetious. > > I think the boggart could be what Snape fears will happen, but I think it also could be what he fears about himself--say guilt or shame. I chose guilt. Carol responds: Oi! How is a naive and gullible person like me supposed to know that you're being facetious without a ? :-0 Seriously, although JKR herself has muddied the waters, I think that a Patronus, which she describes as a spirit guardian, differs from an Animagus form, which clearly represents personal characteristics. (MWPP should have been able to predict Sirius Black's form as a black dog from his name alone, coupled with his barklike laugh and his doglike loyalty to James, and Peter Pettigrew's from his pointy nose and squeaky voice, if not from ratlike traits in his personality (no offense to rat lovers. I like pet rats, myself.) But Harry's Patronus, as DD points out, clearly represents James ("You found your father in yourself" or some such quote). I'm not certain that a Patronus has to be an animal, whereas an Animagus form is that of an animal by definition. (Animagus = ani(mal) magician or sorceror). Not that you need to agree with me; that's just a distinction that seems important to me and that JKR herself may have forgotten in assigning Cho a swan Patronus (unless it's a male swan representing poor dead Cedric!) As I said in another thread, I think that Hermione's otter Patronus represents Ron Weasel, erm, Weasley. What's your nonfacetious idea of Snape's Patronus (as opposed to his Animagus form, if any)? As for a Boggart, I *suppose* it could represent guilt, but I think guilt is unlikely to be a person's greatest fear (Lupin's definition of what a Boggart represents), which is why I believe that it's Voldemort killing Harry and consequently destroying all hope of a victory against the Dark Lord. ms_annethrope: > Let's see if I can be brief. I think there is a strong ethical dimension to the HP books and the key is DD's remark: "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." (CoS p.333, American edition)This seems to be an argument for virtue ethics or character ethics. > > I do think that she [JKR], or at least DD, advocates some sort of virtue ethics. It's not about one's choices per se, but that one's choices reveal who one truly is. I think DD advocates (represents?) some sort of virtue ethics because out of his sheer goodness--or foolhardiness--he is always giving people, and creatures, second chances. This is not ends based action because he does not expect people to be good in return for his kindness. Of course, there are times when DD acts in a different way. He had a plan for keeping Harry alive. And he chose not to divulge critical information to Harry, much to his later regret. But I think virtues are for the most part emblematic of DD. > > On to Snape. Some people think he is Machiavellian. That's Peter and Lucius. I think if Snape were Machiavellian he would not have worked nearly so hard to keep Harry alive in the first book. But I am troubled by the idea of DD cutting a deal with Snape to kill him so that some good may result. This I called Utilitarian for lack of a better word. By Utilitarian I mean the theory that action should be directed at the greatest possible happiness for the greatest number of people. I find this problematic, not just because it sacrifices the happiness of some for the happiness of others, but because I think any single perspective is limited and we cannot know if our chosen action will have the effects we anticipated. I find it difficult to think DD would cause Snape to kill for some good that might not happen. Of course, JKR might have set it up that way because SHE knows the answers. But DD doesn't. > > But deontological (ethics of moral obligation) Snape is a possibility. Snape has various obligations: to Draco, to Harry, to DD, etc., and he holds to them as tenaciously as a Saxon warrior to his oaths. Deonotological Snape allows Snape to be a moral, if flawed, person--perhaps a tragic figure And I suspect DD acted deontologically when he sent Harry to live with the Dursleys. He had to do what he could to keep Harry alive. Ok, I wasn't brief. Carol responds: Brevity isn't always a virtue (or the soul of wit). I prefer clarity, myself, and I appreciate your explanation. (being philosophically challenged myself, and unable to deal in abstractions without suffering a severe headache, I had to look up "deontological." I've never quite grasped ontology, and am glad to find that deontology is another beast altogether, "the theory or study of moral obligation," according to my trusty Merriam-Webster's Online. I see a clash within Dumbledore between utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number, meaning in his case the survival of the WW at whatever cost to the individual) and his personal love for Harry, which may or may not be represented by deontology. (I'd love to hear what you think.) He even states as much himself: "What did I care if numbers of nameless and faceless people and creatures were slaughtered in the vague future, if in the here and now you were alive, and well, and happy?" (OoP Am. ed. 839). An yet, surely, privileging Harry's happiness and temporary safety over the lives and deaths of others can't be JKR's--or DD's--idea of right? He's caught between placing his beloved Prophecy at a terrible risk and keeping him safe at the expense of numerous other people, the whole WW, in fact. Harry must be kept safe until he's ready, but he *must* be made ready, for his own sake and everyone else's, "nameless and faceless" or not. Harry is the WW's only hope, and DD knows it. In HBP, both DD and Snape are preoccupied with Draco's personal (and moral) safety as well as with Harry (over whom Snape has apparently been watching since SS/PS as part of his obligation either to DD or to his own set of ethics--certainly, you're right that he's not Machiavellian). Keeping Draco safe could jeopardize the school, but keeping the school safe by, say, expelling Draco, would guarantee Draco's death. Again, it seems to me, DD tries to strike a balance between the good of the individual (Draco and perhaps UV-bound Snape) and the good of the "greatest number" (the students and staff of Hogwarts). Expelling Draco would certainly be easy, but I'm pretty sure that DD doesn't consider it right. Instead, he has Snape watch over Draco (which he's doing anyway because of the UV) and try to question him; meanwhile, he puts as many protections on the school as possible. In the end, he talks Draco out of killing him, not for his own sake but for Draco's, and he seems to me to ask Snape to kill him as the only way to save Draco's, Harry's, and Snape's lives (good of the individual), save the school from the DEs (utilitarianism), place Snape in his role as saboteur to fight LV (utilitarianism), and save Harry, not as an individual but as the Chosen One for the sake of the WW (utilitarianism). So, in the end, his conflicting values come together. By allowing Snape rather than a DE or the poison to kill him, in which case he would *not* have gone over the wall and Snape, dead from breaking the UV, could not have gotten the DEs and Draco off the tower before Harry came rushing out, DD accomplishes a number of objectives. He can't save his own life, but he can choose how he dies and make sure he doesn't take anyone with him (assuming that his complete trust in Snape is justified and Snape does what's required to save those other lives). that, at any rate, is how I interpret "Severus, please!" DD is begging, not for his own life or for Snape's soul but for the safety of a valued ally and friend, two students, the school itself, and, ultimately, the whole WW. As for Snape himself, I think his immediate action is motivated by the need to get the job done at whatever cost to himself. He hesitates, his expression changing as he looks into DD's eyes and (IMO) learns what he wants, but he doesn't raise his wand even though he surely knows that the UV has been triggered. DD's pleading seems to include a note of urgency--*Please,* Severus! Do it now or it will be too late! But part of Snape, I think, would rather die than kill his mentor (the very opposite of Peter Pettigrew, who would have saved his own skin in a second). So I see him at this point as what you're calling Utilitarian Snape. He does what's best for the WW and Hogwarts at terrible expense to himself (far worse than death, he's making himself an outcast and a fugitive hated by the whole WW). But there's also an element of what you call Deontological Snape because he's saving Draco (for whose sake he put his own life on the line with the UV in the first place, and perhaps his soul as well) and, as always, protecting the "arrogant," rule-breaking Potter boy, without whom the WW is toast. I do think that Snape operates according to his own moral code, a set of strict, old-fashioned virtues of the sort rejected by Shelleyan Romantics in the early eighteenth century and more recently by the Beat generation of the 1950s and its postmodern offspring from the 1990s onward: Duty, Obedience, Respect for Authority, Loyalty (Loyaultie me Lie!), perhaps others that I can't think of right now. Courage is also important to him; Truth, on the other hand, is in DD's words, "a beautiful and terrible thing," to be handed out in small doses and, if the occasion requires, somewhat distorted. Carol, not sure where she's going with this but intrigued by the concept of Deontological!Snape From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 4 22:48:04 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:48:04 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deontological!Snape (Was: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) Message-ID: <380-2200773422484515@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171271 Carol responds: I think that a Patronus, which she describes as a spirit guardian, differs from an Animagus form, which clearly represents personal characteristics. Magpie: Absolutely two different things, I agree. The Patronus seems to be connected with happy memories--what was Harry's the first time? Was it learning he was a wizard? That would make sense why it was a stag, because it represented his wizard family-James-even if he didn't know it. Though I doubt it's always that clear. Tonks' Patronus is connected to Lupin and used to be something else. I doubt her animagus form would be a wolf. Carol: Not that you need to agree with me; that's just a distinction that seems important to me and that JKR herself may have forgotten in assigning Cho a swan Patronus (unless it's a male swan representing poor dead Cedric!) As I said in another thread, I think that Hermione's otter Patronus represents Ron Weasel, erm, Weasley. What's your nonfacetious idea of Snape's Patronus (as opposed to his Animagus form, if any)? Magpie: Didn't JKR say that for a while James had a biting teacup Patronus because he'd been so happy to finally figure out how to make one? It sounds strange, but it somehow sticks in my mind. In Cho's case I absolutely thought the swan was a memory of Cedric--I don't think the swan was supposed to be Cho the way an animagus form would be (though it would make a believable animagus form for her too--perhaps that sometimes happens). Swans mate for life, I believe, and are often associated with love, poetry and mourning. I thought it indicated her happy memory was probably with Cedric and so he was in some ways her guardian spirit, or their love for each other, something like that. Hermione's otter could definitely be a happy memory of Ron being playful or at least making her take herself less seriously. Snape's Patronus is really hard to guess! If it was Dumbledore related it would presumably be a memory that sort of linked to Dumbledore. Though it's not like your Patronus changes with every memory. At this point, for instance, Harry can think of Umbridge getting fired and still get his stag Patronus, probably because at this point his happiness is sort of always related to the same thing, no matter what the memory is. Tonks falling in love with Lupin (and Cho with Cedric) was probably a more transformative experience. I wonder if Snape's boggart was Voldemort killing Harry it would also be implied that it was Snape's fault it happened. Carol responds: I see a clash within Dumbledore between utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number, meaning in his case the survival of the WW at whatever cost to the individual) and his personal love for Harry, which may or may not be represented by deontology. (I'd love to hear what you think.) He even states as much himself: "What did I care if numbers of nameless and faceless people and creatures were slaughtered in the vague future, if in the here and now you were alive, and well, and happy?" (OoP Am. ed. 839). An yet, surely, privileging Harry's happiness and temporary safety over the lives and deaths of others can't be JKR's--or DD's--idea of right? He's caught between placing his beloved Prophecy at a terrible risk and keeping him safe at the expense of numerous other people, the whole WW, in fact. Harry must be kept safe until he's ready, but he *must* be made ready, for his own sake and everyone else's, "nameless and faceless" or not. Harry is the WW's only hope, and DD knows it. Magpie: You know, I'm not surprised there is that conflict and I think it's intentional. I always think LOTR puts it in with Frodo and Sam--Frodo is more making sacrifices for the whole, while Sam is always more naturally motivated to protect individuals. So Frodo is thinking of the world, Sam is thinking of Frodo, and both of them are needed to get to Mount Doom. (Sam always has to choose whom he protects because he can't do it all.) Anyway, that's why I'd guess JKR thinks it's important that Dumbledore would be able to make the "mistake" of caring too much about Harry, to keep him from just being coldly utilitarian. Especially in a kids' book, because what kid would want to not be cared about in that way at least some of the time? It's like how in fairy tales there are a lot of wicked stepparents, but parents are never punished for wanting their children too much (the witch in Rapunzel, for instance, isn't punished for wanting to lock her in the tower). Draco is another good example of showing a balance between the one and the many, where Dumbledore "unwisely" risks the many for the one (in this case not even a particularly "worthy" one either-though I suspect many people would have said the same about Snape back in the day too). -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 4 22:51:59 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 22:51:59 -0000 Subject: Deontological!Snape (Was: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171272 Carol a second ago: > I see a clash within Dumbledore between utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number, meaning in his case the survival of the WW at whatever cost to the individual) and his personal love for Harry, which may or may not be represented by deontology. He's caught between placing his beloved Prophecy at a terrible risk and keeping him safe at the expense of numerous other people, the whole WW, in fact. Carol again: Eurgh. I meant "placing his beloved Prophecy *Boy* at risk"! I've got to stop hitting Send before I've checked my post for absurd and misleading errors! mz_annethrope: > > But deontological (ethics of moral obligation) Snape is a possibility. Snape has various obligations: to Draco, to Harry, to DD, etc., and he holds to them as tenaciously as a Saxon warrior to his oaths. Deonotological Snape allows Snape to be a moral, if flawed, person--perhaps a tragic figure Carol: I forgot to address this part. I agree that part of Snape's behavior on the tower was motivated by his obligations to Harry (solely as the Prophecy Boy, the WW's only hope, Duty over antipathy), to Dumbledore for giving him a second chance and trusting him and being Voldemort's chief antagonist, Prophecy or no Prophecy, and to Draco for personal reasons (as the friend of his family, as his teacher and Head of House, as the reason he took the UV). He has a moral obligation to save Draco, which he can't do if the UV kills him. It may be that Draco's safety rather than DD's wishes and plans tipped the scale for Snape and caused him to cast the spell that caused him such anguish. I don't think the possibility of his own death influenced him or he wouldn't have waited till DD begged him before raising his wand and casting that spell. I love the Saxon warrior analogy. I'm reminded, not of Beowulf but of Gimli in LOTR, "Sworn word may strengthen quaking heart" and of Elrond's response: "Or break it." Carol, who thinks that sworn word broke Severus Snape's heart and fears that he is indeed a tragic figure From celizwh at intergate.com Wed Jul 4 23:26:20 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 23:26:20 -0000 Subject: Of Basilisks and weasels and rue (Was: A basilisk in the final book?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171274 Carol quoted: > "The name Ruta is from the Greek reuo (to set free), > because this herb is so efficacious in various > diseases. It was much used by the Ancients; > Hippocrates specially commended it, and it > constituted a chief ingredient of the famous > antidote to poison used by Mithridates. The > Greeks regarded it as an antimagical herb, > because it served to remedy the nervous indigestion > they suffered when eating before strangers, which > they attributed to witchcraft. In the Middle Ages > and later, it was considered - in many parts of > Europe - a powerful defence against witches, and > was used in many spells. It was also thought to > bestow second sight." houyhnhnm: Ron consumed a lot of rue when he was recovering from the poisoned mead. I wondered if it might mean Ron would become a Seer, but maybe he was just given rue because he's a WEASLey. From celizwh at intergate.com Thu Jul 5 00:10:36 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 00:10:36 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171275 Mike: > Well spotted. Though, (you knew there was going to > be a but here, didn't ya) Krum only tried once to > transfigure himself and actually got marked down > for his incomplete transfiguration. I do agree > that Krum was a natural Gryff in the grand scheme of things. houyhnhnm: I didn't get the impression he was marked down because it was an incomplete transfiguration so much as because it took him longer to get back. You've got to give him credit for attempting *human* transfiguration, but you're right there's not enough evidence to pronounce Viktor Krum a tansfiguration expert. Mike: > But the main problem is that I don't think Hogwarts > can afford him. He's an international star athlete. > His signing bonus alone would bankrupt the school. > Look at how much Beckham got to sign with Los > Angeles and he's arguably over the hill by now. > Krum hasn't even reached his playing prime yet. ;) houyhnhnm: Well, but he's a *Bulgarian* Quidditch player. I'm not sure they would make the superstar salaries. In fact, back in the '90s he might have been lucky to get paid at all. As for Hogwarts, they must have a whale of an endowment. Look at those feasts. They could afford to spend a little more on salaries. I really think they need to add positions, not just fill them. Bring that astronomical pupil to teacher ratio down a little and the professors might be a little less cranky. > > houyhnhnm, who thinks Hogwarts might benefit by doing > > some out-of-the-box hiring. (I wouldn't want to call them > > parochial, but ....) > Mike, who was going for that when he suggested Fleur > for the transfiguration post, but could accept your > option of her filling the Potions job when Sluggy re-retires :) houyhnhnm: Yes, I was agreeing with you. I should have said that. From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 01:07:29 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 01:07:29 -0000 Subject: Who will save Harry? In-Reply-To: <468BAC7C.1060103@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171276 Bart: "I'm pretty sure that Harry will die. But he'll get better (hey, at least he won't get turned into a newt!). More seriously, I see Harry sacrificing himself to destroy Morty, but someone else is going to sacrifice him/herself to save him..." I see great sacrifice for Harry, too, but I thought death too conventional, in a way. I see Harry making an even greater sacrifice: what if he had to give up his ability to perform magic, become a Muggle again, to defeat Voldemort? That's a greater sacrifice than his mere physical life, which Harry would give up more willingly than his magic ability. It opens the way to a rebirth for Harry, as he is loved and revered for his courage, not for his talent. There's really no evidence for this, but it certainly makes the journey complete. Jim Ferer From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 01:19:14 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 01:19:14 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171277 Renee Wrote: "I don't want to read about a young man who is selfish enough to reproduce, whilst knowing he may be dead by the time the child is born." Eggplant Wrote: "As for being selfish, well, all I can say is that I'd be very pleased if Harry's genes remain in the pool. Cassy: At first I agreed with Renee about it being a very selfish act on the Harry's part. But after thinking about poor Ginny, who would be left along to bring up the child, should Harry die, I decided that the baby might actually be a consolation for her, as it will have a "part of Harry" in it." As a parent, I have a perspective here: I think Ginny would look on the child as a consolation, and if there was anyone who had no reason to worry about bringing up her baby alone, it would be Ginny Potter. As strong as she is, she would handle it like few other people could. We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. Jim Ferer From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 01:29:04 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 01:29:04 -0000 Subject: Puppetmaster DD (Was: Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171278 > Carol responds: > I agree with you that the two versions are contradictory and I'm also > not satisfied with reconstructions that attempt to reconcile them. But > I'm not so sure that Trelawney's view is the accurate one. lizzyben: Well, IMO we can probably trust T's version of events more than DD's for two reasons. First, we already know that DD intentionally concealed parts of the prophecy events from Harry, while there's no indication T did. When Harry confronts DD about one conflict (Snape), DD essentially confirms T's version of events - he's admitting that her version is more truthful than what he first presented. Second, T has less incentive to lie. The prophecy is obviously very important to DD, and he has already been highly inconsistent in his speech about how the prophecy was given, and what the prophecy means. He's being incredibly evasive to Harry - which would make sense if he was trying to conceal his own role in leaking the prophecy. As for T's opinion about why Snape was spying, to me that reeked of a cover story that was offered to T after the fact to explain Snape's presence. Most likely by DD himself. Carol: > I, too, am disturbed by DD's unDumbledorean behavior in HBP, praising his own > brilliance and seeming to encourage Harry's desire for vengeance > against Voldemort when at other times he implies that Harry's weapons > are a pure soul and the superpowerful magic of Love. (I have no > problems with DD's trust in Snape, but I wish he'd done more than > credit him with "timely action" in treating the ring curse. We never > get to hear that exciting story.) I can only account for his behavior > as being prompted by the knowledge that he has only a short time to > live and being in a hurry to educate Harry on Horcruxes and > Riddle/Voldemort without undermining his plans for Snape, who will > surely be "outed" as a DE by the DADA curse. lizzyben: I think he's just largely decided to drop the act. The kindly grandfather, twinkle & lemon drops, act worked to disarm people most of the time. But as you say, he's running out of time & now needs to get down to business w/Harry. Mike mentioned that DD's eyes don't *twinkle* anymore in HBP, and it's true. Instead, DD's eyes *gleam* & *glitter* - when Harry describes killing all the Death Eaters he can, DD's eyes are *gleaming*. Creepy. IMO, these descriptions are meant to be echoes of DD's "gleam of triumph" way back in GOF. That moment was a brief glimpse of the real DD. IMO, DD's speech at the end of OOTP was another - he's so exhausted & guilt-ridden that he lets out some of his real motivations to Harry. And in this speech, DD reveals that he is all. about. The Plan - he calls it "my brilliant plan", "my wonderful plan"; a plan that involves both Harry & the prophecy; a plan that requires him to endanger & possibly sacrifice Harry's life. In these moments, his usual kindly eccentric facade slips, & we can catch a glimpse of who DD actually is. And IMO, the real DD is in fact a brilliant, cold, calculating, ruthless wizard. DD says he's impressed by Harry's ability to love, but I'm mostly impressed by Harry's ability to hate. In OOTP & HBP, Harry is often consumed w/hatred & rage, and this is only worsened by losing his two father figures. If you look at DD's first speech to Harry in HBP, he begins by bringing up how *unfair* & *tragic* Sirius' death is - rubbing salt in the wound? He never goes into detail about how Snape helped him, perhaps because he doesn't want to give Harry any reason to lessen his rather unhealthy hatred of Snape. In his Horcrux speech, he again brings up Harry's lost loved ones in order to encourage Harry to kill LV, and fan the flames of hatred in Harry. Immediately after this little hate/revenge pep talk, Harry unleashes a powerful Dark curse on Draco & almost kills him. Coincidence? I think not. Harry's hatred has increased his power & ability to use dark magic. You have to wonder - DD talks about Harry's love, but which emotion is he really encouraging in Harry? How could the "epitome of goodness" ever, ever encourage Harry to kill someone when this act "splits the soul?" Just *what* is DD up to here? After OOTP, I half-jokingly wondered if DD was trying to turn Harry into a Dark Wizard w/his schemes. But it's not a joke anymore. I'm not scared about what might happen to Harry in DH; I'm scared about what Harry might *do* in DH. Because it seems to me that DD has done everything possible to fan Harry's worst emotions, capped off by forcing Harry to watch his death. Beyond cruel. It's almost like he wants to make Harry turn evil. IMO Harry will do some awful things in DH - including using Crucio on Snape. We ain't seen nothing yet. And if Harry truly finds out how much DD has manipulated him from the beginning, he will go ballistic. Infuriatingly, this is also probably part of DD's Plan. Carol: > While we will certainly learn more about these events > (for example, how DD knew to send Hagrid to Godric's Hollow to rescue > Harry and how anyone knew that Voldemort was vanquished but not dead), > I doubt that we'll find that the wise old mentor, for all his > emotional mistakes, engineered those events. At least I hope not. I'll > send my books to Lupinlore to be mulched if it turns out to be true. :-) lizzyben: Get the mulcher ready! The funny thing about DD is that, once you accept Puppetmaster DD, so much about his character & the novels just falls into place. It's like taking the red pill & seeing through the matrix. The many "emotional mistakes" DD makes aren't mistakes at all, and DD does in fact engineer events to his liking. And once you accept that he's engineered one event, it becomes so much easier to see the pattern & spot the typical DD modus operandi in the unfolding of subsequent schemes. DD's MO, simply, is to use bait & traps. Over & over again. We can see this MO in many small ways - like when DD used Harry as "bait" to "trap" Slughorn into teaching again. And in we can see it in his big plans as well. For example, in SS, DD created the obstacle course as a trap for LV. He knew LV would want the Stone in order to become immortal, so the the Stone itself became bait. And what good is LV-bait w/o LV? IMO, it's quite a coincidence that DD's professor gave LV a ride back to Hogwarts shortly before Harry's enrollment. So, DD lures LV to get the Stone. At the same time, he also teaches Harry how to get through the obstacles by showing him the cloak, the Mirror, etc. Then he disappears, trap set. Quirrel/LV uses the opportunity to enter the obstacle course, & Harry & co. follow. When LV tries to get the Stone, he is confronted by Harry, & flees once he realizes that he can't hurt or touch Harry. Trap sprung. Conveniently, DD shows up just in time to save Harry, but after the Harry/LV confrontation. OOTP, same plan. Bait LV w/the prophecy orb to lure him to the MOM trap, don't warn Harry about false visions so that he follows, allow confrontation, & DD shows up in the nick of time. LV flees once he realizes he can't possess Harry. Trap sprung. ETC. OK. Given this pattern, when I look at the events of Godric's Hollow, I see the same MO - bait & trap. Knowing LV's total fear of death, DD leaks the first half of a prophecy foretelling his death & defeat via SS. He knows LV will be obsessed w/preventing the prophecy from coming true. Bait set. Then, he lets LV know where the Potters are via PP. The fact that DD has done so much to protect them makes LV even more sure that this family is the "Chosen One." When he learns their secret location, he feels confident enough to act quickly. DD has successfully lured LV to Godric's Hollow & LV decides to personally attack them there. But Lily has used ancient magic to protect the child, and causes the AK to rebound on LV. Trap sprung. LV defeated, flees. Chosen One created, prophecy fulfilled. Godric's Hollow has DD's fingerprints all over it - the way events unfolded show all the hallmarks of a classic DD bait & trap scheme. Carol: > Regarding the change in pronouns and your explanation: It makes no > sense to me that DD would switch from "my" to "our" out of a sudden > realization that the death of the Potters and his own selection as the > Chosen One was *Harry's* good fortune as well as Dumbledore's. Surely > not. Nor was it the Potters' good fortune. "Our" must refer, IMO, > either to DD and the Order or to the WW as a whole, not to Harry and > DD. The quote again (taken from one of your posts upthread, with your > ellipses) is "My - our - one stroke of good fortune was that the > eavesdropper was detected only a short way into the prophecy and > thrown from the building... Consequently, he could not warn his master > that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you. > So Voldemort never knew that there might be danger in attacking you." > > So the good fortune is not that Harry's parents were attacked but that > the eavesdropper heard and related only part of the Prophecy, so that > neither he nor Voldemort knew that to attack Harry was to create his > own Nemesis. Had he heard the whole Prophecy, the Potters might not > have died (but as members of the Order, they would still have been on > his hit list and Harry might still have been orphaned or lost at least > one parent), but the WW would have had no respite and no Chosen One > who could ultimately vanquish Voldemort. lizzyben: I don't disagree w/anything you've said, but don't really see the distinction. You agree that the "good fortune" was that LV didn't know the danger of attacking the prophecy, & that the Potters' deaths ensured the salvation of the WW. No argument there. But, then, isn't the attack on Harry's parents a vital part of that good fortune? Carol: > But I very much doubt that Dumbledore knew at the time what would > happen if Voldemort heard all or part of the Prophecy. He had no more > idea than Snape did who would be involved or how Voldemort would > interpret the Prophecy (or even that Snape was a DE who would report > it to LV). I very much doubt that he expected Voldemort to attack a > baby; he seems to have taken action only when Snape reported to him > "how Voldemort interpreted the Prophecy." lizzyben: I think DD knew exactly how LV would react. He's practically an expert in LV, and often repeats that LV's consuming fear of death is his biggest weakness. So, if DD hears a prophecy about LV's death, he knows that LV will become obsessed w/preventing that prophecy, even if it involves killing a baby. The ONLY restraint on LV's action would be if he heard the 2nd half the prophecy - and DD ensured he did not. After LV's first defeat, DD also knows that LV will obsessively try to obtain the 2nd half of the prophecy. It is *perfect* LV-bait. So perfect that I wonder if DD actually wrote the thing. And DD successfully used it to bait LV for 17 years. Of course he knew. That's why he allowed Snape to report half, and only half, of the prophecy. Carol: And his hands were tied by > what Snape calls James Potter's "arrogance" in trusting Sirius Black > over Dumbledore. Had DD been able to protect the Potters (and the > Longbottoms?), Harry would (possibly) have grown up with his parents > as an ordinary wizard boy with a talent for Quidditch but no > extraordinary powers or destiny, but the WW would be a much worse > place to live, especially for Muggleborns and House-Elves and the > dwindling number of Order members, with no hope for the defeat of the > apparently immortal LV. > Fortunately for DD and the WW at large (though not for the Potters or > Harry or Voldie or the DEs), matters were taken out of Dumbledore's > (and DDM!Snape's) hands by the choices of other people--the Potters, > Sirius Black, Peter Pettigrew, and Voldemort all contributed in one > way or another to the "Good Bad Thing" that occurred at Godric's Hollow. lizzyben: The events at Godric's Hollow were a "good bad thing" for the Wizarding World at large. We don't see it that way, because we're tied to Harry's perspective. But the WW at large certainly did - they didn't even stop to mourn the Potters before they began celebrating. To them, it was a "good thing" because it probably saved the lives of hundreds, and ensured the WW didn't have to live in fear & terror anymore. Would DD be willing to sacrifice a few people in order to assure that this "good thing" for the WW occurred? I think he would. In DD's OOTP speech, he reveals a great deal about his philosophy & values. Here, he laments the fact that he now cares more about Harry's life more than the numbers of "nameless, faceless" people that may die in the future if The Plan fails. He says that the only flaw in his "brilliant plan" was that he now loves Harry & cares about Harry's personal happiness & safety. This implies that the Plan requires him to sacrifice Harry's happiness &/or life for the "greater good", and caring too much about Harry would endanger that plan. All this shows that DD believes that he should care more about protecting the numbers of "nameless, faceless" people rather than protecting one person in particular. And it shows that he was able to do this in the past; & expected to be able to do it w/Harry as well. DD believes that his Plan creates the "greater good" & caring too much about the good of Harry in particular would endanger that plan. He values the greater good of the WW in general over the good for one person in particular. This is DD's value system - a strict Utilitarian value system. Utilitarianism says that we should choose the course that creates the "greatest good for the greatest number." And when DD calculates the "greatest number", he also includes future generations that may be affected by his choice. OK. Given that DD has these values, how would he act if he heard a prophecy foretelling LV's downfall? If he knew that leaking the first half would force LV to act upon the prophecy, ensuring his defeat, I don't think he would hesitate a second to do this. It would possibly endanger one person, but save the lives of thousands. Under a Utilitarian mindset, the correct course is to allow LV to hear & act upon the prophecy. Now let's say that SS reports who the actual targets are - the Potters & their child. DD helps to hide the Potters. Now, he has a choice to make. If he protects the Potters, they & their child are safe, but LV continues wreaking havoc. Harry grows up in a normal family, but, as you say, the WW is pretty bleak for them, anyway. LV is immortal, & the Potters may die anyway as Order members. On the other hand, if he lets LV know where the Potters are, & inspires him to act upon the prophecy, this will kill LV & also create a Chosen One w/special powers to permanently defeat LV in the future. The Potters die, but this saves the lives of thousands of wizards, saves the entire wizarding world, and may even help save future generations by ensuring that a "chosen one" can stop another LV reign of terror. Which choice guarantees the "greatest good for the greatest number?" >From a strictly Utilitarian stand-point, DD would believe allowing LV to attack the Potters was the *correct* choice, even the moral choice. It would be *immoral* to protect three people he knows at the expense of the lives of thousands of "nameless, faceless" people. So, yes, I can see DD doing this, and I can see him doing so w/little to no regret. It's interesting that, when Harry confronts DD about the prophecy in HBP, DD never apologizes for his actions. He says that SNAPE felt profound remorse about bringing LV the prophecy. But DD never says that he regrets allowing Snape to report the prophecy to LV, even if DD simply made a mistake. He never apologizes to Harry for not doing enough to protect his parents, for not averting Godric's Hollow. And that is because DD DOESN'T regret what happened there - or any part he may have played in ensuring that the attack occurred. Godric's Hollow brought the greatest good to the greatest number in the Wizarding World, and it is therefore a "good bad thing", a stroke of good fortune, a desired outcome. THIS is why DD keeps changing the story of the prophecy to Harry. THIS is why he is so insistent on defending Snape's actions. Snape, either on orders or inadvertently, was doing exactly what DD wanted. And DD's not sorry about it. Why should he be? His choice guaranteed the greatest good for the greatest number. Sacrifices must be made. lizzyben, who apologizes for yet another DD rant. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Thu Jul 5 02:17:42 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 22:17:42 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Junior Message-ID: <380-220077452174278@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171279 Jim: As a parent, I have a perspective here: I think Ginny would look on the child as a consolation, and if there was anyone who had no reason to worry about bringing up her baby alone, it would be Ginny Potter. As strong as she is, she would handle it like few other people could. We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. Magpie: Speaking as just a reader, and a selfish one, I would be incredibly annoyed (and shocked) if JKR wasted space in the seventh book pre-epilogue for Harry and Ginny to decide to get married so that Ginny Potter can decide to have an infant as a "piece of Harry" after he's dead or not. Of all the problems Harry Potter has dealt with in the series, the need to pass his genes on to the next generation via a baby has never been one of them, nor has whether Ginny Weasley is strong enough to be a single mother. Both questions seem completely irrelevent to anything going on. -m From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 5 02:46:31 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 02:46:31 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: <380-220077452174278@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171280 > > Jim: > > As a parent, I have a perspective here: I think Ginny would look on > the child as a consolation, and if there was anyone who had no reason > to worry about bringing up her baby alone, it would be Ginny Potter. > As strong as she is, she would handle it like few other people could. > We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel > sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. > > > Magpie: > Speaking as just a reader, and a selfish one, I would be incredibly annoyed > (and shocked) if JKR wasted space in the seventh book pre-epilogue for > Harry and Ginny to decide to get married so that Ginny Potter can decide to > have an infant as a "piece of Harry" after he's dead or not. Of all the > problems Harry Potter has dealt with in the series, the need to pass his > genes on to the next generation via a baby has never been one of them, nor > has whether Ginny Weasley is strong enough to be a single mother. Both > questions seem completely irrelevent to anything going on. > > Julie: I agree. I can't see this subject even being breached. Is Ginny going to beg Harry to get her pregnant with his child so she'll have something of him if he dies? Or will Harry convince Ginny they should boink and get her preggers so their baby can carry on his genes when he kicks the bucket? Or maybe they're going to fall into each other's arms in a desperate desire to consummate their relationship just in case they never get the chance later, and the baby will be an unexpected byproduct that they then realize (or Ginny alone realizes) will continue the Potter genetic line and comfort Ginny in her bereavement? In any scenario, the bigger question is, when will they find the time and opportunity? Harry has a full agenda. He's already pushed Ginny away from him to keep her safer. What is going to change his mind? They're in the middle of a war, 17 and 16 years old, and while I know this scenario has played out maybe countless times in real life, this is a book. And not a book about Harry and Ginny's relationship, which isn't even a central one in Harry's life in DH, if the book covers are anything to go by. That said, I do think Harry *will* get Ginny pregnant. Probably more than once. A dozen times even ;-) In the epilogue. And their children will grow up with both mother and father, a fact which will be of great relevance and importance to Harry. Julie From colwilrin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 02:49:24 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 02:49:24 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171281 > Jim Ferer: > As a parent, I have a perspective here: I think Ginny would look on > the child as a consolation, and if there was anyone who had no reason > to worry about bringing up her baby alone, it would be Ginny Potter. > As strong as she is, she would handle it like few other people could. > We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel > sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. As a parent of a 4 year old daughter...and knowing that JKR is a mother as well, I would find it surprising if JKR would write a script for a 16 year old girl to become pregnant. As a parent yourself, Jim, I shouldn't have to explain why. When does Ginny turn 16, and what are the Statutory laws in UK anyway? Colwilrin From k12listmomma at comcast.net Thu Jul 5 03:09:53 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 03:09:53 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Junior Message-ID: <070520070309.4386.468C61010000DB880000112222058864420E030301039B9C0704CDCE05@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171282 > Jim Ferer > As a parent, I have a perspective here: I think Ginny would look on > the child as a consolation, and if there was anyone who had no reason > to worry about bringing up her baby alone, it would be Ginny Potter. > As strong as she is, she would handle it like few other people could. > We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel > sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. While I would agree that Ginny could handle being a single parent, I don't think there's even the remote chance of it happening. This story is Harry's story. So either he will die, and there won't be any more Harry-Ginny snogging to see, or Harry will soundly kick LV's ass and then go on to live happily with Ginny and all their children. But, the senerio proposed would leave the door open for an entirely new Harry Potter series to be built on top of the existing series- Ginny and baby's story after Harry's death. Would Rowling really leave that door wide open? Shelley [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 04:01:58 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 04:01:58 -0000 Subject: Patronus from the Power of Love (Was: Deontological!Snape ) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171283 > From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/171271 > > Magpie: > The Patronus seems to be connected with happy memories--what was > Harry's the first time? Was it learning he was a wizard? That > would make sense why it was a stag, because it represented > his wizard family-James-even if he didn't know it. Mike: It was during Harry's first Patronus lesson with Lupin that he settled on learning he was a wizard for his happy memory, on his third attempt. He was able to shoot Patronus-like material out of his wand, but no corporeal form. His first "Stag" Patronus occurs at the Quidditch match against Ravenclaw in response to Draco and company's fake Dementors. We know that because Dumbledore remarked on it in the PoA wrap-up brief. So what happy memory was he using in his first real Patronus casting? Well, I suppose it was winning the match, but we weren't really told. We were told that "He didn't stop to think." He just "whipped out his wand a roared *Expecto Patronum*." (PoA p.262) Now, Harry was generally happy playing Quidditch, but he didn't exactly follow Lupin's recipe of thinking of a happy memory. What about the Patronus that counted, the one that saved his, Sirius, and Hermione's souls against real Dementors? He was thinking about his father during the entire lead up. He even says out loud, "Where are you? Dad, come on --" (PoA p.411) the second before his revelation that it was *him* that he saw casting the Patronus. And once again he whipped out his wand a yelled the incantation. No thinking about a happy memory in advance. In the alley in Little Whinging Harry can't think of a happy memory. Instead he hears Voldemorts words from the graveyard. At the last second he thinks of Ron and Hermione, but not a happy memory. He thinks he'll never see them again. It's when their images come to him clearly in his mind that he produces the Patronus. Again, no happy memory, actually quite the opposite, remembering the torture from the graveyard and the thought that he'll never see his friends again. What I'm taking forever to say, is that I think Lupin teaches the basics of fighting dark creatures, using the most simple of tactics to get his pupil(s) started. That's using a *happy memory* for beginners when learning how to cast a Patronus. (BTW, I think it's the same for his Boggart lesson - make the Boggart look *amusing* and *laughter* is what finishes a Boggart. Really? Lupin's cockroach in place of the full moon is funny? There was loads of laughter when Lupin banished the Boggart at 12 GP for Mrs. Weasley, wasn't there?) For the real Patroni, a powerful Patronus, against real Dementors, Harry doesn't use happy memories. I contend that Harry used *Love*. Harry doesn't have any happy memories of his father. In fact the *only* memory he had accessed was James telling Lily to run, right before he died at the hands of Voldemort. Harry wasn't thinking any happy memories in the alley, he was thinking distinctly horrible memories and a sad thought of not seeing R&H again. But the *Love* for his father and for his friends is not dependent upon memories, that is something that is always there. He just needs to access it. Whether this is peculiar to Harry, or a truism WW wide, I cannot say. Harry is the only one we've seen cast a Patronus, and his is certainly the only mind we've been in. But to me, this is the first case where Harry uses the *Power of Love*, even if he has not recognized it yet. Or, maybe he has! Was this what Harry wrote in his Dementor essay that he expected Snape to mark down? Food for thought. This also underscores my belief that truely advanced magic does not depend on gimmicks or tricking yourself. That once a wizard learns how to cast the spell, the power behind the spell then depends upon the wizard's ability to harness his/her inate magical qualities. And when we learn what's required to cast an effective AK and Cruciatus Curse, from DEs that know from where they speak, this makes me more convinced. Bella told Harry he had to really mean it, to *want* to cause pain, something that seems to come easy to her. Something that is one of her strengths, her inate abilities. So, why wouldn't this work the same way for advanced *good* magic? Since I think Dementors will play some key role in DH, I'm thinking that Harry's *Love Patronus* will also play a key role. When Harry realizes that he can harness his *Love Power* to strengthen his spells, then maybe he'll understand the full meaning of what Dumbledore was trying to convey to him. Mike From neumannm9 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 03:39:53 2007 From: neumannm9 at yahoo.com (mary neumann) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 20:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry Junior Message-ID: <608465.88100.qm@web53307.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171284 Jim Ferer: We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. Magpie: Speaking as just a reader, and a selfish one, I would be incredibly annoyed (and shocked) if JKR wasted space in the seventh book pre- epilogue for Harry and Ginny to decide to get married so that Ginny Potter can decide to have an infant as a "piece of Harry" after he's dead or not. Mary: I completely agree w/ Magpie: I do not see where JKR would bring that into the story. If Harry lives, I could see her possibly saying something about Harry and Ginny getting married.. however IMO I dont think that DH will have much at all about Harry and Ginny's relationship, past, present, or future. From unicornspride at centurytel.net Wed Jul 4 21:12:55 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 15:12:55 -0600 Subject: My final predictions References: Message-ID: <003b01c7be80$18582670$0202a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 171285 Okay here goes.. These are my final predictions.. Let me know what you think. I personally think that we will start this book out earlier in the summer. Maybe a few more chapters. I also think that the trio will attend their 7th year in some form. Not necesarily for hte entire term though. I do anticipate seeing the "graduation" of the trio as the ending of the book. Just seems to strange to me not to have the ceremony. Maybe with Faukes soaring as the final showing of glory. I think that the trio will leave hogwarts for a time during the school year on hunts for the horcruxs. But will return after each one. I also think that Hermoine and Ron will be stronger together as a team now that there is more openness between them. I believe that Ginny will play a key roll for Harry. Maybe his safe haven of some sort. Together or not. I think they will come together in the end. I do not think that Harry will die in the end. Seems to tough of an ending. Seems that it would also be a bit much to kill Ginny off too. She already had her "glory" in COS. Hermoine or Ron may fall victim to death, but I don't really think so. I believe Lupin will die. I think it will be a "the original trio" together in death thing. I can see Hagrid sacrificing himself for Harry and it is probable in my eyes, but I certainly hope not. I believe that Lucius will die, but not Draco. I am sure that Voldermort woudl die, but I somehow hope that he doesn't. It would be something (in my eyes) if he was wasted to the point of total uselessness. Having to watch from a hollow shell how "the boy who lived" defeated him once again. Anyways.. Just thoughts.. Lana From montavilla47 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 04:53:34 2007 From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 04:53:34 -0000 Subject: Of Basilisks and weasels and rue (Was: A basilisk in the final book?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171286 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > constancevigilance wrote: > > > > OK. Here is an off-the-wall prediction for DH. > > > > I'm thinking we might see another basilisk. Here's what I found > while researching mythical creatures in Europe at this link: > http://www.pantheon.org/areas/bestiary/articles.html > > > > [T]he basilisk has natural enemies. The weasel is immune to its > glance and if it gets bitten it withdraws from the fight to eat some > rue, the only plant that does not wither, and returns with renewed > strength. > > > > CV: What is rue, anyway? > > > > Brave Ron - or any of the Weasleys, for that matter - to the rescue > when everyone is being threatened! I've always wondered why JKR was so > determined that Ron's surname be Weasley. Such an odd name and she > said it was the only one of her original surnames that was settled > from the beginning. > > > > Carol responds: > > Regarding rue: As Snape (who knows about dittany and the properties of > herbs, animals, and minerals in general) would know, as would Sprout > and Madam Pomfrey, rue is an herb with healing properties. > Botanical.com (a very interesting and informative website) describes > it this way: > Carol, who thinks that Snape's saving Ron with rue would be a lovely > way of proving to Harry which side he's on (foreshadowed by the Bezoar > incident in HBP) but thinks it's unlikely to happen > Montavilla47: Just as a note: Ron's already been dosed with rue. He took it as an antidote to the poisoned mead. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 05:22:23 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 05:22:23 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171287 Assuming that the last word in DH is indeed "scar," what are your thoughts on the final sentence? I have two ideas, which I'll note here. 1) Harry held his baby son in his arms and smiled into the little face, which was just like his own without the scar. 2) Harry smiled, realizing that he would never again feel pain in his lightning-shaped scar. Okay, not very good, but at least they both indicate a happy ending. Anyone else want to take a stab at it? Carol, who would award a Knut to the sentence that comes closest to the real ending but, alas, doesn't own a single one From bawilson at citynet.net Thu Jul 5 04:29:56 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 00:29:56 -0400 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171288 "Dropping Out" isn't exactly the right term. Harry has passed his OWLs, which is a perfectly respectable qualification. If he did not choose to go on for the NEWTS, it would be more like someone who finished an Associates who decided not to go for a Bachelors than a 'dropout.' I think he will return to Hogwarts, but not as a NEWTS student, rather as a 'special'. Hermione and Ron will be NEWTS candidates, but Harry will be taking private lessons with the various teachers in specialized skills he needs for the Horcrux Hunt. 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 From bawilson at citynet.net Thu Jul 5 04:34:26 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 00:34:26 -0400 Subject: A basilisk in the final book? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171289 Constance Vigilance: "Brave Ron - or any of the Weasleys, for that matter - to the rescue when everyone is being threatened! I've always wondered why JKR was so determined that Ron's surname be Weasley. Such an odd name and she said it was the only one of her original surnames that was settled from the beginning. This could be an interesting reason why Tom Riddle only brought Ginny and his basilisk together when she was unconscious." Someone, I'm not sure who, wrote an essay ringing the changes on the fact that a Weasel and a Ferret are related about as a Dog and a Wolf. PS: Is 'Constance" your real name? I ask because that was my late Mother's name, and I haven't met many others by that name. 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 From bawilson at citynet.net Thu Jul 5 04:38:03 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 00:38:03 -0400 Subject: Mustiledae (Weasels, Ferrets, etc.), was Re:Of Basilisks and weasels and rue (Was: A basilisk in the final book? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171290 The Badger is also in this family. Perhaps Hufflepuff will come into its own? 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 From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 06:33:53 2007 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (constancevigilance) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 06:33:53 -0000 Subject: Of Basilisks and weasels and rue (Was: A basilisk in the final book?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171291 CV previously: OK. Here is an off-the-wall prediction for DH. I'm thinking we might see another basilisk. Carol responds: I'm not so sure about another Basilisk (who'd have hatched it and raised it?) CV: Salazar Slytherin? Carol: I'm pretty sure that Harry will use the Sword of Gryffindor (studded with symbolic and magically powerful rubies) to kill Nagini, another large and probably magical snake. CV: I'm totally convinced that Harry will use the sword for *something*. Harry has established himself as King by pulling the sword from the stone, I mean, *hat*. Carol: I wonder if the weasel vs. Basilisk legend has its roots in mongooses killing snakes? CV: Dunno. But the legend of the basilisk has been around a Really. Long. Time. It's mentioned in Shakespeare several times (Thanks, Caius!) Were English myth-writers aware of mongooses back in the Middle Ages? Carol: (lots of really great info about rue, its healing powers, its nasty taste and references in English literature) CV: (Is awed by the level of knowledge in evidence by members of this group!) Carol: Apparently, it [rue] serves as an antidote to protect the weasel from the Basilisk's poison. [But goes on to disagree with everything that CV suggested in the post.] [A]t any rate, we do know from interviews that JKR is fond of weasels and the whole mustelid family. CV: Me too! I love weasels, martins, otters, etc! Too bad that keeping ferrets is illegal in my state. Carol: To return to "rue," the word, of course, also means "sorrow," and, as a verb, "to regret or to feel remorse" (the etymology of the plant name is different from that of "rue" meaning "sorrow" but I think they must have been associated in the medieval English mind considering the repentance symbolism alluded to by Ophelia). CV: (Is once again in a state of awe. And notices that Shakespeare is once again referenced. Who knew that the presentation of a wacky theory would inspire The Bard from two directions?) From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Jul 5 06:44:30 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 06:44:30 -0000 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171292 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Alan Wilson" wrote: > > "Dropping Out" isn't exactly the right term. Harry has passed his > OWLs, which is a perfectly respectable qualification. If he did > not choose to go on for the NEWTS, it would be more like someone > who finished an Associates who decided not to go for a Bachelors > than a 'dropout.' > > I think he will return to Hogwarts, but not as a NEWTS student, > rather as a 'special'. Hermione and Ron will be NEWTS candidates, > but Harry will be taking private lessons with the various teachers > in specialized skills he needs for the Horcrux Hunt. Geoff: I don't recognise the term Associates but Bachelors sounds more like University to me. From a UK standpoint - which is more relevant to Harry - and looking at the situation in the summer of 1997 which is the setting for the end of HBP, a real world scholar would have completed GCSE at the end of their Year 11 (old Fifth Year) and done a year towards their A-levels. There would be nothing untoward or any suggestion of a drop out in deciding not to complete their Second Year Sixth Form and taking other routes of training or education. The current situation is slightly changed in that Sixth Form pupils take AS level which is a kind of "halfway house" to A-level after their first year. From vinsri83 at gmail.com Thu Jul 5 08:02:34 2007 From: vinsri83 at gmail.com (Vinita Srivastava) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 13:32:34 +0530 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <754c449b0707050102v43395c95j271073d46c0cb75@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171294 > Carol: > Assuming that the last word in DH is indeed "scar," what are > your thoughts on the final sentence? Vinita, Another statement which could be a possibility assuming that the last word is scar: As he sleeps peacefully with a smile of satisfaction on his face and the only souvenir of the great battle which he fought was the lightening shaped "scar". From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 09:13:14 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 09:13:14 -0000 Subject: [TBAY] - The Giant Squid (Was: New wizard of the month on JKR website) In-Reply-To: <754c449b0707032251g53f70c42mc2031c86bcfc4023@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171295 In the year 2007 somewhere in the South Seas Goddlefrood lounged around with a steaming cup of tea in his hand, a cup of the finest Ceylon tea that had been brought to him earlier by his butler P'Hughes (pronounced fuse). The door burst open much to Goddlefrood's vexation and there stood P'Hughes with a silver platter upon which rested a square piece of paper. "Telegram for you, sir", said the butler in his best imitation of Leslie Philips, "just arrived from Hogsmeade this moment." "Bring it to me", his employer said with a note of dread in his tone. Opening the envelope the following note was found: 'COME TO HOGSMEADE IMMEDIATELY STOP SOMEONE HAS DISCOVERED THE SECRET OF THE GIANT SQUID STOP COME BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE' Where Goddlefrood dwelt telegrams were always written in capital letters and there was nothing sinister to be inferred from their use. "Blast it!" exclaimed Goddlefrood, "P'Hughes, you best pack my overnight bag it could take me a day or two to Obliviate the memory of this incident". After an uneventful trip by packet steamer from Fiji to Scotland on a morning some time later Goddlefrood stepped ashore at the Aberdeen docks. Sticking out his thumb he waited for a passing carriage to convey him to the grounds of Hogwarts School, which lay somewhere in Scotland that he had vowed to keep a secret. In a trice a hansom cab approached and after instructing the driver on to whence he wished to go he sat back to plan his next move. "How could this have happened", thought Goddlefrood to himself, "hadn't I tried to impress on JKR the risk involved in divulging sensitive and classified information on her website?" His brain went on: "She could have mentioned almost anything but the mystery of the Giant Squid, but, oh no, she just had to go and have her little joke". > Vinita: > I was just going through the diary section on JKR's site and > she has made an interesting comment which I cannot seem to get > over. The statement made is as follows: " - even if somebody > discovers the giant squid is actually the world's largest > animagus, which rises from the lake at the eleventh hour > transforms into Godric Griffindor & well...I wouldn't like > to spoil it." Goddlefrood was now nearing the castle grounds. The driver was paid and a vague whisper on the wind was heard to say "Obliviate". The story of the hansom and the horse is another tale but it was to come about that several weeks later no sign of the two had been seen again on this side of the Atlantic. Returning to our story, Goddlefrood had gathered that Vinita was to be found in the Hog's Head in the village. He arrived to find her enjoying a butterbeer with a character in a large hooded cloak. "Vinita", boomed Goddlefrood, "I do believe that the little bit of information you found on Ms. Rowling's site was a joke on her part, one which she had included in her statement regarding spoilers, Obliviate!" Instantly Vinitia's memory of the Giant Squid being Godric's Amimagus form disappeared. Before leaving the Hog's Head Goddlefrood turned back to the assembled drinkers and the barman to promise: "If the Giant Squid is Godric Gryffindor's Animagus form I will eat fried calamari and nothing else for the rest of my natural life". Although he would have preferred brussel sprouts, naturally. From rvink7 at hotmail.com Thu Jul 5 09:32:08 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 09:32:08 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and last bragging rights Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171296 > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? He'll seem to die, or die symbolically, but in the end he'll survive. > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? He'll suffer a fate worse than death. > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Severus Snape. > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? The Dark Mark. > > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg > > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? It will remain a vacancy, as no one can be found who wants to take the job, but several characters will give show up to give guest lessons. (My unserious alternative is the portrait of Phineas Nigellus, which is maybe impervious to the DADA curse.) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Harry. He was never DDM, but OFH all the time, but at the latest possible moment he'll redeem himself by choosing Harry's side, possibly at the cost of his own life. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. In Voldemort b. Tom Riddle's diary c. The Peverell ring d. Slytherin's locket e. Helga Hufflepuff's cup f. Rowena Ravenclaw's wand. g. Was to be something at Godric (Gryffindor)'s Hollow, but ended up as Harry's scar. > > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? He can't produce a corporeal Patronus when faced with Dementors. Boggart: Voldemort killing Harry > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love in all its manifestations. > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > credit. > -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in > your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be > scored. 1. Privet Drive will be attacked early in the book and Vernon Dursley will be killed by Death Eaters. Aunt Petunia and Dudley will be taken to Grimmauld Place for their own safety. 2. There is a link between Fenrir Greyback and Regulus Black; possibly, Regulus got bitten by Fenrir as a punishment for wanting to leave the Death-eaters. In alchemy, the `grey wolf' stands for antimony, and the regulus of antimony is the refined metal isolated from the ore, heavy enough to sink to the bottom of the crucible. It is described as a bright semimetal resembling tin or dusky silver - the Slytherin connection... Refined: Regulus came out of the Death-eater crucible a better man. It was then that he decided to destroy the locket Horcrux. 3. Wormtail will turn out to be the only Muggle-born Death-eater. 4. The draught of Living Death will finally play a role, and it will be connected with Lily (the draught contains asphodel, which is a word for lily), though Lily herself is definitely dead. Related to question 2 above, it will probably make Harry seem dead, but he'll come to life again. 5. Fleur will show the aggressive and unpleasant side of her Veela heritage, maybe when she retaliates against Greyback. And two more, because of the symbolical number 7: 6. Harry will not kill Voldemort but vanquish him by his capacity to love. This will not involve learning to close his mind, keep his mouth shut, and mastering his feelings, as Snape wants him to do, but precisely the opposite. 7. Harry and Ginny will definitively get together at the end of Book 7, but first, they'll both suffer separately. Possibly, Ginny will do something without which Harry could never have vanquished Voldemort. At the end, they will look into the Mirror of Erised together and only see themselves. Ren?e From xellina at gmail.com Thu Jul 5 10:03:39 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 14:03:39 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707050303v5ebef24fq7bd108d711663d5d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171297 2007/7/4, maidne : But the death is only one part of the sacrifice. It also involves the willingness to die, the ability to *not die*, and the identity and character of the one who dies. Aslan could have chosen to let Edmund die, or he could have chosen overpower and kill his executioners. He chose to die because he knew that *his* death (not Edmund's) would fulfill the Ancient Magic and cause death to "work backward". Aslan died a "substitutionary death", which is what Christ did. Cassy: Well, what I was trying to say was that to die for someone is the *ultimate* sacrifice because you know it's *irriversible*. If Aslan died and then became alive again, it was more like he fell asleep and then awokened, or fell ill and then became better. Yes, he could have chosen otherwise, but I still feel like he cheated. Had Edmund been killed, he would have stayed dead, it would have been the end of his existance. For Aslan it death was just a temporary inconvenience. And that's what makes his "sacrifice" less important than Lilly's, to me. Because Lilly didn't come back to life and she *knew* she wouldn't. Mind you, I'm only speaking of Aslan the lion here, not Jesus. No offence to Christians ment. > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xellina at gmail.com Thu Jul 5 10:06:19 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 14:06:19 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Junior, Ron Junior, and Hermione Junior In-Reply-To: References: <463f9ec00707040045o3a8ef35dx4403ca969f6a6494@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <463f9ec00707050306s67683ddarc86d82aaa2840070@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171298 2007/7/4, Eddie : > > > Wherein I predict Ron and Hermione will have at least 3 kids, 2 of > which are red-headed twins. > > Cassy: And the third, the youngest one will be a boy named Harry! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From colwilrin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 12:54:01 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 12:54:01 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: <754c449b0707050102v43395c95j271073d46c0cb75@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171299 > > Carol: > > > Assuming that the last word in DH is indeed "scar," what are > > your thoughts on the final sentence? Colwilrin: The grandchildren all huddled around the old man, begging for just one more story before bedtime. His green eyes twinkled as he brushed back his thick gray hair. "Well", he slowly said "let me tell you about this scar." From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 5 13:44:24 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 09:44:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry Junior Message-ID: <8112074.1183643064291.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171300 From: colwilrin >As a parent of a 4 year old daughter...and knowing that JKR is a >mother as well, I would find it surprising if JKR would write a >script for a 16 year old girl to become pregnant. As a parent >yourself, Jim, I shouldn't have to explain why. When does Ginny >turn 16, and what are the Statutory laws in UK anyway? Bart: Well, in Great Britain the age of consent is 16 (it used to be 13, but it got raised in the 1880's due to concern about child prostitution, and confirmed as recently as 2003). Note that the, during feudal times, a young nobleman became a page at 7, a squire at 14, and a knight at 21, with the ages taken out of Aristotle. In Scotland, one becomes an adult for purposes of signing contracts at 20 (perhaps if Lily had been Scottish, Harry would have been protected a few years more). Now, age of consent generally has more to do with criminal law than torts (therefore, you get the paradox in some states in the United States where someone can get married below the age of consent). This is the age where someone is considered to be capable of giving informed consent. This refers to sexual activity, although it also has to do with legal culpability in criminal actions (someone who commits a crime on the orders of someone else is considered to be less culpable than someone above the age of consent; this is why it is an all too common practice among drug dealers in the United States to use children as couriers). The age of consent for homosexual relations is 18 for homosexual acts, which means that Ginny had better be careful in Transfiguration class (I hope I'm not giving any ideas to fanfic shippers). However (getting MUCH more on topic), age of consent does not seem to be as strong in the WW. For example, it APPEARS (Ron's account in HBP is canon, but it IS coming from Ron's memory of his childhood), that even young children who have no idea what they're doing can be bound by it, and children who may not fully understand the implications can cast the spell (F&G were, and are, only one year older than Ron). There is no canon on birth control (either pregnancy prevention or fertility enhancement), although the apparent lack of sexual activity above snogging at Hogwarts may either be an omission by the author of the emissions of the characters, or it may be that the lack of population growth in the WW causes a prejudice against birth control, or there may be magical venereal diseases we don't know about. One wonders if the WW even has sperm banks, or the equivalent thereof. Which brings us back to Harry, Jr. Based on past performance, I doubt seriously that JKR would allow Harry to have children without getting married, or even some form of artificial insemination if he dies (considering the importance some people in the WW place on eugenics, if such a thing were possible, then there would be a rush for essence of Dumbledore). So, from the limited information shown, I don't expect there to be a Harry, Jr. unless Harry survives the final fight with Morty, and then after he gets married to the mother. Bart From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jul 5 15:15:38 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 15:15:38 -0000 Subject: Deontological!Snape (Was: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171301 Carol: > In HBP, both DD and Snape are preoccupied with Draco's personal (and > moral) safety as well as with Harry (over whom Snape has apparently > been watching since SS/PS as part of his obligation either to DD or to > his own set of ethics--certainly, you're right that he's not > Machiavellian). Keeping Draco safe could jeopardize the school, but > keeping the school safe by, say, expelling Draco, would guarantee > Draco's death. Again, it seems to me, DD tries to strike a balance > between the good of the individual (Draco and perhaps UV-bound Snape) > and the good of the "greatest number" (the students and staff of > Hogwarts). Expelling Draco would certainly be easy, but I'm pretty > sure that DD doesn't consider it right. Pippin: JKR gives us so little information about the adult wizards and their world that it's almost impossible to understand their choices from canon alone -- it's one of the most effective things she does to force us into the child's perspective. Canon gives us room for Idiot!Dumbledore and Puppetmaster!DD, and we may doubt that either one of them is what JKR meant by calling DD the epitome of goodeness. I think from what JKR has said outside canon that Dumbledore's value system, when it's revealed, is going to be familiar not esoteric: recognizable by anyone from six to sixty. But conventional morality is not the same as the morality of convention. There is nothing so radical about saying that innocent lives must be protected, after all. But Dumbledore is willing to consider that the conventional, easily accepted means of doing so might not be the most effective, and therefore not the most moral. Convention would say that Draco let himself be manipulated through hatred and greed, that most of the students would not have allowed that, and therefore the school would have been safer if Draco had been expelled. But the grim truth as witnessed through volumes of canon is that none of the students so far has been good enough or wise enough to recognize and evade all Voldemort's attempts to manipulate them. Dumbledore knows this. Expelling Draco is what Fudge would have done: it satisfies the morality of convention. But it would not have made the school any safer, because Voldemort just plain doesn't need hatred or greed to manipulate people. He can do it just as easily through their desire to have friends, like Ginny, or to be a rescuer, like Harry. Voldemort manipulated Harry into invading the most heavily guarded area in the Ministry of Magic and stealing the prophecy, and incidentally bringing five other students into mortal danger along with him. Can we doubt that Voldie could have gotten Harry to fix the cabinet for him? And that in the process Harry would probably have endangered others at least as much as Draco endangered Katie and Ron? I think JKR wants to show us that the conflict between doing the greatest good for the greatest number and protecting our dear ones is an illusion -- we might feel more secure assuring our personal comfort and safety over that of the world at large, but that sense of security would be false. I think Snape chose to accept this when he saw that bringing the prophecy to Voldemort had unintended consequences for people he knew. I don't think Snape killed Dumbledore, but I think JKR and Dumbledore both were relying very much on people's faith in convention to make both the watching DE's and the readers think that he did. It would satisfy convention to have the hateful Snape be a murderer, it would satisfy another sort of convention to have Hubristic!Snape be the victim of the cursed DADA position or the UV. But I don't think it would satisfy the logic of the story, which is that Dumbledore trusted Snape because their aims were identical and because Snape's heart, though filled with hate, was still not the heart of a killer. Pippin From maritajan at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 16:06:34 2007 From: maritajan at yahoo.com (MJ) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 16:06:34 -0000 Subject: "Remember my last!" and Dudley's new word Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171302 I started my re-read of the books on July 1, in advance of Deathly Hallows and something's been niggling at me. In Sorcerer's Stone, Chapter 1, Vernon comes home after seeing owls and wizards all day and Petunia tells him Dudley has learned a new word, "Won't!" (page 6). Wouldn't it be interesting to find out that he learned that word from Petunia, who responded that way when she found out the Potters had been killed and Dumbledore was bringing Harry to her to take care of? A shot in the dark idea, I know. But . . . . With this thought in mind, that Dumbledore had communicated with her prior to bringing Harry to the Dursleys overnight, it's easy to look at her conversation with Vernon after dinner differently. She's had enough of talking about the Potters that day, so she speaks sharply and snaps at Vernon when he brings them up again. The next morning, of course, she opens the door and finds Harry, regardless of her protests the day before. Anyway....just something that caught my eye on this re-read and has been simmering in the back of my mind ever since. MJ MJ From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 14:09:49 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 07:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: <070520070309.4386.468C61010000DB880000112222058864420E030301039B9C0704CDCE05@comcast.net> Message-ID: <298039.85404.qm@web30004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171303 Shelley wrote: While I would agree that Ginny could handle being a single parent, I don't think there's even the remote chance of it happening. This story is Harry's story. So either he will die, and there won't be any more Harry-Ginny snogging to see, or Harry will soundly kick LV's ass and then go on to live happily with Ginny and all their children. But, the scenario proposed would leave the door open for an entirely new Harry Potter series to be built on top of the existing series- Ginny and baby's story after Harry's death. Would Rowling really leave that door wide open? Melanie: I'm not sure that is entirely logical because I think if Harry was still alive at all there is a story to tell. The truth is even if Harry is alive to raise children with Ginny, their story is one that would still be of interest to Rowling's readers. We would still wonder what kind of children Harry would have, we would still wonder what it is like to be Harry Potter child. I see no difference if Harry and Ginny have children later or if they have children now. The point is any carrying on of the Potter name leaves the field wide open for more books. The only way the field would slightly closed is if Harry dies. Still, there are other surviving characters that books could be written about. With that said, I do not see Ginny getting pregnant this year. ~Melanie From orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk Thu Jul 5 16:13:32 2007 From: orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk (or.phan_ann) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 16:13:32 -0000 Subject: Storytelling in Harry Potter (2 of 2) (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171304 Sorry I've taken a while to reply, Jo. I've been away from the computer. Jo said: > PS can be seen as a two part book. The first half up to the > chapter on the Hogwart's express is essentially set up. At the > time of my first reading it seemed excessively long, in retrospect > that's because JK was setting up the whole series. > From "The Journey From Platform 9 ?" onwards the book becomes more > of an adventure with an active hero. Harry is active within the > scope of his experience and age. Ann: True. PS/SS as part of the series is a very different beast to PS/SS read alone, and yes, overplotly stuff is going on there, but my point was purely about there being nothing about Quirrel in there. Of course the troll fight (f'rinstance) is crucial to the series. Jo: > JK has stated that HBP and DH can be viewed as two halves of the > same book, compare that to the two halves of PS and HBP would > equate to the set up phase and DH to the adventure commencing. > in DH it seems likely that we will learn about HRX/Lily's > eyes/Snape's childhood trauma along the way, and that's what will > make the HRX hunt interesting. Ann: Interesting point, and I bet Goddlefrood was pleased to see it, but in my opinion that only goes so far. For instance, later in PS/SS Quidditch is just as important to Harry as the Stone is, and we're expecting Voldemort to be more important than Quidditch in DH... OK, that's pushing it, but you know what I mean. I'm not an English major either (incidentally), and my grand plot definition doesn't seem to have been very helpful to anyone. Sistermagpie in Message 170909 called the series "recognition dramas" and that's much better in my opinion. Ann From lmkos at earthlink.net Thu Jul 5 16:33:19 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 10:33:19 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Remember my last!" and Dudley's new word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171305 MJ: >In Sorcerer's Stone, Chapter 1, Vernon comes home after seeing owls and >wizards all day and Petunia tells him Dudley has learned a new >word, "Won't!" (page 6). > >Wouldn't it be interesting to find out that he learned that word from >Petunia, who responded that way when she found out the Potters had been >killed and Dumbledore was bringing Harry to her to take care of? > >A shot in the dark idea, I know. But . . . . > >With this thought in mind, that Dumbledore had communicated with her >prior to bringing Harry to the Dursleys overnight, it's easy to look at >her conversation with Vernon after dinner differently. She's had >enough of talking about the Potters that day, so she speaks sharply and >snaps at Vernon when he brings them up again. Lenore here: I've had precisely the same thoughts about Petunia's overreactions to Mr. Dursley's comments, viz., her speaking sharply and snapping at Mr. D. She also spoke "stiffly" and "sipped her tea with pursed lips"... She definitely seems more than average bothered and unnerved in this scene. There's more going on here than just her usual touchiness around this touchy subject. I agree that it sounds as though a raw nerve has been jarred on that day for her as well, and the most obvious source would be an unexpected owl message from DD. But I hadn't made a connection with Dudley's new word, and I think that was "bloody brilliant" of you (to use Ron's words). It works great as a doubly subtle clue. I loved your "shot in the dark". Lenore From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 17:38:19 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:38:19 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171306 > Carol > what are your > thoughts on the final sentence? JW: Harry could not get used to his reflection, because his face no longer had a lightning-shaped scar. From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 5 17:49:55 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:49:55 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: <463f9ec00707040030y6fca4ddah677b0cb040487596@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171307 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cassy Ferris" wrote: > > 2007/7/4, Kim : > > > > > > I realize that the Lion sacrifices himself to save the children in the > > Chronicles of Narnia. But I see his role as different from Harry's. And I > > admit I never read the books - knowing they were a Christian allegory, I > > wasn't interested... Others may see him differently... > > > > > Cassy: > > A bit off-topical, sorry, but this thing always nugged me about Narnia - > that Aslan KNEW beforehand that he will come back to life. Not much of a > sacrifice, was it? I mean, dying is certainly not pleasant, but when you > know for sure that it's not permanent and you'll be back alive and kicking > soon, it can be endured. Thus all idea of a self-sacrifice seemed quite > diminished to me in that book. > > Ken: Because we, like Voldemort, fear death and see it as final it is easy to miss what Aslan's (or Christ's) sacrifice really was. Death was not the sacrifice because death is not final for any of us. Dumbledore is right, Voldemort is wrong: Death is the door to the next adventure. Dumbledore was also correct when he told Voldemort that there are other ways to destroy a man. Oddly enough Voldemort's speech in the graveyard scene is where you should turn in the Potterverse to get the best glimpse of what Aslan's death sacrifice involved. You know where he talked about having his soul ripped from his body and his mean state of existence during his personal "dark ages"? In the Christian trinitarian view Aslan's/Christ's sacrifice involved the sundering of God's person for a time. Mere death does not describe it nor can mere humans truly understand it. The healing of the rift between God and humankind required that God be rent for a time. Because death seems so final to us who stand on this side, it has become common to refer to any sacrifice where one gives their life for another, or even loses something very dear for the sake of another, as Christ-like. I don't have a problem with that but we should remember at least occasionally that there was more to Christ's sacrifice than death. Lily's sacrifice was Christ-like in this sense. Mr. "It is a far, far better thing I do than I have ever done, it is a far, far better rest I go to than I have ever known" in *Tale of Two Cities* made a Christ-like sacrifice in this sense. Frodo made this kind of sacrifice in *Lord of the Rings*. The loss of a finger was trivial but having saved the world he found that he had not been able to save it for himself, so he passed on to the Undying Lands. These are some of the most powerful images in literature, though there are many others and some might say better. I think we all realize that Harry Potter's world will be in straits as dire as any faced by these characters by the time the climax of *Deathly Hallows* is reached. If it is required that someone make a Christ-like sacrifice to save it then we all know who will be tapped on the shoulder. But we don't have to like it! And there is always the possibility that someone else, Snape perhaps, with go to that better rest in his stead. Hmm, Snape as the Christ figure? Even a Baptist has to love *that*.... Ken, who is proud to be antiquated when he thinks it is called for From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Jul 5 17:58:08 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:58:08 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171308 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TK Kenyon" wrote: > > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > > If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, > write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters > or characteristics of new character for full credit. > > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. > > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. > > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Percy Weasley also Professor Sprout Remus Lupin Lucius Malfoy Peter Pettigrew > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? The Dark Mark, but it was *faked* > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? Yes. > b. Draco? No. > c. Hermione? Yes. > d. Luna? Yes. > e. Ron? Yes. > f. Neville? Yes. > g. Ginny? Yes. > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Harry and Ginny > > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Petunia Dursley > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ron > b. Head Girl? Hermione > c. DADA Instructor? (Harry, unofficially) > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Remus > e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva Also, f. Herbology Instructor: Neville > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? I think Snape is loyal to DD, hates Harry, likes Draco, loved Lily, and will sell (or has sold) his soul to destroy Voldemort, because LV did not keep his promise not to kill Lily when he went to kill James and Harry. Snape will never forgive Harry for having his mother's eyes and his father's face; his worst memory was when the girl he loved finally rejected him as "Snivelous" and went off for good with his worst enemy. Snape became a DE after Lily finally went off with James, but was drawn back to DD's side by the fact that Lily was in LV's path. He became a double agent for DD to help protect Lily. He did not betray James and Lily, but he did bargain with LV for Lily's life -- a bargain LV did not keep, because she would not get out of the way when LV wanted to kill Harry. Had she allowed LV to kill Harry, she would have been alive and James and Harry dead. Not only does Harry's face remind Snape that James married Lily, his very existence means that the one person who meant the most to Severus is dead, and it is his (Snape's) fault. After his attempt to save her failed, he is still trapped by the goodness of the girl who died, and so cannot help but save the life of the boy who lived, no matter how much he hates him. Snape despises himself more than anyone else can, so no one else's opinions of him matter to him. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > a. Riddle's Diary, created by killing the Riddles, destroyed by Harry in CoS with Basilisk fang > b. Slytherin's Ring, destroyed by DD > c. The locket from 12 GP > d. The cup owned by Helga Hufflepuff > e. Nagini > f. something from Ravenclaw -- my best guess would be the Tiara > g. Harry's Scar One of the above was used to resurrect LV and is now *IN* LV. It wasn't a, b, c (because LV presumably does not know that one is missing,) or g, so it might have been d, e, or f. Best guess: it was d, since that doesn't show up after the early memory, and doesn't seem as sinister as the others. > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: a bat Boggart: a mocking Lily Evans Potter > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Pure, sacrificial love. > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > > Current Off-Limit Spoilers: > -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points > unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. > -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: > because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least > somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a > cover will also be worth 0 points.) > -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR > during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. > -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will > laugh at you when they're wrong. > -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and > Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) > will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. > -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come > skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no > credit. > -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in > your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be > scored. > 1. Ginny will either kill Nagini or will help Harry to do so. Her connection to the basilisk will come full circle and allow her to assist Harry in eliminating that horcrux. 2. See my discussion of Snape's motivations, above. He will finally repay his debt to James and do honor to Lily by saving Harry's life at the cost of his own, but will continue to hate Harry to the very last second. Harry will not understand why this man who so obviously hated him would save his life at the price of his own. Remus will explain it to him, and the burden of it will help Harry to grow up. 3. Hedwig will be killed near the beginning of the book, probably by Vernon or Dudley, but maybe by chance. Harry will grieve for Hedwig through most of the book, even as people are dying. Fawkes will return to Harry at the end, and will assist in the final battle. 4. Peter will ACCIDENTALLY help Harry and die while saving Harry's or Ginny's life. As a character, he will remain a rat and will not show any true remorse or change in character. 5. Harry will decide that he must sacrifice himself by blasting the final horcrux, which is in his scar. This is why only one of the two can live. Harry will do this believing it will kill him, to finally put an end to LV and save the world. He will do it after a semi-victory over LV, when he has the opportunity for a normal life and a season of respite, before LV returns. He will choose to do this for the sake of all the foolish, selfish, vain people, both within and without the wizarding world. It does, in fact, kill him. It will be this act of love on his part, however, that finally unlocks the room of love in the department of mysteries, and restores him to life, although not to all the powers he had. In the end, Harry and Ginny will settle down to make their garden grow. From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 18:13:31 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 11:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <397799.7182.qm@web30006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171309 > Carol > what are your > thoughts on the final sentence? Melanie: "To think that this tale began with a baby boy and his lightening-bolt shaped scar." From jlenox2004 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 18:19:08 2007 From: jlenox2004 at yahoo.com (jdl3811220) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:19:08 -0000 Subject: Riddle's possession of Ginny Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171310 Jenni from Alabama: I have a question. In the Chamber of Secrets, Riddle tells Harry that he poured a bit of his soul into Ginny. (pg. 310 in the US edition.) When Harry destroyed the diary, did it destroy the bit of Riddle's soul that had been poured into Ginny or could she be a horcrux? Your thoughts? Jenni From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 5 18:21:36 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 14:21:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The last word ( Message-ID: <236342.1183659696442.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171311 From: jmwcfo >> Carol >> what are your >> thoughts on the final sentence? > >JW: >Harry could not get used to his reflection, because his face no longer >had a lightning-shaped scar. Bart: The most unlikely endings: A) The Healer announced to the crowd, "It's a boy!", and Harry drunkenly announced to the crowd, "'m a father! Have a scar!" B)"But who IS your favorite character from THE LION KING?" asked Hermoine. And Harry said, without hesitation, "Scar!" C) And Hermoine asked, "What kind of laser did they use to get rid of your disfigurement?" Harry replied, "That was no laser! That was my scar!" From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 18:40:01 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:40:01 -0000 Subject: How can the DEs not know... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171312 Ok so in the 5th book it seems like the DEs are all shocked when Harry declares that their beloved leader is a half-blood himself at the MoM. That seems odd to me because by then shouldn't they have figured it out? When they met him at Hogwarts wouldn't they have know there was no pure blood Riddle family? (the same thing goes for Snape....wouldn't they have known he was a half-blood too?) But granted there has to be A LOT of half-blood DEs no? I mean there are only but a few pure-bloods left. OK, so back on topic, if they didn't figure it out when he was at Hogwarts, what about during the time in the Cemetery in GoF? He mentioned that Harry was standing on the grave of his muggle father no? Why did no one raise and eyebrow then? So, why is it in OoTP, they all act appalled and like they had no clue he wasn't a pure blood? I've babbled on long enough... TKJ :-) From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 18:53:51 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:53:51 -0000 Subject: Riddle's possession of Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171313 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdl3811220" wrote: > > Jenni from Alabama: > > I have a question. In the Chamber of Secrets, Riddle tells Harry that > he poured a bit of his soul into Ginny. (pg. 310 in the US edition.) > When Harry destroyed the diary, did it destroy the bit of Riddle's soul > that had been poured into Ginny or could she be a horcrux? Your > thoughts? > > Jenni > If I remember correctly, the Riddle in the chamber wasn't a real, flesh and blood person. I also don't think that Ginny could be a horcrux because there was no murder, a necessity to create a horcrux. I think that Riddle said something along the lines of "I shared some of my secrets with her" I think THAT will be huge in book 7. However, I haven't read CoS in awhile, so that is purely based on memory...can anyone confirm this? Adam From harryp at stararcher.com Thu Jul 5 19:10:13 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:10:13 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171314 > Carol: > Anyone else want to take a stab at it? Eddie: I have more than one: 1. And with that, Sirius' flying motorcycle headed back into the Forbidden Forest side by side with the Arthur Weasley's car. 2. For long after, first years at Hogwarts were told the riveting story of the two white tombs: one holding the remains of former headmaster Albus Dumbledore, marked only with the image of a phoenix, and one holding the remains of former student Harry Potter, marked only with the image of a lightning-bolt, shaped like Harry's scar. 3. A magical portrait of Harry Potter was put in a place of honor on the Quidditch pitch so he could watch each game, cheering mightily whenever Gryffindor's seeker caught the snitch, and could occasionally be seen nostalgically, smilingly, touching the painted image of his lightning-shaped scar. > Carol, who would award a Knut to the sentence that comes closest to > the real ending but, alas, doesn't own a single one Eddie, who will accept regular Muggle money and just get it exchanged for a Knut at Gringott's. From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 18:45:29 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 11:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Riddle's possession of Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <433553.66699.qm@web30011.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171315 Jenni from Alabama: >> I have a question. In the Chamber of Secrets, Riddle tells Harry that he poured a bit of his soul into Ginny. (pg. 310 in the US edition.) When Harry destroyed the diary, did it destroy the bit of Riddle's soul that had been poured into Ginny or could she be a horcrux? Your thoughts? << Melanie: Wow Ginny! I never thought about it like that. I doubt seriously that she is a horcrux although that is definitely a possibility. Although, I wonder if he was just speaking in metaphorical terms...meaning he shared so much of himself with Ginny the became in essence "soul mates." Though to be fair I doubt Riddle has ever had a real soul mate and I doubt he would ever see Ginny as such due to the fact that he does not seem to connect with other people at all. ~Melanie From harryp at stararcher.com Thu Jul 5 19:48:10 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:48:10 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and last bragging rights In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171316 > Renee: > > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? > > Love in all its manifestations. Eddie: Some sections restricted to minors unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Thu Jul 5 20:13:37 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:13:37 -0000 Subject: Patronus from the Power of Love (Was: Deontological!Snape ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171318 Mike: > This also underscores my belief that truely advanced magic does not > depend on gimmicks or tricking yourself. That once a wizard learns > how to cast the spell, the power behind the spell then depends upon > the wizard's ability to harness his/her inate magical qualities. And > when we learn what's required to cast an effective AK and Cruciatus > Curse, from DEs that know from where they speak, this makes me more > convinced. Bella told Harry he had to really mean it, to *want* to > cause pain, something that seems to come easy to her. Something that > is one of her strengths, her inate abilities. So, why wouldn't this > work the same way for advanced *good* magic? Magpie: I totally agree about this theory of advanced magic. I think the good memory just gives you the right feeling, and after that you almost do it by muscle memory. I don't know how I feel about Patronuses being love, exactly. I see what you mean, but to me "love" should mean something sort of different. It seems more like a personal confidence to me--as DD says, Harry finds his father inside himself. It's a guardian spirit, but comes from inside the person. The Patronus itself doesn't seem like hitting somebody with the power of love, more like the hitting them with your own inner strength. I think that strength can be connected to love, though. Harry feels stronger knowing he has Ron and Hermione, and his parents sort of feed into that too, whether or not he has literal memories of them, he knows he is/was loved. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 20:34:44 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:34:44 -0000 Subject: How can the DEs not know... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171319 Tandra wrote: > > Ok so in the 5th book it seems like the DEs are all shocked when Harry declares that their beloved leader is a half-blood himself at the MoM. That seems odd to me because by then shouldn't they have figured it out? > > When they met him at Hogwarts wouldn't they have know there was no pure blood Riddle family? > > OK, so back on topic, if they didn't figure it out when he was at Hogwarts, what about during the time in the Cemetery in GoF? He mentioned that Harry was standing on the grave of his muggle father no? Why did no one raise and eyebrow then? So, why is it in OoTP, they all act appalled and like they had no clue he wasn't a pure blood? Carol responds: Voldemort tells *Harry* that he's standing on the grave of LV's Muggle father ("You stand, Harry, upon the remains of my late father, a Muggle and a fool," GoF Am. ed. 646), but only Wormtail, who, BTW, is probably a rare Muggle-born DE, overhears this revelation. Later, Voldemort tells the assembled DEs that the restorative potion required him to "come here, where [Tom Sr.] was buried," to obtain "my father's bone" (656), but he says nothing to the DEs about his father's having been a Muggle. They could only deduce that fact if 1) Muggles and Wizards have separate cemeteries and 2) wizards and wiches are never buried in the Muggle cemeteries. I don't think that's likely, myself. Even if the DEs can tell a Muggle cemetery from a wizarding one, a wizard might wish to be buried in a Muggle cemetery if, say, he wants to be buried in his hometown, which has only one cemetery (clearly the case with Little Hangleton) or the wizard is a Muggle-born or Half-Blood (which, for all they know, Tom Sr. could have been). He would at least still have been a wizard and not a Muggle. Those who went to school with Tom Jr. may have assumed something of the sort or, more likely, were so charmed by him and so impressed by his unusual powers that they didn't care that he was a Half-Blood. They also seem to know, and be impressed by, his descent from Salazar Slytherin, which would make up in their minds for any taint of Muggle blood on the other side of his family. The younger ones (Lucius Malfoy excepted) might not even know that LV was ever Tom Riddle, and Lucius certainly knows that Tom Riddle was the Heir of Slytherin and that he opened the Chamber of Secrets before Lucius was born. Some of the other DEs, say Macnair, may be Half-Bloods themselves and not as obsessed with genealogy as Bellatrix Lestrange. (I'm guessing that the Lestrange brothers, like Bellatrix, regard Harry's words as lying slander. As for, say, Dolohov, he's probably too cruel and evil to care whether Harry's words are true or not. He just wants a license to kill and torture, IMO.) At any rate, we don't know for sure that separate Wizarding graveyards even exist. I imagine that James and Lily Potter are buried in a churchyard in Godric's Hollow even though they were a witch and a wizard. If the Potters can be buried in a Muggle graveyard, which seems likely, why not Tom Riddle Sr., supposed Half-Blood or Muggle-Born? IOW, I don't think that the graveyard and the reference to LV's father's bone, casually mentioned (like the reference to LV's going farther than anyone toward immortality, which does not seem to alert them to the existence of the Horcruxes) in the atmosphere of tension and mystery and excitement and terror that surrounds Voldemort's return, made much impression on the assembled DEs, any more than the presence of the "dead" Wormtail did (assuming that they knew who he was, which seems to me unlikely). Maybe, like Harry seeing Snape's reflection along with DD's and McG's in the Foe Glass in GoF, they don't fully process everything they see and hear or fully comprehend its significance. In any case, Lucius Malfoy, who was present at the graveyard, says nothing when Harry blurts out that Voldemort is a Half-Blood in OoP. Some of the other DEs let out "a low hiss" when Harry speaks Voldemort's name, but it's only Bellatrix, who was in Azkaban and missed out on the events in the graveyard, who makes a fuss. She tries to Stupefy Harry and Lucius deflects her curse for fear of injuring the Prophecy orb. Bellatrix screams that Harry, the "filthy Half-Blood," has dared to besmirch the Dark Lord, but Lucius roars at her to wait till they have the Prophecy before hurting Harry (OoP Am. ed. 784-85). Either Lucius hasn't concluded that LV's father was a Muggle based on Tom Sr.'s burial place and thinks that Harry is just winding Bellatrix up (easy enough to do), or he doesn't think that LV's status as a Half-Blood is important--at least, not nearly as important as the Prophecy orb. I'm guessing that Lucius doesn't really care whether LV is a Half-blood or a Pure-Blood. (He's not a "Mudblood," after all. *That* would cause blood supremacist Lucius to reject him, I'm sure--but then, LV would never have recruited blood supremacists as his followers if he were a Muggle-born, however much he hated his Muggle heritage.) Being a Death Eater presumably provides Lucius with an outlet for his evil impulses (and he's self-serving, in any case, with his own agenda, in contrast to, say, Bellatrix or Barty Crouch Jr.). Besides, whatever Voldemort was before he became a snake-faced Dark Lord, he's now the most powerful Dark wizard in a century, and Lucius, who has already faced his wrath (at some point after the graveyard scene) for allowing the diary to be destroyed, is determined in OoP to do LV's bidding as efficiently as possible and avoid further punishment. Unfortunately for Lucius, the Prophecy plot is thwarted and Voldemort places the blame squarely on him. (If he suspects Snape's role, he's kept quiet about it so far.) It's possible that Snape will try to subvert Lucius in DH, in which case he could use LV's not being a pure-blood as one reason (out of many) why Lucius would be better off rebelling against LV, but who knows? As of OoP, LV's blood status seems to be the last thing on Lucius's mind. Carol, who had similar questions after reading the graveyard and MoM scenes for the first time and has tried to answer them to her own satisfaction From iam.kemper at gmail.com Thu Jul 5 20:50:49 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 13:50:49 -0700 Subject: To rue, a plant for the Order, and plant imagery Message-ID: <700201d40707051350h6f3354c4o7671c7048bcb2c70@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171320 > > CV: What is rue, anyway? > Carol answered: > Regarding rue: As Snape (who knows about dittany and the properties of > herbs, animals, and minerals in general) would know, as would Sprout > and Madam Pomfrey, rue is an herb with healing properties. > Botanical.com (a very interesting and informative website) describes > it this way: > ...snipped it can be read at the below address... > http://botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/r/rue---20.html > > The site quotes someone named Gerard (a medieval authority on herbs?) > as stating: "If a man be anointed with the juice of rue, the poison of > wolf's bane, mushrooms, or todestooles, the biting of serpents, > stinging of scorpions, spiders, bees, hornets and wasps will not hurt > him." > ... > To return to "rue," the word, of course, also means "sorrow," and, as > a verb, "to regret or to feel remorse" (the etymology of the plant > name is different from that of "rue" meaning "sorrow" but I think they > must have been associated in the medieval English mind considering the > repentance symbolism alluded to by Ophelia). The whole idea of the > plant--its unpleasantness, its medicinal uses, especially in > antidotes, its association with remorse, makes me think of Snape. > > Carol, who thinks that Snape's saving Ron with rue would be a lovely > way of proving to Harry which side he's on (foreshadowed by the Bezoar > incident in HBP) but thinks it's unlikely to happen Kemper now: I'm going to bring up an old thread which I started in Feb 05 entitled Snape Plant Imagery. It started here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/124167 from message #124292 posted by Valky: > kemper wrote: So I'm re-reading Snape's Worst Memory when I come to passage that happens immediately after Harry 'falls' into the memory. Harry is looking for Snape. > > > > "And there he is, at a table right behind Harry. Harry stared. > > Snape-the-teenager had a stringy, pallid look about him, like a > plant left in the dark." (OoP, soft, 640) > > > > 'Plant' not 'weed'. > > > > Like a plant left in the dark. > > The plant, a symbol of life, is Snape. > > Left in the dark, left out of the light. > > Left to survive in the dark rather than thrive in the light. > Carol replied: > That image caught my eye, too, and it seemed to suggest neglect on the part of the adults in young Severus's life--his parents, his head of house, maybe even Dumbledore. I think the boy Severus had enormous potential,...edit... but that's what the image of the pallid, neglected plant suggests to me, and I find it very sad. > > But the absence of light may also, as you suggest, indicate that he > was raised to believe in the values of the Dark side,.... > Valky agreed with C and me: > I agree with you Carol, and Kemper, I am sure the plant imagery is used by JKR in the same way done so many other characters throughout the books, to say samoething huge about it while only literally saying something apparently insigificant. I like the way that both of you have understood it and I agree. > Just one thing I would like to add. > Sirius' house of a dying person, Bodes sepulchral voice, I wonder if we might also think over how the plant left in the dark could have a more /literal/ meaning like these ones. I mean, is there an actual plant that might hae something to do with Snapes mystery, for example, the reason Dumbledore trusts him. Or could it be to do with Devils Snare? That's just and odd thought that came to mind while thinking about how right you both were. Back to Kemper: As there's been plant imagery with regards to Snape, perhaps rue is appropriate metaphor for him. The characteristis of the plant: Powerful Disagreeable powerful and disagreeable odor (I'm sure greasy hair doesn't smell like rosemary and mint) Bitter Blossoming from June-Sept (when I imagine he is most active as a plant for the order) Healing The meaning of the verb: to feel regret (Dumbledore believes he rues his activities as a Death Eater) to feel remorse (about Lily's death?) Kemper, just excited about an old idea regarding Snape and not adding anything new From ShylahM at gmail.com Thu Jul 5 21:26:16 2007 From: ShylahM at gmail.com (Shylah) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 09:26:16 +1200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <403e946f0707051426x79840fe4qaac5647b2c6dc954@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171321 Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Shylah 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? I think that JKR is playing with us here. I would have to say he probably does die, considering she has been very vocal as to having written an epilogue. However, I see it more like dying sometime after LV, maybe as an old man. I cannot mesh the prophecy with having them both die. It doesn't make sense and if Harry dies and stays dead then it's not a real victory, especially from the viewpoint of the DE. There can be no wiggle-room in a victory on either side. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes, and even Bellatrix will have to admit it's over. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? I'll go with my second pick for OOTP - Hagrid. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? - I see him as bouncing around similar to an adult student. Only doing parts he needs to in order to face LV. b. Draco? - no c. Hermione? - yes d. Luna? - yes e. Ron? - yes f. Neville? - yes g. Ginny? - yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill/Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" I'm crossing my fingers for Mrs Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Ideally Tonks, but she wouldn't get leave, so Moody could be back. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall - at least until a more permanent arrangement is made. 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? I would have to say Dumbledore's cause. His actions, even though he killed, are in direct contrast to the other DE. It would take someone as evil as LV, and he stands alone, not to respond to 16 years of acceptance that Dumbledore handed out. If proved wrong, I would like to see Snape sentenced to writing out textbooks on all he knows. He might not be too popular but he has a wealth of info that would be invaluable to the WW. While I can stomach his (plot necessary) demise, I cringe at the loss of all that info going down with him. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Marvolo Gaunt's Ring b. Diary of Tom Riddle c. Slytherin's Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Nagini f. Voldemort g. Absent - Until we have canon on Horcrux making, I think he had to bring the object with him to Godric's Hollow. I don't put it past LV to wave it in front of Lily's face and say. "Guess what this is for-" When it all went wrong, he failed to complete it but is biding his time. Item could even be back in the rubble still and Harry and LV meet up there. LV with the intention of reclaiming it. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? I think it is Snape who has the other changed patronus and whatever it is now hinges directly on his loyalties to either side. He has a known patronus within the order and no one has gone, aha!. So I think the giveaway patronus is yet to come. To be in any way useful. His changed one would have to be related to Dumbledore in some way that's recognisable and inspires trust. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, of the agape sort. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. For a while I have been wondering what to think regarding Snape. Today a kids program came on and it had an interesting plot which would work. This person got everything their leader needed to destroy the other side even though the person had friends in the other side. A threat was over their head. Anyway, with that, they were praised and stood alongside leader as the power was activated. Leader then focused on harnessing power only to get hit from behind and the person took over commanding the power, and commanded it to destroy all of their side. I would have to admit, Snape is the only one in the DE camp to be able to do this. We've seen a spell that only allows those with the dark mark to pass. I can easily imagine he would have enough brains to do the same but with some kind of deblitating spell as the kindest since the DE's need to be netralised somehow. I can just picture LV gone, Harry and co still around with people like Bellatrix who are not going to slink away. I believe that was part of Dumbledore's plan. 2. LV as a trophy hunter and all round showoff will want as many people to witness his killing (attempt) of Harry. All the better if they are close to Harry and will be for afters. This would include only numbers that the DE's could intimidate. 3. Hogwarts does open but on reduced numbers and in regards to the current climate, classes are more informal and very practical. All centering around what they will need to defend themselves and to be on guard. A return to normal with exams can come after. 4. Harry is going to have to let go of hate enough that LV won't be able to use how Harry feels against him. LV being a master at hate and nothing else, won't be able to deal with the new direction. 5. My all time favourite plot scenario I'd love to read. Dursley's having to take refuge at Grimmauld Place straight after Harry's birthday. Come to think about it, that might include Mrs Figg if she's present. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 22:28:38 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 22:28:38 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <403e946f0707051426x79840fe4qaac5647b2c6dc954@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171322 Shylah wrote: > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? > > I would have to say Dumbledore's cause. His actions, even though he killed, are in direct contrast to the other DE. It would take someone as evil as LV, and he stands alone, not to respond to 16 years of acceptance that Dumbledore handed out. > > If proved wrong, I would like to see Snape sentenced to writing out textbooks on all he knows. He might not be too popular but he has a wealth of info that would be invaluable to the WW. While I can stomach his (plot necessary) demise, I cringe at the loss of all that info going down with him. Carol responds: I love this response and agree completely that it would be a shame to waste all of Snape's valuable knowledge. Alternatively, he could do public service for St. Mungo's, required to remain there with minimal compensation until he developed a cure for werewolf bites. But, yes, he needs to write improved Potions and DADA texts. I'm sure he'd be a much better teacher in writing than in person. Shylah: > I think it is Snape who has the other changed patronus and whatever it is now hinges directly on his loyalties to either side. He has a known patronus within the order and no one has gone, aha!. So I think the giveaway patronus is yet to come. To be in any way useful. His changed one would have to be related to Dumbledore in some way that's recognisable and inspires trust. Carol responds: I agree again, but I don't quite understand what you mean by "no one has gone, aha!" Can you clarify? BTW, someone else in this thread suggested that Snape can't cast a Patronus against a Dementor. I disagree. Snape has no fear of Dementors and seems to have been at Fudge's side when Fudge brought the Denentor into the castle to "protect" him in GoF. Most likely, Snape's skills as a superb Occlumens protect him against Dementors. I think his alternative method of dealing with Dementors (the one Harry argued against in HBP) is either Occlumency (which he still wants Harry to master) or some method that would be easier for his DADA students than conjuring a Patronus when they're faced by a Dementor trying to suck out their happiness, which even Harry found difficult. (TT!Harry was in no immediate danger when he cast the stag Patronus to save himself and the others in PoA. The one in OoP was much more difficult to cast and required all his power, concentration, and experience.) To return to Snape, I agree that he has been using a known Patronus to communicate with the Order and will now use a new one strongly suggestive of Dumbledore to communicate with the Order, or at least one Order member, who will trust him because of the Patronus, which, being good magic, can't lie. > Shylah: > > 3. Hogwarts does open but on reduced numbers and in regards to the current climate, classes are more informal and very practical. All centering around what they will need to defend themselves and to be on guard. A return to normal with exams can come after. Carol responds: This response leads me to wonder: Will the attendance be so low and the classes so small that students from the four Houses are forced to take classes together? Instead of Gryffindors (at least those in Harry's year) having Herbology with the Hufflepuffs and Potions and CoMC with the Slytherins, with only fellow Gryffindors in all their other classes AFAWK, maybe all students from the same year will have classes together, as they do in the smaller NEWT classes. That in itself would be a step toward House Unity. ("The Sorting Hat's Last Song"?) And another thing. Geoff, or someone else familiar with the British school system, can you unconfuse me, please? I'm wondering why, in PoA (which I just finished re-re-re-re-re-reading), the last exam takes place on June 6 but the kids remain at Hogwarts until the end of June. Again, in PoA, the kids receive their marks for the year, including OWL and NEWT results for the Twins and Percy, while they're still at school. Is that just a fluke (in HBP, IIRC, HRH receive *their* OWL results at the Burrow about two weeks into July), or is it normal for kids to stay at a boarding school for several weeks after their last exam, just waiting around for their exams to be marked? (Exams are cancelled in several books, including HBP, so it's hard for me to tell what's normal at Hogwarts and what's determined by the plot of a particular book.) Carol, unsure whether the three weeks without classes in PoA are an inconsistency on JKR's part or a peculiarity of British boarding schools From celizwh at intergate.com Thu Jul 5 22:37:06 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 22:37:06 -0000 Subject: How can the DEs not know... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171323 TKJ: > Ok so in the 5th book it seems like the DEs are > all shocked when Harry declares that their beloved > leader is a half-blood himself at the MoM. That > seems odd to me because by then shouldn't they > have figured it out? > When they met him at Hogwarts wouldn't they have > know there was no pure blood Riddle family? [...] > OK, so back on topic, if they didn't figure it out > when he was at Hogwarts, what about during the time > in the Cemetery in GoF? He mentioned that Harry was > standing on the grave of his muggle father no? Why > did no one raise and eyebrow then? So, why is it in > OoTP, they all act appalled and like they had no clue > he wasn't a pure blood? houyhnhnm: I'm not sure how many DEs are still around that go back to Tom Riddle's time at Hogwarts. We don't really know too many DEs by name as a percentage of their total numbers. Harry thought there were at least thirty Death Eaters present in the graveyard, but only nine are named. The ones we do know seem to be from the next generation from Voldemort's contemporaries for the most part. That's one reason. In the graveyard, I believe it is before he summoned the Death Eaters that Voldemort ran on about his lousy Muggle father. After they showed up, all he said was that he was standing on his father's grave. Couldn't they have figured it out? Well, maybe not Grabbe and Goyle. Six of the DEs who took part in the battle at the MoM were not present in the graveyard. They were in Azkaban. That's another reason. I think any of them could have figured out Voldemort's antecedents, though, if they *wanted* to. That is the real reason, I think. They don't want to know Voldemort is a half blood. Bellatrix, especially. The very vehemence of her reaction is indicative to me of the amount of energy she has invested in denial, not just about Voldemort's bloodlines, but about anything that might contradict her fanatical devotion. To become a Death Eater, I think, it is not only necessary to shut down pity and compassion, but all critical thought. Lucius may be the lone exception. He was at the graveyard. He was at the Ministry. His family has been rich and influential for generations. I think he knew and didn't care that Voldemort was a half blood. I think he may even have liked the fact that there was something about Voldemort that he could look down on (in addition to wealth). He may have seen Voldemort as just one more powerful wizard he could patronize and use for his own ends, as his family has always done. Poor Lucius. I don't expect he's thinking that way any more. I imagine *his* thoughts in Azkaban have been little different than they would have been if the Dementors were still there. From maidne at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 23:11:01 2007 From: maidne at yahoo.com (maidne) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 23:11:01 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jr_pumpkin" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > wrote: > > > > This month features Godric. > > > > jr_pumpkin: > > Did anyone else notice that Godric has red hair and green eyes? > > hmmmmmm....Lily-like? Come to think of it, wasn't Dumbledore a red > head too? > > Okay, maybe I am totally reaching here!!!! ;) > > Is it the 21st yet? > What I noticed about Godric is that he looks like a lion! Susan From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 23:16:36 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 23:16:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's Boggart and Patronus (WAS Re: OPEN: Ultimate and ...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171325 > Shylah: > > > I think it is Snape who has the other changed patronus and whatever > it is now hinges directly on his loyalties to either side. He has a > known patronus within the order and no one has gone, aha!. So I think > the giveaway patronus is yet to come. To be in any way useful. His > changed one would have to be related to Dumbledore in some way that's > recognisable and inspires trust. > > Carol responds: > I agree again, but I don't quite understand what you mean by "no one > has gone, aha!" Can you clarify? zgirnius: Rowling has indicated that she will not tell us Snape's Boggart and Patronus because that would be giving too much away. What I believe Shylah is saying is that Snape has had a patronus form that is known to the Order/Dumbledore throughout the first six books, and whatever that Patronus is cannot give too much away about Snape. If it were (say) a Phoenix, this would presumably have been mentioned in one of the many discussions of Snape's loyalties in the books. "Dumbledore trusts him, and his Patronus is a Phoenix, Harry!". Likewise it cannot, for the same reason, be something that is easily associated with Voldemort/Dark Arts, because then someone should have said something at the end of HBP along the lines of "I can't believe Dumbledore trusted Snape based on that ridiculous story that he was sorry James and Lily were dead, especially since we all know he has a Basilisk (or whatever) Patronus." So if it is the Patronus that is the giveaway, the Patronus must be chaning to this giveaway form in DH (and this hypothetical new form would more or less have to be a Phoenix, I think, none of the other Snape theories would IMO account for a changed Patronus). Of course, it could also be something like a chameleon or fox, indicating OFH!Snape's reliance on and loyalty to himself alone, which would not necessarily be indicative to either side of anything besides Snape's character and talents as a spy. Though we could admire this choice of Patronus by Rowling in retrospect. But of course we know he's not, wink wink. I tend to think, though, that it is the Boggart that is the dead giveaway. I doubt we will see its form in DH, but I think being told what it is it would give us insight into his priorities that would answer the loyalty question, so Rowling refused to answer. From bgrugin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 22:34:43 2007 From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 22:34:43 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171327 > Eddie: > 1. And with that, Sirius' flying motorcycle headed back into the > Forbidden Forest side by side with the Arthur Weasley's car. > > 2. For long after, first years at Hogwarts were told the riveting > story of the two white tombs: one holding the remains of former > headmaster Albus Dumbledore, marked only with the image of a > phoenix, and one holding the remains of former student Harry > Potter, marked only with the image of a lightning-bolt, shaped like > Harry's scar. > > 3. A magical portrait of Harry Potter was put in a place of honor > on the Quidditch pitch so he could watch each game, cheering > mightily whenever Gryffindor's seeker caught the snitch, and could > occasionally be seen nostalgically, smilingly, touching the painted > image of his lightning-shaped scar. MusicalBetsy: I have always been comforted by the idea that JKR still says that the last word will be "scar," because I have imagined the last sentence being similar to what everyone else before Eddie has suggested - in other words, happy endings. But, Eddie, you have given me some food for thought - your ideas are very good! My sentence is this: "Harry was still the same person he always was, maybe a little wiser, with the only difference being that he no longer had a scar." Not very good, but you get the main idea. From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Jul 5 23:52:58 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 23:52:58 -0000 Subject: ...About Snape - Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171329 I (vmonte) wrote: JKR said that the Death Eaters are like how the Nazis were. random832 responded: But my point was, we don't know Snape realized that at that point. And, to take the Nazi Germany analogy at the risk of going off-topic - the average German on the street (or even in the army) didn't see, or at least didn't want to see, what was happening. vmonte again: Snape wasn't the average wizard on the street. Snape was working in close proximity to Voldemort. He knew what was happening to the community around him. According to JKR, the second Reign of Terror started in 1970s. Snape did not graduate from Hogwarts until 1976. The prophecy was heard in sometime between late 1979 and early 1980. Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children, during the 1970s. From elfundeb at gmail.com Fri Jul 6 00:04:32 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (Debbie) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:04:32 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Please Play Nice Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171330 Greetings from Hexquarters! All the List Elves are starting to quiver with excitement at the thought of finally having Book 7 in our ironed, banged-in-the-oven- door little hands very, very soon. We know that everyone else on this List is equally excited and that, sometimes, our excitedness can get the better of us. We become a little more sensitive and a little less cautious about what we say. However, despite all the excitement and anticipation we are still all expected to Play Nice. Reread any posts you have composed before you hit the Send button to make sure that your post is clear, concise and that it contains canon. Be sensitive to List members of other cultures and belief systems and be very, very sure that your post may not be taken in an offensive manner. If you do not like or are not interested in a particular thread or topic then ignore it rather than starting up a a possible flame war. We are all entitled to our opinions but we must all be respectful to each other's opinions as well. We now return you to your last-minute speculations. Speedy Elf (with assistance from Dizzy Elf) for the List Elves From elfundeb at gmail.com Fri Jul 6 00:36:47 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 20:36:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Of Basilisks and weasels and rue (Was: A basilisk in the final book?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0707051736i1037e96ci9ffdd1992917103c@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171331 constancevigilance wrote: >Here's what I found while researching mythical creatures in Europe at this link: http://www.pantheon.org/areas/bestiary/articles.html > > [T]he basilisk has natural enemies. The weasel is immune to its glance and if it gets bitten it withdraws from the fight to eat some rue, the only plant that does not wither, and returns with renewed strength. > > CV: What is rue, anyway? > > Brave Ron - or any of the Weasleys, for that matter - to the rescue when everyone is being threatened! I've always wondered why JKR was so determined that Ron's surname be Weasley. Such an odd name and she said it was the only one of her original surnames that was settled from the beginning. Debbie: I have long been curious as to how JKR will weave the basilisk legend into the Weasleys' role in DH. Both Ron and his father have been poisoned, and I have always assumed that rue was used by the Healers to cure both of them. I have always thought that the Weasleys' natural enemies were the Malfoys, based on the scuffle between Arthur and Lucius in CoS. Draco was (indirectly) Ron's attacker, and while Nagini was possessed by Voldemort when she attacked Arthur, I tend to see Lucius as instrumental to the attempt to penetrate the DOM's defenses. Accordingly, while in prior encounters the Weasleys have always *seemed* to be operating from a position of weakness, due to their poverty and their ideology, compared to the wealthy and politically powerful Malfoys, I expect the Weasleys to fight back (not necessarily with traditional wizarding weapons) in DH with renewed strength, clearly defeating the slippery slytherinish Malfoys. One more thing. Basilisks can be used as a remedy against spiders. I can't help envisioning Nagini's carcass hanging from the lintel at the Burrow. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dougsamu at golden.net Fri Jul 6 01:30:35 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 21:30:35 -0400 Subject: The last word ("scar") Message-ID: <165E7341-A050-4732-83B8-E48C6157B98B@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171332 At last, with everyone dead, the Anglia was his, Harry's car! ___ __ From tobyfoot23 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 01:30:57 2007 From: tobyfoot23 at yahoo.com (tobyfoot23) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 01:30:57 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171333 > > Carol: > > Anyone else want to take a stab at it? Tobyfoot23- I have nightmares that "Deathly Hallows" ends like this: "The man looked into the mirror at a face he did not recognize. The only thing he had of his past was a lightning-bolt shaped scar." Of course, I hope it ends like this: "Harry gazed lovingly at his six children and thirteen grandchildren who all looked so like him, but without his infamous scar." Just my 2 cents. Tobyfoot23 From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Fri Jul 6 01:46:50 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 21:46:50 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: <380-2200775614650984@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171334 Carol responds: BTW, someone else in this thread suggested that Snape can't cast a Patronus against a Dementor. I disagree. Snape has no fear of Dementors and seems to have been at Fudge's side when Fudge brought the Denentor into the castle to "protect" him in GoF. Most likely, Snape's skills as a superb Occlumens protect him against Dementors. I think his alternative method of dealing with Dementors (the one Harry argued against in HBP) is either Occlumency (which he still wants Harry to master) or some method that would be easier for his DADA students than conjuring a Patronus when they're faced by a Dementor trying to suck out their happiness, which even Harry found difficult. (TT!Harry was in no immediate danger when he cast the stag Patronus to save himself and the others in PoA. The one in OoP was much more difficult to cast and required all his power, concentration, and experience.) To return to Snape, I agree that he has been using a known Patronus to communicate with the Order and will now use a new one strongly suggestive of Dumbledore to communicate with the Order, or at least one Order member, who will trust him because of the Patronus, which, being good magic, can't lie. Magpie: I sort of have to appreciate Snape for having a different method, if only because we know now for a fact (even though it was already clear in the books) that nobody except Harry and the people Harry taught know how to cast a Patronus--how are they supposed to use one to fight a Dementor? This is considered advanced magic and it's not taught at Hogwarts. I've no doubt Snape can produce one even against Dementors, but I can imagine him thiking it's a bit strange to teach his students to use Patronuses without actually teaching them Patronuses! -m From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 01:57:13 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 01:57:13 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171335 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "maidne" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jr_pumpkin" > wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > > wrote: > > > > > > This month features Godric. > > > > > > > jr_pumpkin: > > > > Did anyone else notice that Godric has red hair and green eyes? > > > > hmmmmmm....Lily-like? Come to think of it, wasn't Dumbledore a red > > head too? > > > > Okay, maybe I am totally reaching here!!!! ;) > > > > Is it the 21st yet? > > > > What I noticed about Godric is that he looks like a lion! > > Susan > Specifically, a Disney lion -- Mustafa from the Lion King. Gak! Annemehr From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 01:24:25 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 01:24:25 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171336 > > MusicalBetsy: > My sentence is this: > "Harry was still the same person he always was, maybe a little > wiser, with the only difference being that he no longer had a scar." > > Not very good, but you get the main idea. > I've always thought it would be a bit different, something like He was so much more than the boy with the scar. jkoney65 From laurel.coates at gmail.com Fri Jul 6 03:16:20 2007 From: laurel.coates at gmail.com (Laurel Coates) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 20:16:20 -0700 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <380-2200775614650984@earthlink.net> References: <380-2200775614650984@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3cd952930707052016w28ec0c02ia1fa3699d6f819c2@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171337 Magpie: I sort of have to appreciate Snape for having a different method, if only because we know now for a fact (even though it was already clear in the books) that nobody except Harry and the people Harry taught know how to cast a Patronus--how are they supposed to use one to fight a Dementor? Laurel: I have been thinking about this whole idea that accessing the power of love is a type of "advanced magic." Is that why the room at the Ministry is locked? Because it is too powerful? I wonder how it would have turned out if Snape had taught Harry how to repel Dementors. I wonder how it would have turned out if Dumbledore or Lupin had taught Harry Occlumency. I think Snape's method f teaching is shortsighted; just as Voldemort disdains the power of love, so does Snape. Apparently Draco had no trouble learning Occlumency from Auntie Bellatrix in a short period of time; perhaps she learned the skill from Voldemort? And taught Draco the same way she was taught? I think JKR is going with the whole "intent" angle of magic. One can use different methods to attain the same goal, but it is the positive or negative intent that makes the difference. Laurel [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bawilson at citynet.net Fri Jul 6 03:16:48 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 23:16:48 -0400 Subject: Dropping out (was re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171338 An Associate of Arts or Science or whatever is what one earns from an American Junior or Community College. One then goes on to University to complete the Bachelor of [Whatever] degree. However, lots of people--particularly if the Associates is in a job-specific field--will just stop at the Associate's level, or will take a few years off getting practical experience before going on to finish a Bachelor degree. The point is that there is nothing shameful about stopping at OWLS, which is a perfectly respectable qualification. 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 akash2006k at yahoo.co.in Fri Jul 6 03:51:30 2007 From: akash2006k at yahoo.co.in (Akash aki) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 04:51:30 +0100 (BST) Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <231126.75275.qm@web94515.mail.in2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171339 jr_pumpkin: > Did anyone else notice that Godric has red hair > and green eyes? > > hmmmmmm....Lily-like? Come to think of it, > wasn't Dumbledore a red head too? akash2006k: Is she trying to say something about Potter and Weasley relations... red hairs and green eyes... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 04:59:17 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 04:59:17 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <3cd952930707052016w28ec0c02ia1fa3699d6f819c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171340 Laurel wrote: > I wonder how it would have turned out if Snape had taught Harry how to repel Dementors. I wonder how it would have turned out if Dumbledore or Lupin had taught Harry Occlumency. I think Snape's method f teaching is shortsighted; just as Voldemort disdains the power of love, so does Snape. Apparently Draco had no trouble learning Occlumency from Auntie Bellatrix in a short period of time; perhaps she learned the skill from Voldemort? And taught Draco the same way she was taught? I think JKR is going with the whole "intent" angle of magic. One can use different methods to attain the same goal, but it is the positive or negative intent that makes the difference. Carol responds: I don't see much connection, if any, between "the power of Love" and Occlumency. Nor do I think there was any particular problem with Snape's method of teaching Occlumency, which, for all we know, is the standard procedure. He tells Harry what Occlumency is and what Legilimency is, why he needs to learn Occlumency (except for the details of the Prophecy, which DD doesn't want Harry to know), what he intends to do to Harry, and what he expects Harry to do in return (use any spell he can think of to block the Legilimency spell, to practice closing his mind at night, and to try to block the spell with his mind as he blocked Fake!Moody's Imperius Curse). The problem is, Harry has been feeling angry, having difficulty suppressing his emotions, all year. It doesn't help that he hates and mistrusts Snape, and that lack of trust is further undermined by Sirius Black's suggestion that Snape might try to hurt Harry during the lessons. And on top of everything, Harry wants to have the dream that Voldemort iss planting in his head and consequently doesn't practice. Even if he'd had a natural aptitude and hadn't invaded Snape's memories, the lessons under such circumstances were unlikely to be successful. As for Lupin teaching Harry, I'm sure that if he were as skilled at Occlumency as Snape, or anywhere near it, he would have volunteered his services. (And we know why DD didn't try. With Harry reacting with snakelike venom every time he met DD's eyes, I doubt the lessons would have succeeded.) In contrast to Harry, Draco has, according to JKR, a natural aptitude for compartmentalizing his emotions (a trait we can assume that he shares with the "superb Occlumens" Snape). Moreover, he already knows what Occlumency is, knows that Snape is a Legilimens, and has a motive for wanting to block Snape's Legilimency: he believes (thank, no doubt, to aunt Bellatrix) that Snape is trying to "steal his glory." I doubt very much that Bellatrix is as skilled an Occlumens as Snape, or a better teacher. She simply has an apt and eager pupil. Draco, BTW, has not mastered Occlumency to the extent that Snape has. He's still a novice and his effort to block Snape takes conscious effort ("I know what you're trying to do! I can stop you!") and is readily detectable. If he tried such a stunt on Voldemort, he'd probably be Cruciod or even killed. Snape, in contrast, has apparently been able to "hoodwink" the Dark Lord, to lie without detection to the greatest Legilimens who ever lived (or so Voldie believes), by concealing the memories and emotions that would reveal his lies. (See his remarks to Harry in the first Occlumency lesson and to Bellatrix in "Spinner's End.") Whether Snape brings some other thought or memory or an altered memory to his conscious mind to be viewd by Voldemot, I don't know, but what he does is clearly not an obvious blocking (occlusion) like Draco's with Snape. BTW, I notice that a few posters (not Laurel) are confusing Legilimency, which involves what Harry considers to be mind-reading but is actually the ability to detect images and emotions in another person's mind, with Occlumency, which is the ability to block another wizard's efforts to penetrate your mind. Snape can do both, though perhaps his superb Occlumency is somewhat superior to his Legilimency. Possibly a bit of etymology would help make the distinction clearer for those who are having trouble with it: Legilimens (one who practices Legilimency) come from "legere" (to read) plus "mens" (mind); Occlumens (one who practices Occlumency) comes from "occludere" (to block) plus "mens" (mind). Snape to the contrary, the word Legilimency suggests mind reading, whereas Occlumency suggests blocking the mind reading (or, as Snape rather graphically puts it, the penetration of the mind). Carol, who thinks that Snape's methods would succeed brilliantly with Draco if and when the opportunity arises for Snape to teach him From xellina at gmail.com Fri Jul 6 07:02:25 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:02:25 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How can the DEs not know... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707060002i517fc34cqbdf5483abdff2d19@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171341 2007/7/5, Tandra : > > > When they met him at Hogwarts wouldn't they have know there was no > pure blood Riddle family? (the same thing goes for Snape....wouldn't > they have known he was a half-blood too?) But granted there has to be > A LOT of half-blood DEs no? I mean there are only but a few > pure-bloods left. Cassy: Well, I'm not quite sure about Snape, but Tom could just as well pretended to be pure-blood. I mean, his peer would surely know that he lived in Muggle orphanage, seeing him spending summer holidays there, but Tom could have invented a story about a late wizarding father from some dying out pure-blood family. After all, there must be other ancient families, which were degradating and being forgotten, just like Merope's. From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 07:05:07 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 07:05:07 -0000 Subject: Riddle's possession of Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171342 Jenni from Alabama wrote: I have a question. In the Chamber of Secrets, Riddle tells Harry that he poured a bit of his soul into Ginny. (pg. 310 in the US edition.) When Harry destroyed the diary, did it destroy the bit of Riddle's soul that had been poured into Ginny or could she be a horcrux? Your thoughts? vmonte: JKR: Well, I'm prepared to bet you now, that at least before the week is out, at least one of the Horcruxes will have been correctly identified by careful re-readers of the books. MA: Someone put it to me last night, that if Ginny, with the diary - JKR: Harry definitely destroyed that piece of soul, you saw it take shape, you saw it destroyed, it's gone. And Ginny is definitely in no way possessed by Voldemort. MA: Is she still a parselmouth? JKR: No. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli- 3.htm From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 10:05:49 2007 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 10:05:49 -0000 Subject: Deontological!Snape (Was: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171343 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol responds: big snip: As I > said in another thread, I think that Hermione's otter Patronus > represents Ron Weasel, erm, Weasley. What's your nonfacetious idea of > Snape's Patronus (as opposed to his Animagus form, if any)? > > As for a Boggart, I *suppose* it could represent guilt, but I think > guilt is unlikely to be a person's greatest fear (Lupin's definition > of what a Boggart represents), which is why I believe that it's > Voldemort killing Harry and consequently destroying all hope of a > victory against the Dark Lord. mz annethrope replies: I basically agree with you on the distinction between a patronus and an animagus. Or at least as I see it, the patronus protects you but your animagus represents your true self. I hadn't seen your post on Hermione's patronus. It seems plausible. I had seen the otter as being some aspect of herself that saves her from being so serious. But... I really don't know what Snape's patronus is. I suspect it's wrapped up in the enigma of Snape. And it may have changed. > > ms_annethrope: > > Let's see if I can be brief. I think there is a strong ethical > dimension to the HP books and the key is DD's remark: "It is our > choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our > abilities." (CoS p.333, American edition)This seems to be an argument > for virtue ethics or character ethics. > > > > I do think that she [JKR], or at least DD, advocates some sort of > virtue ethics. It's not about one's choices per se, but that one's > choices reveal who one truly is. I think DD advocates (represents?) > some sort of virtue ethics because out of his sheer goodness--or > foolhardiness--he is always giving people, and creatures, second > chances. This is not ends based action because he does not expect > people to be good in return for his kindness. Of course, there are > times when DD acts in a different way. He had a plan for keeping > Harry alive. And he chose not to divulge critical information to > Harry, much to his later regret. But I think virtues are for the most > part emblematic of DD. > > > > On to Snape. Some people think he is Machiavellian. That's Peter and > Lucius. I think if Snape were Machiavellian he would not have worked > nearly so hard to keep Harry alive in the first book. But I am > troubled by the idea of DD cutting a deal with Snape to kill him so > that some good may result. This I called Utilitarian for lack of a > better word. By Utilitarian I mean the theory that action should be > directed at the greatest possible happiness for the greatest number of > people. I find this problematic, not just because it sacrifices the > happiness of some for the happiness of others, but because I think any > single perspective is limited and we cannot know if our chosen action > will have the effects we anticipated. I find it difficult to think DD > would cause Snape to kill for some good that might not happen. Of > course, JKR might have set it up that way because SHE knows the > answers. But DD doesn't. > > > > But deontological (ethics of moral obligation) Snape is a > possibility. Snape has various obligations: to Draco, to Harry, to DD, > etc., and he holds to them as tenaciously as a Saxon warrior to his > oaths. Deonotological Snape allows Snape to be a moral, if flawed, > person--perhaps a tragic figure And I suspect DD acted > deontologically when he sent Harry to live with the Dursleys. He had > to do what he could to keep Harry alive. Ok, I wasn't brief. > > > Carol responds: > > Brevity isn't always a virtue (or the soul of wit). I prefer clarity, > myself, and I appreciate your explanation. (being philosophically > challenged myself, and unable to deal in abstractions without > suffering a severe headache, I had to look up "deontological." I've > never quite grasped ontology, and am glad to find that deontology is > another beast altogether, "the theory or study of moral obligation," > according to my trusty Merriam-Webster's Online. > > I see a clash within Dumbledore between utilitarianism (the greatest > good for the greatest number, meaning in his case the survival of the > WW at whatever cost to the individual) and his personal love for > Harry, which may or may not be represented by deontology. (I'd love to > hear what you think.) He even states as much himself: "What did I care > if numbers of nameless and faceless people and creatures were > slaughtered in the vague future, if in the here and now you were > alive, and well, and happy?" (OoP Am. ed. 839). An yet, surely, > privileging Harry's happiness and temporary safety over the lives and > deaths of others can't be JKR's--or DD's--idea of right? He's caught > between placing his beloved Prophecy at a terrible risk and keeping > him safe at the expense of numerous other people, the whole WW, in > fact. Harry must be kept safe until he's ready, but he *must* be made > ready, for his own sake and everyone else's, "nameless and faceless" > or not. Harry is the WW's only hope, and DD knows it. > > In HBP, both DD and Snape are preoccupied with Draco's personal (and > moral) safety as well as with Harry (over whom Snape has apparently > been watching since SS/PS as part of his obligation either to DD or to > his own set of ethics--certainly, you're right that he's not > Machiavellian). Keeping Draco safe could jeopardize the school, but > keeping the school safe by, say, expelling Draco, would guarantee > Draco's death. Again, it seems to me, DD tries to strike a balance > between the good of the individual (Draco and perhaps UV-bound Snape) > and the good of the "greatest number" (the students and staff of > Hogwarts). Expelling Draco would certainly be easy, but I'm pretty > sure that DD doesn't consider it right. Instead, he has Snape watch > over Draco (which he's doing anyway because of the UV) and try to > question him; meanwhile, he puts as many protections on the school as > possible. In the end, he talks Draco out of killing him, not for his > own sake but for Draco's, and he seems to me to ask Snape to kill him > as the only way to save Draco's, Harry's, and Snape's lives (good of > the individual), save the school from the DEs (utilitarianism), place > Snape in his role as saboteur to fight LV (utilitarianism), and save > Harry, not as an individual but as the Chosen One for the sake of the > WW (utilitarianism). So, in the end, his conflicting values come > together. By allowing Snape rather than a DE or the poison to kill > him, in which case he would *not* have gone over the wall and Snape, > dead from breaking the UV, could not have gotten the DEs and Draco off > the tower before Harry came rushing out, DD accomplishes a number of > objectives. He can't save his own life, but he can choose how he dies > and make sure he doesn't take anyone with him (assuming that his > complete trust in Snape is justified and Snape does what's required to > save those other lives). that, at any rate, is how I interpret > "Severus, please!" DD is begging, not for his own life or for Snape's > soul but for the safety of a valued ally and friend, two students, the > school itself, and, ultimately, the whole WW. > > As for Snape himself, I think his immediate action is motivated by the > need to get the job done at whatever cost to himself. He hesitates, > his expression changing as he looks into DD's eyes and (IMO) learns > what he wants, but he doesn't raise his wand even though he surely > knows that the UV has been triggered. DD's pleading seems to include a > note of urgency--*Please,* Severus! Do it now or it will be too late! > But part of Snape, I think, would rather die than kill his mentor (the > very opposite of Peter Pettigrew, who would have saved his own skin in > a second). So I see him at this point as what you're calling > Utilitarian Snape. He does what's best for the WW and Hogwarts at > terrible expense to himself (far worse than death, he's making himself > an outcast and a fugitive hated by the whole WW). But there's also an > element of what you call Deontological Snape because he's saving Draco > (for whose sake he put his own life on the line with the UV in the > first place, and perhaps his soul as well) and, as always, protecting > the "arrogant," rule-breaking Potter boy, without whom the WW is toast. > > I do think that Snape operates according to his own moral code, a set > of strict, old-fashioned virtues of the sort rejected by Shelleyan > Romantics in the early eighteenth century and more recently by the > Beat generation of the 1950s and its postmodern offspring from the > 1990s onward: Duty, Obedience, Respect for Authority, Loyalty > (Loyaultie me Lie!), perhaps others that I can't think of right now. > Courage is also important to him; Truth, on the other hand, is in DD's > words, "a beautiful and terrible thing," to be handed out in small > doses and, if the occasion requires, somewhat distorted. > > Carol, not sure where she's going with this but intrigued by the > concept of Deontological!Snape > mz_annethrope again: This is not much of a response because there are too many things here, but here are a couple of comments. My concern with utilitarianism or utilitarian!DD is not about sacrificing the one for the sake of the many. Doctors do that all the time when they resort to triage. There are rules for triage. When the rules fall apart, well you either resort to casuistry or you follow your heart (or work on instinct). My concern rather is that utilitarianism aims for maximal happiness, which is an epistemological problem. How can any one of us know what will make the most people happy? That doesn't seem to me to be the choice that DD or Snape makes. As a matter of fact, I think the most truly utilitarian characters we have met so far are Fudge and Umbridge. They actually try to make decisions for the happiness of all. Of course, JKR as author determines all the happy ends and we get to argue about whether or not her choices work. I am not so convinced that her more interesting characters do the same. I take Dumbledore at his word when he tells Harry that he was trying to keep him alive when he placed him with the Dursleys. It is a terrible choice to have to make. But I think his motive was love undiluted by the belief that Harry would be the one to save the Wizarding World. You see it as both/and. I see it as both/and in a somewhat different way. DD is training Harry for the fight with Voldemort. He doesn't know how it will end. He doesn't teach Harry how to fight. Instead he gives Harry lessons in what every great warrior must do: know your enemy. But I still think his motive is love. Or to put it another way, I see Trelawny as Dumbledore's opposite. Trelawny is our determinist, but DD seems to have a high view of freedom and doesn't put much stock in prophecy. In OotP he tells Harry that Harry is the chosen one because Voldemort chose him. Then in HBP we have these exchanges: DD...."I told you this at the end of last year. Voldemort singled you out as the person who would be most dangerous to him--and in doing so, he made you the person who would be most dangerous to him!" "But is comes to the same__" "No, it doesn't!" said Dumbledore...."You are setting too much store by the prophecy!" "But," spluttered Harry, "but you said the prophecy means__" "If Voldemort had never heard of the prophecy, would it have been fulfilled? Would it have meant anything? Of course not! Do you think every prophecy in the Hall of Prophecy has been fulfilled?" (am. ed. 509-10) And then on the next page DD tells Harry he has to kill Voldemort, but not because of the prophecy, but because Voldemort's choices have given Harry a thirst for revenge. So I don't see Dumbledore as acting the way he does because Harry is the only one who can save the wizarding world. What I do think is that he knows Voldemort and that because of that he tries to use the prophecy against him. Voldemort is the one who puts stock on prophecies and he goes after it. Of course, DD doesn't tell Harry what he is doing. There could be so so many problems if he told him. And Harry, being a free person freely misreads the situation. This is the closest thing I can come to utilitarian!Dumbledore. And Dumbledore admits he made a mistake. Now it just occurred to me that in the consequentialist (utilitarian) world Snape might have been the one to suffer if Voldemort had gotten the prophecy. Go figure. Hmmm. Shelley as anti-Snape. This is causing me to like Snape much more than I ought to. mz_annethrope From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Jul 6 10:40:56 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 10:40:56 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <380-2200775614650984@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171344 > > Carol wrote: > > > BTW, someone else in this thread suggested that Snape can't cast a > Patronus against a Dementor. I disagree. Snape has no fear of > Dementors and seems to have been at Fudge's side when Fudge brought > the Denentor into the castle to "protect" him in GoF. Most likely, > Snape's skills as a superb Occlumens protect him against Dementors. > I think his alternative method of dealing with Dementors (the one > Harry argued against in HBP) is either Occlumency (which he still wants > Harry to master) or some method that would be easier for his DADA > students than conjuring a Patronus when they're faced by a Dementor > trying to suck out their happiness, which even Harry found difficult. I find myself agreeing with that Carol, there is a strong link drawn in the books between the effects of Dementor presence and the act of legilimency that I can see. Memories. When Snape is probing Harrys mind he brings good and bad memories to the fore of harry's consciousness, from there he reads them, Dementors actually do a similar thing don't they, the effects of a dementor in some rudimentary ways are not at all dissimilar to the effects of a legilimens, memories come to the fore of conscious mind, that's the half the magic of both. As Snape is a strongly skilled Occlumens it stands to reason he precipitates handling one half of the effects of a Dementor simply by habitual action he engages in every day as a spy. Controlling his reaction to sad memories and continually doing strong conscious magic under the weight of them against powerful wizards like Volemort. It's probably a short distance between Occlumency (possibly like compartmentalisation of conscious thought) and the confidence required to cast an effective Patronus in a situation of duress. Snape's process for handling dementors could simply be the small difference between fighting within emotion (which would be Harry's ideal) and fighting without it, though it would make for a big technical advantage to be an Occlumens in constant practice when faced by Dementors, it's probably something Harry could never do or even understand. Also Dementors feed on your happy emotions which they drain from your like air, and Snape knows that too, so I entertain the notion occasionally that Snape's idea of handling Dementors is merely not having many happy emotions to start with. ;P Valky From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Jul 6 12:53:09 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 12:53:09 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171345 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Assuming that the last word in DH is indeed "scar," what are your > thoughts on the final sentence? Dungrollin: Unfortunately, she's changed it. The last word is no longer 'scar', though she says it does appear quite near the end. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6276682.stm From ekrdg at verizon.net Fri Jul 6 14:46:52 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 10:46:52 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus References: Message-ID: <00f401c7bfdc$7ebb8f80$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 171346 Rules: Copy these questions and email your answers *both* to *tigerpatronus* *at* *yahoo* *dot* *com* and to the newsgroup. You must email your entry to TigerPatronus to be entered in the contest. You will receive an email confirmation of your entry. In the event of a dispute, the entry posted to the group will be your back-up. Deadline: Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 11:59 pm (midnight) EDT. (No Friday entries will be accepted.) 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. Harry will at last be able to enjoy a "normal life". 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. I believe he will be defeated in death. As VaporMort he was already as close to death as he could be, he needs to be "deader" than he was before. Harry needs to make him unequivocably dead in that there is no chance he can ever perform a curse, spell, or otherwise and become alive again. Harry, the Wizarding World, AND his death-eaters will at last be freeeeeeeee. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? I think Draco will die but I think he will be dying and have a revelation, a change of heart and will issue a heart felt apology upon which Harry will forgive him before he dies. I also think that after LV is killed, Bellatrix will become completely unhinged, sacrificing herself while trying to avenge LV's death. She will be killed in the process. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry ? Yes, he'll have to in order to pass his NEWT's so he can go on to be an auror. JKR said that there would be 7 books, one to coincide with each year he's at school and I'm going with that even though I am in the HUGE minority ! LOL b. Draco? No, he'll be somewhere reduced to fear and under the anger and ruling of LV for having not killed DD. c. Hermione? Yes, although she'll go off with Harry at times and it will coincide with her schoolwork of course :-) d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes, and again he'll go off with Harry at times not caring if it coincides with his schoolwork, of course... ;-) f. Neville? Yes and he'll be the classmate that becomes a teacher (of Herbology) g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? I believe that both Bill and Fleur as well as Lupin and Tonks will marry. The most prominent in my opinion is Lupin and Tonks simply because Lupin has had more of a character role in the books. I also think Ron and Hermione will become much closer but I don't think they'll marry. Perhaps the epilogue will have them as being married. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Going to go out on a limb and say Petuna Dursley and it will happen in defense of Harry. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Either Ron, if not Ron then Neville though I'm not sure if you have to have been a Prefect in order to become Head Boy or Girl b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Kingsley Shackelbolt d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Although I believe him to be cold, unfeeling, and inherantly mean.... I do believe him to be on the side of the Order. Being on the Order's side however does not mean that he has it in him to be nice to any of it's members or even treat Harry in any way that would make Harry or Voldemort think he's backing Harry. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Cup (Hufflepuff's) e. Something of Ravenclaw's f. Something of Gryffindor's ( I do not think it's the sword although I think the sword will return in book 7 and help Harry & Co. g. Last piece is the bit in LV himself Another note on Horcruxes, I do not believe Nagini to be a Horcrux. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? His Patronus is a bat (kind of weak) and his boggart would be some form of James Potter humiliating him. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, plain and simple but also exponentially abound in depth as well as complexity Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Lupin and Tonks will be together ! With so much death, destruction, and sadness....love and happiness will be welcomed. It will be a quiet affair held at the Burrow. 2. House-elves, Dobby in particular, will have a big role in DH. Kreacher will die and Dobby will aid Harry enormously. 3. I think there is more to the "locket" than what we've seen. 4. I think that Neville will complete schooling and move on to become an Herbology teacher in the epilogue. 5. When Bellatrix is killed in the process of fighting after LV is killed, Neville will be the one to kill her. From ekrdg at verizon.net Fri Jul 6 14:51:30 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 10:51:30 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort kills self? References: Message-ID: <013301c7bfdd$24787460$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 171347 Eddie said: Sorry if this has been asked before, but I haven't seen it and my search hasn't found it. So..... Suppose Voldemort gets a good solid taste of Love (from the locked room at the MoM) and finally realizes what a shmuck he's been and kills himself? Eddie Kimberly: As he is so strong in his belief that there is nothing worse than death, I don't think he'll kill himself in the manner of suicide. I do think that his demise will be in some part of his own doing. He will get careless, not realize that some horcrux have been destroyed, and in some way give Harry the power that he needs to defeat him. Kimberly From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 6 15:08:40 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 15:08:40 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171348 Exactly one year after that wonderful and horrible day Ginny could hear the sounds of celebration in the distance. It's Potter day, a time for wizards all over the world to honor the memory of a hero. She looked down into the brilliant green eyes of her infant son cradled in her arms and kissed Harry Potter on the forehead. She saw no scar. THE END From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Jul 6 16:11:01 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:11:01 -0000 Subject: ...About Snape - Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171350 I (vmonte) wrote: > > > JKR said that the Death Eaters are like > > > how the Nazis were. random832 responded: > > But my point was, we don't know Snape realized > > that at that point. And, to take the Nazi Germany > > analogy at the risk of going off-topic - the > > average German on the street (or even in the army) > > didn't see, or at least didn't want to see, what > > was happening. vmonte again: > Snape wasn't the average wizard on the street. > Snape was working in close proximity to Voldemort. > He knew what was happening to the community around him. > According to JKR, the second Reign of Terror started > in 1970s. Snape did not graduate from Hogwarts until > 1976. The prophecy was heard in sometime between late > 1979 and early 1980. > Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children, > during the 1970s. houyhnhnm: First of all I have to say I don't understand why it is necessary to keep harking back to Nazi Germany for an example of people willingly closing their eyes to evil and their hearts to suffering when there are so many more recent examples (even as we speak), but that is beside the point. The point is that it is willful. The answer to the question of how Snape (or Regulus Black or any other initial supporter of Voldemort) could not know Voldemort was dealing in murder is the same as the answer to the question on another thread of how a movement of pure-blood supremacists could not know their leader was the son of a Muggle. They didn't want to know. A tyrant like Lord Voldemort speaks only to the reptilian brain-ritual behavior, fear, hunger, attack or run. Complex emotions and abstract thought are not so much shut down completely as disconnected. A Death Eater could "know" that Voldemort's father was a Muggle but not experience the inconsistancy because no connection is ever made. A follower of the Dark Lord could "know" that Voldemort was carrying out murder, but not experience the revulsion with which a normal person would react to killing because the emotions are disconnected. It isn't real. That is what I think happened with Snape. Even though we have no canon that speaks to Snape's actual role among the Death Eaters during the first Voldemort war, common sense tells us that he had to have known what Voldemort was up to. As Rowling said, he saw things. But it wasn't real because there was a massive disconnect. Just as killing had no meaning for Draco until he was face to face with Dumbledore, I think killing had no meaning for Snape until it was the Potters' death he had to contemplate, not because he was fond of them- he wasn't-but because they were real to him in a way Voldemort's other victims had not been. Something about their projected murders flipped the switch in his brain that had been turned off, back on. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 16:22:04 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:22:04 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171351 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > Exactly one year after that wonderful and horrible day Ginny could hear > the sounds of celebration in the distance. It's Potter day, a time for > wizards all over the world to honor the memory of a hero. She looked > down into the brilliant green eyes of her infant son cradled in her > arms and kissed Harry Potter on the forehead. She saw no scar. Oh, that gives me an IDEA. I'm rereading OotP, and we all know the "Two-Book Rule." I am reminded of the DE whose head gets shoved into the Big Jar of Time, and his head transforms into a baby's head, then progresses to a man's head, and back again. What if Harry, having been thoroughly devestated and emotionally battered by his life, goes back and tries it again? What if Harry jumps into the Big Jar of Time, pre-gresses to get rid of his VoldyScar (thus releasing the last Horcrux by making it as though it never happened?), and is raised from infancy in a loving, wizard household? That would satisfy the hero's journey that, at the end, the hero like so many before him (Frodo, etc.,) dies or "goes West?" Rides into the sunset? Do you think Molly Weasley could take on one last baby? "And this time, Harry Potter had no scar." (Somewhere near the end, now.) TK -- TigerPatronus! From kevin_mcgoff at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 16:38:42 2007 From: kevin_mcgoff at yahoo.com (another_potter_fan) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:38:42 -0000 Subject: Will Harry Lose His Powers? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171352 I'm re-reading GOF (the book Rowling says is the 'pivotal' book) with my daughter, and there are several occurances where Harry wishes he was just "part of the crowd." Knowing Rowling's tendency to telegraph plot elements, the only way I can see that happening (and Harry surviving Book 7) is to somehow lose his magical powers. Any thoughts on this? Kevin "Desperately trying to come up with a good excuse for missing several days of work real soon" McGoff From mpjdekker at hotmail.com Fri Jul 6 16:45:23 2007 From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:45:23 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171353 My entry in the Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights contest by TigerPatronus: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Remus Lupin. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark on his arm. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? Yes. d. Luna? Yes. e. Ron? Yes. f. Neville? Yes. g. Ginny? Yes. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Vernon Dursley. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron Weasley. b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger. c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn. e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall. 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's diary. b. Gaunt's ring. c. Slytherin's locket. d. Hufflepuff's cup. e. Something of Ravenclaw's, possibly the wand on display in Ollivander's shop window. f. Harry. g. Nagini. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: unicorn. Boggert: Voldemort. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The room where they study love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Harry will hear a voice inside his head and will even have entire conversations with this voice. This voice will reveal itself to be the Horcrux part of Voldemort inside Harry. We will also find out that the Horcrux part inside Harry already talked to Harry when Harry was very small, and at one time was Harry's only childhood friend. 2. We will find out that the Horcrux part inside Harry has been actively trying to influence Harry's life over the past seven years. The Horcrux part inside Harry tried to get Harry to transfer to Slytherin in PS and COS, it tried to get Harry to kill Sirius in POA, it tried to get Harry to keep Sirius away in GOF, and it tried to get Harry to break with his friends in OOTP. 3. At the end of the book the Horcrux part inside Harry will return to Voldemort, and as a result Voldemort will become truly alive and mortal again. Unfortunately Harry most likely will have to die before this return of the Horcrux part inside Harry can take place. When the Horcrux part inside Harry does return to Voldemort it will take with it everything it experienced while it was trapped inside Harry, including the love Harry experienced for the people around him. And it is this love that will ultimately make Voldemort truly alive again. In this respect Sirius' death will also be revealed to be very significant. Sirius' death is what made the Horcrux part inside Harry see the error of its ways. 4. We will find out that Peter Pettigrew was not the spy. Peter did not voluntarily go to Voldemort with the information about the Potters, Voldemort forced the information out of Peter after he was betrayed by the real spy. The real spy will be revealed to be Remus Lupin's werewolf form. Lupin who also is a Legilimens and has been keeping this a secret. 5. We will finally find out why Dumbledore did not need a cloak to become invisible in PS... he had asked all the portraits in Hogwarts to keep an eye on Harry and report everything Harry did back to the portraits in his study. -Maus From shmantzel at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 17:27:32 2007 From: shmantzel at yahoo.com (Dantzel Withers) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 10:27:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <599361.97491.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171354 That would pretty much kill the Harry-Ginny ships, since he would be her adopted brother. Ewwww. lol TK Kenyon wrote: What if Harry, having been thoroughly devestated and emotionally battered by his life, goes back and tries it again? What if Harry jumps into the Big Jar of Time, pre-gresses to get rid of his VoldyScar (thus releasing the last Horcrux by making it as though it never happened?), and is raised from infancy in a loving, wizard household? That would satisfy the hero's journey that, at the end, the hero like so many before him (Frodo, etc.,) dies or "goes West?" Rides into the sunset? Do you think Molly Weasley could take on one last baby? "And this time, Harry Potter had no scar." (Somewhere near the end, now.) TK -- TigerPatronus! --------------------------------- Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 17:29:17 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 17:29:17 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171355 Carol earlier: > > Assuming that the last word in DH is indeed "scar," what are your > > thoughts on the final sentence? > Dungrollin responded: > > Unfortunately, she's changed it. The last word is no longer 'scar', though she says it does appear quite near the end. > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6276682.stm Carol again: Yup. She ruined my thread. (Maybe she reads HPfGu and thought she needed to "disillusion" us?) Of course, we can still speculate on what the last line was before she changed and why she changed it, and since the word "scar" still appears near the end, we can add "on his forehead" to our "scar" sentences and still hope they're somewhat close. Carol, happy that she won't have to fork out the Muggle equivalent of a Knut (not that she really intended to anyway, :-P!) if anyone duplicates DH's last sentence as we now have no way of guessing it! From harryp at stararcher.com Fri Jul 6 17:34:59 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 17:34:59 -0000 Subject: Ironclad reason: legilemency and/or veritaserum Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171356 OK, I searched for "ironclad legilemency", "iron clad legilemency", "iron legil", "legil verita snape", etc, and have not found this theory. Apologies if this has been done to death before: Was Dumbledore's ironclad reason that he trusted Snape because he used Legilemency and/or veritaserum on Snape (with Snape's voluntary approval)? Yes, Snape is a masterful Occulumens, but could he possibly block Dumbledore (!) from knowing the truth under such conditions? Eddie From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 18:29:25 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 18:29:25 -0000 Subject: ...About Snape - Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171358 I (vmonte) wrote: Snape wasn't the average wizard on the street. Snape was working in close proximity to Voldemort. He knew what was happening to the community around him. According to JKR, the second Reign of Terror started in the 1970s. Snape did not graduate from Hogwarts until 1976. The prophecy was heard sometime between late 1979 and early 1980. Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children, during the 1970s. houyhnhnm responded: A Death Eater could "know" that Voldemort's father was a Muggle but not experience the inconsistancy because no connection is ever made. A follower of the Dark Lord could "know" that Voldemort was carrying out murder, but not experience the revulsion with which a normal person would react to killing because the emotions are disconnected. It isn't real. That is what I think happened with Snape. Even though we have no canon that speaks to Snape's actual role among the Death Eaters during the first Voldemort war, common sense tells us that he had to have known what Voldemort was up to. As Rowling said, he saw things. But it wasn't real because there was a massive disconnect. vmonte responded: I'd like to read where JKR said that Snape saw things but they weren't real to him because there was a massive disconnect. Can you point me to that quote? houyhnhnm responded: Just as killing had no meaning for Draco until he was face to face with Dumbledore, I think killing had no meaning for Snape until it was the Potters' death he had to contemplate, not because he was fond of them-he wasn't-but because they were real to him in a way Voldemort's other victims had not been. Something about their projected murders flipped the switch in his brain that had been turned off, back on. vmonte again: The previous poster mentioned that Snape did not know that a child was going to be targeted by Voldemort. And that Snape never realized that Voldemort was evil enough to go after a child. My comment was that Edgar Bones family (including his children) were murdered in the 1970s--before Voldemort's fall. Hence, Snape knew full well, what Voldemort was capable of. Aside from that, what is your argument really saying? All killers are able to shut down their "good feelings" when they are murdering people. Just because there is a disconnect from emotion does not make what they have done/seen any less horrible or wrong. My point is that there is no canon that says that Snape has ever had any kind of epiphany regarding his horrid past. Would he have gone to Dumbledore if another classmate's family were targeted in the prophecy? I don't think so. Snape told Voldemort the prophecy knowing full well that Voldemort would go after someone. Making pretend you don't notice your neighbor being hauled off to a concentration camp is a lot different than what Snape did. It was Snape's choice to do wrong. When book 5 came out, JKR told an interviewer that they shouldn't think that Snape was too nice, and that it was worth keeping an eye on him. Well we know what happened in book 6. After book 6 came out JKR mentioned that someone had loved Snape and that fact made him more culpable than Riddle, who was never loved. >From Yahoo Dictionary culpable: Deserving of blame or censure as being wrong, evil, improper, or injurious. From muellem at bc.edu Fri Jul 6 18:46:18 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 18:46:18 -0000 Subject: ...About Snape - Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171359 vmonte wrote: The previous poster mentioned that Snape did not know that a child was going to be targeted by Voldemort. And that Snape never realized that Voldemort was evil enough to go after a child colebiancardi: actually, I asked that under the thread of prophecy musings. I had wondered, based on the actual wording of the prophecy, if Snape knew it was a baby or not. If he didn't and then found out it was a baby, someone who is defenseless, not the raging Hero who could fight a battle, would that have turned him. No one stated for a fact that Snape did not know it was a child. It was a thought and a good one at that, even if I say so myself :) As far as "Snape never realized that Voldemort was evil enough to go after a child", didn't Sirius, in OotP, tell Harry that a lot of people supported LV and the whole pure-blood idea until they found out what he was going to non pure-bloods. That is when the support began to stop. I believe it was in the chapter where Sirius talks about Regulus's death and his family. colebiancardi From xellina at gmail.com Fri Jul 6 18:57:08 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 22:57:08 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: <599361.97491.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <599361.97491.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <463f9ec00707061157t19b9a27jaf47e3df7121be02@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171360 Nice guesses, guys! Too bad, that JRK just told in an interview that she changed the last word and it's no longer "scar". Not very nice of her, right? ^_~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Fri Jul 6 18:50:45 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 14:50:45 -0400 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: <1183719593.2712.53496.m41@yahoogroups.com> References: <1183719593.2712.53496.m41@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C98E15B20A1005-964-CB7B@WEBMAIL-DF17.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171361 I want to play! Here is my last sentence(s): ... He'd never wanted fame, never wanted to be the hero of the Wizarding World, no matter what a certain snarky professor had believed. But his children were another matter. He was proud to be *their*hero. Which is why, over the years, Harry was happy to recount every sad, happy, scary, painful, and exhilarating moment of his youth, over and over again, any time one of them jumped up on his lap and said excitedly, "Daddy, tell us again how you got your scar!" ... Julie ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 19:07:50 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:07:50 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's internal conflict and Deontological!Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171362 Carol earlier: > > I see a clash within Dumbledore between utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number, meaning in his case the survival of the WW at whatever cost to the individual) and his personal love for Harry, which may or may not be represented by deontology. > > > > In HBP, both DD and Snape are preoccupied with Draco's personal (and moral) safety as well as with Harry . Keeping Draco safe could jeopardize the school, but keeping the school safe by, say, expelling Draco, would guarantee Draco's death. Again, it seems to me, DD tries to strike a balance between the good of the individual (Draco and perhaps UV-bound Snape) and the good of the "greatest number" (the students and staff of Hogwarts). Expelling Draco would certainly be easy, but I'm pretty sure that DD doesn't consider it right. In the end, he talks Draco out of killing him, not for his own sake but for Draco's, and he seems to me to ask Snape to kill him as the only way to save Draco's, Harry's, and Snape's lives (good of the individual), save the school from the DEs (utilitarianism), place Snape in his role as saboteur to fight LV (utilitarianism), and save Harry, not as an individual but as the Chosen One for the sake of the WW (utilitarianism). So, in the end, his conflicting values come together. By allowing Snape rather than a DE or the poison to kill him, DD can choose how he dies and make sure he doesn't take anyone with him (assuming that his complete trust in Snape is justified and Snape does what's required to save those other lives). That, at any rate, is how I interpret "Severus, please!" DD is begging, not for his own life or for Snape's soul but for the safety of a valued ally and friend, two students, the school itself, and, ultimately, the whole WW. > > > > As for Snape himself, I think his immediate action is motivated by the need to get the job done at whatever cost to himself. He hesitates, his expression changing as he looks into DD's eyes and (IMO) learns what he wants, but he doesn't raise his wand even though he surely knows that the UV has been triggered. DD's pleading seems to include a note of urgency--*Please,* Severus! Do it now or it will be too late! But part of Snape, I think, would rather die than kill his mentor . So I see him at this point as what you're calling Utilitarian Snape. He does what's best for the WW and Hogwarts at terrible expense to himself . But there's also an element of what you call Deontological Snape because he's saving Draco and, as always, protecting the "arrogant," rule-breaking Potter boy, without whom the WW is toast. > > > > I do think that Snape operates according to his own moral code, a set of strict, old-fashioned virtues of the sort rejected by Shelleyan Romantics in the early eighteenth [oops! Make that "nineteenth," of course!] century and more recently by the Beat generation of the 1950s and its postmodern offspring from the 1990s onward: Duty, Obedience, Respect for Authority, Loyalty , perhaps others that I can't think of right now. Courage is also important to him; Truth, on the other hand, is in DD's words, "a beautiful and terrible thing," to be handed out in small doses and, if the occasion requires, somewhat distorted. mz_annethrope responded: > > My concern with utilitarianism or utilitarian!DD is not about sacrificing the one for the sake of the many. My concern rather is that utilitarianism aims for maximal happiness, which is an epistemological problem. How can any one of us know what will make the most people happy? That doesn't seem to me to be the choice that DD or Snape makes. As a matter of fact, I think the most truly utilitarian characters we have met so far are Fudge and Umbridge. They actually try to make decisions for the happiness of all. > > Of course, JKR as author determines all the happy ends and we get to argue about whether or not her choices work. I am not so convinced that her more interesting characters do the same. I take Dumbledore at his word when he tells Harry that he was trying to keep him alive when he placed him with the Dursleys. It is a terrible choice to have to make. But I think his motive was love undiluted by the belief that Harry would be the one to save the Wizarding World. > > You see it as both/and. I see it as both/and in a somewhat different way. DD is training Harry for the fight with Voldemort. He doesn't know how it will end. He doesn't teach Harry how to fight. Instead he gives Harry lessons in what every great warrior must do: know your enemy. But I still think his motive is love. Carol responds: I was thinking of "happiness" as being something different from Umbridge's view of it (essentially, ignorance is bliss--I've compared her elsewhere with Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor), more like the ultimate Utilitarian Jeremy Bentham's idea that happiness is pleasure, or at least the absence of pain, with the ideal being "the greatest good for the greatest number." http://www.probe.org/theology-and-philosophy/worldview--philosophy/utilitarianism-the-greatest-good-for-the-greatest-number.html That is, for Bentham if he were a wizard in Harry's time (rather than an eighteenth-century Muggle who had himself stuffed and placed in the British Museum after his death), the safety of all those "nameless and faceless people" would unquestionably take precedence over Harry's suffering and the deaths of the Potters if that suffering and those deaths are necessary to bring about Voldemort's fall. Dumbledore, IMO, is well aware that, thanks to Voldemort's interpretation of the Prophecy rather than the Prophecy itself, which would not have come true had it not been acted upon, Harry is now the Chosen One, the only one who can save the WW. So which is more important, keeping him alive or letting him be briefly happy? Obviously, keeping him alive, whether or not he's the Prophecy Boy (but he wouldn't be in danger if he weren't). But I don't think DD's motive is love at this point. It's more a concern for a particular child's safety combined with the "greater good" (he knows or at least suspects that LV has created his own nemesis by unwittingly making Harry his "equal"). He doesn't even know Harry, who is fifteen months old. And later, when Harry comes to Hogwarts, he again has to choose. Which is more important, Harry living a long life or Harry defeating Voldemort? Obviously, DD wants both, but in the long run, I think he'd choose the WW--the "greater good" over the life of one boy, no matter how courageous and talented. Until the confrontation, Harry must be kept alive. If he dies before he confronts Voldemort, they will all fall victim to Voldemort. But Harry has to be willing to sacrifice himself, as Lily was and as DD is and as Sirius Black says the Order members must be. And DD, had he survived Harry, would have had to be willing to allow that self-sacrifice. (Note, too, that Harry's blood, and by implication his life, has by the end of HBP become more important than DD's--not because Harry is more powerful, which he isn't, but because he's the Chosen One.) But throughout the books, DD is troubled by this conflict--which is more important, Harry's happiness in the usual sense, or the "happiness" of the WW, the greater good? And ultimately, he gives in to the need to tell Harry almost everything, to destroy his hopes for normal relationships and an ordinary wizarding life, by telling him about the Prophecy and LV and the Horcruxes. Harry is the Chosen One, and by the end of HBP, that destiny is more important than anything else to DD (who nevertheless still values the life of the unworthy Draco enough to persuade him that he's not a killer. He's not Puppet!master Dumbledore, in my view, but a wise and good man trying to do balance the good of the individual against the greater good and finding his choices difficult.) Certainly, DDM!Snape, untroubled by any love for Harry, would choose the WW's "happiness" (safety) over Harry's "happiness" (pleasure), which IMO makes him a Utilitarian. He doesn't care if Harry is *happy* in the usual sense, but he goes out of his way to protect him in every book. He'd rather needle Harry than coddle him, punishing him for his "arrogance" and mediocrity while trying to get him to follow rules and directions, but, as Quirrell tells Harry early on, he doesn't want Harry dead or even physically harmed. In fact, it's of the utmost importance to DDM!Snape to keep Harry alive, not for his own sake but for the WW's. And, IMO, he really wants Harry to recognize his own failings and remedy them before it's too late (which is why, for example, he gets Harry to curse him in DADA class when Ron can't manage a nonverbal hex--only he wanted Harry to use a *nonverbal* Protego instead of a verbal one). Unfortunately, their mutual antipathy makes it impossible for him to get this point across to Harry, who knows perfectly well that Snape isn't concerned about his happiness in the usual sense. But Snape, IMO, *is* concerned about "happiness" in the Utilitarian sense of the greatest good for the greatest number. He wants Voldemort defeated, and the only way to do that is to protect Harry until the job is done, after which Harry can take care of himself, assuming that he survives. Snape's attitude toward Draco is another matter. Here we see personal feelings apparently take precedence over the common good. He wants to protect Draco, and he places his own life (and DD's) on the line to do it. But he (apparently) reports this mistake to DD and DD, too, seems to place Draco's "happiness" (his life and well-being, not to mention his soul) above that of the school (which DD nevertheless strives to protect with such unprecedented measures as the anti-flying charm). At the same time, they both strive to keep Harry out of Draco's struggle (Snape by putting him in detention after the Sectumsempra incident, DD by telling him not to worry about what Draco is up to). In the end, as I said, I think DD's concerns and philosophies come together. By having Snape rather than the DEs or the poison kill him, he enables Snape to save himself and both boys (the good or "happiness" of the individual, though certainly none of them will be happy in the usual sense) and at the same time, get the DEs out of the school and, if not insure, at least make possible, the "good" or "happiness" of the "greatest number," the WW in general by allowing Snape to undermine Voldemort and Harry ultimately to vanquish him. Had DD died in some other way and Harry rushed out to fight the DEs, not only his life but the "happiness" of the WW would have been destroyed. mz_annethrope: > > And then on the next page DD tells Harry he has to kill Voldemort, but not because of the prophecy, but because Voldemort's choices have given Harry a thirst for revenge. Carol responds: Are you sure? IIRC, he tells Harry that he tells Harry that he has to kill Voldemort because Voldemort will continue to hunt him down. So it's not Harry's thirst for revenge (What *is* DD thinking by bringing that up, anyway, if Harry's weapon is Love?) but Voldemort's interpretation of the Prophecy (his choices, as you say) that makes the confrontation (and the fulfillment of the Prophecy in some form) inevitable. DD (or JKR) is again trying to have it both ways, freedom of choice and inevitability. > mz_annethrope: > So I don't see Dumbledore as acting the way he does because Harry is the only one who can save the wizarding world. What I do think is that he knows Voldemort and that because of that he tries to use the prophecy against him. Voldemort is the one who puts stock on prophecies and he goes after it. Of course, DD doesn't tell Harry what he is doing. There could be so so many problems if he told him. And Harry, being a free person freely misreads the situation. This is the closest thing I can come to utilitarian!Dumbledore. And Dumbledore admits he made a mistake. Carol responds: You don't think that DD allows Harry special privileges (and allows him to expose himself to particular dangers) because he's the Prophecy Boy? Would he have given him the Invisibility Cloak at age eleven, watched over him, allowed him to enter the third-floor corridor, provided Harry!suited protections should he enter the Chamber of Secrets, allowed him and Hermione to use a Time Turner to rescue Sirius Black, allowed a fourteen-year-old to enter the TWT, had Snape give him Occlumency lessons, given him special tutoring sessions on LV, if he hadn't been the Chosen One, the only one who could save the WW? Yes, Voldemort is going after Harry personally to kill him, but surely Voldie's ultimate defeat is as important to Dumbledore as Harry himself, which is why his love for Harry is a problem in the first place? Snape, of course, doesn't have that problem. For him, it's the "nameless and faceless people" who matter, and Potter is just a nasty, rule-breaking little boy who, unfortunately, has to be protected (and taught a few lessons) so that he can ultimately defeat the Dark Lord. (With Mrs. Weasley, we see the opposite view. Harry is a child to be protected and loved. Of course, she doesn't know about the Prophecy, but she probably wouldn't change he views if she did.) mz_annethrope: Now it just occurred to me that in the consequentialist (utilitarian) world Snape might have been the one to suffer if Voldemort had gotten the prophecy. Go figure. Carol: I'm not sure what you mean her. Can you clarify? mz_annethrope: > Hmmm. Shelley as anti-Snape. This is causing me to like Snape much more than I ought to. Carol: Erm, wouldn't Snape be the anti-Shelley rather than the other way around? (You don't like Shelley and his anti-establishment values, I take it? Not to go OT but just for clarification?) Carol, who can almost envision our poetic Snape composing an "Ode to Duty" which would cause Shelley to rise in horror from his watery grave From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 19:12:23 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:12:23 -0000 Subject: Deontological!Snape (Was: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171363 > Carol a second ago: > > > I see a clash within Dumbledore between utilitarianism (the greatest > good for the greatest number, meaning in his case the survival of the > WW at whatever cost to the individual) and his personal love for > Harry, which may or may not be represented by deontology. He's > caught between placing his beloved Prophecy at a terrible risk and > keeping him safe at the expense of numerous other people, the whole > WW, in fact. > > mz_annethrope: > > > > But deontological (ethics of moral obligation) Snape is a > possibility. Snape has various obligations: to Draco, to Harry, to DD, > etc., and he holds to them as tenaciously as a Saxon warrior to his > oaths. Deonotological Snape allows Snape to be a moral, if flawed, > person--perhaps a tragic figure > lizzyben: Although I believe Snape is on the good side, I have trouble truly seeing him as "Dumbledore's Man," because it seems like the two think differently and operate under different moral codes. They both might want LV gone, and both might act similarly, but it's for different reasons. I love this idea of a potential clash between Deontological!Snape & Teleological!Dumbledore. Deontological moral systems are characterized primarily by a focus upon adherence to independent moral rules or duties. Thus, in order to make the correct moral choices, we simply have to understand what our moral duties are and what correct rules exist which regulate those duties. When we follow our duty, we are behaving morally. When we fail to follow our duty, we are behaving immorally. Kantian ethics are one example of a deontological moral system. This definition seems to fit Snape fairly well.Because Snape does seem to be driven, above all, by the concept of duty. He has various & often conflicting duties that he takes very seriously - a duty to Dumbledore, a duty to protect his students, a duty to Lily (IMO), a duty to Hogwarts, a duty to Draco, etc. He performs these duties because he believes it is the right thing to do, regardless of whether he personally likes it or not. When he performs his duty, he believe that he has acted morally. Teleological moral systems are characterized primarily by a focus on the consequences which any action might have (for that reason, they are often referred to as consequentalist moral systems, and both terms are used here). Thus, in order to make correct moral choices, we have to have some understanding of what will result from our choices. When we make choices which result in the correct consequences, then we are acting morally; when we make choices which result in the incorrect consequences, then we are acting immorally. Utilitarianism is one example. This seems to describe DD's beliefs fairly well. While Snape focuses on duties, DD focuses on goals, plans, ends, & what means best reach that end. And for DD, the ultimate end is the salvation of the WW. These are totally oppositional ethical pardigms, so I can see a lot of places where DD's & Snape's beliefs might come into conflict. For example, Marietta. Teleological!DD believes that it is right to oblivate Marietta, because this prevents her from revealing the names of the other students in the DA. He considers the consequences of the action - it would protect many students from arrest/expulsion, as opposed to harming one student, and decides that the ends justify the means. Oblivating Marietta would bring the "greatest good to the greatest number", and is therefore the correct choice. OTOH, I don't think Deontological!Snape would agree w/this decision at all. He has always seemed to consider the safety of his students to be a primary concern; and he has never used magic against a student. Whether that student is pro-DA or anti-DA, they still should be protected from harm. Therefore, he would consider it his duty to protect Marietta from harm, as part of his wider duty to all his students (regardless of whether he likes them or not). This same conflict seems to exist in regard to Lupin, w/DD allowing him to teach for the greater good (to Lupin, to Harry, to the Plan), etc. & Snape focused instead on the harm Lupin might cause to students. He assigned the essay & told the Slytherins partially out of revenge, but also out of a genuine desire to protect students from danger. The interesting thing is, in Marietta's case, the oblivation actually didn't protect anybody else at all. One minute later, someone came in w/the entire list of DA members, so their identities were exposed anyway. Marietta was harmed, but the expected benefit never materialized. And the potential negative consequences might be worse than DD foresees - maybe it inspires Marietta to join the Death Eaters, or turn Ravenclaws against Harry, etc. This theme of unforseen consequences also springs up w/the Prank. Covering it up might have seemed the wisest choice at the time, because it protected the Mauraders (and DD), but it had consequences that have reverberated for 20+ years. This seems to point out the problems w/simply making a choice based on the likely consequences. As mz_annethrope said, how can we ever truly know the consequences of an action, or what will bring the greatest happiness? Or as another famous wizard said - "Even the very wise cannot see all ends." lizzyben, who loves the image of Snape as a Saxon warrior. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Fri Jul 6 19:31:35 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:31:35 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171364 TK Kenyon: > I'm rereading OotP, and we all know the "Two-Book Rule." > > I am reminded of the DE whose head gets shoved into the Big Jar of > Time, and his head transforms into a baby's head, then progresses to > a man's head, and back again. > > What if Harry, having been thoroughly devestated and emotionally > battered by his life, goes back and tries it again? > > What if Harry jumps into the Big Jar of Time, pre-gresses to get rid > of his VoldyScar (thus releasing the last Horcrux by making it as > though it never happened?), and is raised from infancy in a loving, > wizard household? > > That would satisfy the hero's journey that, at the end, the hero > like so many before him (Frodo, etc.,) dies or "goes West?" Rides > into the sunset? Magpie: I don't think it would satisfy the hero's journey at all-on the contrary, it would undo all the progress Harry had made, as if he'd been hit with one of Lockhart's memory charms. I can't imagine Harry would want to be an infant, and he certainly wouldn't want to become a stranger, which is what he would become in this scenario. -m From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 6 19:58:33 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 15:58:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ...About Snape - Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children... Message-ID: <17504590.1183751913153.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171365 vmonte again: >All killers are able to shut down their "good feelings" when they >are murdering people. Just because there is a disconnect from >emotion does not make what they have done/seen any less horrible or >wrong. Bart: I suspect that this is part of what JKR is referring to when she says that killing tears the soul; the disconnection is what causes the tear. Easy enough for Morty, who isn't connected to begin with (as I have pointed out before, the only way he doesn't match the textbook definition of a psychopath is that he is capable of long-range planning, and keeping up with it). This would logically mean that the creation of a horcrux makes this disconnect permanent; logically extended it would turn a relatively normal person into a sociopath, unable to make emotional connections with others. No friends, no loved ones, just one's self. Specialists in addiction show that the psychological component of addiction, once belittled, has a physical basis. There is a part of your brain that feels pleasure. If you overstimulate that part, it feels great. But if you keep doing it, it adjusts to the overstimulation, to the point where it feels normal. This, in turn, means that what are normal levels of stimulation simply don't work any more. Since pain/pleasure is a primary motivator, your internal motivations become adjusted to ONLY the overstimulation, hence the addiction. Most people get pleasure from other people. There's a reason why charities bring out the suffering children; people get pleasure from bringing pleasure to others, or reducing their suffering. Harry has an addiction to being the hero; this showed up the most in OOP, where he is in withdrawal. And it's not enough for him to be the hero; he has to be recognized as the hero as well. Morty uses this to lure him and his friends to the MoM. DD was probably right; if Harry is this addicted as it is, think of how addicted he would have been if he had been brought up in a household where he was thought of as The Boy Who Lived. He may well have ended up like Gildylocks, faking heroism, even stealing it from others, to keep the public adulation. But what does Morty have that gives him pleasure? With his disconnection, not a hell of a lot. What he needs is to prove himself to be superior to everybody else. Which was kind of hard with DD around. Morty needs someone like Snape to tell him that Harry is a mediocrity who only wins through dumb luck and a lot of skilled help. Dumbledore's very existence was a continual pain to him. With Dumbledore dead, Morty knows of no wizard as powerful as he is (based on the "half prophecy" and Snape's stories, he probably thinks that if Harry beats him, it would be through sheer luck). Bart From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Jul 6 20:14:42 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 20:14:42 -0000 Subject: ...About Snape - Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171366 vmonte: > I'd like to read where JKR said that Snape saw things > but they weren't real to him because there was a > massive disconnect. Can you point me to that quote? houyhnhnm: She has said that Draco, unlike Harry, would be naturally gifted at Occlumency becaue he is able to compartmentalize his emotions. He has shut down pity and compassion because "how else would you become a Death Eater." This would apply as well or better to Snape. It is canon that Snape joined the Death Eaters and carried what he overheard of the prophecy back to Voldemort. It is canon that Albus Dumbledore claimed Snape had rejoined "our side" and is "now no more a Death Eater than I am." It is also canon that Dumbledore considered giving the prophecy to Voldemort the greatest regret of Snape's life and it is secondary canon that Rowling said Snape had seen things as a Death Eater but omitted to say that he had done things. Beyond that *everything* regarding Snape's activities during VWI is speculation. However, given what we know for sure, I feel it is a reasonable conclusion that he had some kind of epiphany. Obviously that's my interpretation. So obviously, in fact, that I didn't think I needed to spell it out. vmonte: > My comment was that Edgar Bones family (including > his children) were murdered in the 1970s--before > Voldemort's fall. Hence, Snape knew full well, > what Voldemort was capable of. > Aside from that, what is your argument really saying? houyhnhnm: I should have snipped the second two paragraphs because what I was really responding to was: > Snape wasn't the average wizard on the street. > Snape was working in close proximity to Voldemort. > He knew what was happening to the community around him. We don't really know that. Snape may have been a low level minion the first time around, for all we know. But then as I was writing, I started thinking that it doesn't make any difference to the issue of *culpability*, [IMO]. It should have been obvious (as the dimensions of an aluminum tube) to Snape, Regulus, Mr. and Mrs. Black, and all the others who got cold feet when they saw the lengths that Voldemort was willing to go to, the lengths that Voldemort was willing to go to. People see what they want to see. vmonte: > Making pretend you don't notice your neighbor being > hauled off to a concentration camp is a lot different > than what Snape did. houyhnhnm: How is it different? From dignan101 at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 6 19:56:33 2007 From: dignan101 at sbcglobal.net (Mary Dignan) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:56:33 -0800 Subject: The last word is NOT "scar" In-Reply-To: <8C98E15B20A1005-964-CB7B@WEBMAIL-DF17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171367 Hello all: I have just read a news article about a recent interview JKR gave, in which she said she changed the last word of Deathly Hallows at the last hour. Here's the MSNBC link to the story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19631825/ Best, Mary Dignan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 20:25:46 2007 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 20:25:46 -0000 Subject: Last word no longer "scar" after all? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171368 I just read a brief article from my Yahoo news generator (sorry - I x- ed out the article before coming here, so I don't know where it came from) that supposedly included an interview in which JKR said the final word has changed... can anyone confirm? Lorel From aholm006 at gmail.com Fri Jul 6 17:45:01 2007 From: aholm006 at gmail.com (rummage8) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 17:45:01 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy - Did Snape really only hear half of it? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171369 So forgive me if this has already been thoroughly discussed. There are so many posts that there is no way that I could go through them all to see if this subject has been touched upon. Though, I am pretty sure that most of the people in this discussion group are die hard fans, so I'm sure this has been discussed... That being said. The prophecy: I am a little confused about Snape only hearing half of it. And I would love any feed back anyone has. Dumbledore tells Harry "that the eavesdropper was detected only a short way into the prophecy and thrown from the building...He only heard the first part, the part foretelling the birth of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you--again marking you as his equal." This is fine. So from this picture. Snape is hovering outside the door. Listening in. He hears "THE ONE WITH THE POWER TO VANQUISH THE DARK LORD APPROACHES...BORN TO THOSE WHO HAVE THRICE DEFIED HIM, BORN AS THE SEVENTH MONTH DIES." He is caught. The owner tells him to scram. He runs and tells his master what he has heard. Ok, but this is does not make sense. In the 6th book, when Trelawney gets manhandled out of the Room of Requirement, she tells Harry about her first meeting with Dumbledore. She says to him " Dumbledore did me the courtesy of calling upon me in my room. He questioned me...I must confess that at first, I thought he seemed ill-disposed toward Divination...and I remember I was starting to feel a little odd. I had not eaten much that day..but then...but then we were rudely interrupted by Severus Snape!..Yes there was a commotion outside the door and it flew open and there was that rather uncouth barman standing with Snape, who was waffling about having come the wrong way up the stairs, although I'm afraid that I myself rather thought that he had been apprehended eavesdropping on my interview with Dumbledore..." So we have already seen in the third book..crap at least I think it's the third..perhaps it's the fourth..where Trelawney makes that little prophecy to Harry..and she goes all trance like... she is all trance like..and not aware of whats going on.. so for her to have known it was Snape..that means that she would have had to finished the prophecy..she would have had to come out of the trance to see that it was Snape... which means that Snape would have heard the whole thing so ok...few things have come to mind..maybe jk made a mistake..its happened before or maybe Snape only told Voldemort half the prophecy... so if he heard the whole thing...it could totally be read as his downfall would be that night...the night Voldemort goes to kill him.. I mean there is nothing in there about it happening 17 years later? if you heard it..you would assume...the dark lord will fall when he tries to kill him, except Snape doesn't know how its going to end...he doesnt know how Lily is going to go all lovey on Harry. Now... I am assuming that he is assuming that it would be his downfall...keeping in mind..this is kind where Lily comes into play. We can't assume at this point that Snape knows how the dark lord will interpret this prophecy..at this point it could have been either the Potters or the Longbottom's. In fact, apparently Snape (if we cant trust what he tells Dumbledore), is distressed when he finds out how the Dark lord interprets the prophecy. Which only means that he [snape] had interpreted it as the Neville being the one chosen one. Which also makes sense...he despises james..he probably wouldnt have allowed it to enter into his mind that James' son could have been of any importance WHICH..now that I am thinking about it..adds to why Snape would be distressed to think that the dark lord interprets that prophecy to mean Harry..I mean...not because of his love for Lily..but his hatred for James. So yea..i just wanted some feedback..that would be awesome. rummage8 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 21:18:28 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 21:18:28 -0000 Subject: New wizard of the month on JKR website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171370 Alla wrote: > This month features Godric. > > Godric Gryffindor > Medieval (precise dates unknown) > One of the four famous Founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and > Wizardry, Godric Gryffindor was the most accomplished dueller of his > time, an enlightened fighter against Muggle-discrimination and the > first owner of the celebrated Sorting Hat. Carol responds: Rather belatedly returning to this thread: I had expected Rowena Ravenclaw to be this month's Wizard of the Month and was surprised to see Godric Gryffindor, whom I had expected to be the last of the four. I also wondered why the Four Founders sequence began in May (with Helga Hufflepuff) instead of April, which would have given us April: HH; May: Salazar Slytherin; June (RR); and July (Harry's month, complete with ruby birthstone to match the ruby-studded Sword of Gryffindor): GG. It occurs to me that maybe JKR didn't want to show Rowena Ravenclaw on her website just yet because Rowena will be holding the Ravenclaw Horcrux (as HH was holding the cup and SS was wearing that overlarge locket, which BTW ought to be gold, not silver, IIRC). So whether she's holding the wand that ends up in Ollivander's window or the tiara that ends up in the RoR (or something else altogether), she'll appear with the "something from Ravenclaw" that JKR doesn't want us to know about yet. Unfortunately, if this theory is correct, it could mean that the Sword of Gryffindor is a Horcrux. I don't think that's the case--DD says that the Sword is safe, Harry used it to kill the Basilisk, which I don't think he could do if it were a Horcrux, and I think the spell that LV cast after the failed DADA interview was the DADA curse. OTOH, I suppose the Horcruxes could be "deathly hallows" against which Harry is protected by the, erm, "undeathly hallow"--the Sword of Gryffindor, which already indirectly aided him in destroying the diary Horcrux (though Fawkes, not the Sword, saved him from the Basilisk's venom). Carol, who ran across a reference to *rubies* protecting against Basilisks at http://www.ceu.hu/medstud/manual/SRM/symbol.htm when she was researching the properties of rue and wonders what the magical properties of GG's sword may be From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 22:05:41 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:05:41 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy - Did Snape really only hear half of it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171371 rummage8 wrote: > > So forgive me if this has already been thoroughly discussed. There are so many posts that there is no way that I could go through them all to see if this subject has been touched upon. > > Though, I am pretty sure that most of the people in this discussion group are die hard fans, so I'm sure this has been discussed... Carol responds: Our search function does work if you use the right search terms. In this case, Dumbledore Snape Trelawney Prophecy will probably get you what you're looking for. A number of posters (Mike, Steve, lizzyben, zgirnius, and I among them) have discussed the topic fairly frequently, most recently in lizzyben's Puppet!master Dumbledore thread). Try this link for starters and follow the thread from there: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/171052 Here's another, less recent thread, starting with this discussion between brothergib and me: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/162246 rummage 8: > > I am a little confused about Snape only hearing half of it. And I would love any feed back anyone has. > Ok, but this is does not make sense. > > So we have already seen in the third book..crap at least I think it's the third..perhaps it's the fourth..where Trelawney makes that little prophecy to Harry Carol: It's the third book. She's predicting that the servant (Wormtail) will return to his master (Voldemort). And, yes, she does go into a trance like the one she must have been in for the first Prophecy but, of course, doesn't remember. rummage 8: > so ok...few things have come to mind..maybe jk made a mistake..its happened before or maybe Snape only told Voldemort half the prophecy... > > so if he heard the whole thing...it could totally be read as his [Voldemort's] downfall would be that night...the night Voldemort goes to kill him.. I mean there is nothing in there about it happening 17 years later? if you heard it..you would assume...the dark lord will fall when he tries to kill him, except Snape doesn't know how its going to end...he doesnt know how Lily is going to go all lovey on Harry. > > Now... I am assuming that he is assuming that it would be his downfall...keeping in mind..this is kind where Lily comes into play. We can't assume at this point that Snape knows how the dark lord will interpret this prophecy..at this point it could have been either the Potters or the Longbottom's. In fact, apparently Snape (if we cant trust what he tells Dumbledore), is distressed when he finds out how the Dark lord interprets the prophecy. Which only means that he [snape] had interpreted it as the Neville being the one chosen one. Which also makes sense...he despises james..he probably wouldnt have allowed it to enter into his mind that James' son could have been of any importance > > WHICH..now that I am thinking about it..adds to why Snape would be distressed to think that the dark lord interprets that prophecy to mean Harry..I mean...not because of his love for Lily..but his hatred for James. Carol responds: I agree that the two versions are inconsistent, but it's important to note that DD is not only concealing the eavesdropper's identity in his version, he's telescoping events. When he tells Harry, "He [the eavesdropper] only heard the first part, the part foretelling the birth of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you--again marking you as his equal," he makes it sound as if the Prophecy was made at a time when it was possible to tell not only that it referred to a baby but that it referred specifically to Harry. (DD, knowing the whole Prophecy, can figure all this out, but I'm not so sure about young Snape.) Moreover, at the time the Prophecy is made (sometime between autumn 1970 and spring 1980), neither Harry nor Neville has been born, and it's unlikely that Snape (or Voldemort) knows that Lily or Alice is pregnant. I don't see how either of them could know that the Prophecy could apply to Harry and/or Neville until the birth announcements appeared in the Daily Prophet at the earliest, and even then, LV seems to have waited almost fifteen months to act, so even he, perhaps, didn't immediately interpret the Prophecy in a way that endangered a baby and his parents. So, yes, JKR *is* inconsistent on a number of points and the Prophecy could be one of them, but DD's condensation of the events is another factor, and Trelawney is supplying her own explanations for Snape's behavior (he's certainly not eavesdropping for job tips though that could, as Lizzyben suggested be the cover story that DD gave her; he and Snape certainly have concocted their share of cover stories, separately or together.) I also agree that "the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches" does not sound like the birth of a baby. It seems to me that the Prophecy conflates or confuses the events at Godric's Hollow with those that will occur when LV faces Harry as a "man" of seventeen. Not even DD, who alone knew the whole Prophecy, could have anticipated such an outcome originating from LV's interpretation of this first part and his attempts to thwart it. At any rate, I recommend that you explore the links I gave you and the associated threads and perhaps conduct a search of your own using the search terms I've suggested. You'll find plenty of ideas to agree or disagree with and perhaps come up with something new after reading them. We certainly haven't provided any definitive answers, or even persuaded each other to share our individual interpretations AFAIK! Carol, hearing thunder in the distance and afraid that she'll have to turn off her computer shortly and grateful for yesterday's few drops of rain From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Jul 6 23:25:28 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 23:25:28 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy - Did Snape really only hear half of it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171372 Carol: > Moreover, at the time the Prophecy is made (sometime > between autumn 1970 and spring 1980), houyhnhnm: Como? :-D No, I know what you meant and I've always liked your idea that the prophecy was made on Halloween, the night of Harry's conception. The one thing I don't understand is why the the desription of the night as cold and wet is considered by all, it seems, as proof that the interview took place some time between late fall and early spring. In the Scottish Highlands couldn't you have cold, wet nights at any time of the year. I have never been there, but I have been in North Wales in July and I remember several cold, wet nights (and days). From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Jul 6 23:22:36 2007 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:22:36 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Will Harry Lose His Powers? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1974805876.20070706162236@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171373 Kevin: a> I'm re-reading GOF (the book Rowling says is the 'pivotal' book) with a> my daughter, and there are several occurances where Harry wishes he a> was just "part of the crowd." Knowing Rowling's tendency to telegraph a> plot elements, the only way I can see that happening (and Harry a> surviving Book 7) is to somehow lose his magical powers. Any thoughts a> on this? Dave: Even if he loses his powers, I think he will still be, "Famous Harry Potter, who sacrificed even his beloved power of flight to save the world from You-Know-Who". The only way I can see that he can escape lifelong fame and lead a somewhat normal (for a Wizard) life is if someone else (Snape? Umbridge?) manages to seize credit for LV's final demise, which could seem cruelly ironic to us, but probably, after some initial outrage, would suit Harry just fine in the long run: "I'm Harry Potter, just another Auror doing his duty." Dave From balrogmama at wi.rr.com Fri Jul 6 23:42:43 2007 From: balrogmama at wi.rr.com (laurawkids) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 23:42:43 -0000 Subject: Wizard of OZ ending? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171374 You all have been very busy, so busy I can't possibly keep up! Forgive me if this has already been broached. I just watched Wizard of Oz twice this week - my kids will be in the play - and liked what happens to the witch. Dorothy throws water on the witch out of her instinctual concern for her well being - call it love - but water is the one thing that kills her. So Dorothy's love is what kills the witch. If D and co. had stood there and said "burn baby burn" she might have survived through some black magic sort of thing. How elegant it would be if something is threatening LV and Harry struggles with himself to let it happen or step in, and he fires off that saving spell which is the one thing LV cannot survive, just by chance, after all the horcruxes are taken care of, of course. After all, Dorothy says she was only trying to help. Dorothy is not tainted by murder because of this. Harry would still be an innocent! I'm enjoying your last predictions. I can't wait for the big Oak Park Party!! Laura From laurel.coates at gmail.com Fri Jul 6 22:17:32 2007 From: laurel.coates at gmail.com (Laurel Coates) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 15:17:32 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Prophecy - Did Snape really only hear half of it? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3cd952930707061517ya9cc560mdf1bfb70e5130dc6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171375 Rummage8 writes: The prophecy: I am a little confused about Snape only hearing half of it. And I would love any feed back anyone has. Dumbledore tells Harry "that the eavesdropper was detected only a short way into the prophecy and thrown from the building...He only heard the first part, the part foretelling the birth of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you--again marking you as his equal." This is fine. So from this picture. Snape is hovering outside the door. Listening in. He hears "THE ONE WITH THE POWER TO VANQUISH THE DARK LORD APPROACHES...BORN TO THOSE WHO HAVE THRICE DEFIED HIM, BORN AS THE SEVENTH MONTH DIES." He is caught. The owner tells him to scram. He runs and tells his master what he has heard. Ok, but this is does not make sense. so ok...few things have come to mind..maybe jk made a mistake..its happened before or maybe Snape only told Voldemort half the prophecy... Laurel: These are the same ideas I have had. Here' s another idea: Trelawney came out of her trance in time to see Snape, and assumed that he had just gotten there, rudlely interrupted her, etc. However, I think it is more likely that the sequence of events was something like this: 1) Snape follows Dumbledore to the Boar's Head 2) Dumbledore starts his meeting with Trelawney 3) Snape starts sneaking upstairs 4) Aberforth follows Snape to see what he's up to 5) Trelawney breaks into her prophecy 6) Snape listens outside the door 7) Trelawney completes the first half of the prophecy 8) Aberforth catches Snape and pulls him away fromt eh door 9) Trelawney finishes with her prophecy 10) Trelawney hears the noise outside the door 11) Dumbledore and Trelawney open the door and see Snape struggling with Aberforth as he pulls Snape downstairs 12) Aberforth throws him out the door 13) Trelawney and Dumbledore finish their interview. Laurel [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From darksworld at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 02:16:59 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 02:16:59 -0000 Subject: ...About Snape - Edgar Bones was killed, with his wife and children... In-Reply-To: <17504590.1183751913153.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171376 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Specialists in addiction show that the psychological component of addiction, once belittled, has a physical basis. There is a part of your brain that feels pleasure. If you overstimulate that part, it feels great. But if you keep doing it, it adjusts to the overstimulation, to the point where it feels normal. This, in turn, means that what are normal levels of stimulation simply don't work any more. Since pain/pleasure is a primary motivator, your internal motivations become adjusted to ONLY the overstimulation, hence the addiction. > Charles: Close, but not quite. Addiction has more to do with the adjustment of neurotransmitters in the brain and neural receptors than the amount of stimulation. Trust me, I just recently finished a very difficult class on the subject. Bart again: > Harry has an addiction to being the hero; this showed up the most in OOP, where he is in withdrawal. And it's not enough for him to be the hero; he has to be recognized as the hero as well. Morty uses this to lure him and his friends to the MoM. DD was probably right; if Harry is this addicted as it is, think of how addicted he would have been if he had been brought up in a household where he was thought of as The Boy Who Lived. He may well have ended up like Gildylocks, faking heroism, even stealing it from others, to keep the public adulation. > Charles again: I'm sorry, but I really don't see any canon to support your position. Harry does NOT want attention, the text states it time and again. Harry wants to be a hero, yes, but in the sense of someone who does the actual saving, not the guy who ends up in the papers. It is implied (and almost actually stated) in the text that it is his love for Sirius that leads him to the DoM, NOT(!) a quest to get in the WW's heart as the hero of the day. Bart again: > But what does Morty have that gives him pleasure? With his disconnection, not a hell of a lot. What he needs is to prove himself to be superior to everybody else. Which was kind of hard with DD around. Morty needs someone like Snape to tell him that Harry is a mediocrity who only wins through dumb luck and a lot of skilled help. Dumbledore's very existence was a continual pain to him. With Dumbledore dead, Morty knows of no wizard as powerful as he is (based on the "half prophecy" and Snape's stories, he probably thinks that if Harry beats him, it would be through sheer luck). > Charles: You've somewhat answered your own question. Voldemort seeks power. That is his drug. That is what gives him pleasure. Yes, Voldemort needs sycophants. Every megalomaniacal twit needs sycophants, to tell them how great their power is. As far as DD goes, I think that Voldemort always thought himself greater, but was faced with the secret inferiority complex that haunts most fictional super villains. I think he needed his sycophants to tell him he was better than DD, but I don't think that Harry really scares him. I think that if Harry did scare him, Moldybutt would have had Draco going after Harry, rather than DD. Charles, who thinks that the Harry bashers are in for a big letdown when Harry wins. From andie1 at earthlink.net Sat Jul 7 02:25:47 2007 From: andie1 at earthlink.net (grindieloe) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 02:25:47 -0000 Subject: Ironclad reason: NOT legilemency and/or veritaserum In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171377 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: > Was Dumbledore's ironclad reason that he trusted Snape because he > used Legilemency and/or veritaserum on Snape (with Snape's voluntary > approval)? > Eddie > I don't think so. I know that it seems silly to think that the ironclad reason was that Snape was sorry that James and Lilly were dead... sorry he had overheard the prophecy and ran to Voldemort. However, I think that it is a valid, "ironclad" reason when we consider the overall theme of HP - LOVE. I believe that JK has given us some helpful hints to guess that Snape loved Lilly - ex: both great "potioneers." If Snape confided this to DD, DD would believe him. Dumbledore believes in love. This is why Snape came over to the good side. I don't believe that he was so sorry that James was dead, but he was sorry that LILLY was dead. Thus, DD trusts Snape. Snape is DD man... through and through. Andrea From ekrdg at verizon.net Sat Jul 7 02:31:32 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:31:32 -0400 Subject: Dumbledore as Heir of Gryffindor Message-ID: <001201c7c03e$efe954a0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 171378 I know this has been discussed and I did go back through the messages... I just couldn't find anything definite. All the evidence points to it, the griffin on the door, the sorting hat, the sword, etc. But has JKR shot this down that we know of ? I couldn't find anything but wasn't sure. I know she said Harry's not but what about Dumbledore ? Kimberly [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ekrdg at verizon.net Sat Jul 7 02:35:05 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:35:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizard of OZ ending? References: Message-ID: <001a01c7c03f$6eb61d90$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 171379 You all have been very busy, so busy I can't possibly keep up! Forgive me if this has already been broached. I just watched Wizard of Oz twice this week - my kids will be in the play - and liked what happens to the witch. Dorothy throws water on the witch out of her instinctual concern for her well being - call it love - but water is the one thing that kills her. So Dorothy's love is what kills the witch. If D and co. had stood there and said "burn baby burn" she might have survived through some black magic sort of thing. How elegant it would be if something is threatening LV and Harry struggles with himself to let it happen or step in, and he fires off that saving spell which is the one thing LV cannot survive, just by chance, after all the horcruxes are taken care of, of course. After all, Dorothy says she was only trying to help. Dorothy is not tainted by murder because of this. Harry would still be an innocent! I'm enjoying your last predictions. I can't wait for the big Oak Park Party!! Laura Kimberly: I do like this theory and especially, if you think about it, what her followers' reactions were. They were glad to be rid of her, to be free of her ruling. I do think that when LV is dead, his deatheaters will be a bit relieved. When he was thought to be finished off at Godric's Hollow, how many of them went and looked for him or were even upset ? Only a few, the LeStrange's & co. I think the reaction of The Wicked Witch's henchmen will be somewhat the same. I don't think they'll bow on one knee saying, "Hail to Harry !" but you know what I mean. :-) Kimberly From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 7 03:22:32 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 03:22:32 -0000 Subject: It was Neville all along Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171380 My son proposed this theory: the prophecy was about Neville all along. In the end it is Neville who finally finishes off Voldemort, not Harry. Perhaps Harry provides the distraction, or destroys the horcruxes, but it is Neville who does the ultimate deed. Remember that Neville has the last wand Ollivander sold (maybe). Now Neville is becoming his own man. New wand, new confidence, and just as much reason to want to destroy Voldemort as Harry. Comments? Eddie & Son From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 03:51:59 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 03:51:59 -0000 Subject: It was Neville all along In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171381 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: > > My son proposed this theory: the prophecy was about Neville all along. > In the end it is Neville who finally finishes off Voldemort, not > Harry. Perhaps Harry provides the distraction, or destroys the > horcruxes, but it is Neville who does the ultimate deed. Remember > that Neville has the last wand Ollivander sold (maybe). Now Neville > is becoming his own man. New wand, new confidence, and just as much > reason to want to destroy Voldemort as Harry. > > Comments? > > Eddie & Son > TKJ: I think that Neville will play a major part in the end as well as Harry. :-) They might do it together or Neville will do something to help in a major way. But, I also think that since the prophecy could of been about Neville as well (YES, I know LV "marked" Harry) That he will play a part. But I def think that JKR will give Neville a big part n this last book. I'm hoping the Neville will be able to get some sort of revenge on Bellatrix(sp) I hope he doesn't kill her but makes her suffer or takes away her powers or something. He deserves that. It would be great if his parents can come back to normal From balrogmama at wi.rr.com Sat Jul 7 05:11:41 2007 From: balrogmama at wi.rr.com (laurawkids) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 05:11:41 -0000 Subject: Wizard of OZ ending? In-Reply-To: <001a01c7c03f$6eb61d90$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171382 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly" wrote: > > You all have been very busy, so busy I can't possibly keep up! > Forgive me if this has already been broached. > > I just watched Wizard of Oz twice this week - my kids will be in the > play - and liked what happens to the witch. > > Dorothy throws water on the witch out of her instinctual concern for > her well being - call it love - but water is the one thing that kills > her. So Dorothy's love is what kills the witch. If D and co. had > stood there and said "burn baby burn" she might have survived through > some black magic sort of thing. > > How elegant it would be if something is threatening LV and Harry > struggles with himself to let it happen or step in, and he fires off > that saving spell which is the one thing LV cannot survive, just by > chance, after all the horcruxes are taken care of, of course. > > After all, Dorothy says she was only trying to help. Dorothy is not > tainted by murder because of this. Harry would still be an innocent! > > I'm enjoying your last predictions. I can't wait for the big Oak > Park Party!! > > Laura > > > Kimberly: > I do like this theory and especially, if you think about it, what her > followers' reactions were. They were glad to be rid of her, to be free of > her ruling. I do think that when LV is dead, his deatheaters will be a bit > relieved. When he was thought to be finished off at Godric's Hollow, how > many of them went and looked for him or were even upset ? Only a few, the > LeStrange's & co. I think the reaction of The Wicked Witch's henchmen > will be somewhat the same. I don't think they'll bow on one knee saying, > "Hail to Harry !" but you know what I mean. :-) > > Kimberly > Laura: I didn't even get that far, thanks! I'm sure there will be a sense of relief in LV's former followers. I'm guessing LV will be throwing too many out in front as cannon fodder for them to take kindly to it! Laura From aholm006 at gmail.com Sat Jul 7 04:39:43 2007 From: aholm006 at gmail.com (rummage8) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 04:39:43 -0000 Subject: It was Neville all along In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171383 > > Eddie & Son > > > > My son proposed this theory: the prophecy was about Neville all > > along. In the end it is Neville who finally finishes off > > Voldemort, not Harry. > > TKJ: > > I think that Neville will play a major part in the end as well as > Harry. :-) They might do it together or Neville will do > something to help in a major way. > > I'm hoping the Neville will be able to get some sort of revenge on > Bellatrix. I hope he doesn't kill her but makes her suffer or > takes away her powers or something. He deserves that. Ashleigh: Neville is the man. I really love him. So yea, I definitely think that he will have some major part to play. But gosh, I am not sure that I want to see him torture/kill the Lestranges? Honestly, any time Harry tries to use an unforgivable curse, I cringe. And actually I have yet to see anyone in the order use them. Can anyone show me when someone in the OotP has used an unforgivable? What I would like to see is Neville to do some pay back..but and I hate to be cheesy..but in some form of forgiveness. I mean is that what the order is about. Wasn't that what DD was harping on through out all the books. Love..LOVE LOVE, Ashleigh, who pondered enough about Eileen Prince's son From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Sat Jul 7 05:44:31 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 05:44:31 -0000 Subject: Wizard of OZ ending? In-Reply-To: <001a01c7c03f$6eb61d90$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171384 Laura wrote: > I just watched Wizard of Oz twice this week - my kids will be in the > play - and liked what happens to the witch. > > Dorothy throws water on the witch out of her instinctual concern for > her well being - call it love - but water is the one thing that kills > her. So Dorothy's love is what kills the witch. If D and co. had > stood there and said "burn baby burn" she might have survived through > some black magic sort of thing. > > How elegant it would be if something is threatening LV and Harry > struggles with himself to let it happen or step in, and he fires off > that saving spell which is the one thing LV cannot survive, just by > chance, after all the horcruxes are taken care of, of course. > > After all, Dorothy says she was only trying to help. Dorothy is not > tainted by murder because of this. Harry would still be an innocent! Laura > Kimberly wrote: > I do like this theory and especially, if you think about it, what her > followers' reactions were. They were glad to be rid of her, to be free of > her ruling. I do think that when LV is dead, his deatheaters will be a bit > relieved. When he was thought to be finished off at Godric's Hollow, how > many of them went and looked for him or were even upset ? Only a few, the > LeStrange's & co. I think the reaction of The Wicked Witch's henchmen > will be somewhat the same. I don't think they'll bow on one knee saying, > "Hail to Harry !" but you know what I mean. :-) > > Kimberly > Anne Squires: I also like this theory. I was thinking earlier this week about the ending that the "bad guy" gets in many Disney films. My memory of these things may be a bit off; but the way I remember it, many "bad guys" fall to their deaths in the midst of an epic struggle and the "good guy," who is usually just fighting for his life in self-defense, is actually guiltless/blameless in the death of the baddie. Snow White: The Witch/Evil Stepmother/Evil Queen falls to her death as she flees from woodland animals & the dwarfs. It happens during a most convenient thunder storm with lots of thunder and lightning that add even more confusion to the situation. Snow White & Prince Charming are completely innocent of her death. Beauty & The Beast: Gaston falls to his death after attacking the Beast. If I remember correctly, a storm is raging at the same time. At any rate, his fall is an accident. Belle is completely innocent. The Beast not as much, but the way I remember it, the Beast was fighting in self-defense. The Lion King: Uncle Scar also falls to his death. The Lion King (sorry I don't recall his name--Simba maybe?) is fighting in self-defense. At one point I think he has the upper hand and tells his uncle to flee and never return, then Uncle Scar attacks him from the rear. I remember thinking the battle between the two was exactly the same as Gaston vs. the Beast with the exact same result. I think there is also a storm during this battle as well. Cinderella: The cat falls to his death after struggling with the dog and the mice. The mice are fighting for their lives. Cinderella and Prince Charming are completely innocent. So, in these particular films "love" does not destroy the "bad guy;" however, the "good guy" remains innocent, does not really do anything wrong or immoral, and reaps the benefits of a destroyed "bad guy." I have often wondered exactly what DD did to defeat Grindelwald? Did he actually kill Grindelwald? Or did DD neutralize him in some other way? Was it in self-defense? Did "the power of love" play any part? I know none of these books are entitled "Dumbledore and the Defeat of Grindelwald;" but I'd still like to know. I'd like to know how "innocent" DD was of killing (if Grindelwald was, indeed, killed). I feel Harry's actions will mirror whatever DD did. OMG, two weeks left. Anne From Schlobin at aol.com Sat Jul 7 05:57:17 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (Schlobin at aol.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 01:57:17 EDT Subject: Okay, let's get Sirius - Harry Potter predictions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171385 Okay, let's get very serious. What are my predictions for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.... 1) First, Albus Dumbledore is dead. His portrait is already with the former head masters and head mistresses of Hogwarts in his former office. J.K. Rowling told Daniel Radcliffe that Dumbledore was "giving her trouble.". "Isn't he dead?" said Daniel "Oh yes" said J.K. Rowling. Dumbledore is causing trouble through a flashback, or the pensieve..but he is dead, dead, dead. 2) Harry will survive and Tom Riddle (a/k/a Lord Voldemort) will die. I cannot imagine that Ms. Rowling will disappoint all the beautiful and wonderful children (including mine) by killing Harry Potter. Those are the things I am sure of... Now let's go into less certain predictions... Severus Snape and Peter Pettigrew will some how help Harry defeat Lord Voldemort in the final hour. Both will die. Susan From twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 09:20:24 2007 From: twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com (Jo (Joanna)) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 09:20:24 -0000 Subject: Last word no longer "scar" after all? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171386 Lorel wrote: I just read a brief article from my Yahoo news generator (sorry - I x- ed out the article before coming here, so I don't know where it came from) that supposedly included an interview in which JKR said the final word has changed... can anyone confirm? Jo writes: Yes, JKR was on a chat show last night in the UK, Friday Night with Jonathan Ross (on the BBC) and Jonathan asked JKR whether it was true that the last word of book 7 is "scar". JKR replied that whilst it was going to have been it now no longer is. Jonathan asked her what the last word is and she said she couldn't tell him. It was a really interesting interview and I thought the group would be alive with it today. Jo. From nerdie55 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 09:06:26 2007 From: nerdie55 at yahoo.com (nerdie55) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 09:06:26 -0000 Subject: Fawkes: perhaps it was Godric Gryffindor's bird? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171387 The phoenix is reborn from its ashes over and over again. Fawkes must be tremendously old, perhaps Godric Gryffindor was the original owner and the phoenix may be older still. If so, Fawkes has memories that go back ages and that may help Harry. Harry thinks that Fawkes has gone forever after the death of Dumbledore, but I am sure that the phoenix will come back. Perhaps Fawkes knows where the Gryffindor horcrux is and will lead Harry to it. (I don't think it is the sword; would one horcrux be able to destroy another as the sword destroyed the diary-horcrux?) Two more weeks to go... Nerdie55 From twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 09:59:56 2007 From: twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com (Jo (Joanna)) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 09:59:56 -0000 Subject: JKR Interview Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171388 I answered the message regarding the last word no longer being "scar" according to JKR's interview with Jonathan Ross last night. I just thought I would give you some other snippets from the show. JR asked if JKR had cried when she finished the book and she said she hadn't cried then but had absolutely sobbed when she had written a chapter that is quite near the end. She said that two people were dying who she had originally intended to live (we knew this) but that her saying that meant that people thought "only two" people would die when it is actually a "bloodbath". She said she was joking but that more than two people die in the book. JR asked if she would be writing more books about Harry Potter and she said Harry's story "comes to quite a clear end" in book 7 and then went on to say "never say never, I may write again about that world". What was interesting was that she said she might write about "that world" but not about Harry. The whole interview was interesting and I hope I'm not breaking rules on here by saying that if you want to see it you can go to YouTube and it is on there. I don't know what this all means for Harry but it doesn't sound good! Jo. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 10:40:47 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:40:47 -0000 Subject: JKR Interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171389 Spoiler******************** P O I L E R S A H E A D************************************************************ > Jo: > I answered the message regarding the last word no longer > being "scar" according to JKR's interview with Jonathan Ross > last night. > JR asked if JKR had cried when she finished the book and she > said she hadn't cried then but had absolutely sobbed when she > had written a chapter that is quite near the end. > She said that two people were dying who she had originally > intended to live (we knew this) but that her saying that meant > that people thought "only two" people would die when it is > actually a "bloodbath". She said she was joking but that more > than two people die in the book. > I don't know what this all means for Harry but it doesn't sound > good! Goddlefrood: The above is interesting certainly, but does not really add too much to what many could have already inferred from previous interviews with JKR. Nevertheless, certain people will no doubt be pleased, and I'm sure you all know who you are. It would not surprise this poster too much if we see a few changes in the trend of answers on Tiger Patronus's recent bragging rights contest in light of JKR's appearance on the Woss show. I would say that it does seem to suggest that a character or characters for whom JKR has a particular fondness will not be appearing as living entities in any possible future books on the wizarding world. One part of the interview is potentially good news, in that there may be more books, but again it's nothing JKR hasn't said before. Goddlefrood From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 7 10:54:26 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:54:26 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <00f401c7bfdc$7ebb8f80$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171390 > > Rules: > > Copy these questions and email your answers *both* to > *tigerpatronus* *at* *yahoo* *dot* *com* and to the newsgroup. You > must email your entry to TigerPatronus to be entered in the contest. > You will receive an email confirmation of your entry. In the event > of a dispute, the entry posted to the group will be your back-up. > > Deadline: Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 11:59 pm (midnight) EDT. (No > Friday entries will be accepted.) > > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes > > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes > > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Hagrid > > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? The Dark Mark > > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry ? Yes, though he won't attend classes regularly. > > b. Draco? No > > c. Hermione? Yes, though she will go off with Harry at times. > > d. Luna? Yes > > e. Ron? Yes, though he will go off with Harry at times. > > f. Neville? Yes > > g. Ginny? Yes > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur and Lupin and Tonks > > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Argus Filch > > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan > > b. Head Girl? Hermione > > c. DADA Instructor? New teacher we haven't met yet > > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn > > e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore, and because of that, the Order of the Phoenix. > > > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > a. Diary > b. Ring > c. Slytherin Locket > d. Hufflepuff's Cup > e. Ravenclaw's Wand > f. Gryffindor artefact, maybe a medal? > g. Harry's scar > > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus is a phoenix (not Fawkes) Boggart would be a dead Dumbledore > > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, in all its manifestations. > > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > > 1. The giants will support Voldemort and fight. > 2. Dobby will aid Harry enormously in DH. Other house-elves will have a big role too. > 3. Neville will be the cause of Bellatrix's death. > 4. Draco will repent. > 5. Harry will go through the Veil. > From catlady1949 at comcast.net Sat Jul 7 11:23:09 2007 From: catlady1949 at comcast.net (Phyllis Stevens) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 07:23:09 -0400 Subject: Harry dies? Message-ID: <016401c7c089$33bc27d0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> No: HPFGUIDX 171391 Well, I can understand how Harry might die in this series simply because Rowling is not writing any more books, but I don't necessarily think that she will permanently kill Harry just because she's not writing any more. I also can't see her killing him just to keep fans from writing the further adventures of "Harry Potter" books. If he does die, and stay dead, I will be absolutely disappointed that I have spent all this time in anticipation of a good ending, which will be totally ruined. No matter who else dies, I believe that Harry has to live. At least, this would make the series worth finishing. He could die and live happily ever after beyond the veil with Sirius, (hope I spelled that right,) but I still would rather he live his mortal life out with his friends. Maybe one will die, but at least one of them should live. He will destroy LV so should be able to have peace to begin to live a lot happier life than he's ever had the opportunity to do so far. I sure hope he doesn't get killed off, though. catlady1949 at comcast.net add me to your MSN: Catlady1949 at Comcast.net From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Sat Jul 7 13:14:04 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 13:14:04 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <016401c7c089$33bc27d0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171392 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis Stevens" wrote: > > Well, I can understand how Harry might die in this series > simply because Rowling is not writing any more books, but > I don't necessarily think that she will permanently kill > Harry just because she's not writing any more. I also can't > see her killing him just to keep fans from writing the further > adventures of "Harry Potter" books. If he does die, and stay > dead, I will be absolutely disappointed that I have spent all > this time in anticipation of a good ending, which will be > totally ruined. > catlady1949 at ... Phyllis, I am still trying to figure out for myself if I think he will die or not as a re-read the books. However, think of this- what if he kills Voldemort in the same instant that Voldemort kills him. Yes Harry was killed and by Voldemort but he saved the wizarding world from Voldemort and for that he is once again a hero. What a noble death! That could still make for a good ending. From SMacLagan at msn.com Sat Jul 7 13:33:55 2007 From: SMacLagan at msn.com (Susan MacLagan) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 13:33:55 -0000 Subject: born to those who have thrice defied him Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171393 Am I correct that we don't yet know how Voldy was defied by Lily and James (or the Longbottoms) 3 times? Do we expect this to be a vital part of the story in book 7? Surely it doesn't mean Harry's defiance--1) when parents were killed but not him, 2)face to face at the gravesite in GoF, and 3)victorious storyline in book 7(hope, hope). It has to be a past defiance by the parents, right? I've not found this discussion in the archives and would welcome being pointed to it if I've just missed it. London granddaughter From finwitch at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 14:54:29 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:54:29 -0000 Subject: The last word ("scar") In-Reply-To: <8C98E15B20A1005-964-CB7B@WEBMAIL-DF17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171394 Here's a couple of mine: 1) ... and the only thing left to remind them of Lord Voldemort was Harry's scar. 2) After everyone had gone, Ron and Hermione carefully locked the door of their pub, named "Harry's Scar". 3) The boys all looked remarkably like their father, except for Harry's scar. Finwitch From catlady1949 at comcast.net Sat Jul 7 14:09:04 2007 From: catlady1949 at comcast.net (Phyllis Stevens) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 10:09:04 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry dies? References: Message-ID: <018401c7c0a0$60ccbfc0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> No: HPFGUIDX 171395 Karen writes: I am still trying to figure out for myself if I think he will die or not as a re-read the books. However, think of this- what if he kills Voldemort in the same instant that Voldemort kills him. Yes Harry was killed and by Voldemort but he saved the wizarding world from Voldemort and for that he is once again a hero. What a noble death! That could still make for a good ending. Catlady responds: I want my heroes alive and well! I wouldn't mind him dying in the epilogue part, but, just allow him to survive the offing of LV so that for once he will be allowed to have a normal life. I simply won't like him dying, no matter how heroically! catlady1949 at comcast.net add me to your MSN: Catlady1949 at Comcast.net From finwitch at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 15:26:51 2007 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:26:51 -0000 Subject: Predictions... for Tiger Patronus' contest Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171396 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No, but he might make a visit to the otherside. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Absolutely. Otherwise the series would have unsatisfactory conclusion, I think - a chance of Voldemort coming back. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hmm... Molly Weasley. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? Yes. d. Luna? Yes. e. Ron? Yes. f. Neville? Yes. g. Ginny? Yes. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill&Fleur. (does that count? if not, I'm for Lupin&Tonks - at least they're old enough). 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" New Character 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry (well, James was HB without being a prefect...) b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? New Character d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn (why hire new one when he's there already?) e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. In Voldemort b. The Diary of Tom Riddle c. The Ring of Slytherin d. The Locket that could not be Opened (used to be Slytherins) e. The Cup of Helga Hufflepuff f. The Tiara of Ravenclaw (borrowed by the Weasley's auntie) g. The Wand of Godric Gryffindor (in the Ollivanders window) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus AND Boggart: Bat. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Flames of Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape's Patronus and Boggart feature same animal. That's why he prefers another method to deal with dementors. 2. Aberforth Dumbledore will have crucial information, but it's tricky to get it. 3. Harry will confront Petunia and gain some information on Lily. 4. R.A.B. will turn out to have been Regulus Black 5. Fawkes will become Harry's new pet. Finwitch From sherriola at gmail.com Sat Jul 7 15:43:26 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 08:43:26 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <018401c7c0a0$60ccbfc0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: <468fb4a2.12da600a.3d96.fffffac8@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171397 Karen writes: I am still trying to figure out for myself if I think he will die or not as a re-read the books. However, think of this- what if he kills Voldemort in the same instant that Voldemort kills him. Yes Harry was killed and by Voldemort but he saved the wizarding world from Voldemort and for that he is once again a hero. What a noble death! That could still make for a good ending. Sherry: I would not like that ending at all. For me, no death of a 17-year-old could ever be made noble. I want Harry to live to a ripe old age, to have his life briefly laid out in the epilogue, but basically living, if not always happily, at least contentedly ever after. I can't wrap my mind and heart around the idea of him dying being good or happy. Sherry From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 7 15:49:04 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:49:04 -0000 Subject: born to those who have thrice defied him In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171398 > London granddaughter (Susan): > Am I correct that we don't yet know how Voldy was defied by Lily and > James (or the Longbottoms) 3 times? > [...snip...] > Surely it doesn't mean Harry's defiance > [...snip...] > It has to be a past defiance by the parents, right? Eddie: The prophecy definitely refers to the parents' defiance. See JKRowling's website FAQ: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=84 which says, "[Neville's] parents, who were both famous Aurors, had 'thrice defied' Voldemort, just as Lily and James had." Eddie From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 7 15:53:51 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:53:51 -0000 Subject: Wizard of OZ ending? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171399 Hmm, speaking of a Wizard of OZ ending: The applause every student and teacher at Hogwarts was giving Harry for his heroic defeat of Voldemore seemed like it would never end. Draco Malfoy gave him a sincere handshake and begged to be forgiven for all the terrible things he said about him. There were tears in the eyes of Snape as he hugged Harry like a brother. Dumbledore beamed at him with pride, put his hand on Harry's shoulder and said "We're all very proud of your heroism Harry in defeating the Dark Lord single handed but now that you've graduated there is one more thing you need to get up you lazy stupid brat! Why can't you be more like Dudly,he's such a sweet boy." "What?" said Harry groggily as he looked around. He was in the Durseley's tiny closet under the stairs. "You heard me, wake up!" bellowed Uncle Vernon "You can't be late for your first day at work at the toothpaste factory. I'm tired of being Mr. Nice Guy all the time, you've graduated now and your freeloading days are over, you're going to have to start pulling your weight around here. And no breakfast today, Dudly's on a diet." Harry got up, he wished it was real, he wished he really was a wizard, but he knew there was nothing special about him except that he was the only one at school who got picked on every day for having such a silly looking scar. Eggplant From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Jul 7 15:55:03 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 08:55:03 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] born to those who have thrice defied him In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707070855t595b99bfwd6bd85fe7da76676@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171400 London Granddaughter: Am I correct that we don't yet know how Voldy was defied by Lily and James (or the Longbottoms) 3 times? Do we expect this to be a vital part of the story in book 7? Lynda: I think, from all the inferences in canon that we do know that both James and Lily Potter and the Longbottoms had defied Voldemort three times. At least that's what I have understood from multiple readings of all the books and much analysis. It doesn't always have to be in bold print to be in the realm of the story after all. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jul 7 16:07:49 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:07:49 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Pre-DH Spoiler Policy (repost from April 21) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171401 Greetings from Hexquarters! As we all count down the days until the release of Deathly Hallows, the rumour-mill is beginning to spin faster and faster, spitting out tidbits (whether true or false) about what we'll find between the covers come 21 July. While each of the publishers of DH is reputed to be a superb Occlumens, certain unauthorised persons with equally superb Legilimency skills may leak portions of the book before July 21. Do Not Discuss Any Such Leaks on the HPFGU Lists. They are violations of the Wizarding Statute of Secrecy (not to mention copyright laws). If you violate this rule, the elves reserve the right to confiscate, or even destroy, your wand. Unlike leaks, sometimes tidbits of information are released ahead of time which are authorized by JKR herself; these we consider 'spoilers'. Beginning today, we would like members to use the "DH" prefix for any post to any of our lists that contains spoilers for DH. Subject headers should not, of course, contain spoilers themselves: "DH: JKR released chapter title called 'Petunia's Plan'!" rather defeats the point of the DH prefix. For example, an appropriate subject header might be, "DH: Harry, Horcruxes" since we know the Horcruxes will be part of the story. "DH: Longbottoms to play important role" on the other hand *would* be a spoiler since that's new information which gives too much away in the subject line. Spoiler text is a wonderful thing...when it works. Please keep in mind we have members reading in three different formats: individual e-mails, digests and webview, and each one requires a different length of spoiler text. What works best is to write letters vertically down the side of the page, original text WITHOUT chevrons (> >), and then add three or more lines of original text underneath with no spoiler information. Here's an example of a spoiler text which was tested and works for all formats: Spoiler******************** P O I L E R S A H E A D************************************************************ After you write out a vertical line of letters (and you can be creative, the word 'Spoiler' isn't required), please write out at least three lines of text like we're doing here before you get to the juicy part. What's a spoiler? Use common sense. A spoiler is anything you KNOW will be in Book 7. Not as in 'I saw it in a dream'; more 'I saw it in the Scholastic catalog/ on the press release/ on JKR's website.' Anything that you THINK will be in DH based on evidence in Books 1-6, or your own wild speculation, is *not* a spoiler. We've been speculating about what we THINK will be in DH for the last couple of years, after all... So, if you KNOW that parts of your post include information that will be in DH, you need the DH: prefix and spoiler space. Please begin using the new "DH" prefix and spoiler space on all of our lists --especially the main list and OT-Chatter -- beginning today. And if you don't use it, don't be surprised if you suddenly find yourself being hung upside down over the Slytherin Common Room fire. ;-) And remember, if you have any comments about any DH release issues, holler at us: hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com Or post on the Feedback list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/ "The truth." Dumbledore sighed. "It is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution." [PS/SS Chapter 17] Be like Dumbledore. Tell people as little as possible. ;-) Counting down to 21 July, The Administration Team From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Jul 7 15:58:39 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 08:58:39 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] born to those who have thrice defied him In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707070858l44847d01mfaf9acc170af5d7@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171402 Lynda: Sorry, my misreading. I thought you were stating that we did not know if they had defied Voldy. As for how, no, we don't know the specifics, and since this is Harry's story, not his parents and not the Longbottom's, we might not. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From red-siren at hotmail.com Sat Jul 7 15:20:06 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:20:06 -0000 Subject: Fawkes: perhaps it was Godric Gryffindor's bird? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171403 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nerdie55" wrote: > > The phoenix is reborn from its ashes over and over again. > Fawkes must be tremendously old, perhaps Godric Gryffindor > was the original owner and the phoenix may be older still. > If so, Fawkes has memories that go back ages and that may > help Harry. > > Harry thinks that Fawkes has gone forever after the death of > Dumbledore, but I am sure that the phoenix will come back. > > Perhaps Fawkes knows where the Gryffindor horcrux is and will > lead Harry to it. (I don't think it is the sword; would one > horcrux be able to destroy another as the sword destroyed the > diary-horcrux?) > I agree with Nerdie55's opinion that Fawkes could have belonged to Godric Gryffindor. (If Dumbledore is related to Gryffindor, that could be how the phoenix came to belong to him). I also agree that Fawkes could know where another possible artifact belonging to Gryffindor could be, if the sword isn't the only one left. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Harry use the fang of the Basilisk to destroy the diary? Sue Red-Siren From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 16:04:08 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:04:08 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <016401c7c089$33bc27d0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171404 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis Stevens" wrote: > > Well, I can understand how Harry might die in this series > simply because Rowling is not writing any more books, but > I don't necessarily think that she will permanently kill > Harry just because she's not writing any more. I've always thought he was going to die. But if he lives, is he going to have to look over his shoulder like a gunfighter in the old west. Will each new dark wizard want to prove himself as the baddest dark wizard because he killed Harry Potter? If so, that doesn't sound like a peaceful existance. Jack-A-Roe From elseajay at earthlink.net Sat Jul 7 16:11:19 2007 From: elseajay at earthlink.net (Lois Jamieson) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 12:11:19 -0400 Subject: Wizard of OZ ending? Message-ID: <001701c7c0b1$79372530$0c755743@g4j1d8> No: HPFGUIDX 171405 Laura wrote: >>Dorothy throws water on the witch out of her instinctual concern for her well being - call it love - but water is the one thing that kills her. So Dorothy's love is what kills the witch.<< Interesting theory overall, but there's one flaw. Dorothy was throwing water on the Scarecrow, after the witch set him on fire. Dorothy didn't care about the witch--she was trying to save her friend. The water splashed on the witch by accident, with unexpected results. Now, I could see something like that happening--Harry does something to try to save Ron or Hermione, and it backfires onto Voldy. That would be a nice, neat ending and would spare Harry from becoming a deliberate murderer. For whatever it's worth, I'm firmly in the camp that Snape is still Dumbledore's man and will die saving Harry. Two weeks from today--we'll know!! Lois From sl_2010 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 15:41:53 2007 From: sl_2010 at yahoo.com (Latha Thalli) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 08:41:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <018401c7c0a0$60ccbfc0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: <105729.85060.qm@web31903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171406 Karen: I am still trying to figure out for myself if I think he will die or not as a re-read the books. However, think of this- what if he kills Voldemort in the same instant that Voldemort kills him. Yes Harry was killed and by Voldemort but he saved the wizarding world from Voldemort and for that he is once again a hero. What a noble death! That could still make for a good ending. Catlady responds: I want my heroes alive and well! I wouldn't mind him dying in the epilogue part, but, just allow him to survive the offing of LV so that for once he will be allowed to have a normal life. I simply won't like him dying, no matter how heroically! Satya Latha: J.K. always says Love is greater than anything else in the world and the ONLY Power, which Harry has and Voldemort NEVER had which would help him to kill Voldemort!! If that is the case then it would be unfair to kill Harry. Because he had lived his 16 miserable years of life without Happiness in his life. Voldemort on the other hand lived for 50 yrs absolutely Happily on HIS wish without the name of Love. He had suffered in his life only when he attempted to kill Harry but until then nothing stopped him. In other words he was the happiest person!! I do agree that the other word for Love is sacrifice but again that doesn't mean that Love is only to sacrifice!! If Harry dies killing Voldemort in the last book then J.K.s argument that Love is most powerful than anything statement is faltered because the power of Love always gives Happiness at the end!! And if that doesn't happen it is very very unfair!! Regards, Satya Latha Thalli From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jul 7 16:39:09 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 12:39:09 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] It was Neville all along In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <468FC1AD.4060303@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171407 Eddie wrote: > that Neville has the last wand Ollivander sold (maybe). Now Neville > is becoming his own man. New wand, new confidence, and just as much > reason to want to destroy Voldemort as Harry. > > Comments? Bart: DD already made the key comment: Morty didn't mark Neville, he marked Harry. So, if Neville finishes off Morty, then the prophecy is NOT fulfilled. Which, of course, does not mean it won't happen. Bart From aiwa9764 at centurytel.net Sat Jul 7 16:11:13 2007 From: aiwa9764 at centurytel.net (aiwa9764clee) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:11:13 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Book 7 Deathly Hallows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171408 BACK GROUND PREDICTIONS - How We Got Here ? Books 1 through 6 BG01# (AD) Albus Dumbledore has intentionally thrust (HP) Harry Potter into or in the way of most of the situations and obstacles that HP has had to deal with in the in all of the first 6 years to train him allow him to learn, grow, gain confidence and mature as a wizard. BG02# AD and (SS) Severus Snape are working together and AD and SS staged AD's death. BG03# RAB is Regulas Black, Sirius's brother. BG04# The large locket that no one could open that was found, while cleaning out the desk at N12, is the horcrux locket. BG05# AD and RAB went to the cave and retrieved the locket together. BG06# AD took Harry to the cave to train him how to find a horcrux because he had already been there before with RAB. BG07# The necklace from Borgin & Burks or the tiara owned by (MW) Molly Weasley's aunt will turn out to be one of the other horcrux. BG01# - continued- (AD) Albus Dumbledore has intentionally thrust (HP) Harry Potter into or in the way most of the situations and obstacles that HP has had to deal with in the in all of the first 6 years to train him allow him to learn, grow, gain confidence and mature as a wizard. AD has intentionally made life hard for HP from the first day with the Dursley's. AD wanted HP to have to work and struggle for his first 11 years to prepare him to deal with the next 7 years. In HP1SS AD told HP how the Mirror of Erised worked, thereby giving HP the answer to the final obstacle the protected the Sorceror's Stone. The other obstacles that protected the Sorceror's Stone were set up to work to HP, RW, and HG strengths. Flying after the keys for HP, Chess for RW, and the plant and the logic test for HG. AD admits that he watches HP much more closely than anyone knows and that he does not need a invisibility cape to be invisible. In the GOF, AD lets things play out as SS suggested and tells HP at the end of the book that that he had used HP as bait. I do not suggest the AD has controlled all of the situations that HP has handled but I do think that AD manipulated and tried to control as many situations that he could. An example of that is found in HP1SS: "D'you think he meant you to do it?" said Ron. "Sending you your father's cloak and everything?" "Well" Hermione exploded, "if he did?I mean to say?that's terrible?you could have been killed" "No it isn't," said Harry thoughtfully. "He's a funny Man, Dumbledore. I think he knows more or less everything that goes on here. I reckon he had a pretty good idea that 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 know how the mirror worked. It's almost like he thought I had a right to face Voldemort if I could " Book 7 Predictions-What Will Happen In (HP7DH) Book 7 Deathly Hallows: 700# (AW) Arthur Weasley will become the new head of the (OP) Order of the Phoenix. 701# HP7DH will not add any new major characters, but a lesser character will play a much larger role. 702# HP will return to (HS) Hogwarts but not as a student. 703# RW & HG will return HS as students so that it appears that they are not with HP. 704# RW be named head boy & Quidditch captain and HG will be named head girl, Gryffindor will win the House cup. 705# (GYW) Ginny Weasley will be made a Prefect and so will (NL) Neville Longbottom & (LL) Luna Lovegood. 706# (NL) Neville Longbottom and (LL) Luna lovegood will end up together and will both be important characters. 708# RH Rubeus Hagrid or NT will become the new Gryffindor head of house. 707# (NT) Nymphadora Tonks will become the next DADA teacher. 709# RL Remus Lupin & NT will marry and move to Hogsmeade into the Shrieking Shack. 710# The RW & HG along with some of the DA and the House Elves will help Harry stay hidden at Hogwarts. 711# HP will use the (ROR) Room of Requirements as a learning tool & base of operations & as a safe house. 712# AD will be a very important charter in HP7DH, even though he is dead. 713# AD will continue to teach HP, by using the ROR and his portrait. 714# SS will die probably protecting HP and trying to kill LV. 715# RL will also die probably protecting HP and NT. 716# The final battle between HP and LV will take place at Hogwarts. PREDICTIONS (IN DEPTH)(SOME OF THEM) 700# (AW) Arthur Weasley will become the new head of the (OP) Order of the Phoenix: The only logical wizard to head the OP is AW. 701# HP7DH will not add any new major characters, but a lesser character will play a much larger role: JKR has been very careful about how many new characters that she adds in any book, how much of a significant role they play and how long they play that significant role in the overall story. It has been JKR's pattern to introduce a new major character in each book but after that book is complete we normally only see them in passing in the later books. It seems more likely that some existing character will play a more significant role in HP7DH or someone that we have briefly seen in earlier books will be upgraded to a major character. 702# HP will return to (HS) Hogwarts but not as a student: HS has been where so much of the previous books have taken place that it does not make sense that a major portion of HP7DH will not happen at HS. We, the readers, know more about HS than any other location in the books. HS is the safest place in the magical world and HP can be protected while he continues to learn. Not many people would even have to know that HP was at HS because he can move around inside HS get in and out of HS without being seen or discovered. 703# RW & HG will return HS as students so that it appears that they are not with HP. RW & HG will return to HS to help make it appear that they are not helping HP. HP wants to protect his friends and so he will not want to appear to be with them or at school. 704# RW be named head boy & Quidditch captain and HG will be named head girl, Gryffindor will win the House cup. Having RW & HG become head boy and girl allows them to move around the castle after curfew. The head boy and girl play prominent roles at HS and it would generally known that they held those positions by the wizard community. HP is, as far as everyone knows, no longer at HS and the logical replacement captain would be RW. RW winning the Quidditch cup will help him to gain confidence for the battle to come. 705# (GYW) Ginny Weasley will be made a Prefect and so will (NL) Neville Longbottom & (LL) Luna Lovegood: Ginny is the logical choice to replace Hermione as Perfect in Gryffindor. 706# (NL) Neville Longbottom and (LL) Luna Lovegood will end up together and will both be important characters: One of JKR major themes in the HP books has always been tolerance of unusual characters and things. HP has always helped the underdog because he has always thought of himself as an underdog, which never could have happened if he had not been placed with the Dursley's as a foster family. NL & LL are the classic underdogs ie: the train ride with HP in HP6HBP. CHARTERS ABREVEATIONS: ABD = Aberforth Dumbledore AD = Albus Dumbledore AF = Arabella Figg AW = Arthur Weasley BW = Bill Weasley CF = Cornelius Oswald Fudge DD = Dudley Dursley DM = Draco Malfoy FW = Fred Weasley GL = Gilderoy Lockhart GMW = Ginny Weasley = Ginevra Molly "Ginny" Weasley GW = George Weasley HG = Hermione Granger HH = Helga Hufflepuff HP = Harry Potter HS = Horace Slughorn JP = James Potter LL = Luna lovegood LM = Lucius Malfoy LP = Lily Potter LV = Lord Voldemort MW = Molly Weasley MM = Minerva McGonagall NL = Neville Longbottom From lmcdanl at sbcglobal.net Sat Jul 7 17:21:41 2007 From: lmcdanl at sbcglobal.net (mariejgrangerpotter) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 17:21:41 -0000 Subject: It was Neville all along, now with slight JKR website spoiler/discussion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171409 > TKJ: > > I think that Neville will play a major part in the end as well as > Harry. :-) Marie: I agree with the hope that Neville plays a large role in DH. Unfortunately Jo's website negated the theory that Neville being the prophecy's 'also ran' makes him special somehow. That doesn't mean he doesn't have a big role to play, though. I, too, hope it involves Bellatrix. Him killing her would be poetic justice and I certainly want her to die, whether he does the killing or is merely present for it. It would indeed be great if his parents could be cured somehow, but that may be too sweet/pat of an ending. :( The Neville getting the last wand thing is particularly interesting if coupled with the theory about Ravenclaw's wand being a horcrux and possibly being the one that was displayed in Ollivander's shop window. It may be unlikely that Neville ended up with *that* wand as his, but stranger things have happened. He could be the Ravenclaw heir through his mother or something, which would make that wand choose him. Even if he didn't get that wand, he might be able to help Harry, Hermione, and Ron figure out where Mr. Ollivander went to try to keep the wand safe. If, indeed, he went into hiding of his own volition rather than being kidnapped by Death Eaters or something so he would have to create Voldemort a wand that doesn't have the potential to lock up with Harry's. From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 7 18:27:22 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:27:22 -0000 Subject: Wizard of OZ ending? In-Reply-To: <001701c7c0b1$79372530$0c755743@g4j1d8> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171410 > Lois: > For whatever it's worth, I'm firmly in the camp that Snape is still > Dumbledore's man and will die saving Harry. Eddie: Just like [Snape's theoretical love-of-his-life] Lily did? What magical protections would they convey onto Harry, similar to Lily's protection magic? Eddie From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Sat Jul 7 18:33:17 2007 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 11:33:17 -0700 Subject: DH Final and Ultimate Predictions Contest -- REVISED In-Reply-To: <394061.47700.qm@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> References: <394061.47700.qm@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <07494988.20070707113317@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171411 Predictions Contest Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No, he will live to a ripe old age. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES! 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? YES b. Draco? NO (He's in hiding with Snape) c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? NO (Mrs. W will go into "over-protective" mode, but Ginny will soon rebel and sneak into Hogwarts with Fred and George's aid.) 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time very late in life? Arabella Figg. (When the DEs descend on Privet Drive at 12:00:00.00000000001 AM on July 31.) 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Viktor Krum d. Potions Master? Horace Slughorn e. Headmistress? Minerva McGonnegal 9. Where do Snapes ultimate loyalties lie? Lily Potter, and by extension, Dumbledore (But he still hates everyone else...) 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write n/a or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write In Voldemort for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. The Diary c. The Ring d. Slytherin's Locket e. Hufflepuff's Cup f. Great Auntie Muriel's Tiara (Ravenclaw) g. Nagini / Gryffindor's Sword (I think it will change during the book, but it's the same soul bit -- see Predictions...) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snapes patronus and boggert? Patronus: Unicorn (Symbolizes Lily) Boggart: James Potter (!!) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Books, Potions and Magical devices representing years of research into love, much of the work done or initiated by Lily Potter. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Regardless of whether Hogwarts "officially" reopens, McGonnegall will insist that Harry finish his education and take his NEWT's... To this end, she will give the Trio a Time-Turner to use to attend classes and hunt Horcruxes in the same "Year 7" time frame. 2. Lily Potter is somehow connected with Unicorns. 3. One of the Horcruxes is guarded by one or more Lethifolds. 4. Wormtail will kill Greyback. 5. Nagini is either not a Horcrux or is only an "interim" Horcrux -- LV is still hoping to procure "something of Gryffindor's" (probably the sword) in order to complete his Four Founders' collection. Dave From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 7 19:04:00 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 19:04:00 -0000 Subject: Hagrid predictions? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171412 There have been remarkably few predictions on this board concerning Hagrid for Deathly Hallows. Here are some of mine, mostly not taken from canon, but such is the nature of predictions: * Hagrid and Grawp will battle giants in the war against Voldemort * Now that Hagrid's hut is burned, he will move into the castle * Now that Hagrid's hut is burned, he will move into the mountains with Grawp. * Now that Hagrid's hut is burned, he and Grawp (!) will move into the castle (Is it "predicting" if I offer every possible scenario?) * Hagrid will say, "Oh, I *should* have tol' you tha'" * Hagrid will still teach Care of Magical Creatures, not DADA nor anything else * Hagrid will get a new unbroken wand (made by Ollivander), possibly with dragon heartstring core. * Hagrid will enter the Forbidden Forest to enlist the aid of someone ... possibly the centaurs? * Hagrid has Sirius' flying motorcycle, probably at Hogwarts, possibly parked in the Forbidden Forest * Hagrid will give/lend Harry a niffler who will help Harry find shiny horcruxes, possibly the locket at #12 Grimmauld Place * Hagrid will tell Harry the exact details of how he found Harry at Godric's Hollow the night Voldemort killed Harry's parents. This will be an important clue for Harry's success. There is potential information there about how Hagrid knew where the Potters' were hidden, who knew, etc. * Hagrid and Madame Maxime will get engaged and married in the Epilogue. They'll "adopt" Grawp. Can you offer any more Hagrid predictions? Eddie, who has now posted his 5th post of the past 24 hours (see you tomorrow!) PS: Possible Spoiler Predictions: ************************** POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD *S *P *O *I *L *E *R * *A *H *E *A *D *************************** * Hagrid will have another interaction with a Dragon. Perhaps Fluffy. Perhaps this is the dragon on the cover of the Scholastic edition of DH. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 19:39:25 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 19:39:25 -0000 Subject: It was Neville all along In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171413 Eddie wrote: > > My son proposed this theory: the prophecy was about Neville all along. In the end it is Neville who finally finishes off Voldemort, not Harry. Perhaps Harry provides the distraction, or destroys the horcruxes, but it is Neville who does the ultimate deed. Remember that Neville has the last wand Ollivander sold (maybe). Now Neville is becoming his own man. New wand, new confidence, and just as much reason to want to destroy Voldemort as Harry. > > Comments? Carol responds: The only statement I agree with here is that Neville is becoming his own man (to the extent that a seventeen-year-old can be a man, regardless of the age of majority in the WW). As others have pointed out, Voldemort "chose" Harry and passed some of his own powers on to him. Harry is the protagonist and the Prophecy Boy, and Voldemort will, one way or another, fall by his hand whether Harry himself lives or dies. (Lives, I hope.) Nevertheless, Neville is an important supporting character whose story in some ways parallels Harry's. (In technical terms, he's a foil to Harry, simultaneously mirroring him and contrasting with him, much as Diary!Tom reflects and contrasts with Harry in CoS.) Neville, like Harry, has grown up without his parents thanks (indirectly, in Neville's case) to Voldemort. He, too, has been raised by strict relatives, or a strict relative (the contrast being that he was thought to be unmagical or insufficiently magical, whereas Harry was hated and feared for being magical). He, too, was sorted into Gryffindor and, IIRC, worried that he might not belong there. Both, however, have shown themselves to be true Gryffindors since SS/PS, and Neville is slowly overcoming his own lack of confidence and making his strict grandmother proud of him. He showed great courage in the MoM, and probably having his own wand rather than his father's will help him, as will Harry's DADA lessons (and even, maybe, his success in Snae's DADA class--I'll bet that his boggart is no longer Snape). While Harry's Nemesis (despite what I assume will be a temporary obsession with revenge against Snape), Neville's has been shown since at least GoF to be Bellatrix Lestrange, as he begins to realize when Fake!Moody Crucios the spider in front of him and probably fully realizes when Bella Crucios him (and taunts him about his relatives( in OoP. Surely, his role will be to confront Bellatrix and defeat her in some way. Neville is one of my favorite characters (which may seem odd, given that Snape is another of my favorites and the one I find most fascinating), and I don't want his innocence and innate goodness to be ruined forever by killing someone, even an enemy like Bellatrix, even in war. I would love to see him bring her to her knees, wandless, and stand over with the power to Crucio her and resist the temptation to return evil for evil. Whether he will actually forgive her (as Harry will almost certainly forgive Snape), I don't know, but I can't see him succumbing to the temptation to use Dark curses against the Dark witch who, with her cronies, did such irreparable harm to his life. Neville, I predict, will demonstrate the power of goodness and show mercy to an undeserving enemy. Nevertheless, Bellatrix will end up either dead by someone else's hand or in Azkaban (which will be made secure despite the absence of Dementors). and Neville, I predict along with many others, will eventually become the Herbology teacher at Hogwarts. Carol, who doesn't want any of the young characters to kill or perform Unforgiveable Curses, particularly not HRH or Neville From BrwNeil at aol.com Sat Jul 7 20:02:39 2007 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 16:02:39 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatro... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171414 In a message dated 7/7/2007 6:54:55 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk writes: Rules: Copy these questions and email your answers *both* to *tigerpatronus* *at* *yahoo* *dot* *com* and to the newsgroup. You must email your entry to TigerPatronus to be entered in the contest. You will receive an email confirmation of your entry. In the event of a dispute, the entry posted to the group will be your back-up. Deadline: Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 11:59 pm (midnight) EDT. (No Friday entries will be accepted.) 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO, there are things worse than death. Possibly prison and loss of all magical power or a dementor kiss. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Fred and George. Question: How do you determine who is the most prominent character? Example" I'm not predicting her death, but is Luna more or less prominent than Fred and George. Isn't it all a matter of opinion? 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark, but how will you confirm this unless it is mentioned directly in book seven? 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry ? Yes, though he won't attend classes regularly. b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes, though she will go off with Harry at times. d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes, though he will go off with Harry at times. f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Argus Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry Potter b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Dumbledore's Ghost or picture d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore, and because of that, the Order of the Phoenix. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Slytherin Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaw's Wand f. Snake g. Voldemort himself In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus is a phoenix (not Fawkes) Have no idea and doubt we will find out in book seven Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, in all its manifestations. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. The series will end with Ron?s dad being made Minister of Magic. . 2. Neville will become a Hogwarts professor. 3. Ginny will not wait for Harry, but instead will start dating Neville. 4. Ron and Hermione will be friends at the end of the book, but will mutually agree that they have nothing in common to build a lasting relationship with. 5. Harry will get his own Phoenix. Dumbledore's ashes gave birth to a new Phoenix that will help Harry. Neil ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hyder_harry_potter at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 7 19:50:03 2007 From: hyder_harry_potter at yahoo.co.uk (Mark Hyder Yahoo) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 20:50:03 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] It was Neville all along Message-ID: <004701c7c0d0$03f029b0$4001a8c0@FAMILY> No: HPFGUIDX 171415 I have a question regarding the suggestion that Neville has the last wand Ollivander sold. If Ollivander had sold the last wand to Neville, who sold the wand to Ginny? Thanks Mark Hyder From windmills_woodenshoes at hotmail.com Sat Jul 7 20:50:21 2007 From: windmills_woodenshoes at hotmail.com (danielle dassero) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:50:21 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] It was Neville all along In-Reply-To: <004701c7c0d0$03f029b0$4001a8c0@FAMILY> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171416 Mark: >I have a question regarding the suggestion that Neville has the last wand >Ollivander sold. > >If Ollivander had sold the last wand to Neville, who sold the wand to >Ginny? > >Thanks Danielle here: Neville got a new wand at the beginning of his and Harry's 6th year. Neville's old wand was broken in the MOM fight in the 5th book. _________________________________________________________________ Local listings, incredible imagery, and driving directions - all in one place! http://maps.live.com/?wip=69&FORM=MGAC01 From lmkos at earthlink.net Sat Jul 7 20:48:24 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:48:24 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid predictions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171417 Eddie: >There have been remarkably few predictions on this board concerning >Hagrid for Deathly Hallows. Here are some of mine, mostly not taken >from canon, but such is the nature of predictions: > >* Hagrid and Grawp will battle giants in the war against Voldemort >* Now that Hagrid's hut is burned, he will move into the castle >* Now that Hagrid's hut is burned, he will move into the mountains >with Grawp. >* Now that Hagrid's hut is burned, he and Grawp (!) will move into the >castle >(Is it "predicting" if I offer every possible scenario?) >* Hagrid will say, "Oh, I *should* have tol' you tha'" >* Hagrid will still teach Care of Magical Creatures, not DADA nor >anything else >* Hagrid will get a new unbroken wand (made by Ollivander), possibly >with dragon heartstring core. >* Hagrid will enter the Forbidden Forest to enlist the aid of someone >... possibly the centaurs? >* Hagrid has Sirius' flying motorcycle, probably at Hogwarts, possibly >parked in the Forbidden Forest >* Hagrid will give/lend Harry a niffler who will help Harry find shiny >horcruxes, possibly the locket at #12 Grimmauld Place >* Hagrid will tell Harry the exact details of how he found Harry at >Godric's Hollow the night Voldemort killed Harry's parents. This will >be an important clue for Harry's success. There is potential >information there about how Hagrid knew where the Potters' were >hidden, who knew, etc. >* Hagrid and Madame Maxime will get engaged and married in the >Epilogue. They'll "adopt" Grawp. Lenore: These are great. I particularly liked the one about Hagrid getting a new wand (made of oak). But I would also like it if DD had somehow managed to substitute some other old wand in the place of Hagrid's, which was then broken to satisfy the authorities. In which case Hagrid has had his wand all along, though more or less hidden. Yes, Hagrid has stated that he still has the pieces (hidden in the pink umbrella). And there is another problem with this theory: Hagrid doesn't have enough guile to be able to fib well about anything, so I'm sure we'd know it if his wand had never been broken. I love the prediction that Hagrid will be a source of fresh information about the events at Godric's Hollow. That has the ring of possibility. I wonder why it hasn't already occurred to Harry to quiz him about this (as well as many other matters)? >Can you offer any more Hagrid predictions? Lenore: I predict there will be a new hut, built mostly of stone, for Hagrid or his successor. If Hagrid and Maxime get married and live at Hogwarts, Maxime will insist upon a prenuptual agreement about the adoption of dragons and other adorable Magical Creatures, such as Norbert the dragon and Fluffy the three-headed dog. (g) Lenore From bawilson at citynet.net Sat Jul 7 21:57:42 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 17:57:42 -0400 Subject: Harry dies? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171418 Do you remember Houseman's poem "To an Athlete Dieing Young". It tells of a young man who drops dead on the finish line as he wins an important race. Houseman says that the young man is lucky because he'll always be the winner--he'll never loose, he'll never get old and fat, he'll never become a has-been. I think that there is something to that if Harry should die in the process of or the aftermath of defeating Voldemort. We'd not see Harry getting a big head from his celebrity. We'd never see Harry getting bored because, like Alexander, he had no more worlds to conquer. We never see Harry turning into someone like Ludo Bagman, trading on his ever-more-wilted laurels. We never see him becoming old and forgotten, boring his grandkids and their friends with stories of How I Defeated the Dark Lord. All that being said, I too hope that Harry will survive and thrive. 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 mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 7 22:49:04 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 22:49:04 -0000 Subject: Patronus from the Power of Love (Was: Deontological!Snape ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171419 > Magpie: > I totally agree about this theory of advanced magic. I think the > good memory just gives you the right feeling, and after that you > almost do it by muscle memory. Mike: Thanks Magpie, that makes 2 of us. ;) "Muscle memory" is the right phrase. I can't say if it's just Lupin's teaching methods, or if all magic is taught this way. But it seems that beginners are given techniques to produce satifactory beginner results with new spells. To progress to either more advanced spells or to get better results from the more basic spells, one must channel their own internal magical qualities and strengths. So Lupin taught Harry *how* to cast a Patronus by telling him to think of a happy memory. This got Harry started. But it would probably only ever got him that wisp of silver against Dementors if he never internalized what he was trying to do. In fact, a wisp is all Harry ever got thinking *happy memories* when actually going against Dementors. > Magpie: > I don't know how I feel about Patronuses being love, exactly. I see > what you mean, but to me "love" should mean something sort of > different. It seems more like a personal confidence to me--as DD > says, Harry finds his father inside himself. It's a guardian > spirit, but comes from inside the person. The Patronus itself > doesn't seem like hitting somebody with the power of love, more > like the hitting them with your own inner strength. Mike: I think I was unclear in my previous post. I'm not suggesting that the Patronus is going to be Harry's ace in the hole. I'm suggesting that *Love* can be manifest in many forms of magic, the Patronus being the only one we've been shown so far. This was a breakthrough for me when I realized that despite Harry's continued protestations of "Love - Big Deal", he has already used the power of Love and just hasn't realized it yet. Dumbledore said: "You think the dead we loved ever truly leave us?" ... "How else could you produce that *particular* Patronus? Prongs rode again last night." (PoA pp 427-8, US ed.) Mike: Typical Dumbledore (or rather JKR), pass quickly over a key fact from the nights events and jump immediately to the thing that will distract us and Harry - "Prongs". But Dumbledore said it in his first sentence: the ones that Harry **loved** was the key. It was Harry's Love of his father that produced that fully fledged corporeal Stag Patronus, that defeated hundreds of Dementors. It was Harry's Love for Ron and Hermione that produced the second Patronus in the Little Whinging alley. > Magpie: > I think that strength can be connected to love, though. Harry feels > stronger knowing he has Ron and Hermione, and his parents sort of > feed into that too, whether or not he has literal memories of them, > he knows he is/was loved. Mike: I think Harry can use Love in many other expressions of magic. And Harry has a kind of two-pronged power here. His power of Love is not only the most powerful kind of magic, according to Dumbledore, but because Harry has this power he is able to project it in ways a less powerful wizard can't. I might guess anyone could learn to channel *Love* magic, but the amount of inate power can't be taught. Remember in the alleyway when Harry got his wand to light with a Lumos even though he didn't have it in his hand? I can even see Harry projecting a Protego Charm to protect a loved one that is seperate from him, say, across the room. It's because Harry strength is not only the most powerful kind of magic, but Harry also has more of it than any other wizard. From emhensley at comcast.net Sat Jul 7 22:19:36 2007 From: emhensley at comcast.net (Melanie Hensley) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 22:19:36 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171420 Spoiler******************** P O I L E R S A H E A D************************************************************ I completly agree with Satya! I went to Border's the other day and was reading quickly through a book called What to Expect in Harry Potter 7 and it said to rest assured that Harry will live. I agree that he will live and that good will prevail over evil! One thing that scared me today though was that I saw the JKR said she cried writing one of the last chapters in the book and downed a half bottle of champagne. I hope it is NOT mourning over Harry. I refuse to belive it. I like most everyone just want to see Harry finally get his happy ending!! Melanie in Indiana From kamilaa at gmail.com Sat Jul 7 23:04:53 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 18:04:53 -0500 Subject: Revised: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171421 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes, err, maybe. I keep thinking that he might discover one of those things worse than death instead . . . nevermind. Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Professor McGonnagal or Snape, depending on who is felt to be the most "prominent" character 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? A Dark Mark on his (Draco's) arm. (mind, I think this may be one of those things we never know the answer to) 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? yes b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? yes f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Figgy herself, much to her astonishment 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Professor Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Professor McGonnagal 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself; he no longer believes in Lord Thingy's doctrine but his loyalties left Dumbledore once it became clear that Dumbledore would die of the ring curse and would no longer be able to protect him. He may well try and flip back to Harry's side late in the book if it starts to look like Harry will defeat Lord Thingy (ie, if Snape discovers just how many horcruxes have been destroyed), although I'm sure he'll try and sell it as having been deep undercover and on Harry's side all along. I doubt Harry will buy it. =D 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary/destroyed b. Ring/destroyed c. Locket at 10GP - err, assuming it wasn't one of the things Mundungus made off with. If it was something he nicked it's probably with Aberforth now. Although I suppose it could be with Kreacher as well. d. Nagini e. Hufflepuff's cup, wherever it may be f. The Ravenclaw Tiara, which I believe is in the RoR g. Harry's scar; not realizing this was Dumbledore's biggest failure, and it happened because he could not face what Harry being a horcrux would mean. He cared too much. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus=bat - Boggert=Harry, grown and looking exactly like an enraged James Potter (again, I think these are things we may never know) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, in its purest form (on the other hand, this is something I'm sure we'll know =) 1. The Dursleys will find themselves being forced to shelter in Harry's house at 10GP after Number 4PD is destroyed when Voldemort attacks in force on the night of Harry's 17th birthday. They will not enjoy the experience. At all. Harry will, however. ^^ 2. The final battle between Voldemort and Harry will occur behind the Veil. Harry will take both of them through; Voldemort will not fight being taken through as hard as he would otherwise, since he believes Harry will not survive the experience but he will. He believes he has Horcruxes left (he's still unaware of the R.A.B fake-out, and possibly unaware of the destruction of others). He's wrong about that, they're all gone by the time they go through. 3. Harry will communicate with both Sirius and Dumbledore using his half of the two mirrors. Sirius, by virtue of having his corporeal body with him, still has his half of the mirror, which he kept in his pocket at all times lest he miss an attempt by Harry to communicate. This will prove handy. ^^ 4. Tonks' odd behavior in HBP was not the result of her, at that point, unrequited love for Lupin; she has been Imperio'd and is going to (unwillingly) betray the Order at a most inconvenient time, leading to deaths among its members. 5. Because of his deep admiration of her (still) Filch will happily follow Umbridge's orders once more and as a result Death Eaters will breech Hogwarts for one final battle. I further suspect he too will finally live up to a literal meaning of his name and will steal something important, leading to the break-in. 6. Ginny will find herself able to help Harry's search when she recovers memories from diary!Tom; when she meets with Harry to tell him what she's remembered they will find themselves unable to stay apart from that point on. Among other things. *cough* 7. In the epilogue we will discover that Ginny has had Harry's son. 8. I realize this is based on one of the covers, but it won't count anyways and it is what I infer from that cover, while others obviously saw something else, so . . . while at Gringotts the Trio will be attacked by a dragon after they break into a vault whilst searching for a particular Horcrux, probably Hufflepuff's Cup. *adds that she likes the "Harry tames the beast with Parseltongue and it becomes the dragon they are seen flying on the cover" theory* 9. Neville will take over the deceased Professor Sprout's place as Herbology instructor and in the fullness of time will be Head of Gryffindor House. -- Kamil--->giving all due props to the person who first posed that Ginny would recover important memories from diary!Tom, and worried that the predictions not being scored will prove more correct than most of the ones that are scored. Alas. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 00:31:48 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 00:31:48 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171423 Bruce Alan Wilson wrote: > > Do you remember Houseman's poem "To an Athlete Dieing Young". It tells of a young man who drops dead on the finish line as he wins an important race. Houseman says that the young man is lucky because he'll always be the winner--he'll never loose, he'll never get old and fat, he'll never become a has-been. I think that there is something to that if Harry should die in the process of or the aftermath of defeating Voldemort. We'd not see Harry getting a big head from his celebrity. We'd never see Harry getting bored because, like Alexander, he had no more worlds to conquer. We never see Harry turning into someone like Ludo Bagman, trading on his ever-more-wilted laurels. We never see him becoming old and forgotten, boring his grandkids and their friends with stories of How I Defeated the Dark Lord. > > All that being said, I too hope that Harry will survive and thrive. Carol responds: The athlete dying young, forever victorious, has already been done. "'He suffered very little then,' [Mrs. Diggory] said when Harry had told her how he died. 'And after all, Amos . . . he died just when he'd won the tournament. He must have been happy'" (GoF Am. ed. 716, ellipsis in original). I don't think JKR will repeat Cedric's sad fate with Harry. I agree that Harry will survive and thrive, and (IMO) the fickle WW will forget how much it owes to him once it's safe. Carol, who can hardly bear to read Amos Diggory's references to Cedric's imagined grandchildren earlier in the book From ekrdg at verizon.net Sun Jul 8 00:59:13 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 20:59:13 -0400 Subject: What Little Niggling Details will be left? References: Message-ID: <007401c7c0fb$35b558f0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 171424 Kimberly: -I want to know more about Hermione. Yes she is so smart and acts so self-assured but there's an underlying impression in the text that makes me think she's rather unsure of herself as well as suffers from low self-esteem. Low self-esteem is probably not the right word and she doesn't always act that way, just at times I see her as always trying to prove herself or something. Anyway... -I want to know about what Dumbledore was thinking/feeling/going through during the Cave scene. I HAVE to know that, JKR can NOT end the series without answering that ! -I desperately want to know every little detail about the night at Godric's Hollow as well as the missing 24 hours after. -I of course want to know what Dudley could possibly have been thinking about during the Dementor attack and I want it to be something better than, "No pudding for you tonight Dudders". Kimberly From juli17 at aol.com Sun Jul 8 02:39:48 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:39:48 -0000 Subject: Most prominent characters (was Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171425 Neil wrote: > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? > Fred and George. Question: How do you determine who is the most prominent > character? Example" I'm not predicting her death, but is Luna more or less > prominent than Fred and George. Isn't it all a matter of opinion? > Julie: This is a good question. I'm not sure how you'd determine the prominence of each character, though I suppose it would be a combination of their page time and their importance to the various storylines throughout all the HP books. Something like that ;-) Here's how I'd list the "main" characters (yes, another debatable concept!) from most to least prominent: 1. Harry (obviously) 2. Ron 3. Hermione (it's almost a tie with 2&3 but I'd give the edge to Ron because Harry does consider Ron his *best* friend.) 4. Dumbledore (he's the catalyst for so much of the plot) 5. Snape (I know some don't like him, but he is everpresent, and another catalyst for so many parts of the plot) 6. Voldemort (also everpresent, but often in a background way) 7. Hagrid (though I think he definitely knows more than he's revealed) 8. Lupin (more page time and presence in more storylines than the other Mauraders) 9. Neville (the second potential Prophecy boy, and I think he'll have a pivotal role in DH) 10. Ginny (being the girlfriend, she'll presumably have one of the larger roles in DH) 11. Draco (his rating is based on HBP and my presumption that he will also play a critical role in DH) 12. Sirius (not as much page time as some after him, but very critical to several running plotlines) 13. Luna (we saw little of her in HBP, I expect more in DH) 14. Fred & George (I can't separate them, they seem like one person!) 15. Dobby (on the expectation he'll also play a role in DH) 16. McGonagall (another everpresent character, but she hasn't been pivotal to any plotlines, so far) After this I think would be grouped the rest of the Weasleys, Pettigrew, Lucius Malfoy, the Dursleys, Trelawney, Fleur, James and Lily Potter, Aberforth (depending on his role in DH), Slughorn,then a long list of others mentioned numerous times in the books, like the other Hogwarts professors, various students from Gryffindor and Slytherin, Cho Chang, Grawp, Fenrir, Victor Krum, Fudge, Scrimgeour, and many more! I don't think I missed any prominent characters, but if I did I'm sure someone will let me know! Also, if you would list them differently in descending order of prominence, feel free to do so. The above is only my opinion :-) Julie From juli17 at aol.com Sun Jul 8 02:45:10 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:45:10 -0000 Subject: Most prominent characters (was Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171426 Right after I posted I realized I'd immediately forgotten Kreacher, who I would group with the secondary (but still individually important) characters like Lucius Malfoy and Slughorn. Bellatrix would fit there also, I think. I also didn't list any animals, like Hedwig, Fawkes, Nagini, or Buckbeak, though they all have their important moments. Still none of them, except maybe Fawkes (depending on DH) would I consider among the prominent "characters." From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 03:16:41 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 03:16:41 -0000 Subject: Which DEs knew? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171427 So I was just watching CoS on Fox family and it got me to thinking....how many of the DEs knew of the horcruxes(sp)? are we to think Lucious knew about them and knew what he was doing by giving the diary to Ginny? Also, does LV know that the diary was used and destroyed? He has to know a piece of him almost came back to life no? Why has this never been addressed? Anywho, just something that came to me.... TKJ :-( (who just realized yesterday that she is going to be out of the country when her copy of DH is slated to be delivered and won't be home 'til 5 days later...WHAT AM I GOING TO DO??!!) From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 03:18:52 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 03:18:52 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171428 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "colwilrin" wrote: > > > Jim Ferer: > > > As a parent, I have a perspective here: I think Ginny would look on > > the child as a consolation, and if there was anyone who had no reason > > to worry about bringing up her baby alone, it would be Ginny Potter. > > As strong as she is, she would handle it like few other people could. > > We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel > > sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. > > > As a parent of a 4 year old daughter...and knowing that JKR is a > mother as well, I would find it surprising if JKR would write a > script for a 16 year old girl to become pregnant. As a parent > yourself, Jim, I shouldn't have to explain why. When does Ginny > turn 16, and what are the Statutory laws in UK anyway? > > Colwilrin I apologize. I wasn't thinking of the current 16 year old Ginny when I wrote that. My daughter will be 16 in a couple of weeks and what I said absolutely wouldn't apply to her. Why I fixated on a hypothetical older Ginny I don't know. Jim Ferer > From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 03:22:23 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 03:22:23 -0000 Subject: Most prominent characters (was Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171429 > Julie: > I'm not sure how you'd determine > the prominence of each character, though I suppose it would > be a combination of their page time and their importance to > the various storylines throughout all the HP books. Something > like that ;-) Here's how I'd list the "main" characters (yes, > another debatable concept!) from most to least prominent: > > 1. Harry (obviously) > 2. Ron > 3. Hermione > (it's almost a tie with 2&3 but I'd give the edge to Ron > because Harry does consider Ron his *best* friend.) > 4. Dumbledore (he's the catalyst for so much of the plot) > 5. Snape (I know some don't like him, but he is everpresent, > and another catalyst for so many parts of the plot) > 6. Voldemort (also everpresent, but often in a background way) > 7. Hagrid (though I think he definitely knows more than he's > revealed) > 8. Lupin (more page time and presence in more storylines > than the other Mauraders) > 9. Neville (the second potential Prophecy boy, and I think > he'll have a pivotal role in DH) > 10. Ginny (being the girlfriend, she'll presumably have one > of the larger roles in DH) > 11. Draco (his rating is based on HBP and my presumption that > he will also play a critical role in DH) > 12. Sirius (not as much page time as some after him, but > very critical to several running plotlines) > 13. Luna (we saw little of her in HBP, I expect more in DH) > 14. Fred & George (I can't separate them, they seem like > one person!) > 15. Dobby (on the expectation he'll also play a role in DH) > 16. McGonagall (another everpresent character, but she > hasn't been pivotal to any plotlines, so far) > > I don't think I missed any prominent characters, but if I > did I'm sure someone will let me know! Also, if you would > list them differently in descending order of prominence, > feel free to do so. The above is only my opinion :-) > > Julie JW: Hem, hem! I must surely take a teensie bit of umbrage at what seems to be a wee lack of mention of the female politician/teacher who Steven King said is "the greatest fictional villain since Hannibal Lecter." From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 03:30:43 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 03:30:43 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171430 Eggplant: "I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter group for that matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the last book. But can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! If so then if Harry lives I guess I'll be condemned to be known as the town dunce in these parts; but if he really does die you must bow down before my brilliance. If you do agree with me please speak up now, I'd hate to be the only dumbbell." We all know Harry might die, but I don't see evidence *either way.* It's very much an unknowable. Part of the disagreement is a gut reaction from people who don't just don't want Harry to die. I'm one of those. I agree with anybody who says that the price Harry pays for defeating Volemort will be cruelly hard, a heavy, heavy blow. But for Harry, death is far from the heaviest price he might pay. Jim Ferer From catlady at wicca.net Sun Jul 8 03:36:42 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 03:36:42 -0000 Subject: Afterlife/Clue/Quirrell/Phoenices/Apparation/RedGreen/Ravenclaw/Voice/Ethics Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171431 Ann wrote in : << But JKR's treatment of religion does leave out some interesting things. This is a milieu in which souls and the afterlife are maybe not facts of life, but certainly empirically verifiable in a way that nothing spiritual in the real world is. No-one in the Wizarding World can ignore the existence of souls. What's that going to do for religion? Suppose the facts of life in the Wizarding World contradict religions? Isn't this something JKR should have mentioned by now? What's their afterlife like? >> As Eddie quoted in another context in , Sir Nick said in OoP, the wizarding folk don't know any better than Muggles what the afterlife is like: 'He will not come back,' repeated Nick. 'He will have . . . gone on.' 'What d'you mean, "gone on"?' said Harry quickly. 'Gone on where? Listen ? what happens when you die, anyway? Where do you go? Why doesn't everyone come back? Why isn't this place full of ghosts? Why ? ?' 'I cannot answer,' said Nick. 'You're dead, aren't you?' said Harry exasperatedly. 'Who can answer better than you?' 'I was afraid of death,' said Nick softly. 'I chose to remain behind. I sometimes wonder whether I oughtn't to have . . . well, that is neither here nor there . . . in fact, I am neither here nor there . . ' He gave a small sad chuckle. 'I know nothing of the secrets of death, Harry, for I chose my feeble imitation of life instead. I believe learned wizards study the matter in the Department of Mysteries ? ' For all the ghosts know, if they'd gone on, on the other side of the 'door' is extinction and oblivion. Or eternal torture in Hell. There's a reason why Nick was scared to go on -- altho' I can't see Myrtle as motivated by fear. More by vengefulness. Clara wrote in : << I think that all the way back in Book 1, JKR was pointing out to us that Snape, apparently responsible for the potion bottle test, might not actually be the Pure-blood Slytherin everyone thought him to be. (Did anyone pick up that clue?) >> The clue that the logic puzzle was written on paper rather than parchment? I didn't pick it up, but long-ago listies did and argued whether it was a JKR mistake or a Snape insult to the contestant, calling him/her a Muggle by writing on a Muggle material. Constance Vigilance wrote in : << I firmly believe that Quirrell attended Durmstrang and met Victor Krum there. >> Quirrell, already a teacher in 1991, must be a good bit older than Krum. I imagine Krum would have been a first-year when Quirrell was a last-year student. What kind of relationship do you think they formed over such a large age difference? Allie wrote in : << Hi everyone, I'm Allie and I'm a student from New York, USA. This is my first message to this group, so please be gentle! >> Hi, Allie, welcome to HPfGU and please don't feel attacked that I nitpick your essay. One thing about writing a long and detailed essay like yours is there isn't much to reply except 'Interesting!' or nitpicks. << A patronus represents a person's inner personality traits in the form of an animal. >> As Carol mentioned in : << although JKR herself has muddied the waters, I think that a Patronus, which she describes as a spirit guardian, differs from an Animagus form, which clearly represents personal characteristics. >> JKR especially muddied the waters by using her own desired Animagus form, an Otter, as Hermione's Patronus (Which could be read as JKR is what protects Hermione). But one can't analyze DD's inner personality by knowing what his Patronus is. However, your analysis of DD's inner personality may be quite correct anyway: when listies speculate what DD's Animagus form is, the usual suggestions are a bumblebee (because it's his name), a wasp (specifically the one buzzing in the Divination room before Harry dozed off into his 'dream' of LV), or a phoenix (because it fits his nature). Mind you, I don't know if Animagi can become a magical animal, or only a natural animal. << I wonder is there any way that a phoenix can be killed? In my view, if a phoenix could be killed, Voldemort would prevail. >> As far as I know, in mythology there is only one Phoenix, and it is eternal, as least as eternal as the Sun. It seems Potterverse phoenices are a more natural species of animals. It seems there are multiple phoenices in the Potterverse -- perhaps a whole species, which pairs off to reproduce by laying eggs, in addition to renewing individual lives by burning up. In that case, maybe they can't be killed, but they would have to be able to die, or else the world would become completely overrun by phoenices. Maybe their last couple of burnings renew them only to middle-age rather than to youth, and finally they die in their sleep, or burn up and the egg in the ashes never hatches. Carol wrote in : << And how the heck did [Bellatrix] follow Narcissa when she didn't know where Narcissa was going? >> I seem to recall that wizards can Apparate to a place they've never been, by visualizing it very well in their heads. It seems that the Death Eaters, summoned by their Dark Marks, can Apparate to 'where the Dark Lord is', without knowing where that is. Maybe Bella can Apparate to 'where Cissy is'. Maybe Apparation leaves temporary tracks in the ether, or whatever medium it is that they squeeze through. Jr_Pumpkin wrote in : << Did anyone else notice that Godric has red hair and green eyes? >> It's starting to look like she's going to make ALL the Founders red-haired with green eyes. << hmmmmmm....Lily-like? Come to think of it, wasn't Dumbledore a red head too? >> Yes, and I would like him to have been Lily's great-great-grandfather. I would like for him to be Lily's great-great-grandfather, altho' one 'great' is also possible. Lily was born in 1960 according to the Lexicon or 1957 according to me. I also was born in 1957, my late mother was born in 1927, IIRC my late grandmother was born in 1897, and the pattern suggests that my great-grandmother was born in 1867. Dumbledore, born 1840, was around 26-27 when Lily's great-grandparent was born, and around 56-57 when Lily's grandparent was born. However, if he was Harry's great-great-great-grandfather, then he lied when he said the Dursleys were the only relatives Harry had left. He might have lied if his plan to use the Prophecy Boy as a weapon depended either on him growing up completely ignorant of the wizarding world, or growing up in unpleasantness, or both. Constance Vigilance wrote in : << I think it is significant that JKR has shown us only three founders before book publication. Perhaps the Ravenclaw artifact is the most important one. She has said somewhere that Ravenclaws, whose house has been sort of ignored in canon, to have their day. Luna and Ernie MacMillan to be the heroes of Book 7? >> Nitpick: Ernie MacMillan is a Hufflepuff. Do you mean Terry Boot? Wrrex1 wrote in : << Sometimes, "The voice" impresses me as coming from his mother, other times I'd swear I hear Dumbledore or Peter or even Voldemort in there, giving Harry courage, or solutions to the problem at hand. >> I make a big deal about the voice coming from his mother (especially in the scene you mentioned, of resisting the Imperius) because I believe that he could not have grown up to be such a good kid, the way the Dursleys treated him, unless there was some other adult to guide and comfort him, and canon doesn't provide any other adult, except Lily in his head, to tell him he's loved and a good person and to tell him how good people behave. But my theory is weakened by some instances in which canon says a voice in Harry's head told him something and to me it sounds more like something Harry thought of, all on his own. Lizzyben wrote in : << Deontological moral systems (snip) Teleological moral systems (snip) These are totally oppositional ethical pardigms >> How can they be totally opposite to each other when both are totally opposite to Voldemort's statement that 'there is no good or evil, only power and those too weak to use it'? From catlady at wicca.net Sun Jul 8 03:57:06 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 03:57:06 -0000 Subject: PredictionsOf:Hagrid/Hogwarts/DADA/Ginny/Baby/Loved Ones/SNAPE Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171432 Lenore predicted in : << If Hagrid and Maxime get married and live at Hogwarts, >> If Hagrid survives and marries Maxime, surely they'll live at Beauxbatons? It's more important for a school (Beauxbatons) to keep its Headmistress than for a school (Hogwarts) to keep its gamekeeper and Professor of Care of Magical Creatures. Hagrid would never have left Dumbledore, not even for love of Olympe, but Dumbledore is no longer around. Pippin wrote in : << Hogwarts will not open til Oct 31 of Year Seven, after Voldemort's final defeat >> Are you predicting that the action of DH will occupy only Summer, September, and October of 1997, or that Voldemort's final defeat is only the middle of the book? Quick_Silver predicted in : << > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: c. DADA Instructor? Harry with Aberforth subbing in when Harry can't teach >> How can Harry teach NEWT-level DADA when he still needs to study for his own NEWTs? Eggplant predicted in : << Harry will produce with Ginny Harry Potter Junior, although he will not live to see the child. >> Ginny's not the type to be without a man from age 18 to ... age 81 would be symmetrical. And she might well think that her baby needs a daddy as well as a father. Who will be her second husband? Jim Ferer wrote in : << << We have to give Ginny the respect to accept her choice, and I feel sure her choice would be to have a baby with Harry. >> I apologize. I wasn't thinking of the current 16 year old Ginny when I wrote that. My daughter will be 16 in a couple of weeks and what I said absolutely wouldn't apply to her. Why I fixated on a hypothetical older Ginny I don't know. >> I suppose the theory is that just because a girl is only 16, she's too young for her feeling for a man (even a very excellent young man like Harry Potter) to be 'real love', and therefore she doesn't need a 'consolation' for his death. So she's too young for her own choice to be accepted, let alone respected? On the one hand, I agree with that when modern American society is concerned. On the other, [many] parents want to protect their children from hardship, and being a single parent *is* hard, and at what age would you or Molly Weasley think she's old enough to make her own decision to get married and pregnant with a man who has an incurable disease or has already been assigned to a combat tour of duty in the military? Would 25 be old enough? 30? 35? Or is the judgment is based solely on how much income and health insurance her job provides? Goddlefrood wrote in : << If he does die he would be able to rejoin all his loved ones and that would be a happy ending of sorts for Harry after all his suffering. >> He won't be with ALL his loved ones unless Hermione, Ron, and Ginny also die. Neri predicted in : << >Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Will not be specified >> Herself is willing to answer wide-spread fan questions, even if they aren't needed for the plot, such as telling us Lucius was 41 at the beginning of OoP. So it should be easy enough for her to answer this popular fan question even if not needed for the plot. Melanie predicted in : << Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's patronus is a leopard >> Why a leopard? Has any leopard made an appearance in canon so far? << Snape's boggart is himself murdering Dumbledore. >> Can one's boggart be something that has already happened? Boggarts are supposed to frighten people, not 'merely' break their hearts, so if Molly Weasley had seen the image of her dead brothers instead of her dead children, she could have cried out: "They've been dead for years!" rather than "Oh, no, it can't be!" Mz_Anne_Thrope predicted in : << Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS: STAG >> I supposed (before having read your disclaimer) that a Stag Patronus for Snape would have resulted from the tremendous relief he unwillingly felt when the stag rescued him from the werewolf. That requires, of course, that the Prank was before he learned the Patronus spell. Just imagine him concentrating on his happy memory -- a top mark on a paper, I guess, or Dumbledore praising him -- 'Expecto Patronum!' and out from his wand bursts a big silver -- shit! who wants to be reminded of such a humiliating rescue by such a loathsome person! What happens when a person hates his Patronus? From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Sun Jul 8 04:32:57 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 04:32:57 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171433 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: > > Eggplant: "I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter > group for that matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the > last book. But can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? Nobody?! Karen: I am finishing book 4 tonight and quickly re-reading book 5, 6 in the next week or so before book 7 comes out. I go back and forth on my feelings of him dying or not. For the longest time I was convinced he would die but other fans convinced me otherwise. I think the problem is that everyone on this site loves the books so much that they refuse to let themselves face the fact that their beloved character may die. I think many of them have some thought in the back of their mind that perhaps he will not make it to old age. I certainly would like him to live but at the same time I like that JKR is giving us some uncertainty. She's not an author who always gives readers a totally happy ending which I like because some books you open up and from the moment you know what the problem is, you know how the book will end. Not so with HP which makes it interesting and worth reading! From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Jul 8 05:03:16 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 01:03:16 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Wizard of OZ ending? In-Reply-To: <001701c7c0b1$79372530$0c755743@g4j1d8> References: <001701c7c0b1$79372530$0c755743@g4j1d8> Message-ID: <46907014.9050901@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171434 Lois Jamieson wrote: > Interesting theory overall, but there's one flaw. Dorothy was throwing > water on the Scarecrow, after the witch set him on fire. Dorothy didn't > care about the witch--she was trying to save her friend. The water splashed > on the witch by accident, with unexpected results. Bart: Another major difference between Oz and Potter; Baum was familiar with, and believed in, a lot of occult concepts; he was a Theosophist, and had edited a Theosophical magazine. Notably in the first novel, there is a great deal of occult mixed in with the story, as opposed to JKR, who mostly made it up from scratch (such as use of semi-Latin for the spells). In the Wizard of Oz, the 4 elements are based in the 4 cardinal directions, with the feminine elements associated with the good witches, and the masculine elements associated with the wicked witches (note that the Wicked Witch of the East was destroyed by Earth, and the Wicked Witch of the West was destroyed by Water, the feminine elements). Compare this with the elemental associations of the 4 houses, where Griffyndor and Ravenclaw represented the masculine elements (even though Ravenclaw was female), and Hufflepuff and Slytherin represented the feminine elements (although Hufflepuff was female). It wasn't any special insight; it was that JKR knew about the 4 elements, but almost certainly didn't know about the gender associations. She probably didn't even know that the 4 elements came from a time when personalities were ascribed to substances, and the 4 elements were also personality types (although the current Myers-Briggs tests actually parallel those associations). None of the card reading or astrology ("Mars is especially bright"????) matches any readers' world system. Isaac Asimov once published his own reasoning that Shakespeare's plays were actually written by Shakespeare, because there were scientific errors in the plays which were understandable for someone of Shakespeare's education, but were not for someone like Roger Bacon or any of the several others who supposedly penned Shakespeare's plays. Based on JKR's ignorance of readers' world occultism, I would not draw parallels between the Potterverse and Oz. Bart From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 06:07:09 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 06:07:09 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171435 Spoiler******************** P O I L E R S A H E A D************************************************************ Yes, S P O I L E R S > Melanie in Indiana: > One thing > that scared me today though was that I saw the JKR said she cried > writing one of the last chapters in the book and downed a half > bottle of champagne. I hope it is NOT mourning over Harry. zgirnius: Her exact words were 'one chapter near the end'. To me this means not the epilogue, and not the last chapter. I can't see Harry dying with a few chapters to go. I would expect, if he dies, that it would be in the last chapter, and then the epilogue would sum up for us what the fates of the survivors and the WW were, and what were their reactions to Harry's death. So no, I don't think it is his death over which Rowling cried. Which in turn convinces me that Harry does not die at all, because I think that ought to be even worse than any other character dying. My money is (sadly) on Snape, in a tearjerking, dramatic, "It is a far, far better thing I do" type scene. I would love to be wrong about this. From lauren1 at catliness.com Sun Jul 8 02:53:04 2007 From: lauren1 at catliness.com (Lauren Merryfield) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 19:53:04 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry dies? References: <018401c7c0a0$60ccbfc0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: <0ae401c7c13c$41051880$0200a8c0@laurenye0o5w8x> No: HPFGUIDX 171436 Catlady responds: I want my heroes alive and well! I wouldn't mind him dying in the epilogue part, but, just allow him to survive the offing of LV so that for once he will be allowed to have a normal life. I simply won't like him dying, no matter how heroically! Hi, I don't want Harry to die, either. Not even to resurrect. I want him to have a long, happy life as an auror and a parent. Thanks Lauren, who may not get her wishes. ----- Original Message ----- From: Phyllis Stevens To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 7:09 AM Subject: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry dies? Karen writes: I am still trying to figure out for myself if I think he will die or not as a re-read the books. However, think of this- what if he kills Voldemort in the same instant that Voldemort kills him. Yes Harry was killed and by Voldemort but he saved the wizarding world from Voldemort and for that he is once again a hero. What a noble death! That could still make for a good ending. Catlady responds: I want my heroes alive and well! I wouldn't mind him dying in the epilogue part, but, just allow him to survive the offing of LV so that for once he will be allowed to have a normal life. I simply won't like him dying, no matter how heroically! catlady1949 at comcast.net add me to your MSN: Catlady1949 at Comcast.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/890 - Release Date: 7/7/2007 3:26 PM [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 8 10:50:46 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:50:46 -0000 Subject: Hagrid predictions? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171437 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lenore wrote: > > Eddie: > > >There have been remarkably few predictions on this board concerning > >Hagrid for Deathly Hallows. Here are some of mine, mostly not taken > >from canon, but such is the nature of predictions: > > > >* Hagrid and Grawp will battle giants in the war against Voldemort > AmanitaMuscaria now - Agreed. I fear, however, that this is where Hagrid dies. > >* Hagrid will get a new unbroken wand (made by Ollivander), possibly > >with dragon heartstring core. > AM now - only if Ollivander is being hidden by the OotP. I prefer the idea that Hagrid's wand comes from the French wandmaker who supplies Beauxbatons with wands, and that he already has it in HBP. >* Hagrid will enter the Forbidden Forest to enlist the aid of someone > >... possibly the centaurs? > AM now - And the Thestrals. What about a group of DEs led into a trap of Acromantulas - that'd get rid of a few... > >* Hagrid has Sirius' flying motorcycle, probably at Hogwarts, possibly > >parked in the Forbidden Forest > AM now - Agreed - in the Forest. > >* Hagrid will tell Harry the exact details of how he found Harry at > >Godric's Hollow the night Voldemort killed Harry's parents. > AM now - I'm sure he has essential information for Harry about Godric's Hollow. I also think we'll find out why one of Hagrid's titles is 'Keeper of the Keys', and that this will be important. Waiting with bated breath ... From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Sun Jul 8 13:34:50 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 13:34:50 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171438 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Zara" wrote: > > > > Spoiler******************** > P > O > I > L > E > R > S > A > H > E > A > D************************************************************ > Yes, > S > P > O > I > L > E > R > S > > Melanie in Indiana: > > One thing > > that scared me today though was that I saw the JKR said she cried > > writing one of the last chapters in the book and downed a half > > bottle of champagne. I hope it is NOT mourning over Harry. > > zgirnius: > Her exact words were 'one chapter near the end'. To me this means not > the epilogue, and not the last chapter. I can't see Harry dying with > a few chapters to go. I would expect, if he dies, that it would be in > the last chapter, and then the epilogue would sum up for us what the > fates of the survivors and the WW were, and what were their reactions > to Harry's death. > Karen: What has JKR said about her feelings on Hagrid? That's my guess as to who it might be. Him or Ron- since Ron has similar characteristics to her best friend. > From celizwh at intergate.com Sun Jul 8 16:02:22 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:02:22 -0000 Subject: Harry's Bood Relations (was Afterlife/Clue/Quirrell/, etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171439 Catlady: > However, if he was Harry's great-great-great-grandfather, > then he lied when he said the Dursleys were the only > relatives Harry had left. houyhnhnm: Dumbledore must have meant that the Dursleys were Harry's only living relatives within some arbitrary degree of kinship of which neither Harry nor the reader was informed. How could Harry possibly have no blood relations within any degeree of kinship without the entire WW being wiped out (and much of Muggle Britain as well)? So what would be the WW definition of consanguinity? Everybody up to second cousin? Third cousin? One remove? Two removes? Anyone care to speculate? From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 8 16:06:56 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:06:56 -0000 Subject: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171440 "Zara" wrote: > Her [JKR] exact words were 'one chapter > near the end'. To me this means not the > epilogue, and not the last chapter. To me that sounds like exactly where I'd expect Harry to die, after all Dumbledore didn't die in the last chapter of HBP, or even the second to the last. It was also interesting that when asked about writing a book 8 she said "never say never, I may write again about that world"; she did not say she'd ever write another Harry Potter book and I believe the reason is that the saga of Harry Potter "comes to quite a clear end". > My money is (sadly) on Snape, in a tearjerking, > dramatic, "It is a far, far better thing I do" > type scene. If JKR can make me cry over Snape's death she is an even better writer than I think she is. Eggplant From horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 8 16:10:50 2007 From: horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk (horadesiesta) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:10:50 -0000 Subject: Afterlife/Clue/Quirrell/Phoenices/Apparation/RedGreen/Ravenclaw/Voice/Ethics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171441 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > > Clara wrote in > : > > << I think that all the way back in Book 1, JKR was pointing out to > us that Snape, apparently responsible for the potion bottle test, > might not actually be the Pure-blood Slytherin everyone thought him > to be. (Did anyone pick up that clue?) >> > > The clue that the logic puzzle was written on paper rather than > parchment? I didn't pick it up, but long-ago listies did and argued > whether it was a JKR mistake or a Snape insult to the contestant, > calling him/her a Muggle by writing on a Muggle material. > Clara adds: Well, actually I was referring to the juxtaposition of Hermione?s comment about wizards generally not being expert at deciphering problems using logic, together with Snape setting a problem using logic. We assume from these two facts ( taking as read that Hermione?s statement is correct, and Snape did set the puzzle) that Snape is a.) one of those rare wizards who understands logic or b.) not a pure-blood wizard. I think the paper was another clue to the mixed parentage of Snape and not a veiled insult nor a mistake. JMHO, logically. Clara From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Jul 8 16:17:39 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:17:39 -0000 Subject: PredictionsOf:Hagrid/Hogwarts/DADA/Ginny/Baby/Loved Ones/SNAPE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171442 > Pippin wrote in > : > > << Hogwarts will not open til Oct 31 of Year Seven, after Voldemort's final defeat >> > > Are you predicting that the action of DH will occupy only Summer, > September, and October of 1997, or that Voldemort's final defeat is > only the middle of the book? > Pippin: I'm predicting Voldemort falls before dawn on Hallowe'en, just as he did before, and the action ends with a combined opening/Hallowe'en feast. This means the Houses will have to unite, if at all, before Hogwarts reopens. I think that will happen ala The Little White Horse, with both Gryffindor and Slytherin versions of the founding story revised and united thanks to discoveries made during the horcrux hunt. Studying for NEWTs and such can only be anti-climactic compared to fighting Voldie, and JKR has already dealt with test anxiety with the OWLS. Also, this way Harry, Ron and Ginny can continue to play Quidditch for Gryffindor without there being any more Quidditch games in the book. Pippin From amis917 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 8 16:42:35 2007 From: amis917 at hotmail.com (amis917) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:42:35 -0000 Subject: Harry's Bood Relations (was Afterlife/Clue/Quirrell/, etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171443 houyhnhnm: > > Dumbledore must have meant that the Dursleys were > Harry's only living relatives within some arbitrary > degree of kinship of which neither Harry nor the > reader was informed. > > How could Harry possibly have no blood relations > within any degeree of kinship without the entire > WW being wiped out (and much of Muggle Britain as well)? > > So what would be the WW definition of consanguinity? > Everybody up to second cousin? Third cousin? One remove? > Two removes? Anyone care to speculate? Amis917: I think the idea is that the Dursleys are Harry's closest living relatives on his mother's side. In order for the protection to continue (or strengthen) from Lily's sacrifice, Harry had to be placed with one of Lily's relatives. I'm sure there were some distant relatives if you go back up Harry's family tree and down another branch. The protection wouldn't have worked the same though, I don't think. So, in the end - it doesn't really matter if he has some distant relatives, or not. Amis917 From rlaw186 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 15:31:55 2007 From: rlaw186 at yahoo.com (rlaw186) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 15:31:55 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Book 7 Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171444 > aiwa9784clee wrote: > BACK GROUND PREDICTIONS - How We Got Here ? Books 1 through 6 > BG07# The necklace from Borgin & Burks or the tiara owned by (MW) > Molly Weasley's aunt will turn out to be one of the other horcrux. > rlaw186: Interesting predictions...BG07# 'The necklace from Borgin & Burks or the tiara owned by (MW) Molly Weasley's aunt will turn out to be one of the other horcrux.' How can you be sure when HP placed a tiara on a dummy in the ROR when hiding his potions book from SS (HBP)? rlaw186 From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jul 8 16:57:02 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 8 Jul 2007 16:57:02 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 7/8/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1183913822.14.43483.m44@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171445 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday July 8, 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 nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 20:00:56 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:00:56 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Faith=92s_Predictions_for_DH_(and_mine)?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171446 Faith's Predictions for "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" (as dictated to Neri): 1. Dumbledore is really dead. 2. Sirius is really dead as well. 3. So is Regulus Black. So is Emmeline Vance. So is Quirrell. 4. Harry will not kill Voldemort with an Avada Kedavra, nor with any non-magical weapon. 5. Dumbledore has never been a puppet master (Neri: don't tell me he didn't keep a few secrets to himself. Faith: sure he did, but he has never manipulated any of the good guys and has never engineered or staged any of the books' endings). 6. Dumbledore didn't send Peter to Voldemort on purpose, and did not knowingly enabled Voldemort to come back in any other way. 7. Dumbledore didn't make the first half of the prophecy known to Voldemort on purpose. 8. When Sirius was in Azkaban, Dumbledore didn't know he was innocent. 9. Harry is not Gryffindor's heir. 10. No memory charm of any form was used on little Neville. 11. R.A.B. is Regulus Black. 12. Lupin is not ESE. 13. Neither are McGonagall, Sirius, Tonks, Molly, Dobby or Trevor. (Neri: how about Gran? Faith: Gran isn't either). 14. Snape is not DDM. 15. He's not Voldemort's man either. 16. His debt to James was at least one of his reasons, probably the main one, for telling Dumbledore about the danger to the Potters. 17. Snape's tantrum in the Shrieking Shack and in the hospital wing was not an act. 18. In Spinner's End, Snape was telling the truth when he said he knew about the plan. 19. There were no loopholes in the Unbreakable Vow (Neri: are you certain? Faith: I'll say this much: it's possible *Snape* thought there were loopholes, but if he did then he was wrong). 20. The curse on the tower was a full-blown Avada Kedavra. 21. Dumbledore did not plead with Snape to kill him. 22. In his argument with Dumbledore in the wood, the thing that Snape "didn't want to do anymore" was not a plan to kill Dumbledore. 23. Snape was not artificially maintaining Dumbledore alive during HBP. 24. (And yet) Dumbledore will prove right about trusting Snape. 25. (Because) Snape will pay his debt. 26. So will Peter. 27. Draco will come back to the right side. 28. Kreacher will be instrumental in finding a Horcrux. 29. Petunia won't do any magic. Neither will Dudley. 30. The green potion from the cave didn't have any additional effects beside those stated by Dumbledore: weakening the drinker and trying to prevent him from taking the Horcrux by any way possible. 31. Ron will say Voldemort's name. 32. The American cover art is a fairly accurate description of a place we haven't visited yet during the series. 33. At least 80% of Faith's predictions will come true (Neri: you didn't say if *this* prediction will be among the 80%. Faith: this one will. And I say 80% because I'm playing it safe). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neri again: Well, unlike Faith I don't play it safe. Where's the fun in that? So here are *my* predictions: 1. The last of Voldemort's soul parts entered Harry accidentally in Godric's Hollow, either as a Horcrux or just possessing him (this difference may not be of importance). 2. Harry's scar is *not* a Horcrux, at least not in the sense that it would be possible to dehorcrux Harry by removing the scar without destroying him (but it is possible that Harry will lose his scar as a side effect of losing the Voldemort soul part). 3. Harry will have to look into Voldemort's mind and/or the Voldemort bit inside himself in order to find and/or destroy at least one of the other Horcruxes. 4. The soul part inside Harry will appear as little Tom and it will turn out that it has been helping Harry all along. If it leaves Harry in the end it will be the soul part itself making this choice. 5. Petunia will give Harry a clue about this. Most likely she knows little Tom by name. Dudley had also met little Tom once, and this was the horrible moment he recalled under the effect of the Dementor. 6. The Hallows are the four founders' objects: the Slytherin Locket, Hufflepuff Cup, Ravenclaw Wand and Gryffindor Sword. All but the sword are Horcruxes, but the sword will be important too. 7. The Ravenclaw Horcrux is the single wand in Olivander's shop window (alternatively, the wand in the window was transfigured to look like the real wand Horcrux). 8. After a long goose chase, the locket Horcrux will be found in Harry's Gringots vault. 9. Kreacher was with Regulus when they stole the locket from the cave. 10. Bellatrix was entrusted with a Horcrux before GH, most probably the cup. Draco will be the one to tell Harry about it. He saw it in her mind when she gave him Occlumency lessons. 11. Frank and Alice Longbottom know the location of this Horcrux, because they took it from Bellatrix. She tortured them in order to find where it was, but they weren't telling. 12. Nagini is not a Horcrux (yet, but she may be slated to become one). 13. Arthur Weasley's Office for the Detection and Confiscation of Counterfeit Defensive Spells and Protective Objects will play a part in the search for at least one Horcrux. Harry may take a job in this office as a cover story for hunting Horcruxes. 14. Voldemort tried to spare Lily because he wanted to turn her into a living Horcrux, or because Peter had asked him to spare her, or both. 15. Snape wasn't at GH with Voldemort, nor was anybody else (except maybe Peter). If the question of how Dumbledore knew what had happened there will come up at all, it will turn out that he was using a portrait, his silver alchemical set, another magical device or just plain guesswork. 16. The first or second chapter of DH will be similar to "Spinner's End", a non-Harry's point-of-view chapter, only this time depicting Snape with Voldemort himself. Draco and/or Narcissa may make an appearance too. In this chapter we will get much more conclusive evidence that Snape has never been DDM. 17. Peter and/or Snape will be instrumental in killing Voldemort. At least one of them will die too, most probably both. 18. No version of LOLLIPOPS will turn out true. If anybody but James was in love with Lily it was Peter, possibly even Lupin, but not Snape. 19. "That awful boy" Petunia mentions was not Snape. It was most probably James, but might turn out to be Peter. 20. One version of ACID POPS will turn out true. Snape had something about Narcissa, probably with some interesting complication regarding Lucius, and this was one reason he made the Unbreakable Vow. 21. We will find that Draco turned against Snape and Narcissa in HBP because he suspected that they had plotted together against his father. 22. Snape will save Harry's life because he had a Life Debt to James. As a result he will either be killed by Voldemort, or he will have to sever his ties with Voldemort, or both. 23. We will find out, probably from Snape himself, that the Worst Memory scene was his worst memory because he drew James's blood, which later turned out to have critical implications for the debt plot. 24. Snape had never warned James personally against using Sirius as his Secret Keeper. 25. It will turn out that during the Occlumency lessons Snape was perusing some secret mission for Voldemort and/or for himself. Most likely possibility: he was trying to find Voldemort's lost soul part in Harry's mind, and failed. 26. The question of what exactly had happened the night of the battle in the Department of Mysteries will come up, and there will be certain revelations, especially regarding Snape's role. It will turn out he was attempting to achieve his own objectives while maintaining his covers on both sides. Sirius' role will probably come out better than it has previously appeared. 27. Bella and Neville will have a second round. 28. Hogwarts will close down, at least in the beginning of the year and probably for most of the book. 29. Characters ending up dead, from the most likely and down: Voldemort, Nagini, Peter, Snape, Luna, Hagrid, Ginny, Bellatrix, Percy, Lucius, Scrimgeour, Moody, Mundungus, Greyback (is that enough of a bloodbath? ) 30. Characters staying alive, from the most likely and down: Hermione, Ron, Harry, Lupin, Tonks, Bill, Neville, Draco, McGonagall, Umbridge, Fudge, Slughorn. 31. Epilogue chapter: We will *not* be told about the marriage of Ron and Hermione, nor of Harry and Ginny (assuming she stays alive at all, which I'm not very optimistic about). At most we may be told about engagements. However, we *will* be told about the marriage of Lupin and Tonks (if they both stay alive, which I *am* optimistic about). Neri, who will be surprised (but pleased) if more than 30% of his predictions come true. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 20:01:05 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:01:05 -0000 Subject: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171447 eggplant: > To me that sounds like exactly where I'd expect Harry to die, after > all Dumbledore didn't die in the last chapter of HBP, or even the > second to the last. zgirnius: That's right, he died at the very end of the fourth chapter from the end. But there are important differences betweem Dumbledore's death at the end of HBP, and a hypothetical death of Harry in DH a similar number of chapters from the end of DH, in my opinion. 1) If the death of Dumbledore at the hands of Snape was indeed *the* main event of HBP, our account of this event was not over until the second to last chapter, "The Phoenix Lament". It was relevant for Harry to learn all the details of Snape and Draco's actions that night and for us to see his reaction. 2) HBP was not primarily about Dumbledore - Harry is the hero of that book, and DH as well. Further, the book was also about Snape/HBP (the other title character). The revelation of the 'secret' of the book (Snape=HBP) occured a chapter after Dumbledore's death, and the chapter following that gave us more details of the events that led to the killing of Dumbledore by Snape. If Harry dies at a similar point in DH, we will not need further chapters, because Harry's story will be over, and so will the story of DH. 3) HBP was not the final book of the series. The remaining three chapters dealt with the escape of the culprits, the reactions of the good guys, especially Harry, to the events, and set up for Book 7 (Harry making decisions about what he will be doing in DH). The culprit that matters will be dead along with Harry, in my opinion. And no pages will need to be spent on setup. I also think that Harry's story can be brought to an end fairly conclusively without Harry dying. For example, the epilogue could state facts of his future life that would preclude further epic adventures. (Harry was a star Seeker and later respected professional coach, married Ginny, had 12 kids, and lived happily ever after, for example). Without either contradicting such an account, or positing such adventures for Harry and Ginny in late middle age once their brood of twelve have all gone on their merry ways, no sequel could be written. eggplant: > If JKR can make me cry over Snape's death she is an even better writer > than I think she is. zgirnius: What is relevant is how Rowling feels about the matter, since it is her crying that we are speculating about. We're not going to agree on this, as you are convinced she is writing Snape as one of her villains. From tbogdan1 at earthlink.net Sun Jul 8 19:59:28 2007 From: tbogdan1 at earthlink.net (Troy Bogdan) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 19:59:28 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171448 > Jim Ferer wrote: > I agree with anybody who says that the price Harry pays for defeating > Volemort will be cruelly hard, a heavy, heavy blow. But for Harry, > death is far from the heaviest price he might pay. Troy: I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but perhaps Harry will not die, but live a life worse than death, for example, in a room at St. Mungos? From lfreeman at mbc.edu Sun Jul 8 21:12:17 2007 From: lfreeman at mbc.edu (Freeman, Louise Margaret) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 17:12:17 -0400 Subject: Hagrid predictions? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171449 Perhaps that will be the big marriage of Book Seven: the Flying Motorcycle and the Ford Aguila. Then Hagrid starts a new career selling flying blue tricycles. Louise From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 22:14:42 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 22:14:42 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171450 > eggplant: > > If JKR can make me cry over Snape's death she is an even better writer > > than I think she is. > > zgirnius: > What is relevant is how Rowling feels about the matter, since it is her > crying that we are speculating about. We're not going to agree on this, > as you are convinced she is writing Snape as one of her villains. Alla: Yeah, I agree Zara. I think that to decide what JKR was crying over, we have to figure out what *8she** can be crying over, not us. Personally and that is just me, I think she was crying that her era of writing about Harry is over, that the story is done, etc. Having said that, no matter how passionately I hate Snape and think that he is the biggest scam of the earth, I still will not exclude the possibility of her making **me** crying over his death as well. Yeah, so far I think a miracle is needed to make me do it, but hey, she made me cry over Dumbledore's death, which I sooooo did not expect to do after OOP. Granted, DD had in my book only one year of idiotic behaviour, but as I said, hopeless optimist me has faith in JKR writing skills. Maybe I will be proven wrong, but again, she made me not be annoyed with Molly over her treatment of Fleur as well. Granted I do not hate Molly, I like her for the most part, unless she is IMO being obnoxious to Fleur.... and Sirius.... and Hermione.... but still, I think I have faith :) P.S. Just watch me eat that crow on July 24. Alla. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 23:28:14 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 23:28:14 -0000 Subject: Which DEs knew? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171451 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tandra" wrote: > So I was just watching CoS on Fox family and it got me to > thinking....how many of the DEs knew of the horcruxes(sp)? are we to > think Lucious knew about them and knew what he was doing by giving the > diary to Ginny? > Also, does LV know that the diary was used and destroyed? He has to > know a piece of him almost came back to life no? Why has this never > been addressed? Both of your questions were addressed in the "Horcruxes" chapter, at least in part. There, DD says that Lucius didn't know that the diary was a H-x. "Had Lucius known he held a portion of his master's soul in his hands, he would undoubtedly have treated it with more reverence" (p.508 US hardback). On the same page DD mentions that LV found out that the diary was destroyed and "his anger was terrible to behold". As for other DEs, it's possible that Bellatrix knew about at least one H-x (the locket), remember her comment about LV trusting her "with his most precious"? I don't know about the rest of the DEs :-). Hope this helped, zanooda From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 23:52:45 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juliana Botero) Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 16:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DH Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for Bragging Rights in Perpetuity Message-ID: <166987.49942.qm@web53111.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171452 Predictions Contest Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO, Harry will Live 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES, He will be killed, vanished, defeated 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Percy Weasley 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? YES b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur Tonks & Remus 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time ?very late in life?? Dudley 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry b. Head Girl? Someone from Ravenclaw c. DADA Instructor? An Auror, probably Tonks d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape?s ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write ?n/a? or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write ?In Voldemort? for one of the answers.) a. Slytherine's Locket b. Nagini c. Ravenclaw's Cup d. Tom's Diary e. Marvolo's Ring f. Something of Hufflepuff's g. Voldemort himself In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape?s patronus and boggert? Boggart: Voldemort Patronus: Phoenix Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? LOVE Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1- A horcrux is hidden at the Room of Requirements (Probably Hufflepuff's whatever), Harry will se it when he goes back to get the Advanced Potion Making book. 2- Buckbeak will be involved in the final battle (HP vs LV), he'll probably get injured or die. 3- Draco will return to the good side, his mother will regret ever making Snape take the unbreakable oath once she realizes Dumbledore was the only one that could have saved her family. Harry and Draco won't become friends, but they will act together trying to defeat Voldemort. Draco will be jealous of Ron since he's got a crush on Hermione. Lucius will live to see the day they are completely Voldie-free, and he will donate part of his fortune to Hogwarts, where Draco will be a teacher. 4- Severus killed Dumbledore because he asked him to do so. He is still loyal to The Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore left a letter (or perhaps a memory in the pensive) explaining everything, why he still trusts Snape and why he had to die. Snape will help Harry defeat Voldemort by providing information from the inside, and Harry will trust him with his life 5- Harry will communicate somehow with Dumbledore, and he will help him with his quest to destroy the remaining horcruxes Juli Aol: jlnbtr Yahoo: jlnbtr ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mikeyrph at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 00:06:24 2007 From: mikeyrph at yahoo.com (mike) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:06:24 -0000 Subject: Which DEs knew? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171454 > Tandra wrote: > So I was just watching CoS on Fox family and it got me to > thinking....how many of the DEs knew of the horcruxes(sp)? are we to > think Lucious knew about them and knew what he was doing by giving > the diary to Ginny? > > Also, does LV know that the diary was used and destroyed? He has to > know a piece of him almost came back to life no? Why has this never > been addressed? Anywho, just something that came to me.... > > > TKJ :-( > (who just realized yesterday that she is going to be out of the > country when her copy of DH is slated to be delivered and won't be > home 'til 5 days later...WHAT AM I GOING TO DO??!!) Mike: I recommend avoiding all print & electronic media other than HBP which you should read as many times as you can before you get DH...your questions are all answered in THERE. Dumbledore implies that NONE of them knew of the horcruxes (although the mysterious RAB found out somehow). He says Lucius would not have treated the diary so casually if he'd have known how important it was and that Voldy's anger was terrible to behold (or something like that) when he found it had been destroyed (Remember?---he then says that Lucius might temporarily be GLAD to be safe in Azkaban, especially after the disaster at the Ministry). From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jul 9 01:14:50 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 01:14:50 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171455 > > Alla: > > Yeah, I agree Zara. I think that to decide what JKR was crying over, > we have to figure out what *8she** can be crying over, not us. > Pippin: Maybe she was crying over her favorite adult character turning down his last chance at redemption and getting his soul sucked out by dementors. And to decide what JKR means by saying Harry's story comes to quite a clear end, we have to think about what *she* thinks his story is about. I am wondering if the power of love in him is going to diffuse itself through the WW in some way, so that there will be no more need for a story about Harry per se because his power will no longer be unique. Pippin stocking up on crow also From amdeus4444 at aol.com Mon Jul 9 00:39:20 2007 From: amdeus4444 at aol.com (brindisius) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:39:20 -0000 Subject: What happens in DH? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171456 Hello all, I've been lurking and reading everyone's opinions (not all of them of course, that would take years) but I'm going to give my predictions for HPDH anyway. Please forgive me if I've duplicated others' thoughts: 1. Hermione will recognize the locket in Dumbledore's Pensieve. 2. She will figure out that Voldemort accidentally created a Horcrux on Harry's forehead when he tried to Avada Kadavra Harry so soon after murdering James and Lily. 3. Therefore, Harry himself is not the Horcrux, it's actually his SCAR! 4. Harry will NOT die but some other major character will. 5. Snape is on Dumbledore's side after all. 6. Both Snape and Dumbledore are more capable at Legilimency and Occlumency than anyone, including Voldemort, suspects. 7. Harry will lose some if not most of his magical powers after Hermione figures out how to remove the Horcrux without killing him. 8. It's been asked why Voldemort doesn't just make more Horcruxes after he was reborn; it will come out that Harry's blood prevents him from doing so. 9. A severely weakened Harry will still have enough magical powers to finish off Voldemort, who by then, with his Horcruxes and his resurrected body destroyed, will be reduced to an amorphous fog (as in HPPS), unable to defend himself. That's it. We will see how I did in a couple weeks. Burrell Schulz From write2stephenie at bellsouth.net Mon Jul 9 02:24:44 2007 From: write2stephenie at bellsouth.net (StephanieCurrier) Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 22:24:44 -0400 Subject: Harry Dies Message-ID: <002401c7c1d0$506c9480$6501a8c0@S0027642347> No: HPFGUIDX 171457 >>>Satya Latha: J.K. always says Love is greater than anything else in the world and the ONLY Power, which Harry has and Voldemort NEVER had which would help him to kill Voldemort!! If that is the case then it would be unfair to kill Harry. Because he had lived his 16 miserable years of life without Happiness in his life. Voldemort on the other hand lived for 50 yrs absolutely Happily on HIS wish without the name of Love. He had suffered in his life only when he attempted to kill Harry but until then nothing stopped him. In other words he was the happiest person!!<<< Empathy. Harry gaining deep *understanding* of Voldemort from the perspective of Empathy is the only way it can work. It is the only way that Love Conquers All. I don't often post, but as impossible as empathy for Voldemort (or rather for Tom Riddle) seems, that's exactly why it is. JK always comes up with an unexpected concept, so I do wonder what book 7 will hold in that regard. Could it be yet another way (besides the Pensieve) to *truly* tap into some deep pain of Tom Riddle...some way of experiencing him? Dumbledore seemed to suggest this understanding was Key. -Stephanie, who has admittedly not kept up with all discussions but always keys into the role love will play From catlady at wicca.net Mon Jul 9 05:01:22 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 05:01:22 -0000 Subject: Possession Theory/Ethics/R/H Kids/Snape/Four Elements/TLWH/Faith Predictions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171458 Kneasy invented Possession Theory, which I like very much. If I understand correctly, he began with Salazar Slytherin being a bad sort with a yearning for immortality. Sally invented some way he could leave his old or dying body and take over someone else's. He wanted to always be a powerful wizard with Parselmouth ability, so he fixed up the Chamber of Secrets so that only a powerfully magical Parselmouth could enter, and then he talked the person into hosting him, much as Voldemort talked to Quirrell, and then the person was probably surprised to be crushed and suppressed and forgotten. Each possessed person became a Dark Lord, eventually including Grindelwald, and then Tom Riddle. Voldemort changed the pattern a bit with his seven soul pieces and determination to re-create his own body rather than take over someone's. But he did try to possess Harry at the OoP battle. Carol wrote in : << I do think that Snape operates according to his own moral code, a set of strict, old-fashioned virtues of the sort rejected by Shelleyan Romantics in the early eighteenth century and more recently by the Beat generation of the 1950s and its postmodern offspring from the 1990s onward: Duty, Obedience, Respect for Authority, Loyalty (Loyaultie me Lie!), perhaps others that I can't think of right now.>> Duty -- it seems to me that anyone who takes Dumbledore's advice to 'do what is right rather than what is easy' believes in Duty, the duty to do what is right. The argument is, what IS it one's Duty to do (or not do), also called what is right? There are those who say it is always everyone's duty to tell the truth. So as soon as Voldemort asked Peter where the Potters were hiding, it was Peter's Duty to tell him the truth. There are those who say it is always the duty of children to obey teachers, even Umbridge, so Harry and the Defense Association were the bad guys and Draco and the Inquisitorial Squad were the good guys. I take it you propose that Snape believes his duties are Loyalty, Obedience, and Respect for Authority. Loyalty and Obedience are the virtues of Bellatrix and of Barty Junior, not of a double-agent. If Snape is Loyal to Dumbledore, he Betrayed Voldemort and his Death Eater friends. If Snape is Loyal to voldemort ... okay, then maybe Loyalty and Obedience are his virtues, too. Obedience and Respect for Authority are the virtues of Marietta tatting out the Defense Association (listies have argued that Marietta THOUGHT she was doing right, but no one has argued that Rowling intended her to be an example of right behavior), and of The Daily Prophet's smear campaign against Harry at Minister Fudge's direction, and of the law enforcement employees who put Stan Shunpike in Azkaban without trial at Minister Scrimgeour's direction, and of Seamus's mother's distrust of Dumbledore because The Daily Prophet said so. Snape's Respect for Authority didn't extend to obeying Fudge and Umbridge versus Dumbledore, even after Dumbledore had been fired. DDM!Snape and Pettigrew both betrayed their first allegiance and their friends on that side. Dobby and Kreachur both betrayed their owners because of their loyalty to their owners' enemies. Sirius and Percy both turned against their parents and sibling(s). I believe that Rowling deliberately created these parallels to show her belief that it is not that Loyalty and Obedience are duties, but that Loyalty to good is the duty. (If Snape is LVM, then he didn't betray his first allegiance, but also he is a bad guy; if Dobby has been a Malfoy secret agent all along, he didn't betray his owner, but also he is a bad guy; if Percy is DD's spy in the Ministry, then he is a good guy -- but even faking a break-up with his family hurt their feelings.) The Ministry of Magic keeps putting innocent people into Azkaban without trial, sometimes even knowing that the person is innocent, and a trial like the one Fudge planned for Harry wouldn't be any improvement. I believe Rowling presented the Ministry as such an ethics-less institution to show her belief that Authority should be Respected only when it refrains from doing evil. Cassie wrote in : << Eddie : > Wherein I predict Ron and Hermione will have at least 3 kids, 2 of > which are red-headed twins. Cassy: And the third, the youngest one will be a boy named Harry! >> Prediction: Ron and Hermione will name their children after loved or respected ones lost in the struggle against Voldemort: 1. Harry Arthur (but they call him Artie because saying 'Harry' still hurts too much) 2. Minerva Molly 3. Twins: Albus Fred and Rubeus George 5. Neville Bilius 6. Cedric Charlie 7. Twins: Fabian Sirius and Gideon Remus 9. James Viktor 10. Arabella Ginevra 11. Twins: Lily Amelia and Luna Emmeline 13. Nymphadora Lavender (called Dora) They run out of children before they run out of names. I wrote in : << I supposed that a Stag Patronus for Snape would have resulted from the tremendous relief he unwillingly felt when the stag rescued him from the werewolf. >> In which case, probably his boggart would be a werewolf. How many wizards would guess that having a werewolf for a boggart represented fear of being humiliated rather than fear of being torn to bits? But those are a Patronus and Boggart that wouldn't be a clue to his allegiance. Bart wrote in : << the elemental associations of the 4 houses, where Griffyndor and Ravenclaw represented the masculine elements (even though Ravenclaw was female), and Hufflepuff and Slytherin represented the feminine elements (although Hufflepuff was female). It wasn't any special insight; it was that JKR knew about the 4 elements, but almost certainly didn't know about the gender associations. >> I prefer to believe that removing gender associations from the elements is an act of feminism rather than of ignorance. When I'm not warring against gender stereotyping and the assignment of gender to asexual beings (like hydrogen and oxygen), I sometimes point out that each element can be masculine and can be feminine. When I'm called upon to invoke the Watchtowers at a non-private Circle, I make a point of invoking a named God and a named Goddess as well as the generalized 'spirits of' each direction's element. When I haven't had time to plan, it's easiest for me to call back on Classics: "My Lord Apollo, god of the clear light of intellect who plays music for the Muses to dance. My Lady Athena, goddess of knowledge and skill. Spirits of east and of air, of morning and spring time, of intelligence and clarity, and the curious child in every heart. We call upon you to ward our Eastern Watchtower'. Hestia and Hephaistios. Poseidon and Aphrodite. Demeter and Pan, or Pluto, or possibly Atlas. << She probably didn't even know that the 4 elements came from a time when personalities were ascribed to substances, and the 4 elements were also personality types >> Surely she must have known, even if she didn't care about esotericism. Just as a lover of *words*, she must have looked up the etymologies of 'choleric', 'melancholic', 'sanguine', and 'phlegmatic'. Pippin wrote in : << I think that will happen ala The Little White Horse, with both Gryffindor and Slytherin versions of the founding story revised and united thanks to discoveries made during the horcrux hunt. >> Could it be done with a variant of Possession Theory? That Salazar started out a good guy until he became possessed by the Evil Entity. As a result of rescuing Godric from the Evil Entity. Then he locked himself up in the Chamber of Secrets to protect everyone from himself... Neri wrote in : << Faith's Predictions for "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" (snip) 5. [Snape]'s not Voldemort's man either. >> Faith is defined as believing whatever the surface of the narrative says. When there's a plot twist or revelation, she believes the new thing. So in PS/SS, Faith believed that Snape was trying to steal the Stone until Harry went through the door and found Quirrell. And in GoF, she believed Snape had not been a Death Eater from the time that Sirius said Dumbledore wouldn't have hired him if he were an ex-DE until the Pensieve tial scene. Under this definition, Faith would have read the Spinner's End chapter and believed what Snape told the sisters -- that he was loyal to Lord Voldemort. And that belief would have been strengthened by Snape killing Dumbledore. << 30. The green potion from the cave didn't have any additional effects beside those stated by Dumbledore: weakening the drinker and trying to prevent him from taking the Horcrux by any way possible. >> So what was that bad dream he was re-living? From moosiemlo at gmail.com Mon Jul 9 05:23:04 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 22:23:04 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Bood Relations (was Afterlife/Clue/Quirrell/, etc.) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707082223s1075d407t3022749ee590d180@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171459 catlady: However, if he was Harry's great-great-great-grandfather, > then he lied when he said the Dursleys were the only > relatives Harry had left. Lynda: I have privately (okay shared with close family and friend) the possiblity that DD was James Potter's godfather, which could be the reason the invilibility cloak was left in DD's possession when the Potters went into hiding, "just in case" something should happen to James and Lily and Harry were left alive, which, of course did happen, for the purpose of seven books, that is. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xellina at gmail.com Mon Jul 9 07:19:07 2007 From: xellina at gmail.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 11:19:07 +0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <463f9ec00707090019s371bb86amf8bdff3d51ae25c8@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171460 2007/7/8, Troy Bogdan : > I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but perhaps Harry will not > die, but live a life worse than death, for example, in a room at St. > Mungos? Cassy: I don't believe JRK can be *that* cruel to the main character. depriving Harry of magical powers and leaving him to live as a Muggle is one thing, but to have him permanently injured or, worse, insane, would be far too much... Now, having Voldie as a harmless bubbling idiot at St. Mungos would be really fun! From alica_daly at yahoo.com.au Mon Jul 9 05:21:06 2007 From: alica_daly at yahoo.com.au (alica_daly) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 05:21:06 -0000 Subject: Horcrux location (was: format of the book 7 title) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171461 --- In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163111: Mitchell: > It seems to me that the deathly hallows are the places in which > Harry and the scoobies will have to travel in order to find the > final fragments of Voldemort's soul. The most simple answer is > usually the right one!! We all know Harry is on a mission to > find them. We also all know there will be certin death coming!! > Deathly Hallows = Sacred places of the Horcruxes! They'll be > found in the places that meant most to Voldemort and were sacred > to him!! The diary in the chamber of Secrets. The locket in the > cave he brought the children. I believe the others to be in the > Slytherin dorms, the orphange he grew up in, Godric's Hollow, > and the others......well I'm not too sure about. I'll just have > to re-read all the books again. lol... Alica: It occurred to me about halfway through reading HBP that there had been a lot of discussion on the list about what the horcruxes would be, but not where they would be, which I think is equally important in terms of what is going to happen in DH. It's all very well for Harry to know what they are but he still needs to find them. Perhaps RAB (IMHO Regulus) somehow collected them all before he died, but I think that would perhaps be too easy. I think that there would possibly be one in the orphanage. I'm assuming that the ring was in Little Hangleton (DD might have mentioned this, I can't recall). I don't think that there would be one in Godric's Hollow because LV would have failed to make the horcrux there. The cup is in the Room of Requirement. Any other guesses out there, or could someone point me to somewhere that this has been discussed, all I could find was the above very short post. Alica (who will be forgoing her fave activity (ultimate frisbee) to read DH on the day it is released) From saraquel_omphale at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 09:18:14 2007 From: saraquel_omphale at yahoo.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 09:18:14 -0000 Subject: How long has Professor Binns been around? Was Re: Fawkes: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171462 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nerdie55" > wrote: > > > > The phoenix is reborn from its ashes over and over again. > > Fawkes must be tremendously old, perhaps Godric Gryffindor > > was the original owner and the phoenix may be older still. > > If so, Fawkes has memories that go back ages and that may > > help Harry. Saraquel writes: Hi, back again after a very long gap, good to see some familiar names - no doubt much more faithful than me!! After reading this post, I remembered wondering how old Professor Binns was. Florean Fortesque has been kidnapped by death eaters we presume, and his speciality was history. Perhaps it points to a possible plot necessity, which may or may not be focussed around the goblin rebellions of the 17th century :-) It occured to me that Binns could potentially be centuries old and therefore be a source of historical information. Fawkes has gone AWOL at present, but presumably Binns will still be droning on to an empty classroom if Hogwarts doesn't resume and is therefore easily accesible. Saraquel who is currently working on my predictions.... From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 11:05:49 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:05:49 -0000 Subject: Expressing a Sentiment about the Series Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171463 Goddlefrood: Now that the final book is about to be released there are increasing numbers of articles in newspapers, online journals, blogs, etc. relative to book 7. Whatever anyone here may speculate the book series will come to an end. Or will it? At the risk of being bombarded with leftover steak and kidney pie I write the below in counter to a proposed petition I noted in a recent newspaper piece. Ayes to the right, might I suggest? Nays to the left, as is your privilege. Dear Joanne Rowling, I am and have been a keen and avid reader of your series of novels following the adventures of Harry Potter. They are a tremendous and fulfilling read. Your characterisations are fabulous, your way of keeping we readers guessing over certain characters' loyalties keep us turning the pages and I have no doubt that by the time I have finished reading the final installment I will be more than satisfied with the way you have chosen to end your story. Earlier today I came across a story saying that you should continue the series post-Deathly Hallows. It purports to express the sentiment of a number of your fans. There is a call for a petition of a million online signatures, and I, like the writer of that piece, have no doubt that many will sign the same. This petition will be asking you not to stop at Deathly Hallows. Please ignore it, even if there are 100 million signatories. You have stated that Harry's story will come to an end and that all back story necessary to complete the tale will be contained in book 7. I believe you, and have faith in your ability to wrap up Harry's journey to the lasting gratification of your fans. You do not strike me, and I hope many millions of others, as someone who would buckle under pressure to continue writing about Harry Potter and / or his world. If your various publishers are displeased that there will be no further books about this world then ignore them. You will find another publisher if you choose to continue writing other things, and I hope you do. The film industry be hanged too, they should have plenty of material in existing yet to be filmed works, and, dare I hope, original ideas not based on fiction to keep them going for decades, if not centuries. Once you are satisfied with Harry's chronicle that should be good enough. You have added hugely to the enjoyment of reading for millions of people, but ultimately, as you have said, it is your story and you wrote it for yourself. Any further books on the world may just spoil the effect you have created with this series. Perhaps peripheral books may be fine; I urge you not to condescend to write further tales of Harry or his world unless you want to. I remain your faithful reader, Goddlefrood From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon Jul 9 11:20:29 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:20:29 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171464 Pippin: > And to decide what JKR means by saying Harry's story comes > to quite a clear end, we have to think about what *she* thinks > his story is about. I am wondering if the power of love in him is > going to diffuse itself through the WW in some way, so that there will > be no more need for a story about Harry per se because his power will > no longer be unique. Ceridwen: Another possiblity is that his story finishes at the end of DH. He settles down to lead a quiet life, marries, has kids, goes to work every day, comes home every night, occasionally goes out with the wife for dinner, and occasionally gets together with old friends. Sort-of like Arthur Weasley, without the excitement of Order business. Who would want to read something like that? I know we all like Harry, and are interested in what he'll do after he defeats LV (DisneyWorld?), but his story, the one we're reading, the one we're interested in, comes to a close when LV dies. Ceridwen. From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Mon Jul 9 11:31:32 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:31:32 -0000 Subject: Harry Dies In-Reply-To: <002401c7c1d0$506c9480$6501a8c0@S0027642347> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171465 Satya Latha: > J.K. always says Love is greater than anything else in the world and the > ONLY Power, which Harry has and Voldemort NEVER had which would help him to > kill Voldemort!! If that is the case then it would be unfair to kill Harry. > > -Stephanie, who has admittedly not kept up with all discussions but always > keys into the role love will play Karen: I think we need to put emotions aside... Harry will defeat Voldemort with love that is for sure but he may still die in the process. I think he will sacrifice himself for love of his friends and the wizarding community, or be willing to, and that great love is what will kill Voldemort. From kvapost at yahoo.com.au Mon Jul 9 11:57:44 2007 From: kvapost at yahoo.com.au (kvapost) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:57:44 -0000 Subject: Why Snape is more culpable for having been loved? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171466 Hi all I don't get JKR's statement that "someone had loved Snape and that fact made him more culpable than Riddle, who was never loved. " What does having been loved have to do with one's culpability? Any thoughts? Preferably not from a religious POV, just common sense. Kvapost (who's going to get a copy of DH, open it on a random page in the middle, only read a couple of words as a little teaser/spoiler and spend next few minutes making final theories and trying to find her inner Seer. And then, then switch the TV, phones and internet off and dive right into it until she knows all the answers to our questions) From nitalynx at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 12:19:17 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:19:17 -0000 Subject: Why Snape is more culpable for having been loved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171467 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kvapost" wrote: > > Hi all > I don't get JKR's statement that "someone had loved Snape and that fact > made him more culpable than Riddle, who was never loved. " > What does having been loved have to do with one's culpability? > Nita stops lurking for a moment to reply: I suppose she meant that Snape is not a sociopath, and thus he's more responsible for his choices. He knows that there are better things in life than hatred and revenge, unlike Tom, who's been out for himself and himself only for his entire life and has never related to others in a normal way. IOW, people like Voldemort should be given compulsory psychiatric treatment, while most of his Death Eaters should go to jail. Oh, and it also means that practically everyone is more culpable than Riddle, although not everyone has done so many bad things ;) Nita From technomad at intergate.com Mon Jul 9 13:28:31 2007 From: technomad at intergate.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 08:28:31 -0500 Subject: The _true_ power Voldemort knows not Message-ID: <002001c7c22d$118defe0$45570043@D6L2G391> No: HPFGUIDX 171468 I was thinking about "the power Voldemort knows not," and it occurred to me that the said power might well not be love, but _friendship._ Think about it. In the Pensieve scenes where we see Young Tom Riddle in action, it's made fairly clear that he has no friends. Even the gang of followers he has when quizzing Prof. Slughorn about Horcruces are _followers,_ not friends; Riddle plainly doesn't care about them. Harry, OTOH, has friends and does understand friendship. Right at the end of HBP, he's got some stupid idea about going off on his own, but I think his friends won't let him, and they'll demand to be included, just as Neville, Luna and Ginny did on the trip to the Ministry. So my own theory about the power is that it's friendship. Voldemort may well be full of love, albeit only for himself. Friendship, OTOH, he's never experienced in his life, and that may be his downfall. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 14:07:44 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:07:44 -0000 Subject: Why Snape is more culpable for having been loved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171469 kvapost: > I don't get JKR's statement that "someone had loved Snape and that fact > made him more culpable than Riddle, who was never loved. " > What does having been loved have to do with one's culpability? > > Any thoughts? Preferably not from a religious POV, just common sense. zgirnius: I suggested in a post a month or so ago that this might be an indication that one or more of Snape's crimes might have been against someone who loved him. Voldemort has never committed any wrongs against anyone who loved him, because noone has. I would give a link, but the search function is not working properly. There is also a somewhat less 'common-sense' idea, which would be that while Voldemort, as an intelligent individual, understands that his actions are illegal and considred wrong by others, lacks the capacity to understand this on an emotional level because he is a sociopath and has never experienced a meaningful connection to a fellow human being. Whereas Snape has, so he sould have knwon better than to join the DE's. etc. --zgirnius, who would have sworn she has written the occasional post or two with the word "Snape" in the body. From tbogdan1 at earthlink.net Mon Jul 9 12:59:50 2007 From: tbogdan1 at earthlink.net (Troy Bogdan) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:59:50 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171470 Ceridwen writes . . . "Who would want to read something like that? I know we all like Harry, and are interested in what he'll do after he defeats LV (DisneyWorld?), but his story, the one we're reading, the one we're interested in, comes to a close when LV dies." Troy replies . . . Harry might go to Disneyworld, but after 2010, he'll probably take his family on annual pilgrimages to the new Harry Potter Theme Park in Orlando Florida to relive old times. ;-) All kidding aside, I agree, that the books need to end after LV dies, and I'm sure J.K. will tie up all loose ends in the last chapter. As for her crying, It is because she had to kill off two characters that she originally hadn't intended to kill, and that made her "howl." From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 9 16:45:02 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:45:02 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171471 "dumbledore11214" wrote: > I think she was crying that her era of writing > about Harry is over, that the story is done If that was true you'd expect her to cry when she finished the book, but she specifically said she did not cry then. If Harry does die it will be in a chapter near the end of the book and that is exactly where she said she did cry. As I've said before I have a hunch a chapter near the end of the book will be titled "The Man Who Died", and that's why I'm not going to look at the table of contents until I've finished the book. In her recent interview she said the book was a bloodbath and the audience got very quiet, but then she said no it's not a bloodbath but the reports that 2 people would die was incorrect; a lot more than that do. Eggplant From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 16:51:36 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:51:36 -0000 Subject: Afterlife/Clue/Quirrell/Phoenices/Apparation/RedGreen/Ravenclaw/Voice/Eth In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171472 Catlady: > Lizzyben wrote in > : > > << Deontological moral systems (snip) Teleological moral systems > (snip) These are totally oppositional ethical pardigms >> > > How can they be totally opposite to each other when both are totally > opposite to Voldemort's statement that 'there is no good or evil, only > power and those too weak to use it'? lizzyben: Well, they both start out w/the assumption that you actually want to make moral/ethical choices, and have different methods for determining what the ethical choice would be. Under a teleological approach, the ethical choice is the one that brings the most positive consequences & the fewest negative consequences. You look at the consequences first, then decide which course of action would bring the best result. (i.e. - it's OK for Aurors to use a unforgiveable curse against a Death Eaters, because it allows them to stop a DE that would otherwise cause death & suffering to many innocent people.) Whereas, under a deontological approach, there are uniform ethical duties that we are always bound to perform, regardless of the potential consequences. You look at the nature of the act itself to judge its morality, and some acts are simply right or wrong, regardless of consequences. (lying, stealing, etc.) The same universal principles should be followed, no matter what the circumstances. (i.e. - using an unforgivable curse is *always* a serious crime, regardless of the reason for doing so). They both assume that you're actually *trying* to act morally, but have opposite ways of going about that. Whereas LV's statement is totally amoral. It's outside any ethical framework at all. For LV, there aren't any moral laws, and right & wrong don't matter at all, so there's really no need to determine the "right" ethical choice. What's right is what's right for LV, the end. lizzyben From kristin1778 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 14:34:37 2007 From: kristin1778 at yahoo.com (kristin1778) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:34:37 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171473 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Troy Bogdan" wrote > > As for her crying, It is because she had to kill off two characters > that she originally hadn't intended to kill, and that made her "howl." > Kristin: But, that doesn't seem right, because she said "it had been planned for so long". I keep wanting to believe it's Hagrid she's howling over, because I know he's a favorite of hers, and frankly, his death wouldn't cause me that much grief. However, I think it's worth remembering something she said in New York, at the event with John Irving and Stephen King. She said Dumbledore's death wasn't as upsetting to write as you might imagine because she'd had years to get used to it. So, whatever happens in this chapter was upsetting despite her having years to get used to it. And, before anyone tries to argue that she was crying tears of joy, just remember that she used the word "devastated" just before launching into her explanation about this chapter. That's what makes me worry for Harry. It's his head she's been living in for the last 17 years, so I can see his death causing her that kind of grief. I still hold onto a little bit of hope, and as for his story coming to a "quite clear end", well the story has always been about Harry and Voldemort. Once Voldemort's gone for good, the story will be over and told, so that doesn't necessarily have to mean Harry's death. From dananotdayna at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 9 15:13:41 2007 From: dananotdayna at sbcglobal.net (dananotdayna) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 15:13:41 -0000 Subject: Harry's death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171474 Bruce Alan Wilson wrote: > > Do you remember Houseman's poem "To an Athlete Dieing Young". It tells of a young man who drops dead on the finish line as he wins an important race. Houseman says that the young man is lucky because he'll always be the winner--he'll never loose, he'll never get old and fat, he'll never become a has-been. I think that there is something to that if Harry should die in the process of or the aftermath of defeating Voldemort. We'd not see Harry getting a big head from his celebrity. We'd never see Harry getting bored because, like Alexander, he had no more worlds to conquer. We never see Harry turning into someone like Ludo Bagman, trading on his ever-more- wilted laurels. We never see him becoming old and forgotten, boring his grandkids and their friends with stories of How I Defeated the Dark Lord. > Carol responded: The athlete dying young, forever victorious, has already been done. "'He suffered very little then,' [Mrs. Diggory] said when Harry had told her how he died. 'And after all, Amos . . . he died just when he'd won the tournament. He must have been happy'" (GoF Am. ed. 716, ellipsis in original). I don't think JKR will repeat Cedric's sad fate with Harry. I agree that Harry will survive and thrive, and (IMO) the fickle WW will forget how much it owes to him once it's safe. Dana adds: I agree with Carol. The other difficulty with this comparison is that Harry is characterized as being thrust by fate into his "race" as often as he is characterized as someone who chooses to compete. The athlete dying young is only glorious if said athlete is doing something he wanted to do and freely chose to do. Otherwise it is just tragic. There are so many things that we still don't know about the big picture that make depicting Harry's death appropriate or inappropriate pretty much impossible at this point (which is great, actually). It still isn't exactly clear to me the point Rowling is trying to make. But... my gut feeling is that she's less interested in this image of "perfection" than in saying something about truth (and how it's not always pretty), love (and how it's not usually easy), and choices (and the ripples that our choices send out into the world). If Dumbledore is the master manipulator that some of the details seem to indicate; if he knowingly participated in the leak of the prophecy, then Harry's death would be a travesty. If, on the other hand, we find out a more acceptable reason for Dumbledore's failure to tell the whole truth to Harry about everything before he died, then we can see Harry's story without the puppetmaster shadow cast over it, and a self-sacrificing hero's death might be in order. We don't know the truth about Snape either. If he fails to live up to Dumbledore's belief in his loyalty, a death for Harry won't resonate (for me). Harry hates him, and a successfully heroic death defeating the villain with the Ultimate Power of Love just won't make any sense if Harry hasn't changed his mind or forgiven him. Think of how vile Umbridge is in the scene where she's admiting the horrid things she did to persecute Harry and she rationalizes her evil because she claims she's serving the greater good. That kind of hypocrisy is nauseating, and Harry prioritizing revenge on Snape over everything else is similarly disturbing. I'm less interested in whether or not Harry dies than in whether or not he grows up finally and makes choices on this last leg of his journey that are fully informed rather than going about half-cocked and swelled with passionate need to get even with Snape - or Voldemort. Voldemort needs to be neutralized for everyone's sake, not just Harry's. I'm hoping that whoever dies in DH, the deaths will be a catalyst to help Harry reach the maturity his mother had. Dana, who would prefer Snape's death to Hagrid's, Hagrid's death to Lupin or Tonks, Lupin or Tonks death to Arthur or Molly's Arthur or Molly's death to Fred or George's, Fred or George's death to Ginny's, Ginny's death to Ron or Hermione's, Harry's maturity and meaningful survival to his sacrificicial death, and Harry's sacrificial and thematically resonate death to an ending as innocuous and empty as Dumbledore's Erised vision of socks From shmantzel at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 17:02:19 2007 From: shmantzel at yahoo.com (shmantzel) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:02:19 -0000 Subject: Dudley's Worst Memory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171475 Before any oldies attack me for bringing this up, I DID check and the last real instance I found of this was in August 2006, so I'd like to hypotheticalethorize this. :) What IS Dudley's Worst Memory? My guess is when he found out that Harry was a wizard. Even though he makes fun of Harry and his parents are horrified, I think that he may be secretly jealous of Harry's powers. From bfiw2002 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 15:55:44 2007 From: bfiw2002 at yahoo.com (bfiw2002) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 15:55:44 -0000 Subject: DH Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for Bragging Rights in Perpetuity In-Reply-To: <166987.49942.qm@web53111.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171476 > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Hagrid > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin > that scared him? The Dark Mark > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? No > b. Draco? No > c. Hermione? Yes > d. Luna? Yes > e. Ron? Yes > f. Neville? Yes > g. Ginny? Yes > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, > during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Dean Thomas > b. Head Girl? Hermione > c. DADA Instructor? They will eliminate the position and all of the other instructors will take on aspects of the class in their own classes > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? with Snape > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. > a. Slytherin's Locket > b. Nagini > c. Tom Riddle's Diary > d. Marvolo's ring > e. Harry > f. Tom Riddle/Voldemort's award for special services to the school, which is in the trophy room at Hogwarts > g. Voldemort > > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > > Boggart: Lily Potter > Patronus: centipede > > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? some aspect of love > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): 1. Harry will remove the piece of Voldemort's soul that is inside him by allowing a dementor to give him the Kiss. 2. Neville will exact his revenge on Bellatrix and return to Hogwarts as the Defense Against the Dark Arts Teacher 3. Mr. Weasley will become Minister of Magic 4. Lucius Malfoy will be Kissed by a dementor 5. The Muggle world will beome aware of the Wizard world as the battle against Voldemort rages. Once the battle is over, Hermione is appointed a new post at the Ministry of Magic as chief liason between Muggle and Wizard. Biff bifw2002 at yahoo.com From lmkos at earthlink.net Mon Jul 9 16:42:22 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 10:42:22 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The _true_ power Voldemort knows not In-Reply-To: <002001c7c22d$118defe0$45570043@D6L2G391> References: <002001c7c22d$118defe0$45570043@D6L2G391> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171477 Eric: >I was thinking about "the power Voldemort knows not," and it occurred to me >that the said power might well not be love, but _friendship._ > >[snip] > >So my own theory about the power is that it's friendship. Voldemort may >well be full of love, albeit only for himself. Friendship, OTOH, he's never >experienced in his life, and that may be his downfall. Lenore: I understand what you're saying but I don't quite concur, since love and friendship would be in any case inseparable. While friendship is an aspect of love (and I believe that love can be very pure in true friendship), love itself is something which is all-encompassing... In that sense it is an impersonal quality. It is a totality, an all-pervading quality... (for me, anyway). I'm reminded of a quote that I've always loved (I don't recall the source): "The only way to get rid of an enemy is to turn him into a friend." However, we all know that Voldemort is not an enemy which can be turned into a friend! So, archetypally, he must represent something else in the story. For me, that would be the split mind, the ego, i.e., associated with the fall of man into separation and despondency. He himself cannot comprehend love, and yet he must be returned to love in order to be dissolved back into the Wholeness, thus ending the separation... Lenore From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jul 9 17:12:28 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 13:12:28 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Snape is more culpable for having been loved? Message-ID: <25871702.1184001149048.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171478 From: kvapost >Sent: Jul 9, 2007 7:57 AM >To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Snape is more culpable for having been loved? > >Hi all >I don't get JKR's statement that "someone had loved Snape and that fact >made him more culpable than Riddle, who was never loved. " >What does having been loved have to do with one's culpability? > >Any thoughts? Preferably not from a religious POV, just common sense. Bart: A few months ago, in terms of Morty, I did some research on psychopaths/sociopaths (including enough to know that there is still no formal medical diagnosis of either, although the psychiatric community is working on one). In general, one of the ways that sociopathy is differentiated from psychopathy is that sociopathy is thought to have primarily environmental causes, notably never having been on the receiving end of love. On the other hand, Morty's symptoms appear to be more primary psychopathy, which is supposed to be purely biological, rather than secondary psychopathy, whose symptoms are supposedly a combination of biological and environmental. But, after all, Morty is a wizard, and Muggle psychiatry is probably not an exact fit. Now, mind you, had this been a "real world" case, Morty probably would have received more love than Harry did. But Snape at least appears to have had a mother who loved him. And SOMEBODY taught him all those spells coming in. Harry, on the other hand, had no (canon) excuse for coming out the way he did. Certainly, he was loved for the first year or so of his life, but, after that, he was placed in a house where he not only received no affection, they went out of their way to ensure that he was as miserable as possible (canon: Mrs. Figg saying that Harry enjoyed going to her home, the Dursleys would have not let her babysit). So, the question is not why Morty and Snape came out the way they did; the question is, why did HARRY come out so well? Bart From josturgess at eircom.net Mon Jul 9 17:49:19 2007 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:49:19 -0000 Subject: Horcrux location (was: format of the book 7 title) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171479 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alica_daly" wrote: > > --- In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163111: > > Mitchell: > > It seems to me that the deathly hallows are the places in which > > Harry and the scoobies will have to travel in order to find the > > final fragments of Voldemort's soul. The most simple answer is > > usually the right one!! We all know Harry is on a mission to > > find them. We also all know there will be certin death coming!! > > Deathly Hallows = Sacred places of the Horcruxes! They'll be > > found in the places that meant most to Voldemort and were sacred > > to him!! The diary in the chamber of Secrets. The locket in the > > cave he brought the children. I believe the others to be in the > > Slytherin dorms, the orphange he grew up in, Godric's Hollow, > > and the others......well I'm not too sure about. I'll just have > > to re-read all the books again. lol... > > > Alica: > > It occurred to me about halfway through reading HBP that there > had been a lot of discussion on the list about what the horcruxes > would be, but not where they would be, which I think is equally > important in terms of what is going to happen in DH. It's all > very well for Harry to know what they are but he still needs to > find them. Perhaps RAB (IMHO Regulus) somehow collected them all > before he died, but I think that would perhaps be too easy. > > I think that there would possibly be one in the orphanage. I'm > assuming that the ring was in Little Hangleton (DD might have > mentioned this, I can't recall). I don't think that there would > be one in Godric's Hollow because LV would have failed to make > the horcrux there. The cup is in the Room of Requirement. > > Any other guesses out there, or could someone point me to > somewhere that this has been discussed, all I could find was > the above very short post. > > Alica > (who will be forgoing her fave activity (ultimate frisbee) to > read DH on the day it is released) These would be the defanged variety right? > Although Dumbledore explicitly states he believes the victims' whose deaths he uses and the HRX items are significant to Voldy he never actually tells us that the location is significant as well, but I think we can surmise that it is. He says he "stumbled across the ring hidden in the ruin of the Gaunt's house", and this may well have given him the idea as he has been trying to locate the cave associated with the orphanage for "a very long time" and that he believes Voldy always intended for the diary to return to Hogwarts. On closer examination and with a little imagination (aka making it up!) the place, person and thing also appear to have associations between themselves. The diary, the first HRX is related to the Chamber of Secrets in Hogwarts and quite possibly with the death of Moaning Myrtle, Voldy's first victim. The ring, an heirloom from his maternal family who disowned Merope and therefore Tom, is located in the vicinity of his paternal family home where he killed his remaining Riddle family. The locket is located in the orphanage cave. Merope, if I interpret Hepzibah Smith correctly, sold it to Caractacus Burke, she says "Burke bought it, apparently, from a ragged looking woman who seemed to have stolen it, but had no idea of its true value .I daresay Burke paid her a pittance". In this transaction Burke swindled Merope almost certainly of the funds she needed to support herself and Tom so that the locket can be said to be directly responsible for his `abandonment' in the orphanage. I'm prepared to suggest that Burke's death is the one that Voldy used to make this HRX (although that is a canon lite belief). If there is a pattern of connections between person/place/thing then it should be easier for Harry to know where to start looking and what to look for. On the whole we can be reasonably sure that DD is right in identifying the Hufflepuff cup as a HRX. The relevant death would be Hepzibah but what is the significant place? Shortly after nixing Hephzibah (even because of this) Tom takes off to reinvent himself as LV, where did he go? Well obviously we don't know but I bet that is where the cup is. The cup and Hepzibah's death represent his final break from the WW as Tom Riddle. If I were Harry I'd want to know where he went to become LV. We have one non canon hint which is that the Death Eaters were formally known as the Knights of Walpurgis. A quick wiki search reveals that Walpurgis night (aka witches` night) is celebrated in the Brocken mountains which was a high security military zone during the cold war and therefore a very good place for Tom/Voldy to hang out. Also a good place to recruit from the defunct or at least depleted KoW (possibly associated to the Nazi SS) and rebrand them to Death Eaters. A wild stab in the dark suggests that Durmstrang maybe near this location (then again maybe not). The next significant event in Voldy's life is his return to the WW proclaiming himself the big bad. I'd imagine he'd want a high profile death for this perhaps a Minister for Magic, although no one springs immediately to mind. A related item would be a wand as it is the wand which is the object that most obviously identifies a wizard. The hiding place would be in plain sight, somewhere the whole world can see it, so I'm a fan of the wand in Ollivander's for this HRX. Five down and one or possibly two to go .. I've opted for Harry as an accidental HRX so any analysis of this would be futile! Although this does fulfil the pattern as the significant event is Voldy surviving death, victim is Lily Potter who almost did for him and item is Harry his nemesis who failed to defeat him and is a ringer for the Gryffindor item. The final replacement -for-the-diary HRX is either Wormtail's silver hand or Nagini. This HRX marks Voldy's return to flesh for which both Wormtail and Nagini were participants, the significant death would be any of those following his corporeal rebirth: Bertha, Frank Grimes or Cedric would do. The place is by his side so he can daily gloat in his supremacy safe in the knowledge he is immortal (NOT!). Regards Jo From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 17:55:46 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:55:46 -0000 Subject: Harry Junior and War Brides in canon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171480 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > As pointed out, like it or not "war brides" is a very > real phenomenon; and I just can't find it in my heart to criticize > those who are about to die, after all they put their life on the line > to protect me. As for being selfish, well, all I can say is that I'd > be very pleased if Harry's genes remain in the pool. > > I hadn't noticed a connection between Pink Floyd's, The Wall and Harry > Potter before TigerPatronus mentioned it, but now that I think about > it I know exactly what he's talking about. > Eggplant > YEah, well, as E.M. Forrester said in his advice to novelists, "Only connect!" I stumbled upon this little passage in Am HC HBP, p92-3, directly after Fleur tells 'Arry that she and Bill are getting married and then leaves the room: [Molly Weasley says,] "I know why it's happened, of course. It's all this uncertainty with You-Know-Who coming back, people think they might be dead tomorrow, so they're rushing all sorts of decisions they'd normally take time over. It was the same last time he was powerful, people eloping left, right, and center--" "Including you and Dad," said Ginny slyly. [!!!!!!!!!] "Yes, well, your father and I were made for each other, what was the point in waiting?" said Mrs. Weasley. [!!!!!!!!!] Hmmm. The "war bride syndrome" has happened before in the Weasley bloodline. Wonder who it's going to attack this time around? TK -- TigerPatronus! From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 18:18:55 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 18:18:55 -0000 Subject: Why Snape is more culpable for having been loved? In-Reply-To: <25871702.1184001149048.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171481 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: >> Bart: > A few months ago, in terms of Morty, I did some research on psychopaths/sociopaths Harry, on the other hand, had no (canon) excuse for coming out the way he did. Certainly, he was loved for the first year or so of his life, but, after that, he was placed in a house where he not only received no affection, they went out of their way to ensure that he was as miserable as possible (canon: Mrs. Figg saying that Harry enjoyed going to her home, the Dursleys would have not let her babysit). > > So, the question is not why Morty and Snape came out the way they did; the question is, why did HARRY come out so well? > > Bart > 1. Excellent post. 2. There's some research in the psychology arena (not as scientifically rigorous as psychiatry, I'll grant you, but probably not entirely invalid,) that in the first three months of life, a baby forms 50% of its beliefs about the world as far as, "when I have needs, they will be met by someone who loves me," or "when I cry, someone will comfort me," or "the world is a kind and caring place." The next three months (3-6 mo) form another 25% of a child's world outlook. In those formative 6 mos, Harry had both parents. Tom had no one. Just wondering if JKR read the same literature that I did while I was researching psychopaths, TK --TigerPatronus! Author of RABID: A Novel *STARRED REVIEW* "Kenyon is definitely an author to watch. This is a novel quite unlike most standard commercial fare, a genre-bending story--part thriller, part literary slapdown -- David Pitt, Booklist, December 1, 2006 Includes one gratuitous, delusional HP reference! --TK From lisabiles at verizon.net Mon Jul 9 18:28:05 2007 From: lisabiles at verizon.net (leb2323) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 18:28:05 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171482 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The dark mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No, not as a student b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes, in the beginning d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes, in the beginning f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie McMillan in the beginning but it will become Ron after something happens to Ernie b. Head Girl? Hermione of course c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagal 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With the good guys 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. In Voldemort b. the diary c. the ring d. the locket e. Hufflepuff cup f. Ravenclaw's tiara which is in the room of requirement g. one that used to be in Harry but is now back in Voldemort (see predictions) Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus is a bat and boggart is Voldemort Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Probably love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): 1. Harry was an accidental horcrux after the AK backfired but when Voldemort possessed him in the MoM the soul bit reincorporated back into Voldemort and is now gone from Harry. This is why Harry is not feeling any more flashes of LV's moods and seeing what he's doing, not because LV is practicing occlumency against him like DD said. 2. At Bill and Fleur's wedding Harry will overhear Molly talking about Auntie Muriel's tiara being an exact replica of the one belonging to Ravenclaw and it will remind him of the tiara in the RoR which is the real one and a horcrux to boot. 3. If it is not love behind the locked door in the Department of Mysteries then I am betting that it is all the people and/or things that have passed through the veil. 4. Harry will have to cooperate with Snape to either find or destroy one of the horcruxes. 5. Draco will save Hermione's life. Counting the days!!! leb From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Mon Jul 9 19:15:48 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 19:15:48 -0000 Subject: ending: similarities with Genesis 22 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171483 Ok guys- this is my revelation of the day- feel free to pick it apart! I want to hear what you think. 1) Harry's scar is a Horcrux CoS- "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thuderstruck. "It certainly seems so." (DD) GoF- "Because you and he are connected by the curse that failed, " said Dumbledore. "That is no ordinary scar." 2) Because Harry's scar is a Horcrux (which will realize near the end of book 7) , he is stuck with having to destroy himself in order to kill Voldemort. 3) Harry, after much thought, decides he is willing to go through with this as he understands that in sacrificing himself he will be saving millions of wizard lives. Out of love he will go through with his suicide. 4) However... it is not his sacrifice that will kill Voldemort. At the moment Harry is about to kill himself, Voldemort will die! By making the selfless choice out of love, Voldemort will be defeated. Harry will not have to go through with the sacrifice and he will not have to kill Voldemort in some other way and possibly face going to Azkaban. The intense love of being willing to complete such an act will be enough to destroy Voldemort. Think of Genesis 22- God asks Abraham to kill his son and out of love for God Abraham is about to do it until the last minute when God was like "just kidding". Knowing that Abraham would have done it was enough... What do you guys think of that? From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 19:19:38 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 19:19:38 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171484 TK Kenyon: > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > > If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, > write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters > or characteristics of new character for full credit. > > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Hermione > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? Dark Mark > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? no > b. Draco? no > c. Hermione? no > d. Luna? yes > e. Ron? yes > f. Neville? yes > g. Ginny? no > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Bill & Fleur > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Petunia > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ernie McMillian > b. Head Girl? Cho Chang > c. DADA Instructor? Tonks > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Sluggie > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonegal > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? He's Lily's man, through & through. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > a. Diary/destroyed > b. Marvolo ring/destroyed > c. In Voldemort > d. Hufflepuff cup > e. Ravenclaw tiara > f. Slytherin locket > g. Harry's scar > > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Dragon Boggart: Dead Harry > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Agape - unconditional, self-sacrificing love > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > > Current Off-Limit Spoilers: > -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points > unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. > -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: > because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least > somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a > cover will also be worth 0 points.) > -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR > during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. > -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will > laugh at you when they're wrong. > -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and > Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) > will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. > -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come > skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no > credit. > -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in > your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be > scored. > > 1. DD deliberately leaked the prophecy & purchased the Riddle House > 2. Harry will use an unforgivable curse > 3. The final Harry/LV battle will take place in Hogwart's Quidditch stadium. > 4. Snape loved Lily! > 5. Harry will drink the Draught of Living Death, but will not die. > 6. Snape will die in Harry's place, much like Sydney Carton died at the end of Tale of Two Cities. 7. I will cry buckets. lizzyben From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 19:24:23 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 19:24:23 -0000 Subject: Possession Theory/Ethics/R/H Kids/Snape/Four Elements/TLWH/Faith Predicti In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171485 > Neri wrote in > : > > << Faith's Predictions for "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" > (snip) 5. [Snape]'s not Voldemort's man either. >> > > Catlady wrote: > Faith is defined as believing whatever the surface of the narrative > says. When there's a plot twist or revelation, she believes the new > thing. So in PS/SS, Faith believed that Snape was trying to steal > the Stone until Harry went through the door and found Quirrell. And > in GoF, she believed Snape had not been a Death Eater from the time > that Sirius said Dumbledore wouldn't have hired him if he were an > ex-DE until the Pensieve trial scene. > Neri: Yes, this is generally true. Faith is no good (and has never claimed to be) at predicting plot twists or shattering new revelations. What is surprising is that *despite* this, Faith's prediction record is the best in the Bay. Or at least, it is surprising to those readers who fail to realize that, even with JKR, twists and revelations must be the *exception* rather than the rule. > Catlady: > Under this definition, Faith would have read the Spinner's End chapter > and believed what Snape told the sisters -- that he was loyal to Lord > Voldemort. And that belief would have been strengthened by Snape > killing Dumbledore. Neri: Not exactly. Faith isn't quite as superficial as you present her, and she isn't Naive or Gullible (she's only their first cousin ). She indeed generally believes Snape's words in Spinner's End, *except* when they contradict other canon. For example, Dumbledore strongly suggested that Snape was the one who told him about the danger to the Potters, and it isn't likely that Voldemort knew about or authorized this. So Faith concludes that Snape isn't loyal to Voldemort too, but to his own personal objectives. This is a possibility that is suggested by a lot of other canon as well, and therefore sits well with Faith. > Neri : > << 30. The green potion from the cave didn't have any additional > effects beside those stated by Dumbledore: weakening the drinker and > trying to prevent him from taking the Horcrux by any way possible. >> > Catlady: > So what was that bad dream he was re-living? > Neri: Where's the canon that he was re-living anything? A bad dream can be all hallucination, can't it. I don't know any canon that anything Dumbledore was talking about during his potion experience had actually happened before, and Dumbledore's canon explanation of the potion's effect is perfectly adequate. In fact it is considerably more adequate than the OotP explanation of the bubblegum wrappers, and yet before HBP Faith had no trouble predicting that all the grand bubblegum wrappers theories are headed straight for the bottom of the Bay. Neri From darksworld at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 20:56:56 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 20:56:56 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171486 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TK Kenyon" wrote: > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > > If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, > write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters > or characteristics of new character for full credit. > > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > Nope. Harry will be one of the few to crawl out of the wreckage of the final battle. > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > Yep. In the words of the munchkins, he'll be "not only merely dead...really most sincerely dead." > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? > Well, that's kind of hard to say. I believe that Ron and Hermione are both going to snuff it. > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? > His dark mark. I thought that got established in HBP. > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? NO > b. Draco? No > c. Hermione?no > d. Luna? yes, but she will leave with Ginny and Neville to help the trio. > e. Ron?no > f. Neville? see under Luna > g. Ginny? see under Luna > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? > Bill and Fleur, in a double wedding with Tonks and Remus > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Argus Filch, in response to a bloody floor during or after the final battle. Just kidding, I think it will be Marge, at 4 Privet Drive, when Harry is about to leave forever. > > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ron will be named, but Ernie will serve as his alternate. > b. Head Girl? Hermione will be named, but Hannah Abbot will serve as her alternate. > c. DADA Instructor? Tonks, who will fall to the DA curse when she gets bitten by Greyback trying to protect her husband Remus. > d. Potions Master or Mistress? New character, who turns out to be a DE plant. > e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva, of course. She is the natural choice. > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With his greasy git self. He is doing only what he must to keep himself alive and out of Azkaban. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > a. In Voldemort > b. Diary > c. Ring > d. Locket (which will be found at 12GP) > e. Hufflepuff's cup. (which will be traced with the help of a certain "wart" named Zacharias who is heir to Hepzibah.) > f. The wand from Ollivander's, which will be found along with a nearly dead Ollivander who has been in hiding. > g. Nagini > > > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > Patronus: snake (he is, after all, the ultimate Slytherin) Boggart: Happy, laughing Harry. > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? > Love. > > > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > 1. Hermione will die in Ron's arms. Ron will go slightly mad and get AK'ed not taking cover as he charges straight into the battle. > 2. Zacharias smith will be instrumental in finding Hufflepuff's cup. > 3. Ginny, Luna, and Neville will leave school at some point to go aid the trio, probably with the wand horcrux. > 4. Pettigrew will die while Harry is destroying Nagini > 5. Kreacher will be killed by Hermione as the trio tries to retrieve the locket. > From lindseyharrisst at hotmail.com Mon Jul 9 21:08:43 2007 From: lindseyharrisst at hotmail.com (lindseyharrisst) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 21:08:43 -0000 Subject: What happens in DH? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171487 My predictions for book 7, following on from Brindisius's, even though I was entirely wrong about so many things last time... 1. Snape is on Dumbledore's side, will die, and will do so protecting Harry or creating a diversion so that Harry can finish off Voldemort. I think it is quite probable that only the trio will witness this and Harry will become responsible for rehabillitating Snape's memory, which he will actually do. 2. None of the Weasleys will die and ultimately Percy will be reunited with the family, though possibly only at the very very end. 3. Ginny and Harry will be an item at the end, as will Hermione and Ron, thus cementing the trio inot the one nuclear family in the book. 4. Draco will be rehabilitated and get to live as a good guy in society. Lucius will die. 5. RAB is definately Regulus Black and the real locket is the same one cleaned out at Grimmalud Place. 6. The reason why Snape became a goodie will (depressingly) turn out to be as trvia as quite fancying Lily Potter and being upset that Voldemort had killed her, rather than a a noble reason based on abstract principle, such as that he rejected evil for a philosophical reason and would have done so had he not had a stupid, random crush and just been following irrational, hormonal behaviour. If I think of any more I'll say so! What does everyone else think? PS I can't believe this is the last time we will get to do this, even if we stay in fandom after it's all over. What are people's *fantasy* endings? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 21:30:57 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 21:30:57 -0000 Subject: What happens in DH?/ Fantasy endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171488 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lindseyharrisst" wrote: > What does everyone else think? PS I can't believe this is the last > time we will get to do this, even if we stay in fandom after it's all > over. > What are people's *fantasy* endings? > Alla: Oh. Oh. Oh. I love the question. Yes, I cannot believe it either that when list reopens in two weeks there would be NO more speculation, at all. So, what is my fantasy ending? Keep in mind that IS my **fantasy** ending, not necessarily that I believe all of that will happen in canon. I believe in some of it ( Harry lives for example) but not all. So, first and foremost of course Harry lives. I want this character to triumph and yes, enjoy **life**, life free of Voldemort hanging over his head. Yes, with Ginny and his loved ones, or any love interest, really. Ron and Hermione live happily ever after. Poor Remus gets some happiness. Sirius comes back from the veil, because he was not *really* dead. Remember, fantasy ending, so no need to remind me that he is really dead Snape suffers **horribly**, if possible for the rest of his life. Oh, and we will see Snape begging Harry for mercy **on his knees** and would be nice if Harry refuses to grant such mercy as well and just laughs in Snape's face. Again, **fantasy** ending, so please no need to remind me that books are about forgiveness and all that :) I know that Harry is going to be a better man and forgives greasy git, I really do. So, yeah that is pretty much fantasy ending. Oh, oh I hope Hermione gets some sense knocked into her. NO, I do not think that she is a little tyrant, or anything like her. But on smaller scale ( house elves, etc) I want her to realise that she does not always know better. Alla. From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 21:35:36 2007 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 21:35:36 -0000 Subject: Alternate Titles Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171489 My sisters and I were discussing this the other night and I thought it would be a fun topic for discussion here! If you could rename each of the already published Harry Potter Books, what would you call them? Here's what we came up with: SS: Harry Potter and Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry CS: Harry Potter and the Heir of Slytherin POA: Harry Potter and the Servant of Voldemort GOF: Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament OOP: Harry Potter and the Department of Mysteries HBP: Harry Potter and the Unbreakable Vow From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 21:45:24 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 21:45:24 -0000 Subject: What happens in DH?/ Fantasy endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171490 > Alla: > > Oh. Oh. Oh. I love the question. Yes, I cannot believe it either that > when list reopens in two weeks there would be NO more speculation, at > all. > > Snape suffers **horribly**, if possible for the rest of his life. Oh, > and we will see Snape begging Harry for mercy **on his knees** and > would be nice if Harry refuses to grant such mercy as well and just > laughs in Snape's face. > > Again, **fantasy** ending, so please no need to remind me that books > are about forgiveness and all that :) > > I know that Harry is going to be a better man and forgives greasy git, > I really do. > > So, yeah that is pretty much fantasy ending. Alla: Replying to myself, LOL to clarify. No, my fantasy ending does not include Harry killing Snape or even Harry hating Snape for the rest of his life, simply because I do not think it would be good for Harry's emotional health. But my **fantasy** ending certainly includes Harry moving forward and refusing to grant Snape's forgiveness. I think Harry would be quite okay emotionally if he simply decides that Snape does not exist as far as he **Harry** is concerned. Since I believe that Snape and Lily in **some** way are coming in DH, I would **love** to read about Harry telling Snape - as far as I am concerned you are not worth any kindness that my mother showed to you or something like that. Hmmm, does it mean that Harry is continue to hate Snape in my **fantasy** ending? I do not know. But that is how I would describe it. Alla From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 21:51:29 2007 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 21:51:29 -0000 Subject: DH prediction contest Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171491 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Horace Slughorn 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie McMillan b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? New Character? A member of the Order, perhaps one we're heard about in passing but never really seen, or else someone we haven't heard of. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore's Man through and through 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's Diary b. Riddle's Head Boy Badge c. Slytherin's Locket d. Slytherin's Ring e. Hufflepuff's Cup f. Harry's Scar g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's patronus is probably a bat and his boggart is probably a Voldemort who has become aware of Snape's treachery against him. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Someone who we have thought to be dead, (Regulus Black or Amelia Bones), will be revealed to be alive. 2. Neville will somehow defeat/kill Bellatrix. 3. Time Travel will be important: not used again within the time frame of DH, but revealed to have been used in the past 4. Petunia Dursley will be revealed to have been much more involved in the Wizarding World when she was younger than Harry, Vernon and Dudley realize. She will give Harry information about Lily. 5. Draco Malfoy will turn to the Order for protection From dananotdayna at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 9 21:34:39 2007 From: dananotdayna at sbcglobal.net (dananotdayna) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 21:34:39 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171492 Tigerpatronus had an idea in Message #171351 that Harry might jump into the bell jar at the DOM and regress to pre-scar-baby-Harry and somehow start all over. While I thought this a pretty wacky idea as I was reading it, it made me wonder: What if Voldemort fell into the bell jar and regressed to tiny helpless baby Tom Riddle? Would Harry destroy this baby? Or would he then finally be able to apply his unique power? Initially I thought "I doubt it." Even being magically regressed to infancy wouldn't change the facts that TMR had been (ill) conceived with a "Love" Potion that robbed TR Sr. of his free will and that Merope's genetic contribution came from the crazy end of the gene pool. That baby didn't ever have nature or nurture on his side. It seemed ridiculous to think that Harry allowing baby Voldy to live and raise him with love would be the answer. Surely a person with such origins is destined to turn out badly... But then I again I was confronted with the fact JKR doesn't seem to have a clear stance on the nature/nurture question. On the one hand, she obviously indicates that Pureblood supremacist thinking is rubbish. On the other hand, she shows that Harry could emerge from an emotionally abusive childhood with innate decency that hadn't been extinguished. There are innumerable examples of her playing both sides of this fence. Then I remembered posts where Mike and Bart had this exchange of thoughts: >Message #170935 > > Mike, who also wants to know why JKR felt it necessary to > > introduce time travel and hopes that she really needed it at the > > same time hopes he won't see it again. > Bart: > I suspect (hope?) she introduced time travel to give it sufficient > limitations that it could only be used in the most limited of > circumstances (that you can't change the past, but you CAN change > the future). *** Is it possible that even though the horror and terror of Voldemort can't be undone, that there would be a way to give TM Riddle's spirit a "do over"? I wouldn't even call this thought about the bell jar a theory or a prediction, but I am keenly interested in the fact that JKR has said that the very specific wording of the prophecy has everything to do with the resolution of the story. I have, until now, been utterly unable to imagine a plausible scenario in which Harry can defeat Voldemort with Love. He would have to love Voldemort (Lily's sacrificial love for Harry didn't defeat him, it only protected Harry). And a 17-year-old is too flawed, too human, to be able to love and forgive something that is thoroughly evil and inhuman... The prophecy states that One approaches with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord. Vanquish means to defeat, conquer, subdue, overcome or suppress. None of these necessarily means kill. The Dark Lord is what Tom Riddle became after his "horcruxery" (great word, art/bml07646) - an increasingly inhuman evil entity, a soul that has been maimed by self-inflicted unhealing wounds. If the Dark Lord can be overcome without being killed, won't Love be the thing to accomplish that? If Harry destroys the remaining Horcruxes, the wounds will heal as those soul fragments are released. And what will remain is a soul with scars,but re-humanized. If this person is once again human enough to die,could Harry see him as human enough to live? And to change (especially now that the body this damaged soul is housed in has Harry's blood and innate goodness flowing through it)? Harry's mentor was certainly all about second chances. Voldemort will be vanquished, but I don't think Harry will kill him. The truest, purest love forgives. And only that kind of love would be strong enough to counteract this evil. Something could happen to transform Voldemort into a being that Harry can view with compassion and that Harry can forgive for the destruction and pain it/he had wrought. The baby-in-the-bell-jar idea is out there, surely a long shot, but at least now I can envision something that reconciles Harry's (current) inability to love his enemies with the wording of the prophecy... the recurring motif of the magical manipulation of time may or may not have anything to do with it - but - Tigerpatronus' idea was really great food for thought. Any other thoughts about the wording of the prophecy and how it will play out in the end? I can't even wrap my brain around the confusion of " either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives " Who? Huh? An hour of searching and reading the posts on this stuff has confounded me. ~Dana, who has only ever lurked because she is so very very wordy... From bgrugin at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 22:39:44 2007 From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 22:39:44 -0000 Subject: DH prediction contest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171493 > > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > > If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, > write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters > or characteristics of new character for full credit. > MusicalBetsy here: Didn't JKR once say that there would be no new characters in DH, only characters who we "haven't met properly" (or something like that)? Am I imagining this? I suppose if we haven't met them properly, then that could be similar to being new. From harryp at stararcher.com Mon Jul 9 23:06:32 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:06:32 -0000 Subject: Alternate Titles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171494 > Jelly92784: > If you could rename each of the already published Harry Potter Books, > what would you call them? > > Here's what we came up with: > > SS: Harry Potter and Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry > CS: Harry Potter and the Heir of Slytherin > POA: Harry Potter and the Servant of Voldemort > GOF: Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament > OOP: Harry Potter and the Department of Mysteries > HBP: Harry Potter and the Unbreakable Vow > Eddie: I like this topic, although the list elves may not. But let me say that I think the original titles already do a remarkable job of capturing the essential element of each of the stories: the item/person that was sought, feared, wondered about, etc. And in each case, once the thing was acquired/found/etc. then some new important knowledge was received that set the stage for the next book. Perhaps only the Order of the Phoenix doesn't accomplish this as well. For that, I'd rename it "Harry Potter and the Fateful Hall"... referring to the hallway leading to the Department of Mysteries as well as the Hall of Prophecies. But in the spirit of the game: SS: Harry Potter 1: The Boy Who Lived CS: Harry Potter 2: The Heir Who Returned POA: Harry Potter 3: The Prisoner Who Escaped GOF: Harry Potter 4: The Champion Who Wasn't OOP: Harry Potter 5: The Inquisitor Who Ruled HBP: Harry Potter 6: The Prince Who Fled DH: Harry Potter 7: The Wizard Who Died or... SS: Harry Potter and Fluffy the 3-Headed Dog CS: Harry Potter and Tom the Unexpected Friend POA: Harry Potter and Sirius the Desperate Man GOF: Harry Potter and Cedric, Fleur, and Krum OOP: Harry Potter and Delores the High Inquisitor HBP: Harry Potter and Prince the Potion Maker DH: Harry Potter and Voldemort the Dark Lord or... SS: Harry Potter and The Blood Bath CS: Harry Potter and The Bloodier Bath POA: Harry Potter and The Bloodiest Bath GOF: Harry Potter and No, Really, this is Bloodier than Before OOP: Harry Potter and You aren't going to believe how Bloody this is HBP: Harry Potter and You want Blood? I've got your Blood Right Here DH: Harry Potter and Thank Heavens this is the last Bloody Book Good thing JKRowling didn't ask my opinion. Eddie From muellem at bc.edu Mon Jul 9 23:14:03 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:14:03 -0000 Subject: What happens in DH?/ Fantasy endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171495 > > > What does everyone else think? PS I can't believe this is the last > > time we will get to do this, even if we stay in fandom after it's all > > over. > > What are people's *fantasy* endings? > > > > > Alla: > > Oh. Oh. Oh. I love the question. Yes, I cannot believe it either that > when list reopens in two weeks there would be NO more speculation, at > all. colebiancardi: me too!! Ok, my fantasy endings - please note all marriages & children are at least 5 to 10 years after LV is defeated. Harry will live and grow out of Ginny I hope he finds love with Luna instead and loves her quirky beliefs, even though he personally doesn't get them. Due to Luna's independant nature, she refuses to marry, but they live very happily together and have one child, who they name Sirius. Ron & Hermione live happily ever after (In total agreement with Alla). Children will come late in life to them, as Hermione will be very busy with unionizing the house elves for many years. Snape will be redeemed and not have a miserable life. His days of being a double agent are over and he can pursue his life-long dream of being a researcher into obscure & dangerous diseases. Snape will also find a nice sarcastic and witty witch who will not be afraid to put him in his place when he gets out of line. They will NOT HAVE children, because they both detest rug-rats. Remus will be cured of his wolfiness due to Snape's research and will never have to worry about "that time of the month". He will marry Tonks and have several children, all of whom walk all over Remus, as he doesn't know how to say *no* to them. Tonks will be the authorative figure in the household. The House Elves will realize that Dobby has been correct all along and will revolt. They will form a union, which is spearheaded and supported by Hermione's SPEW effort and they will collectively barging with the wizards to do the same work, but with pay and 1 day off a month. Neville will become a famous wizard who is also quite the ladies man. Witches all over the world will adore him. He will not be another Lockhart, however. Neville will enjoy his player days, but will settle down with a muggle woman, who will love him just because of his personality, not because he can do magic. Children galore for Neville and none of them squibs. Draco will become an advocate for Wizard-Muggle relationships and will work tirelessly for this cause. In doing so, much to the horror of his family, he will fall in love with a muggle and marry. All of their children are squibs. colebiancardi From muellem at bc.edu Mon Jul 9 23:27:08 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:27:08 -0000 Subject: What happens in DH?/ Fantasy endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171496 > wrote: > > > > What does everyone else think? PS I can't believe this is the last > > time we will get to do this, even if we stay in fandom after it's all > > over. > > What are people's *fantasy* endings? > colebiancardi back again: Totally forgot about RAB!! Regulus Black - turns out he really is alive after all. A bit confused and deranged in the head (the long-term after effects of the potion). Snape never does find an antidote for this side-effect, but the Black line is not ended afterall. Regulus does produce offspring, but we never find out who his mystery lady is. That is for another book colebiancardi From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Mon Jul 9 23:45:59 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:45:59 -0000 Subject: Checking Out Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171497 Hi all! Well, I love this group and I love reading the posts HOWEVER... I am checking out for a few weeks. I am doing this because everyone here is so awesome with their ideas and theories that I need time to put mine back in order before the big release. I'll be back a week or two afterwards and hopefully I will have a few of you telling me how terribly wrong I have been and, maybe if I'm lucky, I can rely in kind. LOL. Love you all!!! Jeremiah From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 10 01:28:15 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:28:15 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171498 > Canon: > The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. born > to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month > dies . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will > have power the Dark Lord knows not . and either must die at the > hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives . > the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as > the seventh month dies .' > dananotdayna: > The prophecy states that One approaches with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord. Vanquish means to defeat, conquer, subdue, overcome or > suppress. None of these necessarily means kill. The Dark Lord is what > Tom Riddle became after his "horcruxery" (great word, art/bml07646) - > an increasingly inhuman evil entity, a soul that has been maimed by > self-inflicted unhealing wounds. If the Dark Lord can be overcome > without being killed, won't Love be the thing to accomplish that? Eddie: Yes. > dananotdayna: > Voldemort will be vanquished, but I don't think Harry will kill him. Eddie: Maybe. I had a theory long ago that Voldemort would die but Tom Riddle would survive. Leading to another interpretation of "Neither can live while the other survives". Meaning, Riddle could not live while Voldemort survived. Also, Voldemort was not fully "alive" while Riddle survived. But that was long ago. Now I think Voldemort will die. > dananotdayna: > Any other thoughts about the wording of the prophecy and how it will > play out in the end? I can't even wrap my brain around the confusion > of " either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live > while the other survives " Who? Huh? An hour of searching and > reading the posts on this stuff has confounded me. Eddie: I think "either must die" could be read as "both must die". In this case, "either" would be an adjective as in "rings on either hand" -- meaning, on both hands. It also parallels the meaning of "neither" in the next phrase, which refers to both people. Or "neither", LOL. So I'm predicting that both Harry and Voldemort will die at the hand of the other. Simultaneously. Possible Spoiler Ahead, based on book cover: ********************************** *S *P *O *I *L *E *R * *A *H *E *A *D ********************************** The Scholastic American book cover at http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/books/covers/art7.htm shows Voldemort and Harry simultaneously reaching for maybe, accio'ing something maybe, repulsed by something maybe, but both definitely acting/reacting to the same stimulus. So this leads credence to my "simultaneous" prediction. Eddie From celizwh at intergate.com Tue Jul 10 01:33:26 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:33:26 -0000 Subject: DH prediction contest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171499 MusicalBetsy here: > Didn't JKR once say that there would be no new > characters in DH, only characters who we "haven't > met properly" (or something like that)? Am I > imagining this? I suppose if we haven't met > them properly, then that could be similar to being new. houyhnhnm: Peter O'Brien for Easons Ireland - Are you going introduce any new characters in the final book? JK Rowling: There will be some characters who you don't know particularly well, and there may be a couple of new characters, but nobody really major. You know pretty much the cast list by now. (Edinburgh "cub reporter" press conference, ITV, 16 July 2005) houyhnhnm, who just started getting three weeks of Special High Intensity Training today and can't put two thoughts together, hence the Hermione impersonation. From sweetophelia4u at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 02:21:21 2007 From: sweetophelia4u at yahoo.com (Dondee Gorski) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 02:21:21 -0000 Subject: A thought about Lupin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171500 I just had a thought about Lupin and would like some feedback on it, if you please. Forgive me if this matter was discussed before. There has been speculation in past threads about what Lupin is up to *off page*. We know, for the most part, where he was at and what he was doing in PoA and most of OotP and HBP but the rest of the time his movements are a big blank. We know from canon that he has trouble finding work in the WW because of his lycanthropy. JKR has stated that Lupin has a muggle parent. Could Lupin - out of desperation to make a living - have spent that time passing as a muggle and working at a muggle job? He could work a few weeks at a job and then quit when the time of the full moon was on him. I don't know about other professions, but I use to work in food service and I saw many people get hired, work a few days or weeks, and then quit without notice and disapear. It would be a sad and transient life, but he seems to be living that kind of life already. This leads to the question - what muggle job would he have the knowledge to do? Or, could he magic his way through like Shackelbolt seems to do while he is working in the PM's office? Just a thought. Cheers, Dondee From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 10 02:33:15 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 22:33:15 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A thought about Lupin Message-ID: <380-22007721023315546@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171501 Dondee: There has been speculation in past threads about what Lupin is up to *off page*. We know, for the most part, where he was at and what he was doing in PoA and most of OotP and HBP but the rest of the time his movements are a big blank. We know from canon that he has trouble finding work in the WW because of his lycanthropy. JKR has stated that Lupin has a muggle parent. Magpie: Actually, I don't believe she did say that. She said he was a Half-blood, which means he could have a Muggle-born parent or a Muggle parent. I think people tend to do the same thing with Tonks, assume that Ted was a Muggle, but I've always thought he was Muggle-born. Harry, too, is a Half-blood, because his mother was Muggle-born and father was a Wizard, and Tom thought that made him his "equal" even though Tom's father was a regular Muggle. That said, I wouldn't put it past Lupin to be able to blend in with Muggles whatever his background. I suppose it might still explain his poverty, since his monthly absences might make it hard to find work. Still, I think it's more consistent if we assume that the reason he always looks like his life is a struggle is connected to werewolf prejudice, which doesn't really exist in the Muggle world. If he could really get a Muggle job, he might have had it much better. He could have gotten a computer job and worked at home or something freelance. -m From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 10 03:12:26 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:12:26 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Alternate Titles In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4692F91A.60108@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171502 jelly92784 wrote: > My sisters and I were discussing this the other night and I thought it > would be a fun topic for discussion here! > > If you could rename each of the already published Harry Potter Books, > what would you call them? > > Here's what we came up with: > > SS: Harry Potter and Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry > CS: Harry Potter and the Heir of Slytherin > POA: Harry Potter and the Servant of Voldemort > GOF: Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament > OOP: Harry Potter and the Department of Mysteries > HBP: Harry Potter and the Unbreakable Vow Bart: But what is your goal in renaming them? How are the new names superior to the old names? I am NOT, by the way, being rhetorical. My main form of living is as a systems analyst, and there are three basic rules that I follow: 1) Don't try to solve the problem until you've defined it. 2) Don't alter the solution unless the alteration helps to solve the problem. 3) Don't break the rules unless you understand them. In this case, retitling the books assumes that there is a problem with the current titles. By rule #1, it's hard to come up with new titles unless we know what is wrong with the current titles. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 10 03:18:42 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:18:42 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4692FA92.2000500@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171503 dananotdayna wrote: > Is it possible that even though the horror and terror of Voldemort > can't be undone, that there would be a way to give TM Riddle's > spirit a "do over"? Bart: At one point, maybe. But as soon as Morty created the first Horcrux, he lost all hope of redemption (which is why a Horcrux is such a terrible thing). Even if Morty were turned into a baby again, he would be one with only a tiny piece of soul. He is no longer human, and all the age regression in the world won't make him one. Bart From mercuryblue144 at gmail.com Tue Jul 10 03:33:58 2007 From: mercuryblue144 at gmail.com (Beth Hartung) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 23:33:58 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy In-Reply-To: <4692FA92.2000500@sprynet.com> References: <4692FA92.2000500@sprynet.com> Message-ID: <1be73e550707092033q76cfe583hb457b7237f8f4082@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171504 dananotdayna wrote: > Is it possible that even though the horror and terror of Voldemort > can't be undone, that there would be a way to give TM Riddle's > spirit a "do over"? Bart: At one point, maybe. But as soon as Morty created the first Horcrux, he lost all hope of redemption (which is why a Horcrux is such a terrible thing). Even if Morty were turned into a baby again, he would be one with only a tiny piece of soul. He is no longer human, and all the age regression in the world won't make him one. MercuryBlue: One of my fanfics involves the various pieces of Voldemort's soul being collected and healing magic applied to restore his soul to the condition it was in when he was an infant (along with giving him the body of an infant, stripping him of conscious memory of the life of Tom Riddle, and providing a foster mother, namely she who did the healing). Is there canon to contradict this? MercuryBlue [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 10 03:48:56 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:48:56 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy In-Reply-To: <1be73e550707092033q76cfe583hb457b7237f8f4082@mail.gmail.com> References: <4692FA92.2000500@sprynet.com> <1be73e550707092033q76cfe583hb457b7237f8f4082@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <469301A8.5010604@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171505 MercuryBlue: > One of my fanfics involves the various pieces of Voldemort's soul being > collected and healing magic applied to restore his soul to the condition it > was in when he was an infant (along with giving him the body of an infant, > stripping him of conscious memory of the life of Tom Riddle, and providing a > foster mother, namely she who did the healing). Is there canon to contradict > this? Bart: Yes. Two pieces (diary and ring) have definitely been destroyed, and two (one in Morty's body when he was backlashed and the one in the locket) may well have been destroyed. Bart From juli17 at aol.com Tue Jul 10 03:49:01 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 03:49:01 -0000 Subject: What happens in DH?/ Fantasy endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171506 > > wrote: > > > > > > > What does everyone else think? PS I can't believe this is the last > > > time we will get to do this, even if we stay in fandom after it's all > > > over. > > > What are people's *fantasy* endings? > > Julie: Harry lives! Well, that better be the real ending too ;-) I do see Ron and Hermione married, and Harry and Ginny ending up together also--not necessarily my first choice, but JKR put it in my head and now it's stuck! Anyway, I expect Hermione would work for the Ministry, where Arthur is the Minister of Magic. Ron might play Quidditch for a while, then become a coach for a national team. They'll no doubt have a passel of red-headed kids, and one will have the middle name of Harry to honor their greatest friend (no need to call two of their nearest and dearest "Harry," and since Harry Potter is NOT dead, a middle name suffices). Harry will become an auror, and maybe Ginny will work as an Unspeakable (much as Harry's mother possibly did). At the end of the epilogue--July 31, 2007, Harry's 27th birthday--they will have 3 boys, all named after the men most infuential in their lives. The oldest will be Albus James Potter, a well-behaved yet whimsical lad, and wise beyond his years. The second and third will be a set of twins, given to sibling rivalry and early use of magic to pull pranks on each other, two mischievous boys named Sirius Arthur Potter and Severus Ronald Potter. (Hee, okay, maybe I'm kidding about that second twin, even though I suspect Severus Snape will greatly aid in Harry's defeat of Voldemort!) Neville will become the Herbology professor at Hogwarts and eventually Gryffindor Head of House. He will marry a Squib, who can comfortably live in the magical world with him, but who is not overcome by magic envy (perhaps a granddaughter of Mrs Figg?). After he has redeemed himself and helped Harry reunite the Hogwarts Houses to defend the school from Voldemort, Draco will become the Potions master and professor at Hogwarts. Eventually he will become Slytherin's Head of House, and he and Neville will engage in a (mostly) friendly rivalry, similar to what we've seen between Snape and McGonagall over Quidditch matches. Luna will become a Magical animal breeder and handler (Thestrals, Hippogriffs, Unicorns, etc). Due to her complete inability to be insulted by his sarcasm, and her uncanny perceptiveness and ability to take him to task with her artless candor, Draco will become deeply attracted to her despite himself. They will eventually marry and produce a new and more enlightened generation of Malfoys. (I really do think they could make a great couple, with much more chemistry than I see in Luna and Harry or Luna and Ron. And just forget Luna and Neville! IMO of course ;-) The Weasley twins will open a dozen or more franchises of their joke shop throughout the world. They will both eventually marry, one to a Muggle. As for the adults, Lupin (who will survive an encounter with Greyback) and Tonks will marry and have a family. Bill and Fleur's marriage will flourish, and Charlie will find a dragon-loving mate (a male one, since some wizards must be gay!). Snape is the one JKR was going to kill who was instead given a reprieve. He will be exonerated of Dumbledore's murder (Dumbledore died of the Ring curse, reactivated when the life-supporting "stopper of death" Snape had administered to save him was neutralized by the cave potion), and his many contributions to the defeat of Voldemort will be recognized. He will get an Order of Merlin but no Congeniality award, which will be fine by him! Snape will combine his Potions ability, healing skills and DADA knowledge toward research and finding cures for various Wizard maladies, including Werewolfism. All this he will do squirrelled away in a Potions lab far from other people (and especially children), who he doesn't much like anyway! He will deign to accept the occasional visitor, but they better have a good reason for interrupting his important work! McGonagall will remain Hogwarts Headmistress for many years to come. Trelawney will give up teaching (it made her nervous anyway) and after a brief fling with the much younger Victor Krum, will settle in Ireland among the leprechauns. Arthur as mentioned will become the Minister of Magic, and he and Molly will welcome their first grandchild courtesy of Bill and Fleur, to be followed by a good two dozen more! Who did I leave out? Well, I have a weird thing about sticking with plausible scenarios, and since some wizards *will* die in DH, I'm sadly giving up Hagrid, Percy (who turns back to the good side first and saves one of the twins before he is summarily killed, thus recapturing his family's love and respect in death), Moody, Seamus and Parvati--the latter two being the two JKR did not originally intend to kill. (I know the two she didn't intend to kill may well be more central characters than these two, but this is my fantasy, right? ;-) All the bad guys die, BTW. Bye bye Voldemort, Peter Pettigrew, Bellatrix, Lucius, Narcissa, Greyback, and...well, I'll let Umbridge live as long as she's confined to St. Mungo's mental ward! That's all I can think of for the moment, Julie From mercuryblue144 at gmail.com Tue Jul 10 03:53:09 2007 From: mercuryblue144 at gmail.com (Beth Hartung) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 23:53:09 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy In-Reply-To: <469301A8.5010604@sprynet.com> References: <4692FA92.2000500@sprynet.com> <1be73e550707092033q76cfe583hb457b7237f8f4082@mail.gmail.com> <469301A8.5010604@sprynet.com> Message-ID: <1be73e550707092053q193e2446i5954c6a9f45567d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171507 Bart: Yes. Two pieces (diary and ring) have definitely been destroyed, and two (one in Morty's body when he was backlashed and the one in the locket) may well have been destroyed. MercuryBlue: The objects were damaged or destroyed, yes. Whatever connected the soul pieces to the objects is gone, yes. Are the soul pieces destroyed as well, or simply set loose to wander until such time as they are all detached from physical things and therefore capable of passing beyond the veil? MercuryBlue [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Tue Jul 10 03:52:56 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 03:52:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171508 Please bear with me and read through till the end, I think a lot of people would agree with my first few points but I want to know what you think about points 3 and 4! Taken from Harry Potter Lexicon: "The term "Horcrux" is used to refer to any object in which a person has concealed a part of his or her soul. The object need not be inanimate; according to Dumbledore, a living creature can be used as a Horcrux, although it is risky to do so since the Horcrux in such a case is something that can move and think for itself, independently of the implanted fragment of soul." 1) Harry's scar is a Horcrux CoS- "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thuderstruck. "It certainly seems so." (DD) GoF- "Because you and he are connected by the curse that failed, " said Dumbledore. "That is no ordinary scar." Other supports for this theory taken from Harry Potter Lexicon: LV wants a relic of each founder and harry is probably a Gryffindor decendant. The murder of Harry's parents was a significant murder and LV might want a "trophy" from that murder. Harry is a parseltoungue. LV possesses Harry in OP. Killing curses do not leave scars. No one tries to kill Harry besides LV- he wants him alive. 2) Because Harry's scar is a Horcrux (which will realize near the end of book 7) , he is stuck with having to destroy himself in order to kill Voldemort. 3) Harry, after much thought, decides he is willing to go through with this as he understands that in sacrificing himself he will be saving millions of wizard lives. Out of love he will go through with his suicide. 4) However... it is not his sacrifice that will kill Voldemort. At the moment Harry is about to kill himself, Voldemort will die! By making the selfless choice out of love, Voldemort will be defeated. Harry will not have to go through with the sacrifice and he will not have to kill Voldemort in some other way and possibly face going to Azkaban. The intense love of being willing to complete such an act will be enough to destroy Voldemort. How would that be for an ending?! From mikeyrph at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 03:47:40 2007 From: mikeyrph at yahoo.com (mike) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 03:47:40 -0000 Subject: Expressing a Sentiment about the Series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171509 Goddlefrood: (edited for content) > Dear Joanne Rowling, > > I am and have been a keen and avid reader of your series of > novels following the adventures of Harry Potter. They are > a tremendous and fulfilling read. Your characterisations > are fabulous, your way of keeping we readers guessing over > certain characters' loyalties keep us turning the pages > and I have no doubt that by the time I have finished reading > the final installment I will be more than satisfied with the > way you have chosen to end your story. MikeyRPh agrees and adds a P.S. on GF's behalf: Heck! Don't write another WORD...just give me all those boxes of notes you didn't include in the published versions!!!! (I promise I'll take GOOD care of them--for a small fee I'll play Christopher to your JRRT:) From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 04:14:28 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 04:14:28 -0000 Subject: McGonagall a Muggle-born? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171510 Not that it makes a difference but someone referenced this in another group and I was wondering if there was anyway to know if the info from this link is correct... http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Minerva_McGonagall TKJ :-) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Jul 10 05:17:46 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 05:17:46 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171511 I know, this quote has been rehashed to death. I never heard the audio for this particular interview until tonight and had a thought about how JKR answers the question. Link: http://www.accio-quote.org/themes/book7-commentary.html (12th question down the page) Something struck me when I heard JKR's voice, something I'd never picked up on while reading the quote. First off, it sounds like she *is* referring back to the question from the correspondent and not what comes after, imo. Here it is: "Lydon: Er - one of our connec- ... one of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love?" I wondered if JKR was referring back to Snape's *ability* to fall in love there, expressing her surprise someone sees him as a person who could fall in love, who would be willing and able to open his heart to another person after he returns to Dumbledore. With everything he's seen and done, his work as a double agent, and most notably, as someone who represses emotions in order to be a superb Occlumens**, JKR might not think of Snape as someone interested in or capable of loving another person as an adult. (The question is asked of the future and not the past.) This ties into something else, i.e., the run across the grounds: Snape tells Harry to learn to close his mind, the opposite of what Dumbledore believes is Harry's strength. I'm pretty sure Snape is attempting to give Harry advice, information that's worked for Snape in his own life. But it also speaks to what Snape values: That magical power (perhaps all power?) springs from the element of surprise and the ability to shield yourself and your intent from others. In Snape's mind, Harry can only be successful if he learns to value the same skills Snape does (my interpretation). My point is, JKR seems to be highlighting the differences between the two at that moment, summarizing Snape's views and contrasting them with Dumbledore's beliefs about Harry only a few chapters before. And Harry *is* someone who has the 'ability to love' according to Dumbledore. What if that's something Snape has lost, the price he's paid to stay alive and live the life of a double agent?? I'm not sure what, if anything, this would have to do with the plot, but perhaps there's some meaning for Snape's final characterization if true. Jen **Referring to 2005 TLC/MN interview when JKR said: "...but I think Draco would be very gifted in Occlumency, unlike Harry. Harry's problem with it was always that his emotions were too near the surface and that he is in some ways too damaged. But he's also very in touch with his feelings about what's happened to him. He's not repressed, he's quite honest about facing them, and he couldn't suppress them, he couldn't suppress these memories." From mikeyrph at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 03:32:42 2007 From: mikeyrph at yahoo.com (mike) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 03:32:42 -0000 Subject: Am I unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171512 > Eggplant: "I can't find anyone in this group (or any other Potter > group for that matter) who agrees with me that Harry will die in the > last book. But can that really be true? Nobody agrees with me? > Nobody?! > > If so then if Harry lives I guess I'll be condemned to be known as > the town dunce in these parts; but if he really does die you must bow > down before my brilliance. MikeyRPh replies... MOST everyone will have observed that for Harry the lives and happiness of his FRIENDS (he's fresh out of relatives) are of ULTIMATE importance. The character we have become familiar with would NOT consider his death to be much of a sacrifice to end the terror of Voldemort. Therefore I believe the loss of his friends (as already promised) will be the worst he will/can suffer. ("There are things more important than death"--a MAJOR difference between Harry/Dumbledore and Voldy, and--for those who have eyes to see--a MAJOR clue for DH and the role of Severus Snape). ...and while I'm getting biblical PLEASE do not confuse the sacrifices of Jesus/Aslam with anything that might happen to Harry. Unless you consider Harry DIVINE (and hopefully there aren't many of you out there) the comparison is invalid. From mikeyrph at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 05:07:35 2007 From: mikeyrph at yahoo.com (mike) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 05:07:35 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171513 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > > "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > I think she was crying that her era of writing about Harry is > > over, that the story is done > > If that was true you'd expect her to cry when she finished the book, > but she specifically said she did not cry then. If Harry does die it > will be in a chapter near the end of the book and that is exactly > where she said she did cry. As I've said before I have a hunch a > chapter near the end of the book will be titled "The Man Who Died", > and that's why I'm not going to look at the table of contents until > I've finished the book. > > In her recent interview she said the book was a bloodbath and the > audience got very quiet, but then she said no it's not a bloodbath > but the reports that 2 people would die was incorrect; a lot more > than that do. MikeyRPh sighs again: I have come to the conclusion after reading many of these posts that only I and JKR have ever read any spy novels/stories, particularly ones involving the lives of double agents (guess who). Double agents (DA's) are hated by ALL on BOTH sides! DA's aren't wholly trusted by ANYone! Despite contributions which often make the KEY difference in a 'war' they usually die vilified and without public recognition of their true roles. (Public recognition is, for most people, the one thing that keeps us moving ahead in spite of adversity. DA's are denied this utterly during their professional lives. Try to imagine how that must feel). The risks to which they are exposed are FAR more serious than the risk to any 'armed combatant'. They must always be more intelligent than (or at least as intelligent as) everyone else with whom they deal (they have to remember everyTHING they've told to everyONE at ALL times to avoid capture). (Not counting Hermione:) there are 2 true geniuses among JKR's main characters. ONE of them is Albus Dumbledore, loved and mourned by most of the WW. The OTHER is a double agent. If his death is typical, it SHOULD be something to cry over. So THERE!! :-).............mikey From ameritrainscott at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 13:36:31 2007 From: ameritrainscott at yahoo.com (Scott) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:36:31 -0000 Subject: OOTP page 624 word 42 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171515 I haven't seen this mentioned before, maybe it has. When Arthur takes Harry to the MoM he dials 62442 "Magic" on the telephone. If you turn to Page 624, the 42nd word is also magic. Is this true in the non-US versions as well, or is it just a coincidence? Either way, I love finding new stuff in these books with each re-read. -Scott From rkelley at blazingisp.net Tue Jul 10 13:54:23 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Rick & LeAnn Kelley) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:54:23 -0500 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: <000001c7c2f9$d62c2110$8105f504@yourat5qgaac3z> No: HPFGUIDX 171516 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No, but dementors will suck his soul. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The mark of the Death Eaters. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" A new character 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie MacMillan b. Head Girl? Cho Chang c. DADA Instructor? Slughorn d. Potions Master or Mistress? Dolores Umbridge e. Headmaster or -mistress? Cornelius Fudge 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Gaunt's ring c. Slytherin's locket d. Hufflepuff's cup e. Ravenclaw's wand f. Nagini g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Bat & his father Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Trevor the toad is a transfigured human. 2. Harry goes through the veil. 3. Trelawney's room has a secret entrance to the sleeping dragon of Hogwarts, and that's why her room is always so hot and perfumy - dragon's breath which is so stinky she continually tries to cover it up. 4. Pettigrew pays his debt to Harry by killing Fenrir Greyback 5. At the end, the remaining bit of LV's soul passes into Harry through the scar. Dementors swoop down, suck it out, and LV gets the immortality he wanted, but it's a fate worse than death. 6. Lucius Malfoy discovers he was adopted at birth and is, in fact, a muggle. 7. Petunia had a crush on Snape and when he scorned her because she was muggle, she became bitter toward the wizarding world. 8. DD used James' invisibility cloak to hide Regulus Black. 9. Draco Malfoy is bitten by Greyback and becomes a werewolf. 10. Neville and Bellatrix will have brother wands and perform priori incantatum. Neville's wand turns out to be Ravenclaw's from Ollivander's window which VM used as a horcrux. During their priori incantatum, Sirius' essence comes out of Bellatrix's wand, and Sirius taunts her by calling her a muggle-lover. She becomes so angry that she breaks off the spell, grabs Neville's wand and destroys it, thereby destroying a horcrux. Voldy tortures her by making her write with Umbridge's pen, "I wish I was a muggle," while staring at photographs of Hermione Granger, Dudley Dursley, and Graham Norton. 11. Harry & Dobby buy Florean Fortescue's Ice Cream Parlor and create every-flavor ice cream, including Dobby's favorite, liver ripple. 12. Harry elects to leave on the last sailing ship with the house elves and Dumbledore the White after Ron and Hermione continually ask him to baby-sit with their seven red-headed smart-mouth brats. 13. Last but not least, JKR decides to begin a new series entitled, "Mundungus Fletcher and his Magic Carpet Rides." Book One will be, _Dung and the Pillar of Storgi_, followed by, _Dung and the Pyramids of Furmi_. Anders From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Tue Jul 10 14:21:59 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:21:59 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What happens in DH? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8C99114CF9DB136-BF4-3B60@WEBMAIL-RE13.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171517 lindseyharrisst: What does everyone else think? PS I can't believe this is the last time we will get to do this, even if we stay in fandom after it's all over. What are people's *fantasy* endings? . Oryomai: Ooooh!? How fun!? In *MY* Potterverse, here's what happens: Severus lives.? No questions asked.? He hasn't really changed -- he's still a git, but he's alive. Remus is the real traitor who Imperio'd Peter into betraying the Potters (ESE!Lupin becomes more appealing each time I think about it!). Lucius, although I love him dearly, is spending the rest of his days in Azkaban with the insane (but one of my favorites) Bellatrix. The twins are both alive and have their joke shop.? George is one of the people who had a crazy elopement due to the war...with a Muggle girl. Tonks married Remus only to find out that he is the traitor, and she killed him herself. Ah...the Trio Ron: Ron will become Head Boy only to be kidnapped by UnrepetentDE!Draco Malfoy. Hermione: Will go crazy after the death of Ron, hunt Malfoy down, AK him, and spend the rest of her life with Bellatrix. Harry Potter: He'll foil Voldy's plan and save the world.? But his friends are gone.? So he goes through the veil to join Sirius, DD, his parents, and everyone else. ...But that's in my world. Oryomai -Who's excited to be going to the 1203am showing at the Waterfront all the while realizing she'll be a shitshow at work tomorrow. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 10 14:29:20 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:29:20 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy Message-ID: <15166286.1184077760444.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171518 From: Beth Hartung MercuryBlue: >The objects were damaged or destroyed, yes. Whatever connected the soul >pieces to the objects is gone, yes. Are the soul pieces destroyed as well, >or simply set loose to wander until such time as they are all detached from >physical things and therefore capable of passing beyond the veil? Bart: Either way, they cannot be recombined with Morty; otherwise, wouldn't it be better to let the soul pieces roam free than to put them in objects, which can be captured and destroyed? Consider, there must be a reason why even Dark magicians shy from making horcruxes. The most obvious reason is that, while it makes you harder to kill, with a piece of your soul gone, you are not "you" any more. I do admit that I am taking an educated guess that, when your body dies, if you have a horcrux, then the soul piece in your body is gone, and it is the soul piece that is in the horcrux that keeps you from going beyond the Veil. Bart From orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk Tue Jul 10 14:40:52 2007 From: orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk (or.phan_ann) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:40:52 -0000 Subject: Afterlife/JKR cried In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171519 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > Ann wrote in : > > << But JKR's treatment of religion does leave out some interesting > things. This is a milieu in which souls and the afterlife are maybe > not facts of life, but certainly empirically verifiable in a way > that nothing spiritual in the real world is. No-one in the > Wizarding World can ignore the existence of souls. What's that > going to do for religion? Suppose the facts of life in the > Wizarding World contradict religions? Isn't this something JKR > should have mentioned by now? What's their afterlife like? >> > > As Eddie quoted in another context in > , > Sir Nick said in OoP, the wizarding folk don't know any better than > Muggles what the afterlife is like at the end of OotP snipped> For all the ghosts know, if they'd > gone on, on the other side of the 'door' is extinction and > oblivion. Or eternal torture in Hell. There's a reason why Nick > was scared to go on -- altho' I can't see Myrtle as motivated by > fear. More by vengefulness. Ann: OK, but they *know* there's an afterlife. Now consider all the different religions Muggles have developed without such knowledge (please don't take that the wrong way, anyone, we've had enough onlist arguments about religion lately). Why aren't there wizarding- only religions? And what did knowledge of the soul do to wizarding philosophy? They do seem to be empiricists over rationalists... On a more plotly point, what *is* the relationship between the soul and life? As it stands, the data are contradictory - we need an explanation of why soulless people live and what happens when a Horcru is destroyed. It had better be offered pretty early in DH, is all I can say, cause these are pretty basic details. Regarding Myrtle, I'd say she has JKR's standard flaw of not being able to grow up, still stuck in her toilet. (Witness Sirius, Snape, even Voldemort, still afraid of death at *65*)... And re JKR crying when she finished DH: I don't think it's worth speculating about. Most of us would cry after finishing a seventeen- year odyssey like hers, in my opinion. Ann From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 14:42:40 2007 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:42:40 -0000 Subject: Alternate Titles In-Reply-To: <4692F91A.60108@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171520 jelly92784 wrote: If you could rename each of the already published Harry Potter Books, what would you call them? Here's what we came up with: SS: Harry Potter and Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry CS: Harry Potter and the Heir of Slytherin POA: Harry Potter and the Servant of Voldemort GOF: Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament OOP: Harry Potter and the Department of Mysteries HBP: Harry Potter and the Unbreakable Vow Bart: But what is your goal in renaming them? How are the new names superior to the old names? In this case, retitling the books assumes that there is a problem with the current titles. By rule #1, it's hard to come up with new titles unless we know what is wrong with the current titles. Jelly92784: I wouldn't say that there is anything necessarily "wrong" with the titles, in fact, for the most part, I like them all! The topic came up as we were discussing the titles JKR said she had prior to Deathly Hallows and wondering what they could've been, which led us to wondering what other titles she may have had for the other books. It was really just meant as a fun exercise. At the same time, I have always wondered why she chose, in the title of book one, to give away the object that Harry spends so much time attempting to discover. Although now that I've read SS about a million times, the title obviously doesn't take anything away from my enjoyment of the story, because I already know that it is the sorcerer's stone. But it still seems a bit odd to me that people reading it for the first time already know what the hero is trying to find out (although, of course, they don't know who is trying to steal the stone, just that it is a stone that is being pursued). My sister doesn't like the title of Half Blood Prince. She thinks that it doesn't make sense because we never find out the background of why this nickname is important, why Snape chose to call himself that and what it may mean. I don't agree. I think that the title is excellent. After the fact, we know that the story revolves, to a great extent, around Harry and Snape, but we don't really know that until the end. In this case, the title tells us that the Prince is important but doens't give away who it really is. I think that Snape's reasons for the nickname aren't as important as the fact that the name allows Harry to form a different sort of relationship with Snape, not knowing that it is him. That said, I also love the alternate title we came up with of "the unbreakable vow". Of course, this could have different implications depending on where Snape's loyalties lie, but, like many of the subjects of the other titles, the vow is something that we learn about in the beginning of the novel and that continues to be a motivating force, influencing events up until the end. So, like I said above, in coming up with alternate titles for the books, I wasn't trying to imply that there is anything wrong with the actual titles. Instead, I just thought it a fun way to reanalyze the novels and figure out what is important for each one. It also helped me to appreciate how difficult it is to come up with a good title! From orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk Tue Jul 10 15:01:23 2007 From: orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk (or.phan_ann) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:01:23 -0000 Subject: [TBAY] My DH predictions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171521 Faith glances out of the window, returns to her work, then looks back sharply. Is that a new ship she sees down by the harbour? It does look a little strange. Then she recognises the person standing on it, apparently ordering someone around, and storms out after her. By the time she gets to the ship, George is already there, trading insults with Ann. `I told you I was going paddling!' she shouts. `Didn't it cross your mind I might want to climb aboard some of those old ships?' `You were shelling my pub with the Big Bang!' he retorts. `And now you're stealing supplies!' `I have a Theorists' Licence! If I need to requisition supplies, I can!' She waves it in his face. `You don't!' scoffs Faith. `You need the harbourmaster's signature for one of those.' Ann smirks. `The post was vacant, what with the Bay being virtually abandoned. I filled it myself. If you've got a problem with that, take it up with the Elves. Until then, I've got a perfect right to launch a ship and take all the supplies I need.' As she says this, Avery emerges from the George carrying a crate of L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S. and stows them in the ship. Ann checks a list and orders him to fetch some pots of C.R.A.B.C.U.S.T.A.R.D. `Well? Nothing to say?' `Where did you get *him* from?' asks George. `He'd been hiding in the woods since about Message 78500, and I thought he might appreciate having a little work to do. Now, the rules are quite clear, aren't they? I'm perfectly able to take this ship out, and there's nothing you can do about it.' `Not quite,' says Faith, thinking fast. `If your ship isn't seaworthy, we can impound it on security grounds.' `And break it up with the G.A.R.B.A.G.E. S.C.O.W.,' sneers Ann. `Come aboard, then.' But it's an impasse. She doesn't want her ship inspected any more than Faith wants to step aboard, and their mutual reluctance is justified, for this is one of the least seaworthy vessels ever seen on the Bay, a catamaran reduced to little more than two hulls crammed with junk and the occasional canon, barely supporting the weight of a huge S.I.E.G.E. C.A.T.A.P.U.L.T. `Suppose we begin with the form,' says Faith, playing for time. `Captain, Ann. She's a prediction, so crew of one. Name of ship? Not the Mary Rose, by any chance?' Ann sniffs. `Her name's N.O.S.T.A.L.G.I.A. It's an acronym. "Not Only Silly but Totally Against Likely Goings-on In Canon". Like it?' `Am I supposed to read something into that?' asked George. `Modesty,' Ann suggests. `Well? Why don't the pair of you come aboard?' `Because it's unsafe,' mutters Faith, but they do anyway, the ship listing dangerously. `Take a seat,' offers Ann, climbing onto the catapult and off to the other hull. Somehow, she has managed to cram two M.A.T.C.H.I.N.G. A.R.M.C.H.A.I.R.S. into it. Faith shrieks. `It's a memory charm theory,' she squeals, `It's a memory charm, get me off get me off oh, Ann, how could you do this to me ' She hops ashore and George stands, ready to join her, though he has always been more tolerant of theories that lack canon. `Relax!' says Ann, `I'm not stupid ? well, maybe I am, but that's just around for decoration, honest. Come on. I'll throw them overboard if you like.' Thus reassured, Faith hops aboard once more and crouches on the edge of one. `So. Your predictions,' she demands, in a voice like very nervous ice. Ann heaves what looks like a telephone directory in at them, bungles the throw, and drops it in the Bay. `Whoops. Well, most of that was rather dull; I wasn't going to bore you. Here's the exciting stuff.' `Suppose you explain the S.I.E.G.E. C.A.T.A.P.U.L.T. first,' interrupts George. Ann nods. `That's another acronym; it stands for Sudden Irruption of Exciting Good vs. Evil Climax Attributed To Actions Planned Unobtrusively and Laid Tirelessly. The idea is basically that the series is as one long book, and like each of the individual novels it's had a long period of not much happening while clues gather. Now Harry's been catapulted into action, he'll start calling the shots, things will be explained, we'll work out what's really been going on all this time, and so on.' `Hardly controversial,' says George, and she blushes, `But I really think you're overemphasising it.' `It's my ship. Now, for my first prediction,' (and she pulls a F.E.A.T.H.E.R.B.O.A. from one sleeve), `This book's going to be an absolute abattoir! The deaths have been getting worse throughout the series.' She points at several large canons labeled with things like "Remember Cedric Diggory" and "Snape Kills Dumbledore", not quite balancing each other out. `I'm betting on Kreacher, Percy, poor lad, Voldemort, and Harry (although he'll return) in particular. Plus hordes of Death Eaters, Phoenixes, and innocent bystanders. If anything Nice happens it'll be either at the wedding' ? she gestures at a canon with a flower down its barrel ? `or the very end. Actually, what if things turn bad at the wedding? I think either that'll be the first chapter or Voldemort plotting something. And I think he's Up to Something Big, but the Muggle and Wizarding Worlds will ultimately remain separate.' George nods. `Sounds fair enough. You think Harry'll come back?' Ann nods. `Voldemort'll zap him through the Veil, killing himself, Sirius and his parents will help him back. But lots of people are predicting that!' She reaches for three tiny canons, one of them transparent. `Aberforth Dumbledore is Albus' brother and so very old. He's also a Phoenix and we don't know much about him.' (This is the canon of omission.) `Therefore, he will be the next head of the Order of the Phoenix.' Faith sighs. George shakes his head and makes a small note. `Oh, come on! It's not that bad the line about his being illiterate was probably a joke! And I also think he's got the Locket and will use it to show Harry how to de-Horcrux something.' She points at something white in the other hull. `See that M.A.G.I.C. D.I.S.H.W.A.S.H.E.R.? I rescued it from the Safe House, and it still works fine ? I even took out the "Dumbledore let Pettigrew escape in PoA" and it works perfectly. Stow that C.R.A.B.C.U.S.T.A.R.D. by the yellow flags, Avery. Where was I?' `You were extolling the virtues of your M.A.G.I.C. D.I.S.H.W.A.S.H.E.R.,' George reminded her. `Oh, yes! There'll be plenty of Phoenixes hunting Horcruxes, which will be just as well because Harry'll ignore them and be after Snape, demonstrating his remarkable talent for ignoring the main plot. And there are between two and four Horcruxes to find, so that'll stop the main plot being repetitive, too.' `That contradicts S.I.E.G.E. C.A.T.A.P.U.L.T., doesn't it?' asks Faith, peeking down to see if they're sinking already. `Oh no,' says Ann blithely, `Snape's loyalties are crucial now JKR told Salman Rushdie so! It fits his character and advances the plot! Particularly because the Snape reunion will explain tons of stuff about the Marauders and Lily and the Prank and so on. L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P., anyone?' `No thanks,' says George. `Doesn't the back of the UK childrens' edition cover imply that Harry will be alone?' He reads: > He must leave the warmth, safety, and companionship of The Burrow > and follow without fear or hesitation the inexorable path laid out > for him. Ann wriggles uncomfortably. `That's just an implication based on that, though, I think the Burrow'll be more important than Number Twelve. The Weasleys are "blood traitors", Muggle-lovers, and known Phoenixes ? they must have some serious magical protection on the Burrow. Oh yeah, and Dragons might be able to de-Horcrux things, a la The Lord of the Rings Speaking of which, Nazg?l, I mean Dementors, will be crucial!' Faith docks a point gleefully. `And they'll have some connection to Boggarts. Worst memories and greatest fears have something in common, don't you think? And Dementors' reliving-a-memory schtick is rather like the way Boggarts appear differently to everyone, *and* the Mirror of Erised.' `You think the Mirror of Erised's a Dementor?' asks George, confused. `Next best thing,' says Ann. `Oh, and the epilogue will end with the Dursleys, making a nice symmetry. It'll only go about ten or twenty years into the future, rather than the ends of the characters' natural lives, and be solid information rather than two characters reminiscing.' `Anything a little less abstruse?' asks Faith. `That other people might be interested in?' `Nope,' grins Ann. `Wouldn't want to waste your time! I expect hundreds of people are telling you they think Neville will end up as a teacher. Anyway, all that went in the Bay. So, did I pass?' Faith coughs diplomatically. `It's a rather unusual craft, Ann.' `It's a catamaran. It has dignity. Imperioed!Arthur Weasley was one, too.' `Dignity, but not much canon,' mutters Faith, and they pause a moment, considering all the wrecks littering the Bay. `Ann, we haven't passed you yet,' warns Faith. `Setting out in this weather really isn't a good idea.' She points at the hurricane warning flag. `Oh, I know,' grins Ann. `But what else can I do? It's my last chance to make predictions. Everyone else is doing it! Well, not on the Bay, but... come on, Faith. Wouldn't it be unsporting not to give everyone a chance to laugh at what I get wrong when the Last Canon is fired?' They all turn around to look at it, the fattest of the seven canon ranged above the Bay. Rumour says that, just as the sound of the First Canon had created the Bay, the Last will destroy it, or perhaps replace it with a perfect version of itself in some ideal realm. None of them are keen on finding out the hard way. The eruption when the Fifth was fired was enough to last George the rest of his life. They glance up at the sky, seeing the stormclouds gather. Suddenly, a man pops up from the far end of the catapult, where he has been tightening screws. `All ready now, Ann,' he says. `George!' says Faith. `You didn't tell me you had a twin brother!' George frowns. `I don't talk about it much,' he said. `We're, ah, not on speaking terms.' `Faith,' says Ann, `this is Fred, he designed the Canon Museum and he's been helping me with the catapult, too. We're ready to put the last piece in place.' She climbs over to Fred and the pair of them lift a large, herbal- smelling package along the catapult and into its sling. Curiousity piqued, Faith climbs up to peer inside. There, blissfully ignorant, lies Stoned!Harry, trussed up like a turkey. Ann For further explanation of the acronyms and theories in this post, visit Hypothetic Alley at http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/faq/ and Inish Alley at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database? method=reportRows&tbl=13 Avery was a frequent visitor to the Bay back in the days, and can be seen about to run away in Message 78500. Imperioed!Arthur Weasley is proposed in Message 40168 and can be seen as a catamaran in Message 45386. Fred is new, as mentioned by myself in Message 170960. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 15:25:42 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:25:42 -0000 Subject: Christ figures in LOTR and HP (LOTR spoilers) (Was: Am I unique?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171522 MikeyRPh wrote: > > MOST everyone will have observed that for Harry the lives and happiness of his FRIENDS (he's fresh out of relatives) are of ULTIMATE importance. The character we have become familiar with would NOT consider his death to be much of a sacrifice to end the terror of Voldemort. Therefore I believe the loss of his friends (as already promised) will be the worst he will/can suffer. > > ("There are things more important than death"--a MAJOR difference between Harry/Dumbledore and Voldy, and--for those who have eyes to see--a MAJOR clue for DH and the role of Severus Snape). > > ...and while I'm getting biblical PLEASE do not confuse the > sacrifices of Jesus/Aslam with anything that might happen to Harry. > Unless you consider Harry DIVINE (and hopefully there aren't many of > you out there) the comparison is invalid. > Carol responds: Forgive me, but the comparison is not necessarily invalid. Although I certainly hope that Harry is not a Christ figure, he can legitimately be interpreted as one if he sacrifices himself to save the WW. Christ figures are quite common in literature. A Christ figure is not divine and is not intended to represent Jesus. Instead he (or she) has traits in common with Christ. LOTR spoilers ahead********* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * For example, Gandalf in LOTR dies and is resurrected (which, of course, is what JKR refers to when she says that Dumbledore won't "pull a Gandalf"). Frodo doesn't die, but he saves Middle Earth only to find that he can no longer live in it, so he, too, has been interpreted by some critics as a Christ figure. To call a character a Christ figure is not to say that the story or novel or play is an allegory of the life of Christ, much less to say that the character *is* or represents Jesus the man or Jesus the Son of God. It's merely to say that the character is Christ*like* in some ways but, even in the case of the Maia Gandalf, still fallible. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "fresh out of relatives." Neither sirius Black nor dumbledore was a relative of Harry's, and he still has the Dursleys, two of whom (Petunia and Dudley) are closely related to him by blood. Can you clarify what you mean by "a major clue" regarding Snape? I'm hoping he won't die, and I certainly don't think he's going to suffer a fate worse than death. Had it not been for him, Harry could have been killed by the DEs on the tower or the Hogwarts grounds. Carol, noting that symbolism is not allegory (a one-on-one correspondence throughout the whole story) and that JKR as a Christian writer may well be using Christian symbolism in Harry's holly wand and elsewhere From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Tue Jul 10 15:51:34 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:51:34 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171523 Jen: > I know, this quote has been rehashed to death. I never heard the > audio for this particular interview until tonight and had a thought > about how JKR answers the question. Link: > > http://www.accio-quote.org/themes/book7-commentary.html > (12th question down the page) > > I wondered if JKR was referring back to Snape's *ability* to fall in > love there, expressing her surprise someone sees him as a person who > could fall in love, who would be willing and able to open his heart > to another person after he returns to Dumbledore. With everything > he's seen and done, his work as a double agent, and most notably, as > someone who represses emotions in order to be a superb Occlumens**, > JKR might not think of Snape as someone interested in or capable of > loving another person as an adult. (The question is asked of the > future and not the past.) > > > My point is, JKR seems to be highlighting the differences between the > two at that moment, summarizing Snape's views and contrasting them > with Dumbledore's beliefs about Harry only a few chapters before. > And Harry *is* someone who has the 'ability to love' according to > Dumbledore. What if that's something Snape has lost, the price he's > paid to stay alive and live the life of a double agent?? I'm not > sure what, if anything, this would have to do with the plot, but > perhaps there's some meaning for Snape's final characterization if > true. Dungrollin: I know what you mean. I've always felt sorry for Snape because I read him as someone who is profoundly unhappy (he reminds me in a lot of ways of an ex-boyfriend), and I'm hoping the final revelation gives us some insight into why he's so miserable. I've had this little thought buzzing round my head since HBP came out, that Snape is what you get when someone like Ron has a childhood like Harry had at the Dursleys. The HBP's "Just shove a bezoar down their throat" reminds me of Ron, and I think that's part of why Harry connects to him. But I think you're right, that there has to be a reason for his unhappiness, and his inability (or lack of desire) to forge friendships. Whether Snape's ESE, OFH or DDM ? I doubt that JKR's going to leave it as simple as "some people are just horrible", but how forcefully she wants to make a point I don't know. It could be the same miserable despair which drove him away from Voldemort and back to DD, love of Lily, or the death of Regulus or Snape's (hypothetical) wife and son. Or it could be a mixture of influences on his life, horrible childhood, bullying at school, always the outsider, saw horrific things as a DE, etc. Or, if she really wants to drive home a point, there could be a magical reason for his unsociable demeanour and (hypothetical) inability to love, for example the result of failing to repay a life debt. Part of the reason I don't feel a need to see Snape punished is that I think he's already been suffering for a long time, and horrible though he certainly is, in an odd way I think he's doing his best. I might be wrong, but I don't think JKR has ever used the word `happy' in connection with Snape. There's the grim pleasure he gets from winding Harry up, and humiliating Neville, but he's never described as happy. Even Tom Riddle has wild happiness on his face when he sees Hepzibah's treasures, but not Snape, never Snape. Jen: > This ties into something else, i.e., the run across the grounds: > Snape tells Harry to learn to close his mind, the opposite of what > Dumbledore believes is Harry's strength. I'm pretty sure Snape is > attempting to give Harry advice, information that's worked for Snape > in his own life. Dungrollin: It's worth noting that DD believes this too, throughout OotP while he wants Harry to learn Occlumency, and as others have noticed, in HBP DD doesn't seem to be encouraging Harry to let go of his hate. I wonder sometimes if what JKR's driving at is that it's all about getting the balance right, love can destroy just as well as hatred can (witness Merope's sad end), which is why that room in the DoM stays permanently locked. I'm not sure that she'd go so far as to say that hatred can be constructive, but I dimly remember a quote saying that she thinks it's important not to let yourself become immune to horror, to always maintain a sense of what's unjust and be affected by it. Perhaps she intends to point out that love and hate can be two sides of the same coin. Can anyone who can't love truly hate? She's already pointed out that hatred and indifference aren't the same thing. Anyway, I think that the way she handled DD explaining that Harry's ability to love has so far protected him from going down the wrong path was done well, and I have high hopes that we'll see her show how Harry's ability to love (in general) gives him the edge over Voldy without it having to be love in any way directed *towards* Voldemort. Jen: But it also speaks to what Snape values: That > magical power (perhaps all power?) springs from the element of > surprise and the ability to shield yourself and your intent from > others. In Snape's mind, Harry can only be successful if he learns > to value the same skills Snape does (my interpretation). Dungrollin: He goes on about controlling emotions, not wallowing in sad memories and so on during the Occlumency lessons, which he equates to handing your opponent weapons, but when it comes to hatred and anger on a personal level he doesn't seem to be able to let go at all. I think Snape is capable of loving, I suspect that he won't let himself until Voldemort's gone, because he's seen too often how Voldy uses it to manipulate people (Harry's love of Sirius took him to the DoM, Draco's love of his parents drove him on through HBP). I quite like the idea that one of Voldemort's worst crimes is turning playful and creative people like the HBP we saw through the textbook into people like Snape, who are so afraid of love and the power it can have over a person that they shut it down altogether. One of the big questions for me is whether there's any of that playfulness left in him that we see in the HBP's book. Part of the reason I want Snape to survive (so long as he's DDM, if he's not he can go hang) is to see what he's like once Voldy's gone for good; is he permanently emotionally disabled, or is he just a *really* good Occlumens? Dungrollin Rambling again. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 16:49:17 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:49:17 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on the specific wording of the prophecy In-Reply-To: <15166286.1184077760444.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171524 Bart: > Either way, they cannot be recombined with Morty; otherwise, wouldn't it be better to let the soul pieces roam free than to put them in objects, which can be captured and destroyed? > > Consider, there must be a reason why even Dark magicians shy from making horcruxes. The most obvious reason is that, while it makes you harder to kill, with a piece of your soul gone, you are not "you" any more. I do admit that I am taking an educated guess that, when your body dies, if you have a horcrux, then the soul piece in your body is gone, and it is the soul piece that is in the horcrux that keeps you from going beyond the Veil. Carol responds: That's not quite the way I understand it. IMO, if your body is destroyed and have even one Horcrux, the soul piece that was inside you is "anchored" to the earth. So Vapormort was the damaged soul remnant that was inside Voldie before he (his soul) was ripped from his body at Godric's Hollow. The Horcruxes prevented the damaged main soul from going beyond the Veil. What happens to the soul bit in a Horcrux when the Horcrux is destroyed is unclear. DD speaks of the soul bits from the diary and ring as having been destroyed. Whether they go beyond the Veil or simply cease to exist is unclear (I think it must be the former since the soul is by definition immortal), but they cease to function as Horcruxes. However, as long as Voldie has even one remaining Horcrux, the main soul, which was Vapormort but is now inside his reconstituted or resurrected body, can't go beyond the Veil. The soul piece in Voldie's body before GH is not "gone," IOW. It was prevented from "going" by the existence of the Horcruxes. In fact, that's the whole point of a Horcrux; it "anchors" the main soul to the earth and prevents the wizard from dying regardless of what happens to his body. Carol, who thinks that DD defeated Grindelwald by destroying his Horcrux and making him mortal (causing the main soul to leave his body when his body died, however that may have happened) From akaplan at hebrewhome.org Tue Jul 10 15:27:30 2007 From: akaplan at hebrewhome.org (aldanon2005) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:27:30 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171525 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "karen" wrote: > 4) However... it is not his sacrifice that will kill Voldemort. At > the moment Harry is about to kill himself, Voldemort will die! By > making the selfless choice out of love, Voldemort will be defeated. > Harry will not have to go through with the sacrifice and he will not > have to kill Voldemort in some other way and possibly face going to > Azkaban. The intense love of being willing to complete such an act > will be enough to destroy Voldemort. > > How would that be for an ending?! > That feels so right. Didn't JKR say somewhere that if people remembered that she is a Christian, they would know how DH ends? That is what you described. Harry, out of love, is willing to lay down his life for his friends, and through that love, he is reborn. aldanon2005 From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 18:07:25 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:07:25 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171526 > > > "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > > I think she was crying that her era of writing about Harry is > > > over, that the story is done > MikeyRPh sighs again: > > I have come to the conclusion after reading many of these posts that only I and JKR have ever read any spy novels/stories, particularly ones involving the lives of double agents (guess who). > > Double agents (DA's) are hated by ALL on BOTH sides! > DA's aren't wholly trusted by ANYone! > Despite contributions which often make the KEY difference in a 'war' they usually die vilified and without public recognition of their true roles. (Public recognition is, for most people, the one thing that keeps us moving ahead in spite of adversity. DA's are denied this utterly during their professional lives. Try to imagine how that must feel). > (Not counting Hermione:) there are 2 true geniuses among JKR's main characters. ONE of them is Albus Dumbledore, loved and mourned by most of the WW. The OTHER is a double agent. > > If his death is typical, it SHOULD be something to cry over. > > So THERE!! :-).............mikey > Alla: Hm, I think that you are using **double agent** to have the same meaning as spy, right? Because if you are arguing that Snape as **double agent**, meaning that he is playing both sides equally - reporting information to BOTH Dumbledore and Voldemort in the equal way, then I am really really not sure what is so tragic about his situation? Then I see a character who is loyal to nobody but himself and who does his best to play both sides for whatever he wants to achieve. So, I am again not quite sure what exactly is there to cry over for. IMO of course. Now, if you are really talking about the death of Dumbledore's loyal spy unrecognised by other WW, well, sure I suppose this can be done as tragic, not that I anticipate myself being moved much, but as I said upthread I will not exclude the possibility. By the way I read plenty spy novels, but I am really not sure that HP can be characterised as spy novel . From bfiw2002 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 18:00:40 2007 From: bfiw2002 at yahoo.com (bfiw2002) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:00:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171527 snippage Karen: > 1) Harry's scar is a Horcrux > CoS- "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thuderstruck. > "It certainly seems so." (DD) snippage Biff: I am starting to believe in this theory more and more, however, the problem I have always had was that I couldn't believe that Harry died in the final book. While I could very well be wrong (and am getting nervous about the possibility that I am), I can't believe that the hero of story originally meant for children would sacrifice themselves and die for the greater good. But if Harry WAS a horcrux, how would he destroy the horcrux and live? This was my dilemma until.... I happened to see a snippet of an MTV special online and heard the founder of Mugglenet.com, (who I think has moments of brilliance) make a comment in passing. He said something to the effect that there is probably a very good reason why JK Rowling created characters who can suck the soul out of a person. A blinding flash of light, followed by thunderous and triumphant music (which startled my co-workers to no end), and I had my answer: Harry is a horcrux. His ultimate sacrifice is to submit to a dementor and let them suck out his soul, only it's not HIS soul- it's LV's. He lives, although he is never his former self again. I'm sure many will disagree with this, but I am fairly convinced. Biff From amis917 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 10 18:28:29 2007 From: amis917 at hotmail.com (amis917) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:28:29 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171528 Amis917: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No! 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes! 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? no > b. Draco? no > c. Hermione? yes > d. Luna? yes > e. Ron? yes > f. Neville? yes > g. Ginny? yes > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Ron & Hermione 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan > b. Head Girl? Hermione > c. DADA Instructor? Bill > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? with Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > a. In the diary (destroyed) > b. Slytherin's ring (destroyed) > c. The locket (was in Grimmauld Place) > d. Hufflepuff's cup > e. Ravenclaw's wand (was at Ollivander's) > f. In Voltemort > g. n/a In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus - phoenix boggart - dead Harry Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Harry's willingness to sacrifice himself will cause him to not have to do so. 2. While Harry is hunting the various Horcruxes, Snape will find one (Ravenclaw's) and destroy it. 3. Percy is acting as a spy for the Order within the Ministry. 4. Dumbledore will have left Harry some important memories to see using the Pensive. 5. With the help of the people he loves, Harry will be able to see Snape's true motives - as Dumbledore's man! Amis917, who was not planning to enter - because she really has no clue what's going to happen!! From nitalynx at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 18:52:42 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:52:42 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171529 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > Hm, I think that you are using **double agent** to have the same > meaning as spy, right? > > Because if you are arguing that Snape as **double agent**, meaning > that he is playing both sides equally - reporting information to BOTH > Dumbledore and Voldemort in the equal way, then I am really really > not sure what is so tragic about his situation? Nita visits the omniscient Wiki oracle and has a field day with all the shiny new words: Um, a "double agent" is neither a plain old spy nor an OFH type of person, says the Wikipedia: "A double agent is someone who pretends to spy on a target organization on behalf of a controlling organization, but in fact is loyal to the target organization. Double agents may be agents of the target organization who infiltrate the controlling organization, or may be previously loyal agents of the controlling organization who have been captured and turned by the target." DDM!Snape is "double" because he's stationed at Hogwarts, pretending to spy on DD and the Order. Now, if Avery, for instance, was DDM as well, he would be just an "agent" or a "spy". Interestingly, ESE!Snape would also be a double agent since he's also the Order's spy in DE camp, so Voldie would be able to feed false information to them through Snape's reports. A plain agent for Voldemort would be an ESE!McGonagall, for instance. Or FakeMoody!Crouch. Nita, excited about all the spy-talk but not sure that it's JKR's favourite part of the story, and thus still expecting her to deal with Snape in her usual ruthless way... From AntaresCheryl at aol.com Tue Jul 10 18:56:00 2007 From: AntaresCheryl at aol.com (antarestch) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:56:00 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <016401c7c089$33bc27d0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171530 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis Stevens" wrote: > > Well, I can understand how Harry might die in this series > simply because Rowling is not writing any more books, but > I don't necessarily think that she will permanently kill > Harry just because she's not writing any more. I saw an interview that JKR did very recently in England on Youtube. She said that there wouldn't be anymore HP books (I know, she has always said that) because, "Harry's story comes to a very clear end." That quote really gave me the creeps. I have always thought that Harry would survive and become an auror and have a future with Gnny, but now I'm not so sure. Opinions? Cheryl Warren, Mi SAVE HARRY, SAVE THE WORLD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From AntaresCheryl at aol.com Tue Jul 10 18:57:26 2007 From: AntaresCheryl at aol.com (antarestch) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:57:26 -0000 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <016401c7c089$33bc27d0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171531 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis Stevens" wrote: > > > I don't necessarily think that she will permanently kill > Harry just because she's not writing any more. JKR has always said that death is one of the rules she has set up in her books. Dead is permanent and there is no coming back. Cheryl Warren, Mi SAVE HARRY, SAVE THE WORLD From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 19:00:00 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: New (as well as a repost of previous) Off Limit Spoilers for the ULTIMATE BRAGGING RIGHTS CONTEST! Message-ID: <959047.13545.qm@web55708.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171532 Chancie "Minion of Spoilers" S P O I L E R S P A C E We now have information concerning Bellatrix's importance in DH. In a new interview with Helena Bonham Carter, .... Bellatrix Lestrange in the Order of the Phoenix film. She also briefly mentioned the following: "JK Rowling sent a message saying she's [Bellatrix] going to be very significant in the last one." Since this information has been revealed, any predictions stating "Bellatrix will be significant in DH" or something similar will be worth 0 points, UNLESS you choose to try to predict HOW she will be "significant". I have enjoyed reading all your predictions, and can't wait until DH is released! Also, please note that the deadline for Contest entries is fast approaching, so if you want that free years worth of Butter beer (and I know we all do!) you MUST send a copy of your predictions to the HPFGU, and to tigerpatronus at yahoo.com! Have a Great Day!!! Chancie Minion of Spoilers _______________ The following is a re post of Off limit Spoilers for your convenience! ~ ~ ~ ~ TK wrote : > Current Off-Limit Spoilers: > -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points > unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. > -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: > because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least > somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a > cover will also be worth 0 points.) > -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR > during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. > -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will > laugh at you when they're wrong. > -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and > Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) > will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. > -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come > skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no > credit. > -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in > your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be > scored. Chancie again: In addition to these, you should also be aware that any predictions stating that : Wormtail will repay his life debt, spoken about by Author Levine. Godric Gryffindor was a "muggle advocate" or a great dueller... Will recieve NO points (unless as stated below, you add details HOW do you think Wormtail will pay his life debt?) And as TK stated originally, NEGATIVE predicitons will not recieve points. The exception to this is that if you're suggesting that something that is assumed to have/will happen will not, and you add additonal information on what you think WILL happen instead. I would also suggest that you add as much detail as you can. Even if your main idea is wrong, if some of your details do happen you can gain some points that way. Hope That Helps, Chancie "Minion of Spoilers" --------------------------------- Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 10 19:51:01 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:51:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death Message-ID: <28639689.1184097061725.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171533 From: dumbledore11214 >Hm, I think that you are using **double agent** to have the same >meaning as spy, right? > >Because if you are arguing that Snape as **double agent**, meaning >that he is playing both sides equally - reporting information to BOTH >Dumbledore and Voldemort in the equal way, then I am really really >not sure what is so tragic about his situation? Bart: This can be a BIT confusing, so I'm going to break it down. You have two sides in a contention. A double agent is a spy who pretends to be working for one side, but is really working for the other. Now, depending on how much each side knows, the agent can be a triple agent, quadruple agent, on up. Snape either is a double agent, pretending to work for the Death Eaters (DE's) when he is really working for the Order of the Phoenix (OOP's), or he WAS a triple agent, where he was an agent of the DE's pretending to work as a double agent for the OOP's, and is currently just an agent for the DE's. The thing is, WE DON'T KNOW. And that's the problem with double agents. Even a loyal person, when in close contact with an enemy, can become sympathetic to the enemy's cause. Someone who is out for himself in the spy game is called a "freelancer". A prominent real world example is Ahmed Chalabi, who was instrumental in getting the United States (and Britain) to decide to invade Iraq. It turns out that he was in the pay of a number of different countries, each of whom had their own reasons for wanting the U.S. to invade Iraq. While there is much disagreement on the actions taken based partially on his information, there is little disagreement as to its lack of accuracy and its origins. In a couple of weeks, we will determine if Snape is: A) A double agent, really working for the OOP's (DDM!Snape) B) Formerly a triple agent for the DE's, currently an agent for the DE's (ESE!Snape) C) A freelancer, ready to go to whichever side benefits him the most (OFH!Snape) Bart From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 10 20:21:14 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:21:14 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A thought about Lupin In-Reply-To: <380-22007721023315546@earthlink.net> References: <380-22007721023315546@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <22F1398B-676C-417C-AE95-482CB549D9D8@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171534 > Magpie: > Actually, I don't believe she did say that. She said he was a Half- > blood, > which means he could have a Muggle-born parent or a Muggle parent. Jadon: I'm sure the list's had this discussion before, but if Lupin had a muggle-born parent he would be a full-blooded _wizard_. Not a pureblood, because they have their own criteria for this sort of thing, but not a halfblood either. Riddle calls Harry a halfblood to bring him 'down' to his own level. I think the terms are flexible because they're used as veiled insults. The unwanted trait is emphasised. Doesn't Hagrid deny that Harry's a halfblood at some point? I've always thought of Lupin as freelancing in the muggle and wizarding worlds, doing work here and there for the cause, for science, all very Stephen Maturin and underground, not a lot of money to pay him in the work he wants/is able to do. It's been kept so deliberately secret since PoA I feel we must find out something more in DH. Lupin's parents, too - where are they? Pettigrew's parents? Did they all die in the war? Are the Weasleys a cover-up for the fact that no-one else has a family? Employment must be much easier for female werewolves. :) Jadon From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 20:24:14 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:24:14 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171535 Biff wrote: I am starting to believe in this theory more and more, however, the problem I have always had was that I couldn't believe that Harry died in the final book. While I could very well be wrong (and am getting nervous about the possibility that I am), I can't believe that the hero of story originally meant for children would sacrifice themselves and die for the greater good. But if Harry WAS a horcrux, how would he destroy the horcrux and live? This was my dilemma until.... > I happened to see a snippet of an MTV special online and heard the founder of Mugglenet.com, (who I think has moments of brilliance) make a comment in passing. He said something to the effect that there is probably a very good reason why JK Rowling created characters who can suck the soul out of a person. A blinding flash of light, followed by thunderous and triumphant music (which startled my co-workers to no end), and I had my answer: Harry is a horcrux. His ultimate sacrifice is to submit to a dementor and let them suck out his soul, only it's not HIS soul- it's LV's. He lives, although he is never his former self again. > I'm sure many will disagree with this, but I am fairly convinced. Carol responds: I can see Harry offering to die but not to sacrifice his soul to a Dementor. In any case, the problem with the whole Harry!Horcrux theory (any version) is that it's circular. If Harry is a Horcrux, he must be destroyed like the other Horcruxes, but if he dies (or is soul-sucked), how can he, the Chosen One, the only "one with the power to destroy the Dark Lord," kill or destroy Voldemort after the last Horcrux (himself) is destroyed? OTOH, if Harry!Horcrux isn't destroyed, he could "kill" Voldie but Voldie wouldn't die because his main soul (what's left of it) would still be "anchored" to the earth by Harry!Horcrux. I can see him *thinking* that the last soul bit somehow found its way into his scar and that he has to die or be destroyed, but if he does think that, Hermione or Snape (or someone) will explain that he isn't a Horcrux and doesn't need to die. Also, if Harry is indeed the Chosen One, Harry and only Harry can destroy him, so something other than an AK (which any powerful and motivated wizard can cast) is needed to destroy him. What powers does Voldie have that no one else has? Parseltongue and possession. It seems to me likely that Harry acquired both of those powers at Godric's Hollow. Carol, who thinks that Harry's sacrificial act will be to possess Voldie and force him through the Veil and that Harry will return using sirius Black's (dead) body but that Voldie will be permanently and irrevocably dead From jmnabers at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 19:04:17 2007 From: jmnabers at yahoo.com (jmnabers) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:04:17 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171536 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape, killed by Voldemort or a death eater. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The dark mark on his arm. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? Yes. d. Luna? Yes. e. Ron? Yes. f. Neville? Yes. g. Ginny? Yes. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? No one will marry. In the first chapter, we will learn that Bill and Fleur have already eloped. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Petunia. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry b. Head Girl? Hermoine c. DADA Instructor? No one. The class is not offered this year. d. Potions Master or Mistress? A new character, somone irrelevant and brought in from the Ministry of Magic. e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Ultimately, with himself. Secondarily with Voldemort & the death eaters. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's Diary b. Marvolo's Ring c. Slytherin's Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. In Voldemort, but destroyed by the A.K. curse he tried to place on Harry. It rebounded back and killed that part of his soul. f. In Voldemort, as part of a horcrux that was hidden in Albania. He had to use it to stay alive and then he found Quirrell before the events of the first book. g. An artifact of Ravenclaw's. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus: a snake boggart: Voldemort Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? This will not be revealed in the book. Harry will have the chance to look here, but will turn away, not wanting the knowledge. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Percy Weasley will die. 2. Dumbledore, as a portrait in the headmaster's office, will deliver a message to Harry from Sirius. 3. Harry will be either fully or partially blinded by the end of the book. His eyes are/were important in some way that has not yet been revealed. 4. Voldemort will try to attack Harry at Privet Drive on the evening of his 17th birthday. 5. Wormtail will help Harry in some way, and he will be killed by Voldemort as a consequence of this action. jmnabers From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 10 20:39:45 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:39:45 -0000 Subject: A thought about Lupin In-Reply-To: <22F1398B-676C-417C-AE95-482CB549D9D8@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171537 > > Magpie: > > Actually, I don't believe she did say that. She said he was a Half- > > blood, > > which means he could have a Muggle-born parent or a Muggle parent. > > Jadon: > I'm sure the list's had this discussion before, but if Lupin had a > muggle-born parent he would be a full-blooded _wizard_. Not a > pureblood, because they have their own criteria for this sort of > thing, but not a halfblood either. Riddle calls Harry a halfblood to > bring him 'down' to his own level. I think the terms are flexible > because they're used as veiled insults. The unwanted trait is > emphasised. Doesn't Hagrid deny that Harry's a halfblood at some point? Magpie: I agree the terms seem flexible, but the child of a Muggle-born and a Wizard does seem to be a Half-blood. I don't think, when JKR said that the breakdown was 25% Pureblood, 25% Muggle-born and 50% Half- blood that she meant 50% of wizards had a Muggle parent. Dumbledore calls Harry a half-blood in OotP (he says Voldemort chose not the pure-blood but the half-blood like himself to mark as an equal). I don't remember any Hagrid quotes about it off the top of my head. I would guess that Half-bloods who have a Muggle parent perhaps relate to the term differently because their parents seem more different, but Voldemort seems to genuinely consider Harry a half- blood and so does Dumbledore. -m From ida3 at planet.nl Tue Jul 10 20:46:50 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:46:50 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171538 Nita: > Um, a "double agent" is neither a plain old spy nor an OFH type of > person, says the Wikipedia: > > "A double agent is someone who pretends to spy on a target > organization on behalf of a controlling organization, but in fact is > loyal to the target organization. Double agents may be agents of the > target organization who infiltrate the controlling organization, or > may be previously loyal agents of the controlling organization who > have been captured and turned by the target." > > DDM!Snape is "double" because he's stationed at Hogwarts, pretending > to spy on DD and the Order. Now, if Avery, for instance, was DDM as > well, he would be just an "agent" or a "spy". Dana: I resisted replying to people posting the wikipedia definition of double spy but let's look at it more closely shall we? (Also I suggest that everyone read the rest of the page on wikipedia because there you will find that many double agents indeed worked both ways causing devastation in both camps) So a double agent as stated in the wikipedia definition is stated to spy on a target organization on behalf of a controlling organization, but is in fact loyal to the target organization. So who are the target and controlling organizations in case of Snape? Well before Snape turned spy for the Order, Snape was not a double agent but just merely a spy for LV. Snape only became a double agent when he agreed to spy on LV for DD. And as we see when Snape brought the prophecy to LV he was not in DD's service but was just spying on DD. DD says himself that Snape was still in LV's employ at the time. So after Snape turned DD became the controlling organization by Snape's own agreement to work for DD to spy on LV. That also means that LV became the target organization. This is the same after GoF where DD send Snape back to LV to spy on him. In both cases LV is the target where information needs to be retrieved in order to help DD and not the other way around. Let's fill this in to the definition shall we? DD = controlling LV = target. A double agent (Snape) is someone who pretends to spy on LV on behalf of DD, but in fact is loyal to LV. Double agents (Snape) may be agents of LV who infiltrate DD (the Order), or may be previously loyal agent (Peter, but could also be Snape if he really turned the first war) of DD who have been captured and turned by LV. Doesn't look that good now does it? But let's look at something else that is noted on the wikipedia site which seems to apply cunningly well too. Double agents are often used to transmit disinformation or to identify other agents as part of counter-espionage operations. They are often very trusted by the controlling organization, since the target organization will give them true, but useless, information to pass along. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_agent Interesting isn't it that it is stated that double agents are often VERY TRUSTED by the Controlling organization (DD), since the target organization (LV) will give them true, but useless, information to pass along. Coincidence that the controlling organization is DD and he so very trusts Snape? I think not. In the first part (of the second Wikipedia definition) it is stated that these agents are often used to identify other agents as part of counter-espionage operations. This means that DD as the controlling organization would have wanted Snape to identify the spy in the Order but as we see Snape never identified who the spy was in the first war, with devistating results I might add. So in the stricktest sense of the definition Snape is really working for LV but is pretending to work for DD and his Order. So I can only suggest that if people want to use definitions to proof Snape is DDM then they should first work out that definition to understand what it actually says. In Snape's case the target and controlling organizations can not be interchanged for the simple fact that from the readers point of view it is DD who Snape is supposed to be working for with the intention to retreive information from LV and not the other way around. Snape is supposed to be pretending to work for LV in service of the Order and not as the definition indicates pretending to spy on LV. Double agents do not truly work for the party they are send *by*, they truly work for the party they are send *to* and in both wars Snape is send to LV to spy on him and even if Snape was initially send to DD then it was never in a double agent role but merely a normal spy. Snape was supposed to infiltrate DD's organization which did not require his DE status to be revealed so in the strictes sense Snape made himself a double agent and this therefore could still indicate that he was and still is out for himself as he did not know if the prophecy would come true and LV would truly meet his downfall, so in a sense him revealing that he used to be a DE made it possible for him to still opperate as one but at the same time providing him with a useful way out if he ever needed one. JMHO Dana From kamilaa at gmail.com Tue Jul 10 20:52:36 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:52:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171539 In any case, the problem with the whole Harry!Horcrux theory (any version) is that it's circular. If Harry is a Horcrux, he must be destroyed like the other Horcruxes, but if he dies (or is soul-sucked), how can he, the Chosen One, the only "one with the power to destroy the Dark Lord," kill or destroy Voldemort after the last Horcrux (himself) is destroyed? OTOH, if Harry!Horcrux isn't destroyed, he could "kill" Voldie but Voldie wouldn't die because his main soul (what's left of it) would still be "anchored" to the earth by Harry!Horcrux. I can see him *thinking* that the last soul bit somehow found its way into his scar and that he has to die or be destroyed, but if he does think that, Hermione or Snape (or someone) will explain that he isn't a Horcrux and doesn't need to die. Also, if Harry is indeed the Chosen One, Harry and only Harry can destroy him, so something other than an AK (which any powerful and motivated wizard can cast) is needed to destroy him. What powers does Voldie have that no one else has? Parseltongue and possession. It seems to me likely that Harry acquired both of those powers at Godric's Hollow. I agree it's circular, but I think there are ways out. If, as for example, Harry houses the last of the Horcruxes (but Voldemort doesn't know they are down to the last one) and then Harry drags Voldemort though the Veil with him then Harry will have killed the last of the Horcrux pieces (with his own death) and will have destroyed Voldemort at the same time. Or shortly afterwards, as I'm sure they'll fight it out behind the Veil. I can see Voldemort being willing to go fight Harry behind the Veil because he, Voldemort, will be unaware that he's out of Horcruxes and will think that by letting Harry take him through he'll be able to return (because of the anchoring Horcruxes) but Harry won't. Probably not the grand death he'd like for Harry, but hey, if Harry has proven . . . problematic to kill he might be willing to just have it done with. Possession and/or Parseltongue can't be the "power he knows not", as Voldemort knows both of those powers quite well indeed. But a willingness to face death to ensure triumph for others could easily be the power the Dark Lord knows not because never in a million years would Voldemort be willing to sacrifice himself just to kill Harry, so he will not be able to imagine that Harry, or anyone, would be willing to do the reverse. Kamil From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 10 20:57:56 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:57:56 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <095532BE-6733-4ECA-BD25-DCA5D9D99E9F@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171540 > Biff: > A blinding flash of light, followed by thunderous and triumphant > music (which startled my co-workers to no end), and I had my answer: > Harry is a horcrux. His ultimate sacrifice is to submit to a > dementor and let them suck out his soul, only it's not HIS soul- > it's LV's. He lives, although he is never his former self again. > I'm sure many will disagree with this, but I am fairly convinced. Jadon: The problem with this is - who would that be? If a bit of LV's soul has been floating on top of Harry since he was a year old, how has Harry managed to be so very unlike LV? And recognisably like James, minus the arrogance? I like the theory - Harry's being so horrified by the dementors sets it up for sacrifice, but I can't believe it would really change Harry all that much - and if it didn't, would it be a sacrifice? Relatedly, I think all those hints from former DEs about waiting to see whether Harry was the next dark lord are significant (*cue Frodo sequence*). At the very least, a potential-to-become-a-dark-lord part to the story ("Petunia, you must show love to this baby or his soul will become filled with hate, and for the world there will be DOOM"). One one hand, we have the idea that Harry is very simple and ordinary and he was CHOSEN! (by LV), and on the other we have hints here and there that actually, he wasn't so ordinary at all - and if dementors suck out the LV, perhaps it's that bit we shall see. All very speculative, of course - how much can Harry be changed in one final book? If I had to, I'd bet on the simple-and-ordinary!Harry sequence ... but perhaps DD still hasn't 'told Harry everything' - there's some part of the story missing as vital as the reasons for trusting Snape. Something more about the magic used to save Harry, about _Lily_ - how she could do it, why it worked, what marks of herself she left in Harry. Is it just something about Lily? - we've been told we're going to find that out - or something about Harry, too? No baby would ever die in the WW if it was just about choice - even if a direct question's necessary all supervillains play up the melodrama like LV. And LV - we _know_ this - isn't stupid. I think he knew a lot more of what was going on than we do. Snape perhaps knows this too. Jadon From kamilaa at gmail.com Tue Jul 10 21:09:22 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:09:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171541 But a willingness to face death to ensure triumph for others could easily be the power the Dark Lord knows not because never in a million years would Voldemort be willing to sacrifice himself just to kill Harry *so that others would enjoy a boon that he himself would never see*, so he will not be able to imagine that Harry, or anyone, would be willing to do the reverse. Kamil, proof-reading=good From bfiw2002 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 21:16:40 2007 From: bfiw2002 at yahoo.com (bfiw2002) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:16:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171542 snip! > Carol responds: > I can see Harry offering to die but not to sacrifice his soul to a > Dementor. In any case, the problem with the whole Harry!Horcrux theory > (any version) is that it's circular. snippage Biff I absolutely agree in the circular logic of the Harry is a Horcrux theory. But for me, that logic was solved by the dementors. What if Harry is a Horcrux. He knows he has to destroy the bit of LV that's inside him and realizes that the only way to do that is to die. But wait- there are the dementors, who feed on people's souls. So Harry decides to sacrifice himself to the dementors to save the world from LV. He receives the slimy kiss- and lives! The dementor who has sucked out LV's soul shrivels and dies, a la The Wicked Witch of the West who just had water thrown on her. Harry, now more himself than he ever was, is filled with the love of his departed parents and Sirius and supported by his friends. He defeats LV, who has seen that Harry has succeeded in destroying the last Horcrux, is weakened by fear of his mortality and the aura of love surrounding Harry. He too succumbs to the water-on-the-witch death throes. Okay, so a bit over the top, but it does essentially provide for a living Harry at the end of DH. Biff- who is stubborn enough to believe this, but not so stubborn to believe anything else that strikes her fancy From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 22:19:18 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:19:18 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171543 > Nita: > > Um, a "double agent" is neither a plain old spy nor an OFH type of > > person, says the Wikipedia: > > > > "A double agent is someone who pretends to spy on a target > > organization on behalf of a controlling organization, but in fact is > > loyal to the target organization. Double agents may be agents of the > > target organization who infiltrate the controlling organization, or > > may be previously loyal agents of the controlling organization who > > have been captured and turned by the target." > Dana: > (Also I > suggest that everyone read the rest of the page on wikipedia because > there you will find that many double agents indeed worked both ways > causing devastation in both camps) zgirnius: That is beside the point. The point is that, in contrast to what Alla suggested in her post, a double agent is not necessarily OFH. The definition is about the relationship between two sides and the agent. Either or both sides may be *wrong* in what they believe of the double agent, but the definition still describes the idea of what a double agent is supposed to be. > Dana: > In Snape's case the target and controlling organizations can not be > interchanged for the simple fact that from the readers point of view > it is DD who Snape is supposed to be working for with the intention > to retreive information from LV and not the other way around. zgirnius: This is not the point of view of readers who believe Snape's statements in Spinner's End. Snape states he was sent to Hogwarts by Volemort (controlling organization) to spy on the target (Dumbledore). He further states that Voldemort is happy Snape stayed at that post, and that Voldemort is happy with the intelligence he provides about Dumbledore. All of which indicates Voldemort believes himself to be the controlling organization of Snape, and Snape's target is Dumbledore. Wrongly, IMO, but my opinion is not based on a definition, but on the evidence I see in canon for DDM!. Snape's position vis-a-vis his two masters at the start of HBP is pretty darned symmetrical. > Dana: > Snape was supposed to infiltrate DD's organization which > did not require his DE status to be revealed so in the strictes sense > Snape made himself a double agent and this therefore could still > indicate that he was and still is out for himself as he did not know > if the prophecy would come true and LV would truly meet his downfall, > so in a sense him revealing that he used to be a DE made it possible > for him to still opperate as one but at the same time providing him > with a useful way out if he ever needed one. zgirnius: It is possible Snape's DE status was already known to Dumbledore before Snape got his order from Voldemort to get the teaching position he got two months before the Potters died. We do not know. At any rate, his being a double agent certainly does not preclude his being OFH, DDM, ESE, or a combination. From missvassy at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 18:59:33 2007 From: missvassy at yahoo.com (missvassy) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:59:33 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171544 > snippage > > Karen: > > 1) Harry's scar is a Horcrux > > CoS- "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, > thuderstruck. > > "It certainly seems so." (DD) > > snippage Up until I saw the movie last night (free preview), I thought Harry might be a horcrux. There was nothing specific in the movie that made me change my mind, but it was different seeing the occlumency on screen rather than just reading about it and envisioning it in my mind. I no longer think he is a horcrux. I think that if Harry was truly a horcrux, Snape would have seen some of Voldemort's memories too when he was doing the occlumency lessons. If a bit of Voldy's soul was in Harry, I don't think Voldy would be able to control whether or not Harry revealed some memories to Snape. Even Dumbledore says, when telling Harry he thinks Nagini might be a horcrux, that there is a risk in making a horcrux out of something that can think and act for itself. I believe Harry's ability to see what Voldy was thinking, it was only because there is a link from the scar and moreso from the blood that Voldy took from Harry in the graveyard. As an aside, I think Dumbledore may have thought that Harry was a horcrux when he found out Harry was having VoldyVision, and I think this may have been a partial motive in having Snape give him occlumency lessons. If Snape had seen Voldy's memories, he would have reported them to Dumbledore, thinking that he was able to see them because Voldy was planting them into Harry's mind. Dumbledore, knowing or suspecting that Voldy had made horcruxes, would make the connection that Harry was a horcrux, though. But that didn't happen, so it became apparent that the next move was to continue occlumency to strengthen Harry against Voldy invading his mind. Of course we all know how that backfired. We shall all see in a week, I guess, at which time, I may have to eat my words. Miss Vassy From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 22:38:13 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:38:13 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171545 Dana wrote: > In the first part (of the second Wikipedia definition) it is stated > that these agents are often used to identify other agents as part of > counter-espionage operations. This means that DD as the controlling > organization would have wanted Snape to identify the spy in the Order > but as we see Snape never identified who the spy was in the first > war, with devistating results I might add. > > So in the stricktest sense of the definition Snape is really working > for LV but is pretending to work for DD and his Order. So I can only > suggest that if people want to use definitions to proof Snape is DDM > then they should first work out that definition to understand what it > actually says. Carol responds: Thanks for the clarification regarding double agents. You've described Snape as LV and Draco ("He's a double agent, you stupid old man!") perceive. whether Snape is really, say, a triple agent I won't attempt to speculate as I'm no authority on spies, but I don't think that the Wikipedia definition of "double agent" qualifies as evidence against Snape. It does, however, help to clarify the concept, and again I thank you. I want to ask, however, how Snape, who was working for Dumbledore (according to DD himself) could have identified the spy in the Order when he wasn't a member of the Order himself. At any rate, he's not in the photograph of the first Order and Sirius Black, who *was* in the first Order, seems to have no idea what Snape was doing at the time of Godric's Hollow. A lot of posters seem to think that "turned spy for our side" means that he was actually in the Order. My understanding, which could of course be wrong, is that he was working directly with and for Dumbledore (as spy or double agent or triple agent or whatever). Another thing: We don't know that young Snape was officially a spy when he eavesdropped on Trelawney's interview. He might have been no more a spy than Harry, who is quite fond of eavesdropping, and been working in some other capacity (say, potion making) for LV. (I'm not denying that he was a loyal DE at the time; I'm just not sure when and for whom he first became a spy.) We really know too little at this point to sort out exactly what sort of spy he was at any point in terms of target organization vs. controlling organization. And in the long run, IMO, the technicalities of his job description matter far less than where his loyalties lie, which remains one of the chief mysteries of the series. (I see nothing in the definition of "double agent" to convince me that he's loyal to anyone but Dumbledore). Carol, starting to get confused as we seem to have two Danas and two Catladys on the list From potterfreak0515 at gmail.com Tue Jul 10 21:00:27 2007 From: potterfreak0515 at gmail.com (potter_freak0515) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:00:27 -0000 Subject: OOTP page 624 word 42 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171546 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > I haven't seen this mentioned before, maybe it has. When Arthur takes > Harry to the MoM he dials 62442 "Magic" on the telephone. If you turn > to Page 624, the 42nd word is also magic. Is this true in the non-US > versions as well, or is it just a coincidence? Either way, I love > finding new stuff in these books with each re-read. > > -Scott > That's pretty cool! I just checked it myself, and you're right. I'm sure it's just a coincidence, though. There's now way (or reason) Jo would have purposely planned that. It's certainly interesting, though. -Crystal From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Tue Jul 10 22:50:46 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:50:46 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171547 Karen: > > > 1) Harry's scar is a Horcrux > > > CoS- "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, > > thuderstruck. > > > "It certainly seems so." (DD) Miss Vassy: Up until I saw the movie last night (free preview), I thought Harry > might be a horcrux. There was nothing specific in the movie that > made me change my mind, but it was different seeing the occlumency on > screen rather than just reading about it and envisioning it in my > mind. I no longer think he is a horcrux. I think that if Harry was > truly a horcrux, Snape would have seen some of Voldemort's memories > too when he was doing the occlumency lessons. If a bit of Voldy's > soul was in Harry, I don't think Voldy would be able to control > whether or not Harry revealed some memories to Snape. Even > Dumbledore says, when telling Harry he thinks Nagini might be a > horcrux, that there is a risk in making a horcrux out of something > that can think and act for itself. I believe Harry's ability to see > what Voldy was thinking, it was only because there is a link from the > scar and moreso from the blood that Voldy took from Harry in the > graveyard. Karen: I know it's very difficult to make a horcrux but it almost seems that throughout the books, when the scar is talked about, that LV doesn't realize how much power he really gave Harry. It's almost as if he perhaps created the horcrux by mistake in Harry as it was intended to be in someone else... idk- it's just a feeling I get. I really am not sure he meant to put it in a thing that can "think and act for itself". From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Tue Jul 10 22:54:03 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:54:03 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171548 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kamil wrote: > > > > But a willingness to face death to ensure triumph for others could easily be > the power the Dark Lord knows not because never in a million years > would Voldemort be willing to sacrifice himself just to kill Harry *so > that others would enjoy a boon that he himself would never see*, so he > will not be able to imagine that Harry, or anyone, would be willing to > do the reverse. > > Kamil, proof-reading=good Karen: I believe JK Rowling has said that LV greatest fear is death (which is the reason for the horcruxes)... good point! > From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jul 10 22:55:00 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:55:00 -0000 Subject: OOTP page 624 word 42 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171549 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > I haven't seen this mentioned before, maybe it has. When Arthur takes > Harry to the MoM he dials 62442 "Magic" on the telephone. If you turn > to Page 624, the 42nd word is also magic. Is this true in the non-US > versions as well, or is it just a coincidence? Either way, I love > finding new stuff in these books with each re-read. Geoff: Coincidence I fear. In the UK Bloomsbury editions, it's "Marchbanks" - as in Professor Marchbanks. From nitalynx at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 22:21:14 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:21:14 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171550 Dana: > So who are the target and controlling organizations in case of > Snape? Nita: Well, that's what readers here and elsewhere have been arguing about for years, isn't it? :) > Well before Snape turned spy for the Order, Snape was not a double > agent but just merely a spy for LV. Agreed. > Snape only became a double agent when he agreed to spy on LV for DD. Mhmmm... So, whose double agent did he become by agreeing to do that? LV's spy agreeing to spy on LV - sounds like DD's agent, to me. > And as we see when Snape brought the prophecy to LV he was not in > DD's service but was just spying on DD. DD says himself that Snape > was still in LV's employ at the time. Right. Didn't you already say that earlier? "Just merely a spy for LV" and such? > So after Snape turned DD became the controlling organization by > Snape's own agreement to work for DD to spy on LV. That also means > that LV became the target organization. Oh, wait. I don't think it works that way. He was still pretending (or "pretending", if you prefer) to spy on DD for LV, wasn't he? So the Order was still the nominal target (that he was possibly actually loyal to, hence the doubleness). The confusing part is that *both* sides believe him to be a spy in both camps - loyal to their side, of course. > In both cases LV is the target where information needs to be > retrieved in order to help DD and not the other way around. Why not the other way around? Didn't Snape use his "sixteen years of information on Dumbledore" to get back into LV's good graces, according to his speech in Spinner's End? > Let's fill this in to the definition shall we? DD = controlling LV > = target. A double agent (Snape) is someone who pretends to spy on > LV on behalf of DD, but in fact is loyal to LV. Well, I see that you see it that way. But don't you agree that it could work equally well the other way around? :) > Interesting isn't it that it is stated that double agents are often > VERY TRUSTED by the Controlling organization (DD), since the target > organization (LV) will give them true, but useless, information to > pass along. > > Coincidence that the controlling organization is DD and he so very > trusts Snape? I think not. Well, could he rely on Snape's reports if he didn't trust him? I don't think so. LV simply tries to ensure loyalty using death threats, torture and Legilimency, and since he apparently thinks himself so great no one could "hoodwink" him (notice how Bella shuts up after Snape's question), he deems trust unnecessary. Instead, he makes sure his agents don't know each other if possible (or at least Karkaroff says so) and fear him more than anything. So, different leaders, different strategy. And since no "civilized" government in their right mind would admit to using LV's methods, the article says that apparently good spies are trusted, like DD trusted Snape. Makes sense to me. > In the first part (of the second Wikipedia definition) it is stated > that these agents are often used to identify other agents as part > of counter-espionage operations. This means that DD as the > controlling organization would have wanted Snape to identify the > spy in the Order but as we see Snape never identified who the spy > was in the first war, with devistating results I might add. Yeah, he didn't manage to do that. By the way, Karkaroff didn't name Pettigrew either, despite such effective motivation. And if I were LV, I would *certainly* keep my two spies in the Order separately. It's such a great opportunity to cross-check their reports, after all :) > So in the stricktest sense of the definition Snape is really > working for LV but is pretending to work for DD and his Order. So I > can only suggest that if people want to use definitions to proof > Snape is DDM then they should first work out that definition to > understand what it actually says. I wasn't actually trying to prove anything, though. After I described how the term "double agent" applies to DDM!Snape, I went on to explain how it works for ESE!Snape as well. That's the beauty of the situation - he was certainly a double agent, but *whose* agent? Did he cunningly infiltrate the Order, or did he turn against LV, like DD said? You're the one who seems to be using the definition to try and resolve the debate, something I wouldn't dare attempt ;) Nita, fairly sure this is more of a misunderstanding than a real argument From gsereikas at cfl.rr.com Tue Jul 10 22:52:48 2007 From: gsereikas at cfl.rr.com (momto2gr8tkids) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:52:48 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171551 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? He will suffer a fate worse than death. He will not be dead. He will be gone. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs Figgs 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? new character d. Potions Master or Mistress? new character e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's Diary b. Marvolo Gaunt's ring c. Slytherin's locket d. Hufflepuff's cup e. Ravenclaw's wand f. Gryffindor's sword g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? stag and sun Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? heaven Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. The final battle will include Harry, LV, as well as Firenze (centaur), Dobby (house elf), Gawp (giant). And some DE and OoTP members. It is important that the battle be won only with the important help of "other" creatures. 2. Harry will not use Avada Kevadra. He will use Amortentia potion. 3. Because of S.P.E.W. more house elves will come to Hermione's aid. 4. Hermione will not be MOM, but head of the office that manages relations with all the other magical creatures. 5. Percy will redeem himself when a member of his family is nearly killed in front of him - he will save them. That's all I've got. Andie From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Tue Jul 10 23:04:45 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:04:45 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171552 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Biff wrote: I am starting to believe in this theory more and more, > however, the problem I have always had was that I couldn't believe > that Harry died in the final book. While I could very well be wrong > (and am getting nervous about the possibility that I am), I can't > believe that the hero of story originally meant for children would > sacrifice themselves and die for the greater good. Karen: remember that JKR has developed a children's book that grows with the character. yes the book started when Harry was a child and thus was a child friendly book but as Harry grows he faces things that are more adultlike and thus the series develops into adult books as Harry grows. I know JKR thought it was important that Harry act his age in the books. But if Harry WAS a > horcrux, how would he destroy the horcrux and live? This was my > dilemma until.... > > I happened to see a snippet of an MTV special online and heard the > founder of Mugglenet.com, (who I think has moments of brilliance) make > a comment in passing. He said something to the effect that there is > probably a very good reason why JK Rowling created characters who can > suck the soul out of a person. A blinding flash of light, followed by > thunderous and triumphant music (which startled my co-workers to no > end), and I had my answer: Harry is a horcrux. His ultimate sacrifice > is to submit to a dementor and let them suck out his soul, only it's > not HIS soul- it's LV's. He lives, although he is never his former > self again. > > I'm sure many will disagree with this, but I am fairly convinced. > > Carol responds: > I can see Harry offering to die but not to sacrifice his soul to a > Dementor. In any case, the problem with the whole Harry!Horcrux theory > (any version) is that it's circular. If Harry is a Horcrux, he must be > destroyed like the other Horcruxes, but if he dies (or is > soul-sucked), how can he, the Chosen One, the only "one with the power > to destroy the Dark Lord," kill or destroy Voldemort after the last > Horcrux (himself) is destroyed? OTOH, if Harry!Horcrux isn't > destroyed, he could "kill" Voldie but Voldie wouldn't die because his > main soul (what's left of it) would still be "anchored" to the earth > by Harry!Horcrux. Karen: I'm not sure you read my whole post or perhaps I worded it poorly. I stated that I was of the opinion that having Harry willing to die was the one thing LV didn't have (call it love or lack of the fear of death) and it was that which would kill LV. Harry wouldn't have to go through with it just the willingness to do it. > From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 23:18:56 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:18:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171553 Carol earlier: > In any case, the problem with the whole Harry!Horcrux theory (any version) is that it's circular. If Harry is a Horcrux, he must be destroyed like the other Horcruxes, but if he dies (or is soul-sucked), how can he, the Chosen One, the only "one with the power to destroy the Dark Lord," kill or destroy Voldemort after the last Horcrux (himself) is destroyed? OTOH, if Harry!Horcrux isn't destroyed, he could "kill" Voldie but Voldie wouldn't die because his main soul (what's left of it) would still be "anchored" to the earth by Harry!Horcrux. > > I can see him *thinking* that the last soul bit somehow found its way into his scar and that he has to die or be destroyed, but if he does think that, Hermione or Snape (or someone) will [IMO] explain that he isn't a Horcrux and doesn't need to die. Also, if Harry is indeed the Chosen One, Harry and only Harry can destroy [Voldemort], so something other than an AK (which any powerful and motivated wizard can cast) is needed to destroy him [LV]. What powers does Voldie have that no one else has? Parseltongue and possession. It seems to me likely that Harry acquired both of those powers at Godric's Hollow. > Kamil responded: > I agree it's circular, but I think there are ways out. If, as for example, Harry houses the last of the Horcruxes (but Voldemort doesn't know they are down to the last one) and then Harry drags Voldemort though the Veil with him then Harry will have killed the last of the Horcrux pieces (with his own death) and will have destroyed Voldemort at the same time. Or shortly afterwards, as I'm sure they'll fight it out behind the Veil. > > Possession and/or Parseltongue can't be the "power he knows not", as Voldemort knows both of those powers quite well indeed. But a willingness to face death to ensure triumph for others could easily be the power the Dark Lord knows not because never in a million years would Voldemort be willing to sacrifice himself just to kill Harry, so he will not be able to imagine that Harry, or anyone, would be willing to do the reverse. Carol again: I can see that my second paragraph (even with the ambiguous pronouns clarified) wasn't very clear. There's a jump from why I think Harry isn't a Horcrux (and doesn't have to die) to my alternative theory relating to the powers he possesses that will help him defeat Voldemort (without the circularity involved in being himself one of the objects he has to destroy to kill or otherwise permanently vanquish Voldemort). I know, of course, that possession isn't and can't be "the power that the Dark Lord knows not." That, of course, is Love. But Harry is hardly the only person in the WW who has the capacity to love or the capacity for Agape Love or botherly love or sacrificial love or whatever sort of love is behind the locked door in the MoM. Certainly, he'll have to acquire that capacity (by, IMO, forgiving Snape), but that alone is not sufficient to distinguish him from everyone else in the Potterverse. Voldemort marked Harry "as his equal," and he certainly didn't do so by giving him the power of Love. That power, in so far as he has it without any conscious realization or effort on his own part, results from his mother's sacrifice and relates, so far, to Harry's protection from LV (it saved him from the AK and from being possessed by LV in the MoM). The power of Love is intolerable to LV; he can't bear being in close contact with it any more than Quirrell could bear the touch of Harry's hands in SS/PS. But how can Harry use the power of Love offensively, as a weapon against LV? Not, heaven forfend, by loving him. Not by forgiving him, as unlike the very human Snape, the barely human Voldemort would only sneer at his folly. Something else is needed, IMO, beyond compassion for the WW and for Voldemort's victims (including even Snape), beyond a willingness to sacrifice himself as Lily did without defeating Voldemort. According to Dumbledore, Voldemort unwillingly (and no doubt unwittingly) passed some of his powers (*not* Love, which is antithetical to LV) to Harry. So far, we've seen only one of those powers, Parseltongue, which may help in defeating Nagini but seems unlikely to be of much use against Voldie himself. (I'm not counting the scar connection as a "power," primarily because I think that Harry's ability to enter LV's mind, a kind of unconscious Legilimency, has been blocked by LV's Occlumency.) That leaves the one power that remained to LV when he lost his powers at Godric's Hollow, possession. He can't use it against Harry, but suppose that Harry could use it against him? Suppose Harry, standing with Voldie on the dais of the Veil in the Death Room, could enter Voldemort's mind and fill it with the burning power of Love so that the pain of it tormented him as the Silmaril burned Maedhros' hand and he leaps through the Veil to rid himself of the pain. That's my theory of what will happen. It would make Sirius Black's death significant not only by introducing us to the Veil but when Black offers Harry a chance to "take my body back"--Sirius's soul would stay behind the Veil, as would Voldemort's because they would both be dead. But Harry, whose body would lie outside the Veil, would be a superfluous soul who is not really dead and could "borrow" Sirius Black's (dead) body to reenter the WW. (Christ figure alert: We'd have a symbolic death and resurrection, foreshadowed by all the underground passages Harry has entered and emerged from in all the other books. And no, that would not make him Christ or an allegory of Christ. It would only be a symbol of his Christlike willingness to sacrifice himself for others.) It's just an idea that I prefer to Harry!Horcrux. I think that Harry acquired some of Voldie's *powers* rather than part of his soul at Godric's Hollow. I'm trying to figure out what makes Harry, a much less loving figure than, say, Luna, "the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord," and I'm also trying to bring in "mark him as his equal" and tie it in with what DD has said about DD giving Harry powers. Harry protests that he doesn't have the power of possession, but Harry, as we know, has been wrong before. Carol, not equating possession with demonic possession, just thinking of it as the power to invade someone else's mind on a grand scale, in this case used as a weapon of last resort to defeat evil From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 10 23:08:04 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:08:04 -0000 Subject: Thanks to all of you for such great reading Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171554 Hello, The last book will be out soon and I just wanted to say to all of you thanks for providing great reading. Wonderful predictions and why you think things will go a certain way in the final book. For the crying that JKR did. I watched an interview with her and she was asked what she would do when she was writing the final book. She said she would probably cry through it. I didn't understand that as she was going to kill Harry. But if Harry is killed, I won't go to any more movies, I mean what would be the point, right ? Had George Lucas killed off Luke SkyWalker I would not watch anymore star wars movies. I think a lot of people feel this way so I doubt if anyone does die, it won't be Harry, just because that would not make good business sense. Again thanks for all the great reading. I have enjoyed all of your postings very much. Lady Potions. From ida3 at planet.nl Tue Jul 10 23:32:09 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:32:09 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171555 zgirnius: > That is beside the point. The point is that, in contrast to what > Alla suggested in her post, a double agent is not necessarily OFH. > The definition is about the relationship between two sides and the > agent. Either or both sides may be *wrong* in what they believe of > the double agent, but the definition still describes the idea of > what a double agent is supposed to be. Dana: It is not besides the point for the simple fact that becoming a double agent does not have to be directed by either organization but can be a decision a spy makes himself. In most cases even if a spy is loyal to one group it is not by definition that he wants to be revealed as a traitor to the other. In case where a group he is loyal to becomes a party that has potential to lose (which the prophecy predicted could be the case even against all odds), double agents will have the benefit of being known to the other party, providing them with a convenient cover in case something happens to the party they where initially loyal to. Snape brought the prophecy to LV and only turned spy for DD when LV chose to follow up on that said prophecy. For all we know Snape could have used his orders to get a place at Hogwarts to cover his butt in case the prophecy would turn out to have a negative effect on LV. Essentially it is what the prophecy predicted even in the part Snape is said to have overheard. That would mean that to keep believable even if loyal to the other side, Snape had to work both ways. And if he worked neither then he wasn't actually a double agent at all but just pretending to be one and the entire definition false flat. zgirnius: > This is not the point of view of readers who believe Snape's > statements in Spinner's End. Snape states he was sent to Hogwarts > by Volemort (controlling organization) to spy on the target > (Dumbledore). He further states that Voldemort is happy Snape > stayed at that post, and that Voldemort is happy with the > intelligence he provides about Dumbledore. All of which indicates > Voldemort believes himself to be the controlling organization of > Snape, and Snape's target is Dumbledore. Wrongly, IMO, but my > opinion is not based on a definition, but on the evidence I see in > canon for DDM!. Dana: Yes, it is the point of the reader because all you see is DD's side of the story and not LV's. DD tells us Snape turned spy for the Order, that he is no longer a DE. It is DD that asks Snape to return to LV and become a spy for the Order within LV's inner circle. It doesn't matter if Snape's loyalties are truly with LV or not. It is DD that from the reader's point of view, Snape should be working for. He is supposed to be pretending to still be a DE and therefore able to spy on LV for the Order. Snape himself mocks Sirius that he is working for the Order at great personal risk and so states DD in GoF. We never see Snape with LV so you have no way of knowing what Snape tells LV or visa versa. Therefore the reader's point of view is from the controlling organization as we are supposed to believe that Snape is working for DD. LV in the first war sent Snape to DD as a normal spy to infiltrate Hogwarts and take up a position there. That is not the same thing as a double agent. DD sends Snape back to LV to spy on him while LV is supposed to believe that Snape is actually trying to get close to DD (and DD is not suppossed to know Snape is send to him as a spy). That is what makes a double agent, double. It is only DD that uses Snape's double status as a DE. For Snape to infiltrate Hogwarts as a teacher and get a position there, his DE status is actually more damning then good. If DD truly knew Snape to be a DE and believed he still was loyal to LV then Snape would never be able to get in. After GoF, it is DD that asks Snape to go back to LV. It is not LV that orders Snape to go to DD. LV remains the original target in this operation. LV believing Snape to be loyal to him is irrelevant because LV knows Snape is ordered to spy on him and send to him by DD to pretend to still be a loyal DE as Snape explains to Bella and Narcissa in Spinner's End. And as the definition states the target knows the double agent is loyal to him. LV does not have to order Snape to do anything because Snape was send to him. It is actually much harder for Snape to pretend to work for LV then for DD because LV knows what Snape is supposed to do so if information leaks to DD that helps the Order to remain one step ahead of him then he doesn't have to look far, while on the other hand information on the Order can be leaked in several ways to various different channels. DD will not capture a person and torture information out of him or her but LV would. So DD is totally dependent on what Snape will or will not retrieve and as we see Snape never gives information that can be directed back to him. I have not based my opinion on the wikipedia definition either but I have seen various people romanticize the double agent status and use this definition to proof that Snape must be DDM but when you actually fill it in then Snape by this definition would be LVM. It is that simple. Does that mean that Snape is therefore LVM because the definition filled in, suggests so? No, it doesn't but I was not replying to proof Snape was LVM but just that I think people should first understand a definition before they use it to proof a point. zgirnius: > At any rate, his being a double agent certainly does not preclude > his being OFH, DDM, ESE, or a combination. Dana: It was not me that pulled in the definition. I just pointed out that if you apply the definition in the strictest sense then Snape would be LVM. And that a double agent can still be out for himself and himself alone. My opinion about Snape has to do with Snape and only Snape and I got enough indication from canon that whatever he is, he is not DDM. JMHO Dana From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Wed Jul 11 00:05:16 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:05:16 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar, love, and the death of Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171556 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier: > > In any case, the problem with the whole Harry!Horcrux theory (any > version) is that it's circular. If Harry is a Horcrux, he must be > destroyed like the other Horcruxes, but if he dies (or is > soul-sucked), how can he, the Chosen One, the only "one with the power > to destroy the Dark Lord," kill or destroy Voldemort after the last > Horcrux (himself) is destroyed? OTOH, if Harry!Horcrux isn't > destroyed, he could "kill" Voldie but Voldie wouldn't die because his > main soul (what's left of it) would still be "anchored" to the earth > by Harry!Horcrux. > > > > I can see him *thinking* that the last soul bit somehow found its > way into his scar and that he has to die or be destroyed, but if he > does think that, Hermione or Snape (or someone) will [IMO] explain > that he isn't a Horcrux and doesn't need to die. Also, if Harry is > indeed the Chosen One, Harry and only Harry can destroy [Voldemort], > so something other than an AK (which any powerful and motivated wizard > can cast) is needed to destroy him [LV]. What powers does Voldie have > that no one else has? Parseltongue and possession. It seems to me > likely that Harry acquired both of those powers at Godric's Hollow. > > > Kamil responded: > > I agree it's circular, but I think there are ways out. If, as for > example, Harry houses the last of the Horcruxes (but Voldemort doesn't > know they are down to the last one) and then Harry drags Voldemort > though the Veil with him then Harry will have killed the last of the > Horcrux pieces (with his own death) and will have destroyed Voldemort > at the same time. Or shortly afterwards, as I'm sure they'll fight it > out behind the Veil. > > > > > Possession and/or Parseltongue can't be the "power he knows not", as > Voldemort knows both of those powers quite well indeed. But a > willingness to face death to ensure triumph for others could easily be > the power the Dark Lord knows not because never in a million years > would Voldemort be willing to sacrifice himself just to kill Harry, so > he will not be able to imagine that Harry, or anyone, would be willing > to do the reverse. > > Carol again: > > I can see that my second paragraph (even with the ambiguous pronouns > clarified) wasn't very clear. There's a jump from why I think Harry > isn't a Horcrux (and doesn't have to die) to my alternative theory > relating to the powers he possesses that will help him defeat > Voldemort (without the circularity involved in being himself one of > the objects he has to destroy to kill or otherwise permanently > vanquish Voldemort). > > I know, of course, that possession isn't and can't be "the power that > the Dark Lord knows not." That, of course, is Love. But Harry is > hardly the only person in the WW who has the capacity to love or the > capacity for Agape Love or botherly love or sacrificial love or > whatever sort of love is behind the locked door in the MoM. Certainly, > he'll have to acquire that capacity (by, IMO, forgiving Snape), but > that alone is not sufficient to distinguish him from everyone else in > the Potterverse. Voldemort marked Harry "as his equal," and he > certainly didn't do so by giving him the power of Love. That power, in > so far as he has it without any conscious realization or effort on his > own part, results from his mother's sacrifice and relates, so far, to > Harry's protection from LV (it saved him from the AK and from being > possessed by LV in the MoM). The power of Love is intolerable to LV; > he can't bear being in close contact with it any more than Quirrell > could bear the touch of Harry's hands in SS/PS. > > But how can Harry use the power of Love offensively, as a weapon > against LV? Not, heaven forfend, by loving him. Not by forgiving him, > as unlike the very human Snape, the barely human Voldemort would only > sneer at his folly. Something else is needed, IMO, beyond compassion > for the WW and for Voldemort's victims (including even Snape), beyond > a willingness to sacrifice himself as Lily did without defeating > Voldemort. According to Dumbledore, Voldemort unwillingly (and no > doubt unwittingly) passed some of his powers (*not* Love, which is > antithetical to LV) to Harry. So far, we've seen only one of those > powers, Parseltongue, which may help in defeating Nagini but seems > unlikely to be of much use against Voldie himself. (I'm not counting > the scar connection as a "power," primarily because I think that > Harry's ability to enter LV's mind, a kind of unconscious Legilimency, > has been blocked by LV's Occlumency.) That leaves the one power that > remained to LV when he lost his powers at Godric's Hollow, possession. > He can't use it against Harry, but suppose that Harry could use it > against him? Suppose Harry, standing with Voldie on the dais of the > Veil in the Death Room, could enter Voldemort's mind and fill it with > the burning power of Love so that the pain of it tormented him as the > Silmaril burned Maedhros' hand and he leaps through the Veil to rid > himself of the pain. > > That's my theory of what will happen. It would make Sirius Black's > death significant not only by introducing us to the Veil but when > Black offers Harry a chance to "take my body back"--Sirius's soul > would stay behind the Veil, as would Voldemort's because they would > both be dead. But Harry, whose body would lie outside the Veil, would > be a superfluous soul who is not really dead and could "borrow" Sirius > Black's (dead) body to reenter the WW. (Christ figure alert: We'd have > a symbolic death and resurrection, foreshadowed by all the underground > passages Harry has entered and emerged from in all the other books. > And no, that would not make him Christ or an allegory of Christ. It > would only be a symbol of his Christlike willingness to sacrifice > himself for others.) > > It's just an idea that I prefer to Harry!Horcrux. I think that Harry > acquired some of Voldie's *powers* rather than part of his soul at > Godric's Hollow. I'm trying to figure out what makes Harry, a much > less loving figure than, say, Luna, "the one with the power to > vanquish the Dark Lord," and I'm also trying to bring in "mark him as > his equal" and tie it in with what DD has said about DD giving Harry > powers. Harry protests that he doesn't have the power of possession, > but Harry, as we know, has been wrong before. > > Carol, not equating possession with demonic possession, just thinking > of it as the power to invade someone else's mind on a grand scale, in > this case used as a weapon of last resort to defeat evil Karen: I don't think Harry will ever love LV- that would be crazy but perhaps his willingness to destroy the horcrux inside of him out of love for his friends will be what kills LV. Seeing his intense love of others. 10 more days! > From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 00:15:48 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:15:48 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171557 > zgirnius: > > That is beside the point. The point is that, in contrast to what > > Alla suggested in her post, a double agent is not necessarily OFH. > > The definition is about the relationship between two sides and the > > agent. Either or both sides may be *wrong* in what they believe of > > the double agent, but the definition still describes the idea of > > what a double agent is supposed to be. > Alla: Hmmm, I want to clarify. Absolutely, according to Wikipedia definition double agent does not have to be OFH that much is clear to me. But **my point** had a lot with second sentence of that definition. I was certainly using a bit different definition than what Wikipedia gives, even if this definition is different from what this supposed to mean or completely incorrect, that comes from me reading spy fiction and inferring what double agent is for myself. Hmmm, how to explain? To me double agent is someone who **changed** his loyalty in the process, who maybe was recruited by rival country at some point or decided that to be loyal to his initial boss is not lucrative enough or something like that? Does it make sense? And in **my mind** double agent is absolutely somebody who is OFH, because at some point of his life he changed his loyalties to another boss and that is what I believe Snape did for whatever reason. Like here is the second sentence of Wiki definition: "Double agents may be agents of the target organization who infiltrate the controlling organization, or may be previously loyal agents of the controlling organization who have been captured and turned by the target; the threat of execution is the most common method of turning a captured agent into a double agent." THAT is probably the main reason why in my head I used to believe and still do that double agent has no set in stone loyalties, yeah, because in my mind double agent is usually turned by force or money. So, if he changed the bosses once for threats or money, I do not trust "double agent" to stay loyal to anybody but himself anymore. Ugh, I am not sure how to explain better at the moment, I will come back to it later, if I can. > Dana: > It is not besides the point for the simple fact that becoming a > double agent does not have to be directed by either organization but > can be a decision a spy makes himself. >< BIG SNIP> Alla: Exactly. From ida3 at planet.nl Wed Jul 11 01:00:09 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:00:09 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171558 Nita: > Well, that's what readers here and elsewhere have been arguing about > for years, isn't it? :) Dana: The question is does that change the perception of who Snape is supposed to be working for? No, it doesn't because Snape is supposed to be working for DD. And even if one believes he is not then it still does not change this directive from the reader's point of view. Snape is said to have become a double agent when he turned spy for the right side. So he was supposedly no longer loyal to LV when he returned to the right side. This also means that his controlling organization changed no matter what LV believes himself. Snape is supposedly working for DD as one of his useful spies and therefore LV is his target to spy on. If he really turned (if you believe so or not) then he is now working for DD and in GoF we see DD ask Snape to return to LV's side to again take up his role as a spy for the Order (besides who says DD thinks of Snape as a double agent and not just as a normal spy?). So no matter how you want to define Snape's true loyalties if you apply Snape's target and his controlling organization to the definition then there is only one way to correctly do that -> DD is controlling and LV is the target. Nita: > Mhmmm... So, whose double agent did he become by agreeing to do > that? LV's spy agreeing to spy on LV - sounds like DD's agent, to > me. Dana: Yes, but Snape only became a double spy for DD after he agreed to spy on LV as he was a normal spy when he was send to DD. But a double spy is not a noble person that changes his allegiances. He is actually a double crosser that makes the person, he agreed to spy for, believe that he is actually working for him, while in reality he never changed allegiances and is still working for the same party he was originally from. Nita: > Oh, wait. I don't think it works that way. He was still pretending > (or "pretending", if you prefer) to spy on DD for LV, wasn't he? So > the Order was still the nominal target (that he was possibly > actually loyal to, hence the doubleness). The confusing part is > that *both* sides believe him to be a spy in both camps - loyal to > their side, of course. Dana: You are turning the normal spy (LV's spy) into a double spy while Snape only became a double spy as soon as he agreed to work for DD. According to DD, when Snape turned, Snape was no longer believed to be a DE but just pretended to be one so he could retrieve information from LV. LV never though Snape to no longer be a DE at that time other wise Snape would have been death. The problem is that you want to imply that Snape turning spy for DD somehow proofs that Snape indeed had returned to the right side but unfortunately that is not proof because Snape knows DD saw him when the prophecy was made and therefore Snape could just have used this information to concoct his story of remorse to get on DD's good side without defecting to the other side. Snape never truly defected otherwise Snape could never have gone back to LV in GoF and as we see he kept his options open by keeping his former associates close. Snape was under orders to get himself in a position at Hogwarts and we know LV is not the most patients of guys so Snape would not have the luxury to take forever to get there. I do not want to imply that it therefore can't be so but it is by no means proof that Snape did not make himself a double agent for a) to win DD's trust and b) to fulfill his life-debt to James. If we for a moment even assume that DD knew that Snape was a DE because of him listening at the door or him chasing DD around on other occasions then Snape would have needed to have come up with something to convince DD he was no longer loyal to LV. What I am trying to say is that Snape's double agent status will not give any inside into Snape's true loyalties but if you apply the wikipedia definition as you did then Snape is pretending to spy on LV, while he actually has been spying on DD all along. Nita: > Why not the other way around? Didn't Snape use his "sixteen years of > information on Dumbledore" to get back into LV's good graces, > according to his speech in Spinner's End? Dana: So, does this mean that he has been pretending to spy on DD? Nita: > Well, I see that you see it that way. But don't you agree that it > could work equally well the other way around? :) Dana: No, it could not equally work the other way. Snape is either a double agent loyal to LV or he is a triple agent loyal to DD but he is not a double agent loyal to DD in the strictest sense of the definition you posted. Snape is working on DD's orders to spy on LV that is what canon tells us and whatever Snape is truly doing or who he is truly loyal too can't be defined by just conveniently turning the definition up-side down (MHO). LV is and has always been the target in Snape's double agent function, before that time he was a normal spy and after, he not a spy at all because he has no controlling organization to report to anymore, he is now just a DE if he wants to be or not, as the rest of the WW is looking for him. Nita: > Well, could he rely on Snape's reports if he didn't trust him? I > don't think so. LV simply tries to ensure loyalty using death > threats,torture and Legilimency, and since he apparently thinks > himself so great no one could "hoodwink" him (notice how Bella > shuts up after Snape's question), he deems trust unnecessary. > Instead, he makes sure his agents don't know each other if possible > (or at least Karkaroff says so) and fear him more than anything. Dana: Personally I do not think LV can be "hoodwinked" and I do not believe Snape is too stupid to try (there is much more to lose if he does and is found out). But Snape's reports, how much have they helped the Order so far? He is not able to identify the spy in the Potters inner circle, he doesn't know LV is going to target the Potters on Halloween, he doesn't tell DD that LV's plans have changed and only alerts the Order when he already lost track of Harry, he does absolutely nothing to stop Draco because he has made a packed that prevents him to act. Casulty rate on the Orders side: 2 death, 1 imprisoned for 12 years, 1 death and 1 claimed to have died by information given by him (Emmeline Vance) and 1 death by his own hand. Mhhh 5 dead people, all on Snape's watch and even more lives ruined. What a great guy that Snape that he offered his service to DD, really big help he has been. Nita: > So, different leaders, different strategy. And since no "civilized" > government in their right mind would admit to using LV's methods, > the article says that apparently good spies are trusted, like DD > trusted Snape. Makes sense to me. Dana: The article states that the controlling organization trusts these double agents to actually be truly working for them while in reality they never have. They are betrayed in that trust. A good spy is one that is not a double spy, who just infiltrates an organization for information but it is a one way street as they never reveal they actually belong to the other side so the enemy does not know they have a spy in their midst. Nita: > Yeah, he didn't manage to do that. By the way, Karkaroff didn't name > Pettigrew either, despite such effective motivation. And if I were > LV, I would *certainly* keep my two spies in the Order separately. > It's such a great opportunity to cross-check their reports, after > all :) Dana: Pettigrew is believed to be dead by the time Karkaroff gives his statements. He wants to get out of Azkaban so what is the use to give evidence on a dead guy (or believed to be dead)? And it actually doesn't help him when he mentions Rosier and it is stated that he died just after the MoM had put Karkaroff in prison himself. Nita: > I wasn't actually trying to prove anything, though. After I > described how the term "double agent" applies to DDM!Snape, I went > on to explain how it works for ESE!Snape as well. That's the beauty > of the situation - he was certainly a double agent, but *whose* > agent? Did he cunningly infiltrate the Order, or did he turn > against LV, like DD said? You're the one who seems to be using the > definition to try and resolve the debate, something I wouldn't dare > attempt ;) Dana: No, you weren't but providing that definition indicates to me that you did not understand the concept of what is actually meant by it. Double agent does not apply to DDM. If Snape is DDM then he can only be a triple agent but not a double agent by this definition because we as a reader only get the view point as DD being the one that send Snape to LV making DD the controlling and LV the target organization. I am not trying to resolve the debate what I'm trying to resolve is understanding the meaning of what being a double agent stands for and it is not some romantic label you can put on someone. A double agent is a double crosser someone that pretends to work for the side sending him but actually working for the side he is send to. JMHO Dana From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 11 01:40:35 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:40:35 -0000 Subject: Dementors and Horcrux-sucking Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171559 The many theories that involve Dementors sucking bits of Voldemort's soul out of Horcrux(es) is flawed, I think. Just because the bit of soul is Dementor-sucked doesn't necessarily mean that the bit of soul no longer works as it did inside the Horcrux object. The soul bit may have moved from a locket (for example) to inside a Dementor tummy, but the soul bit is still around. Right? Eddie From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 11 01:44:35 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:44:35 -0000 Subject: Voldemort creates a replacement Horcrux for Diary? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171560 Since Voldemort presumably wants 7 soul bits (6 horcruxes + 1 soul bit in himself) and he knows the diary's horcrux was destroyed, wouldn't he have created a horcrux to replace the diary? If not, why not? Methinks Harry may have one MORE horcrux to destroy than he realizes. At the same time, Voldemort has one FEWER horcruxes remaining than he realizes (since the ring is destroyed). Eddie From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 01:54:12 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:54:12 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171561 > Alla: > Hmmm, how to explain? To me double agent is someone who **changed** > his loyalty in the process, who maybe was recruited by rival > country at some point or decided that to be loyal to his initial > boss is not lucrative enough or something like that? > Does it make sense? zgirnius: Oh, that's different. That is totally a sensible reason not to trust someone, or to think they are 'OFH'. But the word double agent may be used to describe anyone who ends up in that specific both-sides-think- he-is-working-for-them type of situation regardless of how they got there. It is possible to use that term to describe any flavor of Snape, including DDM!. > Alla: > So, if he changed the bosses once for threats or money, I do not > trust "double agent" to stay loyal to anybody but himself anymore. zgirnius: I think your post was quite clear. I don't think the argument applies to DDM!Snape, but it makes sense. DDM!Snape changed sides, of course, not for threats or for money, but out of remorse for having made the wrong choice in the past. Which to me seems very different. The sides are not equal, and Snape's stated reason for picking one over the other reflects something intrinsic to the side he chose. If Dumbledore is right about Snape's reasons, he has nothing to worry about until he starts to go around killing babies and their parents on the off chance they might grow up to threaten his power. From celizwh at intergate.com Wed Jul 11 02:32:12 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 02:32:12 -0000 Subject: A thought about Lupin In-Reply-To: <380-22007721023315546@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171562 Magpie: > Actually, I don't believe she did say that. She said > he was a Half-blood, which means he could have a > Muggle-born parent or a Muggle parent. I think people > tend to do the same thing with Tonks, assume that Ted > was a Muggle, but I've always thought he was > Muggle-born. Harry, too, is a Half-blood, because > his mother was Muggle-born and father was a Wizard, houyhnhnm: I agree that Rowling's calling Lupin a half blood could mean either that he has a Muggle parent or a Muggle grandparent. It is probably somewhat more likely that he has a Muggle grandparent because I would think there are more wizards with a Muggle-born parent than a Muggle parent. It would be really interesting if Lupin had a Muggle parent, though. Lupin said, "My parents tried everything, but in those days there was no cure." That makes me think that they were a) very supportive and protective of Lupin (rejection as a result of his lycanthropy was not an issue) and b) united ( alienation from each other because of Lupin's lycanthropy was not an issue). Later on we learn that Lupin's infection was not an accident but a deliberate act of revenge against his father. If either his father or his mother was a non-magical person who not only left the "normal" world behind to live in a completely alien one, but then had a child was turned into a dark creature by a deliberate cursed bite, and still kept sanity and marriage together, that's a story I'd like to hear. In fact I would like to know more about Lupin's parents even if one of them wasn't a Muggle. We don't even know if they are still alive. Lupin's never said they were dead, either. I'm very curious to know what happened to them. From celizwh at intergate.com Wed Jul 11 02:59:57 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 02:59:57 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171563 Carol: > Another thing: We don't know that young Snape was > officially a spy when he eavesdropped on Trelawney's > interview. He might have been no more a spy than > Harry, who is quite fond of eavesdropping, and been > working in some other capacity (say, potion making) for LV. houyhnhnm: Actually, we don't have any idea what Snape was doing in the Hog's Head that night. The Hog's Head, after all, has an interesting clientele and all kinds of questionable transactions are carried out there. Snape could have been buying restricted potion ingredients on the black market. He could have been there to meet someone for some other reason. He could have just been hanging out, getting toasted. Naturally, if he was working for Voldemort and saw Dumbledore come in and go upstairs, he would have felt it worth his while to find out what was going on. Two things I think we can rule out: He was not there to pick up job interview tips and he was not there to hear the prophecy. From laurel.coates at gmail.com Wed Jul 11 03:15:18 2007 From: laurel.coates at gmail.com (Laurel Coates) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:15:18 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dementors and Horcrux-sucking In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3cd952930707102015t240648eel34867319404ad2f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171564 Eddie: The many theories that involve Dementors sucking bits of Voldemort's soul out of Horcrux(es) is flawed, I think. Just because the bit of soul is Dementor-sucked doesn't necessarily mean that the bit of soul no longer works as it did inside the Horcrux object. The soul bit may have moved from a locket (for example) to inside a Dementor tummy, but the soul bit is still around. Right? Laurel: My theory is that Voldemort will receive the Dementor's Kiss *after* Harry has destroyed all the Horcruxes. This will result in a "fate worse than death," and eliminate any possibility of Harry having to commit murder. The dementors are going after Voldemort's soul-piece inside of *him*, not after the soul-pieces inside the Horcruxes. Laurel [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 04:27:47 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 04:27:47 -0000 Subject: Voldemort creates a replacement Horcrux for Diary? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171565 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: > > Since Voldemort presumably wants 7 soul bits (6 horcruxes + 1 soul bit > in himself) and he knows the diary's horcrux was destroyed, wouldn't > he have created a horcrux to replace the diary? If not, why not? > > Methinks Harry may have one MORE horcrux to destroy than he realizes. > At the same time, Voldemort has one FEWER horcruxes remaining than he > realizes (since the ring is destroyed). > > Eddie > lizzyben: It doesn't really seem like LV can make more horcruxes now, does it? DD tells Harry that he only has to worry about finding & destroying the seven horcruxes LV had already made before his first defeat. LV is still killing people, he still wants to be immortal - so why wouldn't DD warn Harry that he may create more horcruxes? It seems like DD is pretty certain that no more horcruxes can be made. And it's a good thing. If LV could, he'd just keep making more faster than Harry could ever destroy them, and truly become immortal. IMO, if DD knows that LV can't make any more horcruxes, this would also explain why he'd choose to share the horcrux knowledge w/Harry - who can't do Occlumency & does have a direct mental connection to LV. It seems like that information would be too dangerous to share otherwise. Also, this explains why LV would be so angry w/Malfoy for giving away the diary. lizzyben From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jul 11 04:29:03 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 04:29:03 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171566 Dana: > I am not trying to resolve the debate what I'm trying to resolve is > understanding the meaning of what being a double agent stands for and > it is not some romantic label you can put on someone. A double agent > is a double crosser someone that pretends to work for the side > sending him but actually working for the side he is send to. > Julie: That definition works fine for me, since LV sent Snape to spy on Dumbledore, and now Snape pretends to work for the side who sent him (LV's side) while actually working for the side he was sent to (DD's side). As for "double-crosser," well, that's not a very meaningful term on its own, IMO. It all depends on *who* you double-crossed and *why.* Those are the two things we don't yet know for sure when it comes to Snape. Maybe he double-crossed Voldemort and has been on Dumbledore's side since that first double-cross. Maybe he's been double-crossing Voldemort and Dumbledore back and forth repeatedly like a ping-pong ball, siding with whichever one is most helpful to his own objectives at that given time. If Snape double-crossed Voldemort because of a complusion (to repay the life-debt to James, because he took a UV with Dumbledore) or merely to satisfy his own needs (for vengeance if Voldemort killed someone he loved, to rid the WW of LV so he can become the top dog), then while he may be nominally "Dumbledore's Man," his defection won't resonate in any romantic sense. If however he double-crossed Voldemort because he had a true crisis of conscience, if he had come to realize he was morally opposed to Voldemort's goals and methods, then Snape as "Dumbledore's Man" would take on the same romantic resonance it does when Harry states that he is Dumbledore's Man. IMO of course. Julie, hoping for the second, and believing that even a man with as bitter a relationship with the world around him as Snape can possess a genuine moral code. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 11 04:42:57 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:42:57 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death Message-ID: <380-22007731144257218@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171567 Nita: > Mhmmm... So, whose double agent did he become by agreeing to do > that? LV's spy agreeing to spy on LV - sounds like DD's agent, to > me. Dana: Yes, but Snape only became a double spy for DD after he agreed to spy on LV as he was a normal spy when he was send to DD. But a double spy is not a noble person that changes his allegiances. He is actually a double crosser that makes the person, he agreed to spy for, believe that he is actually working for him, while in reality he never changed allegiances and is still working for the same party he was originally from. Magpie: That depends on the spy. The fact that he changed allegiences does not mean he can't be noble. He could change for noble reasons. Garbo was a double agent in WW2. He wanted to work for the allies, but they weren't interested. So he became a spy for Hitler, and then went back to the allies. They still didn't see him as valuable. Then he started working against Hitler from the inside and eventually they tracked him down and made him an agent for themselves--he had become valuable because he was a Nazi spy. He was a double and triple agent. He started off working for the Nazis. He changed his allegience technically but in his case was only ever really loyal to the allies. Not that Snape seems to be Garbo, but the fact that he's a double agent really doesn't seem to me to prove that he has to be out for himself. We've been given possibilities in the text where he's loyal to one side or the other, no matter who he started out as. Just because he changed sides once doesn't automatically mean he will change sides for any reason. Nita: > Oh, wait. I don't think it works that way. He was still pretending > (or "pretending", if you prefer) to spy on DD for LV, wasn't he? So > the Order was still the nominal target (that he was possibly > actually loyal to, hence the doubleness). The confusing part is > that *both* sides believe him to be a spy in both camps - loyal to > their side, of course. Dana: You are turning the normal spy (LV's spy) into a double spy while Snape only became a double spy as soon as he agreed to work for DD. According to DD, when Snape turned, Snape was no longer believed to be a DE but just pretended to be one so he could retrieve information from LV. LV never though Snape to no longer be a DE at that time other wise Snape would have been death. Magpie: Yes, he couldn't be a double agent if Voldemort thought he was working for Dumbledore. Both sides have to think he's working for them. Dana: The problem is that you want to imply that Snape turning spy for DD somehow proofs that Snape indeed had returned to the right side but unfortunately that is not proof because Snape knows DD saw him when the prophecy was made and therefore Snape could just have used this information to concoct his story of remorse to get on DD's good side without defecting to the other side. Magpie: Sure he could have done that. I thought the other poster was saying that he also could have truly switched sides. S/he was saying it works both ways, so we can't say for sure whose side he's on I thought. Dana: Snape never truly defected otherwise Snape could never have gone back to LV in GoF and as we see he kept his options open by keeping his former associates close. Snape was under orders to get himself in a position at Hogwarts and we know LV is not the most patients of guys so Snape would not have the luxury to take forever to get there. Magpie: We don't know that Snape never truly defected. He most certainly could have gone back to LV even if he truly defected. Truly defecting doesn't have to require going around and personally convincing everyone you knew on the other side and Voldemort himself that you've defected. (It's not like a 12 step program ;-) It's equally possible that Snape didn't truly defect and that he did. In neither case would defecting mean that Snape had to have burned all his bridges with the other side. Dana: I do not want to imply that it therefore can't be so but it is by no means proof that Snape did not make himself a double agent for a) to win DD's trust and b) to fulfill his life-debt to James. Magpie: Right. He could be the double agent DD says he is, or he could be the double agent Draco says he is. Both sides are presented as a possibility. Dana: If we for a moment even assume that DD knew that Snape was a DE because of him listening at the door or him chasing DD around on other occasions then Snape would have needed to have come up with something to convince DD he was no longer loyal to LV. What I am trying to say is that Snape's double agent status will not give any inside into Snape's true loyalties but if you apply the wikipedia definition as you did then Snape is pretending to spy on LV, while he actually has been spying on DD all along. Magpie: Yes, that's the version of Snape that Snape himself gives in Spinner's End, and that the other DEs say is true. His double/triple agent status says nothing about which side he's loyal to one way or the other. Nita: > Why not the other way around? Didn't Snape use his "sixteen years of > information on Dumbledore" to get back into LV's good graces, > according to his speech in Spinner's End? Dana: So, does this mean that he has been pretending to spy on DD? Magpie: Of course. That's what Voldemort and the DEs think he is doing, spying on DD. If he's really DDM he's only pretending to spy on DD. Nita: > Well, I see that you see it that way. But don't you agree that it > could work equally well the other way around? :) Dana: No, it could not equally work the other way. Snape is either a double agent loyal to LV or he is a triple agent loyal to DD but he is not a double agent loyal to DD in the strictest sense of the definition you posted. Magpie: Yeah, but isn't that nitpicking for little reason? People use "double agent" to loosely to refer to this sort of thing often without being technical about counting the steps of his loyalty. I think Nita's point stands that it *does* work the other way around. Either Snape did spy on DD and reported back to LV and has basically continued doing so, or he switched sides and started to pretend to spy on DD and reported back to DD on LV. I think that's still working the same the other way around despite making him technically a triple agent because he started with LV. Dana: Snape is working on DD's orders to spy on LV that is what canon tells us and whatever Snape is truly doing or who he is truly loyal too can't be defined by just conveniently turning the definition up-side down (MHO). LV is and has always been the target in Snape's double agent function, before that time he was a normal spy and after, he not a spy at all because he has no controlling organization to report to anymore, he is now just a DE if he wants to be or not, as the rest of the WW is looking for him. Magpie: But this discussion isn't really about the Wiki definition of a double agent, is it? I mean, if it's just a case of remembering to say "triple" instead of "double" is that really that important? Even the characters in canon seem happy with just "double agent" no matter which side they're on.. Dana: Personally I do not think LV can be "hoodwinked" and I do not believe Snape is too stupid to try (there is much more to lose if he does and is found out). But Snape's reports, how much have they helped the Order so far? He is not able to identify the spy in the Potters inner circle, he doesn't know LV is going to target the Potters on Halloween, he doesn't tell DD that LV's plans have changed and only alerts the Order when he already lost track of Harry, he does absolutely nothing to stop Draco because he has made a packed that prevents him to act. Magpie: We can't make judgments on helping the Order on information we don't have, so Snape can't be judged on that either way imo. Snape's working for DD does not automatically mean he'd be privvy to all of this information. He couldn't stop him, but that doesn't mean he didn't try because of the Vow. Dumbledore himself also had reasons for not stopping Draco any way they could as well. I just don't think we have anywhere near enough information to decide that Snape hasn't been helping the Order at all. Dana: Casulty rate on the Orders side: 2 death, 1 imprisoned for 12 years, 1 death and 1 claimed to have died by information given by him (Emmeline Vance) and 1 death by his own hand. Mhhh 5 dead people, all on Snape's watch and even more lives ruined. What a great guy that Snape that he offered his service to DD, really big help he has been. Magpie: Not ready to judge Snape for everything bad that happened to the Order throughout a war. Lots of people died in WW2 as well on Garbo's watch. Snape could just as easily be DD's most loyal man with this record. Doesn't say one way or the other. Presumably if Snape was never any help at all Dumbledore would have noticed. At least I presume it. Dana: The article states that the controlling organization trusts these double agents to actually be truly working for them while in reality they never have. They are betrayed in that trust. A good spy is one that is not a double spy, who just infiltrates an organization for information but it is a one way street as they never reveal they actually belong to the other side so the enemy does not know they have a spy in their midst. Magpie: The article isn't talking about Snape, so it's of limited use in understanding Snape's loyalties in a work of fiction. If Snape had an actual epiphany and started working against LV, then he could be loyal to Dumbledore despite not starting out that way. It seems Regulus changed sides, and he died for it willingly. Nita: > Yeah, he didn't manage to do that. By the way, Karkaroff didn't name > Pettigrew either, despite such effective motivation. And if I were > LV, I would *certainly* keep my two spies in the Order separately. > It's such a great opportunity to cross-check their reports, after > all :) Dana: Pettigrew is believed to be dead by the time Karkaroff gives his statements. He wants to get out of Azkaban so what is the use to give evidence on a dead guy (or believed to be dead)? And it actually doesn't help him when he mentions Rosier and it is stated that he died just after the MoM had put Karkaroff in prison himself. Magpie: But we have no evidence that Snape knew Peter was a spy in the Order or that Karkaroff knew it. Nita: > I wasn't actually trying to prove anything, though. After I > described how the term "double agent" applies to DDM!Snape, I went > on to explain how it works for ESE!Snape as well. That's the beauty > of the situation - he was certainly a double agent, but *whose* > agent? Did he cunningly infiltrate the Order, or did he turn > against LV, like DD said? You're the one who seems to be using the > definition to try and resolve the debate, something I wouldn't dare > attempt ;) Dana: No, you weren't but providing that definition indicates to me that you did not understand the concept of what is actually meant by it. Double agent does not apply to DDM. If Snape is DDM then he can only be a triple agent but not a double agent by this definition because we as a reader only get the view point as DD being the one that send Snape to LV making DD the controlling and LV the target organization. I am not trying to resolve the debate what I'm trying to resolve is understanding the meaning of what being a double agent stands for and it is not some romantic label you can put on someone. A double agent is a double crosser someone that pretends to work for the side sending him but actually working for the side he is send to. Magpie: I don't think Nita saying "double" instead of "triple" shows any misunderstanding of the concept, it's just using "double agent" as a catch all to refer to this type of spy without counting all the steps of loyalty. I don't see how that has anything to do with Nita romanticizing the term one way or the other. It seems to me that "double crosser" is the more emotionally charged word, unless you don't actually mean that term to have negative connotations. A double agent can be loyal to one side, and it's certainly possible they can have noble intentions or true loyalty to only one side-especially in fiction. Nita's point as I understood it was that Snape could equally be an agent that is loyal to LV and spying on DD, while DD thinks he is loyal to him and spying on LV, or he could be an agent that is loyal to DD and spying on LV, while LV thinks he is loyal to him and spying on DD. At this point I don't think the way the whole thing started 17 years ago is the main point, even if that does make him technically a triple rather than a double agent. If it sounds a bit romantic well, that's good, isn't it? It's an adventure story. The romance will go out of it soon enough if Snape's a low life, just as it did with Peter (while Sirius Black seemed imo more of a romantic evil figure). -m From jnoyl at aim.com Wed Jul 11 06:12:33 2007 From: jnoyl at aim.com (JLyon) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:12:33 -0700 Subject: Dementors and Horcrux-sucking Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171568 The "theory" I would like to see tested is to throw the horcruxes through the veil. The soul pieces then are no longer tied to this world, so Voldie shouldn't be either. Sure would save on losing arms and other appendages. Harry and Voldie may start their spirit quest in the DoM, inside the locked room where some "most terrible" force resides... JLyon From petmani at gmail.com Wed Jul 11 02:39:34 2007 From: petmani at gmail.com (Manikandan Ehambaram) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:39:34 -0700 Subject: Harry dies? In-Reply-To: References: <016401c7c089$33bc27d0$c0fe3e44@user53796g88h2> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171569 "Phyllis Stevens" wrote: > > I don't necessarily think that she will permanently kill > > Harry just because she's not writing any more. Cheryl wrote: > JKR has always said that death is one of the rules she has set up in > her books. Dead is permanent and there is no coming back. *"I saw an interview that JKR did very recently in England on Youtube. She said that there wouldn't be anymore HP books (I know, she has always said that) because, "Harry's story comes to a very clear end."* If above is true, then JKR might be crying because HP is going to end at the final chapter and its been her 17 years of PASSION about writing HP. -Mani From josturgess at eircom.net Wed Jul 11 12:22:56 2007 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:22:56 -0000 Subject: [TBAY] My DH predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171570 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "or.phan_ann" wrote: > > for this is one of the least seaworthy > vessels ever seen on the Bay, a catamaran reduced to little more than > two hulls crammed with junk and the occasional canon, barely > supporting the weight of a huge S.I.E.G.E. C.A.T.A.P.U.L.T. > An old tar is standing on the dock viewing the slightly listing S.I.E.G.E. C.A.T.A.P.U.L.T. Not to worry she's slightly listing herself. "Putting out to sea just before Hurrican Jo arrives, brave move! They say it will be a real Howling Rowling this time, the blow to end all blows. Still the Shipping Forecast has been wrong before - Harry/Hermione and all that." She casts an experienced eye over the vessel, saw a lot of those go down last time, captained a few in her time too. Something catches her eye, just there, is that sloppy tension in a securing line? >`Oh, yes! There'll be plenty of Phoenixes hunting Horcruxes, which >will be just as well because Harry'll ignore them and be after >Snape, >demonstrating his remarkable talent for ignoring the main plot.' She shakes her, you'd want to check that, the HBP handbook says: `And then what?' said Ron `Then I've got to track down the rest of the Horcruxes, haven't I .. That's what he wanted me to do, that's why he told me all about them And if I meet Severus Snape along the way,' he added, `so much the better for me, so much the worse for him.' Time to apply some block and tackle? Mooseming off to check her Rum ration. From zzzzzzipppppy at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 11 12:31:44 2007 From: zzzzzzipppppy at yahoo.co.uk (zzzzzzipppppy) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:31:44 -0000 Subject: Fred & George (at the Quidditch world cup) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171571 Hi all, I'm a newbie here, so forgive me if this question has already been answered. I have read HP&GOF several times, and I still can't find the answer. I wanted to know how Fred & George were able to make such an unlikely bet against Ludo Bagman before the Quidditch world cup final.... and win. Do the twins have access to time turners, or did they just get lucky when they made their 'prediction'. Maybe I have a page missing from my book, maybe I just missed something, or maybe we will find out in book 7? Looking forward to book 7, Alan. From red-siren at hotmail.com Wed Jul 11 14:23:27 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 14:23:27 -0000 Subject: Voldemort creates a replacement Horcrux for Diary? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171572 Eddie: > > Since Voldemort presumably wants 7 soul bits (6 horcruxes + 1 > > soul bit in himself) and he knows the diary's horcrux was > > destroyed, wouldn't he have created a horcrux to replace the > > diary? If not, why not? lizzyben: > It doesn't really seem like LV can make more horcruxes now, does > it? DD tells Harry that he only has to worry about finding & > destroying the seven horcruxes LV had already made before his first > defeat. LV is still killing people, he still wants to be immortal - > so why wouldn't DD warn Harry that he may create more horcruxes? It > seems like DD is pretty certain that no more horcruxes can be made. I think that if LV knew that the diary wasn't the only horcrux destroyed, then yes he would make more. He should be able to accomplish this because he's still a very powerful wizard. I don't think he did though because he wanted the diary found to prove he was the heir of Slytherin, which he couldn't let be discovered while he (LV) was still in school. He may have expected the diary to be destroyed. Remember, Dumbledore said that he rarely makes mistakes and when he does they are "huger." red_siren From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 15:14:06 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:14:06 -0000 Subject: 9 Days Left for Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171573 All entries must be emailed to tigerpatronus*[at]*yahoo*{dot}*com by 11:59 PM (midnight) on Thursday, July 19th. You must BOTH email the entry (for grading) and post the entry here (for backup.) Full rules and compulsory questions at Post# 170980. Yours in Potter, TK -- TigerPatronus! SAVE HARRY, SAVE THE WORLD: http://www.saveharrypotter.co.uk/ Starred Review for RABID: A Novel, by TK Kenyon: "What begins as a riff on Peyton Place (salacious small-town intrigue) smoothly metamorphoses into a philosophical battle between science and religion. This is a novel quite unlike most standard commercial fare, a genre-bending story--part thriller, part literary slapdown. Kenyon is definitely a keeper." -- David Pitt, Booklist, December 1, 2006 From shmantzel at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 15:56:12 2007 From: shmantzel at yahoo.com (Dantzel Withers) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 08:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dementors and Horcrux-sucking In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <390220.65190.qm@web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171574 Eddie wrote: The many theories that involve Dementors sucking bits of Voldemort's soul out of Horcrux(es) is flawed, I think. Just because the bit of soul is Dementor-sucked doesn't necessarily mean that the bit of soul no longer works as it did inside the Horcrux object. The soul bit may have moved from a locket (for example) to inside a Dementor tummy, but the soul bit is still around. Right? Eddie Dantzel replies: If it isn't destroyed by a Dementor sucking it out, and rather resides in a Dementor tummy, doesn't that mean that it will go through a process where it turns into a giant Dementor poo? Oh no! Then, not only will LV's soul be free once again to gain a body, but it'll stink too!!! *bg* Honestly, I think the soul is destroyed when a Dementor sucks it out. _._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Members 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 Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe . --------------------------------- Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 16:09:09 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:09:09 -0000 Subject: Fred & George (at the Quidditch world cup) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171575 Alan wrote: > > Hi all, I'm a newbie here, so forgive me if this question has already been answered. I have read HP&GOF several times, and I still can't find the answer. I wanted to know how Fred & George were able to make such an unlikely bet against Ludo Bagman before the Quidditch world cup final.... and win. Do the twins have access to time turners, or did they just get lucky when they made their 'prediction'. Maybe I have a page missing from my book, maybe I just missed something, or maybe we will find out in book 7? Carol responds: This question has been discussed before, naturally. You could probably find the posts using Advanced Search if you're sufficiently interested. However, the simplest answer is what we hear in the discussion between Charlie and the Twins before the QWC: Krum is the best *Seeker* in the world but the Irish have the best *team* in the world. Put those two together and you have the unlikely but not impossible combination of Ireland (the best team) winning the match but Krum (the best Seeker) catching the Snitch. (If catching the Snitch always meant winning the game, why bother to have Chasers and a Keeper? All you would need is a Seeker on each team and a Beater or two raining Bludgers at him. Boring!) Fred and George are clever enough to figure out that Krum will catch the Snitch, losing the game on his own terms rather than allowing Aidan Lynch to catch it, which would result in Krum's team being slaughtered by, say, 310 to 10 (which would have been the score if Lynch rather than Krum had caught the Snitch at that particular point). As it is, the score is 160 to 150, a respectable point difference. I think the Twins understand Krum and his psychology a lot better than the not-very-clever Ludo Bagman does. Carol, who thinks the Twins were, erm, right on the money with their inspired guess and did not require a Time Turner or Divination to predict the likely outcome From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 16:24:34 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:24:34 -0000 Subject: Voldemort creates a replacement Horcrux for Diary? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171576 red_siren wrote: > I think that if LV knew that the diary wasn't the only horcrux destroyed, then yes he would make more. He should be able to accomplish this because he's still a very powerful wizard. I don't think he did though because he wanted the diary found to prove he was the heir of Slytherin, which he couldn't let be discovered while he (LV) was still in school. He may have expected the diary to be destroyed. > Carol responds: I partially agree. He certainly expected, and wanted, the diary to be used at some point, but not before he had regained power. It had a dual purpose and it alone was expendable (but he was furious that it had been destroyed prematurely). The other Horcruxes (except Nagini) are durable objects and are not interactive (though I expect that some of them have powerful magic of their own unrelated to their being Horcruxes). But I think the reason that Voldemort doesn't replace the diary (he doesn't know the ring has been destroyed) is that he's already made his self-imposed quota of six Horcruxes. Somehow, he has ended up with exactly one-seventh of a soul, however mangled from additional murders (RW math does not apply in a world created by a math-challenged author) and he doesn't want to further diminish it, undoing the powerful magic of the number seven. So even if one or two Horcruxes are destroyed and he knows it, he won't replace them. As long as even one Horcrux remains, his remaining one-seventh of a soul is anchored to the earth and he can't die. I think his efforts will go into protecting the remaining Horcruxes rather than creating new ones when he learns what Harry is up to. In any case, JKR has already outlined the Horcrux-hunting segment of DH and I doubt that she'll complicate it by adding an unknown Horcrux with so many other loose ends (Snape, Godric's Hollow, RAB, Wormtail's life debt, etc.) to tie up. Carol, hoping that Voldemort will entrust a Horcrux to DDM!Snape, the DADA expert, who will destroy it with no bad consequences to himself From bfiw2002 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 16:27:54 2007 From: bfiw2002 at yahoo.com (bfiw2002) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:27:54 -0000 Subject: Dementors and Horcrux-sucking In-Reply-To: <390220.65190.qm@web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171577 snip! > > Dantzel replies: > If it isn't destroyed by a Dementor sucking it out, and rather resides in a Dementor tummy, doesn't that mean that it will go through a process where it turns into a giant Dementor poo? Oh no! Then, not only will LV's soul be free once again to gain a body, but it'll stink too!!! *bg* > Honestly, I think the soul is destroyed when a Dementor sucks it out. > Biff: LOL! I was going to reply something along these lines, but more that once a soul becomes crunchy goodness for a dementor, it's gone. I would think that if there was a possibility for a soul to survive dementor suckage, the books would have mentioned it at some point. Thanks for the laugh! Biff From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 11 17:50:06 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 13:50:06 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] A thought about Lupin Message-ID: <16470625.1184176206295.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171578 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk >Employment must be much easier for female werewolves. :) Bart: There's no such thing as a female werewolf. Unless, of course, some sort of gender-alteration takes place somewhere along the way. A female vulpine lycanthrope would be a wifwolf. And a man who turns into a female would be a werewoman. Now, of course, this all assumes that JKR knows something about mystical etymology, which is only a slightly better bet than assuming that she knows how to count (hmmmmm.... if enough of us convince her that she has only written 6 books in the series, do you think she might be tricked into writing an 8th?). Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 18:05:02 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:05:02 -0000 Subject: Dementors and Horcrux-sucking In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171579 Eddie wrote: > > The many theories that involve Dementors sucking bits of Voldemort's soul out of Horcrux(es) is flawed, I think. Just because the bit of soul is Dementor-sucked doesn't necessarily mean that the bit of soul no longer works as it did inside the Horcrux object. The soul bit may have moved from a locket (for example) to inside a Dementor tummy, but the soul bit is still around. Right? Carol responds: I agree that the idea is flawed, but for different reasons. A Dementor sucks out a soul through the mouth of the victim. I can't imagine a blind Dementor, which senses rather than sees the presence of its victim, sucking a soul bit out of an emotionless object, much less out of Harry's scar when his own whole and untarnished soul would be temptingly available through his mouth. In any case, the soul bits would *not* still be around (and serving as reencased Horcruxes) if they were sucked by a Dementor. As someone else pointed out, a soul sucked by a Dementor is annihilated. The same would apply in the unlikely event that a Dementor acted on Harry's request to suck out a soul bit from an object (which in any case has magical protections on it to protect the soul bit) or, heaven forfend, his own scar. On a more technical note, souls don't go into a Dementor's "tummy" (I don't think Dementors have internal organs). As I understand it, they're sucked like air, not into the Dementor's nonexistent lungs but into its very being, and they become part of that being (itself a malignant spirit), irretrievable, utterly destroyed. (I find the whole concept abhorrent since the soul is supposed to be immortal, but that's how I understand what happens to a Dementor's victim from Lupin's description.) FWIW, the idea of sucking a soul through the mouth is linked, as far as I can determine, to the ancient conception of soul or spirit as related or analogous to breath, as shown in this entry from the Online etymology dictionary. 'spirit (n.) c.1250, "animating or vital principle in man and animals," from O.Fr. espirit, from L. spiritus "soul, courage, vigor, breath," related to spirare "to breathe," from PIE *(s)peis- "to blow" (cf. O.C.S. pisto "to play on the flute"). Original usage in Eng. mainly from passages in Vulgate, where the L. word translates Gk. pneuma and Heb. ruah. Distinction between "soul" and "spirit" (as "seat of emotions") became current in Christian terminology (e.g. Gk. psykhe vs. pneuma, L. anima vs. spiritus) but "is without significance for earlier periods" [Buck]. L. spiritus, usually in classical L. "breath," replaces animus in the sense "spirit" in the imperial period and appears in Christian writings as the usual equivalent of Gk. pneuma. Meaning "supernatural being" is attested from c.1300 (see ghost)' http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?l=s&p=35 The connection of spirit with moving air (breath or wind) appears in the New Testament where the Greek "hagios pneuma," meaning a holy or sacred wind, breath, or spirit, is translated into English as "Holy Spirit" (most notably, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles with the sound of a rushing wind) http://www.gnmagazine.org/bsc/09/holyspirit.htm http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4151 and in Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind" ("O wild West Wind, thou breath of Autumn's being) where the West Wind is a spirit which "inspires" or gives life to Autumn and to the whole concept of inspiration. (Shelley is playing with etymology, both the Latin spiritus and the Greek pneuma, in his brilliant and beautiful poem.) http://www.bartleby.com/106/275.html Or think of God blowing the "breath of life" into Adam: "The Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being" (Genesis 2:7). Michelangelo depicts this moment as a touching of fingers, presumably because that's a more artistic conception than God blowing into Adam's nostrils. (I'm considering the Bible as a work of literature or a cultural/linguistic document here, so please don't be offended if you're neither Christian nor Jewish.) To return to Dementors and the Potterverse, as I see it, a Dementor sucks the wind/spirit/breath of life out of its victim as if it were sucking air from the victim's lungs but without killing the person or destroying his body. What it's stealing is his being, his essence. So a soul-sucked body like Barty Crouch's is the opposite of the "less than spirit" Vapormort, who was the battered remnant of a soul without a body. Both are incomplete and horrible. A Horcrux, whether it's a cup, a locket, or a scar (nad I don't think Harry's scar is a Horcrux) has no soul, no breath of life to steal. Even Nagini, though she's alive, has no soul in the sense that I'm speaking of. I can't imagine what would happen to a Dementor foolish enough to attempt to suck the Voldiebit from her. As far as I can see, it simply wouldn't happen. (No need, in any case. I'm quite sure that Harry will kill her, as he killed her Basilisk predecessor, with the non-Horcruxed Sword of Gryffindor.) I'm not sure where I'm going with this post, which is not really an answer to Eddie or the original poster in the thread so much as my own thoughts on Dementors and the concept of soul or spirit (not necessarily the same thing yet surely related in terms of imagery and concept) in the HP books. I don't think the books are internally consistent with regard to the concept(s), but that perceived inconsistency could simply reflect my own confusion. To return to the topic, I think that a Dementor sucking the soul bit from a Horcrux is extremely unlikely and the idea of Harry submitting himself to be soul-sucked to remove a soul bit from himself or his scar is abhorrent. What the Dementor would end up with is Harry's own soul sucked through his mouth while the soul bit in his scar (if any!) would remain there, still acting to anchor Voldie's main soul to the earth despite Harry's having sacrificed his essence and identity and selfhood. It would be a horrible and meaningless sacrifice which Harry will surely not even contemplate. I realize that the person who proposed this (IMO) monstrous sacrifice doesn't think it will actually happen, only that Harry will be willing for it to happen, thereby demonstrating his capacity for sacrificial Love. But while I don't doubt for a moment that Harry's willingness to sacrifice himself is crucial to his defeat of Voldemort, I don't think the idea of having his (hypothetical) soulbit sucked will even occur to Harry, who has far too much up-close experience with Dementors to trust them to go after the soul bit in his scar (if any) rather than his own soul. If he wants anyone to be soul-sucked, it will be Voldie (as an alternative to "murdering" him), who would learn too late that death is not the worst possible fate. Carol, not so much arguing with anyone as exploring ideas in relation to etymology, which she finds endlessly fascinating From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 11 19:28:23 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:28:23 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a Horcrux Message-ID: <12156471.1184182103558.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171580 Bart: Repeating the subject: Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a horcrux. The major theories of how Harry might have become a Horcrux was that Voldemort either was or was not planning to use Harry's death to create one, and the spell went wrong, thanks to Lily's incantation. I do not believe that Voldemort was planning to use Harry's death to create a Horcrux, nor do I believe one could have been created by accident. A) Voldemort is depicted as being VERY fearful of death. It is highly out of character that he would have even started making his move towards conquest until AFTER he got the horcruxes all in place. Therefore, it is equally unlikely that he was PLANNING to turn Harry into a horcrux. B) This leaves the possibility that Harry was made a horcrux by accident. Now, just because Lily used ancient magic doesn't mean that she made up the spell on the spot. Seeing that they were hiding from Voldemort, it is logical that Lily had the protection for Harry prepared. And I can't imagine a protection that would RESULT IN HARRY BEING TURNED INTO A HORCRUX. Bart From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 11 19:46:04 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:46:04 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A thought about Lupin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <464E9911-8CCC-4921-BFFA-2E8550DC9772@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171581 > Magpie: > I agree the terms seem flexible, but the child of a Muggle-born and > a Wizard does seem to be a Half-blood. I don't think, when JKR said > that the breakdown was 25% Pureblood, 25% Muggle-born and 50% Half- > blood that she meant 50% of wizards had a Muggle parent. Dumbledore > calls Harry a half-blood in OotP (he says Voldemort chose not the > pure-blood but the half-blood like himself to mark as an equal). I > don't remember any Hagrid quotes about it off the top of my head. Jadon: I was thinking of Philosopher's Stone: "--and he said people from Muggle families shouldn't even be allowed in." "Yer not from a Muggle family. If he'd known who yeh were -- he's grown up knowin' yer name if his parents are wizardin' folk." - which is quite different. You make good points. I think it is a bit flexible, depending on who's using the term, but I'll accept that anyone called a halfblood doesn't necessarily have a muggle parent. It's quite possible 50% of wizards _do_, though, if she's trying to emphasise how far from reality the pureblood fantasy is. Where does that quote come from? Jadon From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Wed Jul 11 19:54:22 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:54:22 -0000 Subject: Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <12156471.1184182103558.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171582 Bart: > > A) Voldemort is depicted as being VERY fearful of death... Therefore, it is equally unlikely that he was PLANNING to turn Harry into a horcrux. > > B) This leaves the possibility that Harry was made a horcrux by accident... And I can't imagine a protection that would RESULT IN HARRY BEING TURNED INTO A HORCRUX. Karen: Reasons why I think his scar IS a horcrux: Harry's scar is a Horcrux PS- "Scars can come in useful" CoS- "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thuderstruck. "It certainly seems so." (DD) GoF- "Because you and he are connected by the curse that failed, " said Dumbledore. "That is no ordinary scar." LV and Harry share the same tailfeathers from a Pheonix in their wands. That could be because a piece of LV soul is in Harry and the significance of the pheonix is that they go on living forever as LV is terrified of death. Other supports for this theory taken from Harry Potter Lexicon: LV wants a relic of each founder and harry is probably a Gryffindor decendant. The murder of Harry's parents was a significant murder and LV might want a "trophy" from that murder. Harry is a parseltoungue. LV possesses Harry in OP. Killing curses do not leave scars. No one tries to kill Harry besides LV- he wants him alive. I do believe it was accidental though and while I have no quotes from the books to back me up I really feel that somehow something rebounded due to his mother's love and Harry ended up with the scar as a horcrux. I am not sure LV or even Harry's mother intended for this although I suppose it could be possible that Lily wanted to give her son the opportunity to defeat LV that she and her husband did not get. The details of why the scar is a horcrux are unclear to me but I am certain that it is! From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 11 19:58:09 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:58:09 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A thought about Lupin In-Reply-To: <16470625.1184176206295.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <16470625.1184176206295.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <27B9EBD2-0FEF-4C6D-B7B8-A49727B56725@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171583 > From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk >> Employment must be much easier for female werewolves. :) > > Bart: > There's no such thing as a female werewolf. Unless, of course, some > sort of gender-alteration takes place somewhere along the way. A > female vulpine lycanthrope would be a wifwolf. Jadon: All right, so a female bitten by a werewolf (or a wifwolf) is in some unspecified mythology a wifwolf? Isn't there a gender-neutral word? Quoted in the OED: 1912 E. O'DONNELL Werwolves xiii. 212 As in France, the werwolf, in Belgium, is not restricted to one sex. The definition: "A person who...", not 'a man who...'. And here we have 22,900 google results for 'female werewolf': http:// www.google.co.uk/search?q="female+werewolf" All the evidence because the idea that there are no female werewolves seems very odd to me. :) Where do foxes come in? From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 20:28:29 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:28:29 -0000 Subject: I think Kreacher might play a BIG roll in the last book (spoiler on the movie??) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171584 I'm only saying this because I saw the 12:01 showing of OoTP this morning and it made me think. I heard rumblings that the director had wanted to get rid of a character during the 5th movie but JKR said they could feel free, but they would have a big problem come the 7th movie. Now, after watching the movie I think that character might be Kreacher. He was in the 5th movie but his roll was SO small that it makes me feel it was added in hindsight, or just to say, "ok, yes this character exists." but that seems about it. Has anyone else who's seen the movie gotten this feeling too? TKJ :-) From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 11 20:14:58 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:14:58 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <12156471.1184182103558.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <12156471.1184182103558.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <8C04DAAF-F647-4636-A307-F892C9D31B41@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171586 Bart: > A) Voldemort is depicted as being VERY fearful of death. It is > highly out of character that he would have even started making his > move towards conquest until AFTER he got the horcruxes all in > place. Therefore, it is equally unlikely that he was PLANNING to > turn Harry into a horcrux. Jadon: Harry wasn't important. Harry was a little niggle to be sorted out before the real work could begin. I wonder if it actually matters how many horcruxes one plans to create - are five always good, because they're more than anyone's made before, or is the magic incomplete because a sixth was intended, or is it incomplete only in Voldemort's mind? Incidentally, does the soul work like cake? i.e. 1st horcrux - 50% of soul, 2nd horcrux - 25% of soul, 3rd horcrux - 12.5% of soul, and so on. I ask (knowing it's not likely with JKR) because if it doesn't, what's to stop LV finding he's low on horcruxes and creating a couple more, this time with very specific anti-Harry spells? (I assume the soul - retaining links to all its scattered pieces - weakens as each dies, until it is in some way worthless, without needing to be finite in volume.) Bart: > B) This leaves the possibility that Harry was made a horcrux by > accident. Now, just because Lily used ancient magic doesn't mean > that she made up the spell on the spot. Seeing that they were > hiding from Voldemort, it is logical that Lily had the protection > for Harry prepared. And I can't imagine a protection that would > RESULT IN HARRY BEING TURNED INTO A HORCRUX. Jadon: Why not? One ancient magic, two ancient magics - ooh, shiny light effects! And look, nearly everyone's dead! That's why Hermione told me to always read the label, isn't it, Mummy? I didn't know mediaeval mould could change instructions like that! Jadon From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 20:55:15 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:55:15 -0000 Subject: Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171587 Karen wrote: > Reasons why I think his scar IS a horcrux: > PS- "Scars can come in useful" > > CoS- "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thuderstruck. > "It certainly seems so." (DD) > > GoF- "Because you and he are connected by the curse that failed, " said Dumbledore. "That is no ordinary scar." > > > Other supports for this theory taken from Harry Potter Lexicon: > LV wants a relic of each founder and harry is probably a Gryffindor > decendant. > Killing curses do not leave scars. > No one tries to kill Harry besides LV- he wants him alive. > > I do believe it was accidental though and while I have no quotes from the books to back me up I really feel that somehow something rebounded due to his mother's love and Harry ended up with the scar as a horcrux. I am not sure LV or even Harry's mother intended for this although I suppose it could be possible that Lily wanted to give her son the opportunity to defeat LV that she and her husband did not get. > > The details of why the scar is a horcrux are unclear to me but I am > certain that it is! > Carol responds: The scar has certainly been useful, but that does not mean it's necessarily a Horcrux. It's a souvenir of the failed attempt to murder Harry, but how it occurred, we don't know. We do, however, know that it was not a scar but an open cut when Harry was placed on the Dursley's doorstep. We also know, as you say, that AKs don't create scars, but we're talking about a *rebounded* AK. I think Lily's sacrifice (there was no incantation, Bart, only her offer to die instead of Harry) acted as a barrier, a kind of wandless Protego. IMO, the killing curse entered Harry's skin but burst out again because it was blocked by the ancient magic, tearing a lightning-shaped gash in Harry's forehead on its way *out.* The "bit" of Voldemort in Harry need not be a soul bit. In the context of CoS, it refers to powers, specifically Parseltongue but possibly possession and other powers unique to Voldemort that we haven't seen yet in Harry, or the communication via the scar link, which amounts to a peculiar sort of Legilimency. I think it's those powers, accidentally given to Harry by LV, that "mark [Harry] as [Voldemort's] equal." No soul bit is necessary. As far as I can tell, magical powers reside in the blood. (Cf. "not a drop of magical blood in their veins" in reference to the Dursleys, Wormtail's statement that any witch or wizard could supply the blood for the restorative potion--notice that Muggles are excluded, and the whole pureblood superiority ethic, which must have some basis in WW reality to have persisted so long). I think a drop of blood entering the open cut when Voldie explodes is at least as likely as a soul bit entering him. The Lexicon is not canon, so I don't think we can use it as support for either side. Your assertion that Harry is "probably a Gryffindor descendant" has no canon support that I know of. There's more support (though not enough to constitute proof) for Dumbledore as Godric Gryffindor's heir. However, Harry could hardly be considered a "relic" of Gryffindor's as the cup is a relic of Helga Hufflepuff's, not to mention that Voldemort is trying to *kill* Harry to thwart the Prophecy. When DD says that he thinks LV would want to use Harry's death to create his last Horcrux, he doesn't mean that Harry himself would be that Horcrux, any more than Hepzibah Smith, Helga Hufflepuff's descendant, is made into a Horcrux. DD means that Voldemort would *encase* the soul bit created by Harry's murder in an appropriate object (Gryffindor's sword would have been perfect, and no doubt LV thought that with Harry dead, he could easily acquire that last relic after he'd finished off Harry. DD would be no threat, not with five other Horcruxes and the Prophecy Boy dead.) Karen: > The murder of Harry's parents was a significant murder and LV might want a "trophy" from that murder. > Harry is a parseltoungue. > LV possesses Harry in OP. Carol responds: Er, I don't see how any of these arguments relates to Harry as a Horcrux. James's death in battle with Voldemort might not even count as a murder in Voldemort's mind, and he clearly doesn't want to kill Lily, whose death clearly *is* a murder. He only kills her, as far as we know, because she refuses to get out of the way and let him kill Harry. And JKR has said that the spell LV cast against Harry *is* a killing curse. It's an AK, not a Horcrux-encasing spell, that rebounds on Voldemort and vaporizes him. Now granted, Lily's death is certainly a soul-splitting murder, so *if* Horcruxes can be created accidentally and *if* soul bits can float around and land in a cut, becoming sealed in when it heals and creates a scar, then the significance of her death matters. But thats not what DD said. He thinks that LV wanted to use the soul bit created by the much more significant murder of Harry, the Prophecy Boy, to create a last Horcrux. I.e., he wants a "trophy" from *Harry's* murder, not James's or Lily's, since he already has five Horcruxes and the death of "the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord" would be much more significant than the deaths of his Order member parents, however powerful in their own right. Also, creating a Horcrux also requires an encasing spell, which was not performed at GH. Harry's being a Parselmouth (not Parseltongue, which is snake language) only means that he has some of LV's *powers*, not that he is a Horcrux. (With the exception of the diary, which had to be interactive so that the reader could control the Basilisk, and Nagini, who already has a mind and, it seems, an affinity for Voldemort, the Horcruxes are just objects encasing soul bits, which collectively and individually anchor the main soul to earth. They are protected by curses or potions or Inferi, but they themselves exist solely to prevent Voldemort from dying even if his body is destroyed. (They don't have to be objects belonging to the Founders or having personal significance for Voldemort; that's just his personal preference.) Nor does Voldmeort's possessing Harry (thwarted by Harry's ability to love) have anything to do with Harry's being a Horcrux. Voldemort had that power before he ever made any Horcruxes. He may have used it on the Muggle children he terrified in the cave. It was the only power left to him when he was vaporized, so he resorted to possessing small animals, usually snakes, until a human host by the name of Quirrell came along. And Quirrell, whom LV abandoned to his death, was certainly no Horcrux. Lily's sacrifice saved Harry's life and provided him with blood protection. It seems clear from JKR's interviews and the FAQ on her website that she didn't know her sacrifice would have those results. The ancient magic is sacrificial love, the power that Voldemort underestimates (or "knows not") rather than any *plan* to save Harry. (I used to think that she had performed some sort of protective charm on him that served as an extra-strong Protego, but evidently not.) Voldemort, OTOH, "marked Harry as his equal," giving him some of his own powers (which, for all we know, Harry's wand core and the Sorting Hat sensed). But those powers are not necessarily the result of a soul bit in Harry's scar, and even if they are, the soul bit is not a Horcrux because no encasing spell has been performed on it. *If* Harry has a soul bit in him (rather than a drop of Voldie's blood or some of his powers acquired some other way), that soul bit would not help to anchor Voldie's soul to earth since no Horcrux-creating spell has been performed on it. Carol, conceding that Harry *could* have a soul bit in his scar but not believing that such a soul bit makes the scar a Horcrux or requires Harry to sacrifice himself, leaving no one with "the power to vanquish the Dark Lord" since the Chosen One would be dead From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jul 11 21:19:20 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:19:20 -0000 Subject: Final thoughts on Harry surviving.... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171588 Sadly, JKR did not synchronise her calendar with Bloomsbury and myself with the result that I shall find myself returning by steamer from the Isles of Scilly on 21st July. Unfortunately, the 28 miles or so which separate the Isles from the very south-western tip of England will render me incommunicado in terms of the net and there isn't a half decent newsagents to carry DH ? even if they were offloaded from the steamer in time. Hence I shall not be able to dip into my DH copy until at least the afternoon of the 22nd. So, from tomorrow (Thursday), I shall be surgically amputated from the group. I shall miss the mounting frenzy as members try to predict what will happen and increasingly wild and wacky theories begin to appear on the board: Harry is a Horcrux; oh no, he isn't; Voldemort drinks Carling Black Label; is Margaret Thatcher a closet DE? and so on .. :-) Seriously, I want to express my views probably for the last time before all our questions are answered ? they will be won't they? :-) - on my belief and hope that Harry will survive, admittedly a topic on which I have previously expounded. I believe that if JKR kills Harry, it will send the wrong messages to many of the younger readers of the books. In the UK at least, one result of the books has been an explosion in the number of boys reading; they had been notoriously unwilling to sit with a book until PS and its successors appeared. As a result, many boys look to Harry as a role model, particularly those who had a low self-esteem. You see, Harry did not fit the requirements for a role model or poster boy at the beginning. He is described as "small and skinny with brilliant green eyes .. He wore round glasses " (COS "The Worst Birthday" p.9 UK edition). Hardly Superman material. I have always felt that I can identify with him because I was similar in my teens: wimpy, geeky, not very athletic or physically well-developed. But as his fame has grown and we have seen him take on the various challenges in the books, boys like that have felt that they can imagine finding fame and overcoming obstacles. It doesn't matter if they wear glasses. It doesn't matter if they're not strong or fast runners. They now have a poster boy. So, what happens if Harry dies? To all these fans, their dreams and fantasies are blown away in a moment and they are back in the unforgiving real world. This also aligns itself with the fact that Harry is young. One or two contributors recently have drawn parallels with Frodo in LOTR. But the comparisons are not overwhelming. I believe that a number of people who say that are really seeing Elijah Wood and not Frodo. When he set out on the quest of the Ring, Frodo was 50 years old. He had experienced a pleasant life, had had adventures with this friends and had generally nothing to really to complain about. Also, after his return from Mordor, despite his continuing bouts of ill-health, he remained in Hobbiton for almost two years before going to the Grey Havens. There are too many true stories of young men who went off ? in the First World War for example ? and lost their lives. In the UK, something like fifteen teenagers have been stabbed or shot this year and have been lost pointlessly to their families. Harry has not had the length of life of Frodo. His time has been turbulent; he has been physically ill-treated, pursued by those who desire his death, misunderstood by the wizarding world because of press campaigns. He deserves more then the First World War young soldier or the youngster killed in street violence because he is the hero of a story. Being the creation of his author, she has the power to grant him a happy resolution of his problems ? what Tolkien termed the "eucatastrophe". I hope she will. If my views prove to be wrong and Harry does not live, I shall feel greatly disappointed and saddened because my "willing suspension of disbelief" has been wrecked. I shall not however follow the example of one of our members and despatch my books to the shredder. I shall read them again but I also shall seek out and read some decent fan fiction where my wishes are granted! See you after the closure. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Jul 11 22:37:02 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:37:02 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171589 > Dungrollin: > But I think you're right, that there has to be a reason for his > unhappiness, and his inability (or lack of desire) to forge > friendships. Whether Snape's ESE, OFH or DDM ? I doubt that JKR's > going to leave it as simple as "some people are just horrible", but > how forcefully she wants to make a point I don't know. > It could be the same miserable despair which drove him away from > Voldemort and back to DD, love of Lily, or the death of Regulus or > Snape's (hypothetical) wife and son. Or it could be a mixture of > influences on his life, horrible childhood, bullying at school, > always the outsider, saw horrific things as a DE, etc. Or, if she > really wants to drive home a point, there could be a magical reason > for his unsociable demeanour and (hypothetical) inability to love, > for example the result of failing to repay a life debt. Jen: I'll be very disappointed if we don't get an illuminating backstory for Snape like we did for Sirius. JKR doesn't spend much time on any one of the adults (except Voldemort), yet she took care to develop Sirius and the Blacks; I expect Snape - and the Princes to a much lesser extent - to have a short spotlight on them in DH. (Dumbledore is the only other adult I'm expecting JKR to spend much time on, meaning he, Snape and Regulus/Sirius/Blacks will all by vying for the coveted adult page-time. Sigh - it's never enough for me!) As to what led to his isolated life, I'm guessing Snape was influenced by multiple situations: His family life and whatever secrets might be revealed that lead to Snape arriving at Hogwarts already a loner and someone who, unlike a Neville, wasn't able to forge bonds with people who might have helped and supported him. Then there's the emphasis on Snape's emotions, wearing his heart on his sleeve and allowing others to continually stoke his anger and hatred. It appears he had valid reasons to feel those things, but if a person doesn't have any support from others then it can be difficult to put strong emotions into perspective. Dungrollin: > Part of the reason I don't feel a need to see Snape punished is > that I think he's already been suffering for a long time, and > horrible though he certainly is, in an odd way I think he's doing > his best. I might be wrong, but I don't think JKR has ever used > the word `happy' in connection with Snape. There's the grim > pleasure he gets from winding Harry up, and humiliating Neville, > but he's never described as happy. Even Tom Riddle has wild > happiness on his face when he sees Hepzibah's treasures, but not > Snape, never Snape. Jen: Insightful paragraph here, Dung. There are times the Snape character makes me boil, especially when he appears to be using his position as an adult and authority figure (with Dumbledore's permission by omission if nothing else) over those in lesser positions by age, circumstance or power. It feels like injustice to me and not something others should have to tolerate. However, there's always the truism we can't escape ourselves! Snape is no different; he has to live inside his mind with all those thoughts of the past and feelings of anger, hatred and whatever else sours inside him. Sometimes a tormented mind IS the worst punishment. And in a book with creatures like Dementors, who guard not with physical weapons but the weapon of leaving a person with only the miserable parts of their lives, then JKR could be saying a person left dwelling on only his worst memories *has* been punished. > Dungrollin: > It's worth noting that DD believes this too, throughout OotP while > he wants Harry to learn Occlumency, and as others have noticed, in > HBP DD doesn't seem to be encouraging Harry to let go of his hate. Jen: It's true Dumbledore believes Harry needs to learn the tool of Occlumency. He doesn't think of it as the "power the Dark Lord knows not", not the ultimate power that will cause Voldemort to fail as Snape seems to view Occlumency. Or rather, what Occlumency *represents* to Snape imo - a mechanism to shut off painful feelings and a way to prevent anyone from having power over you. You know, I did think of a plot purpose if JKR was surprised someone thought Snape could fall in love: If his ability to love is damaged, he's not protected from Voldemort should his Occlumency fail. I'm pretty sure that fits in with the idea Dumbledore expressed, that the ability to love is the "only protection that can possibly work against the lure of power like Voldemort's!" It doesn't protect a person from pain or death, but the ability to love is one power Voldemort can't penetrate. Dung: > Anyway, I think that the way she handled DD explaining that Harry's > ability to love has so far protected him from going down the wrong > path was done well, and I have high hopes that we'll see her show > how Harry's ability to love (in general) gives him the edge over > Voldy without it having to be love in any way directed *towards* > Voldemort. Jen: Like you, I've always intepreted that passage as Dumbledore talking about Harry's protection and not that love will be his weapon. I hope JKR is making the point everyone has the ability Harry has, that he's not above anyone except in the sense of being protected by Lily's sacrifice and Dumbledore's charm - those definitely give him protection no one else has. The prophecy doesn't say Harry's power is unique but only something the Dark Lord doesn't 'know', as in 'understand' it seems, rather than a secret kept from him. Dungrollin: > I think Snape is capable of loving, I suspect that he won't let > himself until Voldemort's gone, because he's seen too often how > Voldy uses it to manipulate people (Harry's love of Sirius took him > to the DoM, Draco's love of his parents drove him on through HBP). > I quite like the idea that one of Voldemort's worst crimes is > turning playful and creative people like the HBP we saw through the > textbook into people like Snape, who are so afraid of love and the > power it can have over a person that they shut it down altogether. Jen: I'm pretty sure this is what JKR is trying to convey about Voldemort. One weakness for me with the series is not getting the full picture of just how fearsome LV is meant to be, how evil and manipulative he is that he's capable of forcing people to give up everything to follow him. Re: young Snape, I'm re-reading HBP and can identify with the HBP. I felt sympathy for the boy in the Pensieve scene. I don't believe Snape was always the person Harry knows as an adult. But I'm not sure how much of the other person is left or if Harry will find out if Snape dies. Jen From BrwNeil at aol.com Wed Jul 11 22:47:02 2007 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:47:02 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a Horcrux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171590 In a message dated 7/11/2007 4:56:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: >Carol, conceding that Harry *could* have a soul bit in his scar but >not believing that such a soul bit makes the scar a Horcrux or >requires Harry to sacrifice himself, leaving no one with "the power to >vanquish the Dark Lord" since the Chosen One would be dead Neil If Harry is a Horcrux, then Voldemort is really stupid. Why would you put a part of your soul in someone who you were trying to destroy and if you were so foolish, why would you continue to try and destroy the person? How many times has Voldemort tried to kill Harry in the series thus far; SS, CS, GF and OotP? Not once did he show any concern for a part of him residing in the boy. Plus, how is Harry suppose to destroy himself and then still be around to kill Voldemort. In my opinion many people are trying very hard to make the story more complicated than it is. Dumbledore and Harry listed the Horcrux items several times in HB. Neil ************************************** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From random832 at fastmail.us Wed Jul 11 23:24:12 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:24:12 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH/ Double agent's death In-Reply-To: <380-22007731144257218@earthlink.net> References: <380-22007731144257218@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4695669C.1070703@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 171591 > Magpie: > That depends on the spy. The fact that he changed allegiences does not mean > he can't be noble. He could change for noble reasons. Garbo was a double > agent in WW2. {snipped the rest of Garbo's story} I looked up this person after seeing your message - did you know that he had a fictitious network of 27 "spies" supposedly working under him? Anyway, the reason I replied is... Garbo's German codename was "Arabel". I'll let you all ponder that. From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Wed Jul 11 23:47:32 2007 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:47:32 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Movie Discussion Not Allowed on Main Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171592 Greetings from Hexquarters! Please remember that discussion of the HP movies at the Main HPfGU list is not permitted, as per our posting guidelines: "Posts that discuss the movies should go to HPFGU-Movie, including posts that use the movies to make a point about the books or that use the movies as a jumping-off point for canon discussion." [Section 2.2 of the HFB] If you wish to post about the films, even if you are using them as support for a book-related point, please direct your post to the Movie list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie When unmoderated members submit off-topic posts, such as in movie-related threads, it is especially frustrating to moderated members who find their similar posts rejected by elves. We count on our longer-term members to serve as role models for newbies and thank you in advance for your assistance. Thanks! The List Elves From celizwh at intergate.com Wed Jul 11 23:51:40 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:51:40 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171593 Jen: > You know, I did think of a plot purpose if JKR was > surprised someone thought Snape could fall in love: houyhnhnm: Rowling may have said something about Snape being unable to fall in love, though it doesn't ring any bell with me. The quote I am familiar with is: JKR: Yeah? Who on earth would want Snape in love with them, that is a very horrible idea. Erm ... Who would want Snape in love with them is quite different from Snape himself being unable to fall in love. It makes me wonder if the vampire theory may have been close to the mark in essentials, if wrong in specifics. What would make *no one* want Snape to be in love with them. It can't be that he turns out to be bad because some fans would still find him attractive and she very well knows it. I think it's got to be something creepy; something that would turn *anyone* off. If Snape is not a vampire, maybe he is something else that is not quite human. I can't think what it would be, but it would have to be yucky. A human hooking up with a giant is a little risque. A human and a goblin is downright kinky, IMO, but both of these pairings are considered fairly normal in the WW. What would Snape have to be to be beyond the pale? houyhnhnm, who doesn't *want* this to be the case but is bracing herself for psychological trauma with the read-a-thon only 10 days away. From reyakittens at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 22:52:52 2007 From: reyakittens at yahoo.com (tamuril elensar) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:52:52 -0000 Subject: Voldemort creates a replacement Horcrux for Diary? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171594 > Eddie > > Since Voldemort presumably wants 7 soul bits (6 horcruxes + 1 soul > bit in himself) and he knows the diary's horcrux was destroyed, > wouldn't he have created a horcrux to replace the diary? If not, why > not? > > Methinks Harry may have one MORE horcrux to destroy than he realizes. > At the same time, Voldemort has one FEWER horcruxes remaining than > he realizes (since the ring is destroyed). Robyn: I just reread all the books to prepare for 7. I had a thought. Perhaps Voldermort never made the 6th horcrux. Perhaps he is still waiting to kill Harry and that is why Snape is adamant about leaving Harry for Lord Voldermort at the end of book 6. If that is the case, Harry might only have 3 more to find (well 4 considering he still has to find the real locket) From jenni.merrifield at jamm.com Thu Jul 12 00:04:08 2007 From: jenni.merrifield at jamm.com (Jenni Merrifield) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:04:08 -0700 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: <0755CA1B7D0C9A4B81F4AA2D9178012C02B3F1@zeus.rsmnetworks.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171595 It's been a while since I've posted here, but this seemed like a good place to jump in. Who knows, I might actually get a decent score. :-D Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO, HARRY LIVES AT THE END OF THE STORY. HE MIGHT SACRIFICE HIMSELF NEAR THE END, BUT HE WILL NOT ACTUALL DIE (OR REMAIN DEAD) IF HE DOES. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? I'M OF TWO MINDS, BUT BOTH OPTIONS ARE BASED ON THE FACT THAT, AS THE VILLIAN IN A MYTHIC STORY, VOLDEMORT MUST ULTIMATE PAY THE FINAL PRICE. HOWEVER, IN HIS CASE, PHYSICAL DEATH MAY NOT BE THAT PRICE. *IF* SOMETHING HAPPENS THAT WOULD KILLS HIM AFTER ALL THE HORCRUXES ARE DESTROYED, HE WILL PHYSICALLY DIE AND STAY DEAD. *IF* NOTHING ACTUALLY KILLS HIM, HE WILL STILL "DIE" IN SOME OTHER, MAJOR WAY - I.E. HE COULD BE STRIPPED OF THE ABILITY TO DO MAGIC (which, even with his desire for immortality, would likely be a fate worse than death.) 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? SEVERUS SNAPE 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? A DARK MARK 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? BILL & FLEUR 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" ARGUS FILCH 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? ERNIE MACMILLAN b. Head Girl? HERMIONE GRANGER c. DADA Instructor? ABERFORTH DUMBLEDORE d. Potions Master or Mistress? HORACE SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? MINERVA MCGONNIGALL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? WITH HIMSELF MAINLY. BUT, IN THE GRANDER CONTEXT, WITH THE OotP AND THE SIDE OF GOOD 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. INSIDE VOLDEMORT b. TOM RIDDLE'S DIARY c. MARVOLO GAUNT'S RING d. SLYTHERIN'S LOCKET e. HELGA HUFFLEPUFF'S CUP f. AN AS YET UNIDENTIFIED ARTEFACT BELONGING TO ROWEENA RAVENCLAW (Best Guess: HER WAND) g. NAGINI In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS: A BAT BOGGART: JAMES POTTER, ALIVE AND WELL AND PREPARING TO CURSE HIM Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? EXPERIMENTS FOCUSED ON THE POWER OF LOVE SIMILAR TO THE EXPERIMENTS FOCUSED ON THE POWER OF TIME IN THE TIME ROOM, THE POWER OF THOUGHTS/THE MIND IN THE ROOM WITH THE SWIMMING BRAINS, ETC. E.g.: Something practical and observable showing the effect of emotional spectrum from love through to hate [*] along the lines of the practical, observable "Time Bell Jar" with the circling egg and baby bird; practical magical items related to love, friendship, desire, hate, dislike; etc. [*] I Include hate because hate and love are really just opposite ends of a single emotional spectrum. Without a sense of love one cannot have a true sense of hate because both are the passionate, emotional response to something in one's environment. Voldemort is just as incapable of really hating as he is of loving. At best he is indifferent or dismissive, at worst he reacts with a sense of unease or apprehention (in which case, he attempts to completely eliminate the cause of his emotional discomfort). Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. DEATH EATERS AND/OR VOLDEMORT WILL LAUNCH AN ATTACK ON PRIVIT DR. ONCE HARRY HAS TURNED 17 2. THE CENTAURS OF THE FORBIDDEN FOREST WILL CONCLUDE THAT NOW IS THE TIME TO SET ASIDE THEIR NEUTRAL STANCE AND WILL THROW THEIR SUPPORT AGAINST VOLDEMORT 3. GRAWP WILL PLAY A KEY ROLL IN THE DH STORYLINE (Most Likely: ENCOURAGING AT LEAST SOME OF THE GIANTS TO JOIN IN AGAINST VOLDEMORT) 4. REMUS LUPIN WILL KICK SOME SERIUS FENRIS GREYBACK BUTT 5. NEVILLE LONGBOTTOM WILL AVENGE HIS PARENTS BY HAVING A HAND (IF NOT THE MAIN ROLE) IN THE FINAL DEFEAT OF BELATRIX BLACK LESTRANGE (and possibly: IN THE FINAL DEFEAT OF RUDOLPHUS AND RABASTAN LESTRANGE, who also tortured his parents) jenni merrifield -- jenni.merrifield at jamm.com ~~~~~ Designing to requirements And walking on water Are easy if both are frozen. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bgrugin at yahoo.com Wed Jul 11 23:35:38 2007 From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:35:38 -0000 Subject: Final thoughts on Harry surviving.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171596 "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > I believe that if JKR kills Harry, it will send the wrong messages to many of the younger readers of the books. In the UK at least, one > result of the books has been an explosion in the number of boys > reading; they had been notoriously unwilling to sit with a book > until PS and its successors appeared. As a result, many boys look > to Harry as a role model, particularly those who had a low self- esteem. They now have a poster boy. So, what happens if Harry dies? To all these fans, their dreams and fantasies are blown away in a moment and > they are back in the unforgiving real world. MusicalBetsy here: I understand exactly how you feel, Geoff. In the US it has been the same - many more boys AND girls are reading than before, and it's been great to have a role model like Harry. However, JKR has had this story planned for many years, and I just don't see her changing it because more children are reading and because it might have a negative impact on their views of Harry as a role model. Yes, it would be great if this fact would sway her decision into letting Harry live, but I really don't think any of this matters to her. It's her story, and she's said many times that she's going to tell it her way. Now, that being said, that doesn't mean I believe Harry will die - I sure hope not!! To be honest, I would be really devastated. We all know that she chose to give one character a reprieve that wasn't originally planned - but I would bet just about anything that the character was NOT Harry (yes, I'll be putting more than my foot in my mouth when I'm proved wrong!). Well, I guess we'll all see in just a little over a week...ooh, the waiting is killing me!! MusicalBetsy, whose town has declared July 21 "Harry Potter Day" - so cool! From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 00:46:51 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 00:46:51 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171597 > Jen: > There are times the Snape character makes me boil, especially > when he appears to be using his position as an adult and > authority figure (with Dumbledore's > permission by omission > if nothing else) over those in lesser positions by age, > circumstance or power. It feels like injustice to me and > not something others should have to tolerate. However, > there's always the truism we can't escape ourselves! Snape > is no different; he has to live inside his mind with all > those thoughts of the past and feelings of anger, hatred > and whatever else sours inside him. Sometimes a tormented > mind IS the worst punishment. And in a book with creatures > like Dementors, who guard not with physical weapons but the > weapon of leaving a person with only the miserable parts of > their lives, then JKR could be saying a person left dwelling > on only his worst memories *has* been punished. Jim: One of the major points in the story is that it is our choices who determine who we are. Whatever Snape has been through, he made his choices. He was forgiven by Dumbledore but it doesn't appear that he truly changed. He is still a petty bully. He never grew up. It doesn't matter what side he is on, he is still a loathsome character. The Order only trusts him because Dumbledore says to trust him. We are told that he sent word to the Order about Harry and friends going to the ministry. Considering it took them a long time to get there, it seems to me that the Order should have been there waiting for them not arriving after they've been there a while. I don't believe he was ever a good guy and I hope that his death is slow and painful. Jim From jnferr at gmail.com Thu Jul 12 00:42:29 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:42:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a Horcrux In-Reply-To: <12156471.1184182103558.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <12156471.1184182103558.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707111742l4f994de6sd4b3bfbfa509dd88@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171598 > > Bart: > Repeating the subject: Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a horcrux. > > The major theories of how Harry might have become a Horcrux was that > Voldemort either was or was not planning to use Harry's death to create one, > and the spell went wrong, thanks to Lily's incantation. I do not believe > that Voldemort was planning to use Harry's death to create a Horcrux, nor do > I believe one could have been created by accident. montims: And yet DD says this: "However, if my calculations are correct, Voldemort was at least one Horcrux short of his goal of six when he entered your parents' house with the intention of killing you. He seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths. You would certainly have been that. He believed that in killing you, he was destroying the danger the prophecy had outlined. I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death. As we know, he failed." >From HBP, P. 473 in UK Bloomsbury version - Horcuxes chapter. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 01:01:20 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 01:01:20 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171599 > JKR: Yeah? Who on earth would want Snape in love with > them, that is a very horrible idea. Erm ... > houyhnhnm: > I > think it's got to be something creepy; something > that would turn *anyone* off. If Snape is not a > vampire, maybe he is something else that is not > quite human. I can't think what it would be, but > it would have to be yucky. A human hooking up with > a giant is a little risque. A human and a goblin > is downright kinky, IMO, but both of these pairings > are considered fairly normal in the WW. What would > Snape have to be to be beyond the pale? zgirnius: I consider this to be of *very* low probability. Snape appears human; his father, a Muggle, was human. His mother, Eileen, also appears human. So, if Snape is part something else, that something else has previously mated with a human, and his "half-breed" ancestors have also mated with his human ancestors. Also, the idea that noone would want him to love them because he is a "half-breed" of some sort does not seem like an opinion Rowling would endorse - it is rather more the sort of position Umbridge might espouse. I think the comment was a somewhat flippant remark based on Snape's personality. I, of course, and a convinced LOLLIPOPs believer...so this answer seems also a dodge of further discussion of Snape being in love with someone. And an honest one. If Snape was indeed in love with Lily Evans, it sure worked out badly for her. From sue.stanley at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 12 01:05:46 2007 From: sue.stanley at sbcglobal.net (suehpfan1) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 01:05:46 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171600 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > Jen: > > > You know, I did think of a plot purpose if JKR was > > surprised someone thought Snape could fall in love: > > houyhnhnm: > > Rowling may have said something about Snape being unable > to fall in love, though it doesn't ring any bell with me. > The quote I am familiar with is: > > JKR: Yeah? Who on earth would want Snape in love with > them, that is a very horrible idea. Erm ... > > snip I think it's got to be something creepy; something > that would turn *anyone* off. If Snape is not a > vampire, maybe he is something else that is not > quite human. I can't think what it would be, but > it would have to be yucky. A human hooking up with > a giant is a little risque. A human and a goblin > is downright kinky, IMO, but both of these pairings > are considered fairly normal in the WW. What would > Snape have to be to be beyond the pale? > > houyhnhnm, who doesn't *want* this to be the case but > is bracing herself for psychological trauma with the > read-a-thon only 10 days away. > Sue(hpfan): I agree that if no one would want Snape, it would have to be for a really terrible reason. Although, Draco doesn't have any trouble and he is just as foul, some times more foul. I wonder if her comment was to throw everyone off. He is "creepy" but I think it is too late and too cheap to make him different in some way. I think if posed the question pre-Pansy Parkinson, JKR might have said the same thing about Draco. Just because no one generally desirable wouldn't want him, doesn't mean no one would. BTW.. remember when she said Snape Doesn't have a daughter? What about a son? Sue(hpfan0 From the_myaards at netzero.net Thu Jul 12 01:57:20 2007 From: the_myaards at netzero.net (wish4puppy) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 01:57:20 -0000 Subject: Ollivander Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171601 According to a number of websites, the name Ollivander is an anagram. i.e., Ollivander = An evil lord. Has anyone thought of the fact that he could be totally the opposite? The olive branch is a symbol of peace and in Dutch "van der" means "of the." So Ollivander could be "of the peace." His disappearance from his shop is suspicious, regardless of the meaning behind his name. wish4puppy From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 12 02:51:40 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 02:51:40 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171602 zigurnius wrote: > > I think the comment was a somewhat flippant remark based on Snape's > personality. I, of course, and a convinced LOLLIPOPs believer...so > this answer seems also a dodge of further discussion of Snape being > in love with someone. And an honest one. If Snape was indeed in love > with Lily Evans, it sure worked out badly for her. > Julie: I agree that it was a flippant remark on JKR's part. Just as she calls him horrible, and says "you wouldn't want to think he's too nice," she simply doesn't want to give away too much about the character. Remember, she's always known that Snape would be the one killing Dumbledore in HBP, and that 6th book would end with the whole of the WW (and many readers) seeing Snape as ESE. Whether Snape really is that bad, or whether he turns out to be DDM, she has to maintain as a negative an impression about him as possible to prepare for his betrayal scene (real or apparent) in HBP. That said, I'm not certain about Snape being in love with Lily, but I do think love played a part in his defection from Voldemort, as reflected in his "fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves..." speech. Lily, Narcissa, Regulus (not sure JKR would buck the establishment by featuring a gay couple, but I'd like to see her do so), or some other unknown love (Florence, anyone?), I'm not sure the identity matters that much. (And Snape could-and apparently-did have some sort of relationship/contact with Lily without it being based on romantic love.) Sue wrote: Just because no one generally desirable wouldn't want him, doesn't mean no one would. BTW.. remember when she said Snape Doesn't have a daughter? What about a son? Julie: I've always found that a rather interesting answer to the question posed ("Is Luna Lovegood Snape's daughter?") Saying Snape doesn't have a daughter could just have been a very direct way of answering the question, rather than the more likely answer to pop out of JKR's mouth (to me, anyway), "No, Snape doesn't have any children! Do you think I would do that to a child?!" Or something equally pithy. So a son is not definitively ruled out, but neither do we have any direct evidence that a son of Snape does or did exist. Julie, who thinks it'd be great if there was or had been a son, but figures it's a bit of a long shot. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 02:52:20 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 02:52:20 -0000 Subject: Ollivander In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171603 wish4puppy wrote: > > According to a number of websites, the name Ollivander is an anagram. i.e., Ollivander = An evil lord. > > Has anyone thought of the fact that he could be totally the opposite? > > The olive branch is a symbol of peace and in Dutch "van der" means "of the." So Ollivander could be "of the peace." > > His disappearance from his shop is suspicious, regardless of the meaning behind his name. Carol responds: I think the only significant anagram in the series is "I am Lord Voldemort." The etymology of a character's name, I agree, is more likely to provide a clue to his character traits and/or loyalties. I agree with you that "Olliv" suggests Olive, and we might want to check into the properties and associations of olive wood (above and beyond the proverbial olive branch). But I think "vander" relates to "wand" (appropriate given his profession): "Wand" is Middle English for "slender stick" and comes from Old Norse "vondr" (same meaning). Essentially, Ollivander means "olive wand." That being the case, I'm pretty sure he's a good guy, perhaps one of Dumbledore's "useful spies." We know that he informed DD when each of the wands containing a Fawkes feather was sold. Quite likely, he sent other messages as well. Carol, hoping that Ollivander is alive and well and related to Luna, whose silvery eyes resemble his [Side note to Neil in the Harry is not a Horcrux thread: If you go upthread and read my post a little more carefully, you'll find that I agree with most of your points. I was arguing that neither Harry nor his scar is a Horcrux. I agree that it would be stupid to make the boy he's trying to kill into a Horcrux and probably impossible to create a Horcrux accidentally. I only conceded that a soul bit *might* have accidentally entered Harry's cut, giving him some of Voldemort's powers, but *if* that's what happened, it didn't make him a Horcrux. Most of the people who *do* think that Harry's scar is a Horcrux--and I am not one of them--think that it became one accidentally. *I* think that an encasing spell is required to create a Horcrux, making an accidental Horcrux impossible. As for deliberately making Harry a Horcrux, not even Voldemort would be that stupid. C.] From aorta47 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 02:29:57 2007 From: aorta47 at yahoo.com (aorta47) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 02:29:57 -0000 Subject: Alternate Titles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171604 Harry Potter: Egg Harry Potter: Enter the Chamber Harry Potter: Escape from Azkaban Harry Potter: Enemy at the Gate Harry Potter: Exile Harry Potter: End of Time Harry Potter: Exit Planet Horcrux Mark From celizwh at intergate.com Thu Jul 12 03:46:03 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 03:46:03 -0000 Subject: Ollivander In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171605 wish4puppy: > According to a number of websites, the name Ollivander > is an anagram. i.e., Ollivander = An evil lord. > Has anyone thought of the fact that he could be > totally the opposite? > The olive branch is a symbol of peace and in Dutch > "van der" means "of the." So Ollivander could be > "of the peace." > His disappearance from his shop is suspicious, > regardless of the meaning behind his name. houyhnhnm: The nine muses don't offer any etymology for Ollivander. According to YeahBaby.com: "meaning of the boy?s name Ollivander: from Vander, protector of mankind" justmommies.com doesn't have /Ollivander/ but does give the meaning for /Oliver/ as "kind one; olive tree, peace". So, I think you are mainly right. From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Jul 12 04:03:54 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:03:54 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707112103j53419191med40f1cec55f20bc@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171606 Mikey RPh: I have come to the conclusion after reading many of these posts that only I and JKR have ever read any spy novels/stories, particularly ones involving the lives of double agents (guess who). Lynda: Of course I've read spy novels! (someone hasn't?--Well maybe not--they were plentiful in my household when I was growing up though) and more than a few PI/mystery novels too. Which is why, upon reading a certain key chapter in HBP I got up and danced around the house yelling "Frame up! Its a frame up!" nearly giving my roommie a heart attack although after reading the same chapter herself, she agreed. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 04:06:44 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:06:44 -0000 Subject: Ollivander In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171607 > wish4puppy: > > The olive branch is a symbol of peace and in Dutch > > "van der" means "of the." So Ollivander could be > > "of the peace." > Our Intelligent Horse Friend (houyhnhnm): > According to YeahBaby.com: "meaning of the boy?s name Ollivander: > from Vander, protector of mankind" justmommies.com doesn't > have / Ollivander / but does give the meaning for /Oliver/ > as kind one; olive tree, peace". Goddlefrood: I had a little thought on this, I've dragged it out of the archive and present it again. (From - 151516) My position on this is that it is an amalgam of 'OL'ynthus, 'LIV'y and lys'ANDER'. Olynthus was the site of a siege by the Spartans in 382 B. C. Titus Livy mentioned this in his histories and Lysander was one of the legendary kings of Sparta. Oh, something I failed to mention then, but which I'm sure you all know, is that JKR studied classics. 9 days from now I will know what happened to Mr. Ollivander and get back to you on that ;-) From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 04:26:37 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:26:37 -0000 Subject: JKR's crying at the end of writing DH WAS: Re: Harry dies?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171608 "Troy Bogdan" wrote > > As for her crying, It is because she had to kill off two characters > that she originally hadn't intended to kill, and that made her "howl." > Kristin: But, that doesn't seem right, because she said "it had been planned for so long". I keep wanting to believe it's Hagrid she's howling over, because I know he's a favorite of hers, and frankly, his death wouldn't cause me that much grief. Now Lisa: :::waves::: I haven't posted in a while, but my anticipation of DH is just killing me, I have to jump in here! The "howling" that JKR referenced was done after she had finished a chapter near the end of the book. She didn't actually say she was howling because she killed anyone off -- in fact, in context, she was referencing the emotions that she was feeling upon completing the book. While I'm certain that several of our favorite characters are going to die, and may even die within the chapter she referenced, I think she "howled" in emotional release of being so near the end of what she's been doing for 17 years. But I have to agree with Kristin as well -- Hagrid's a goner. :0( JMO! ;0) Lisa From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 04:38:38 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:38:38 -0000 Subject: I think Kreacher might play a BIG roll in the last book (spoiler on the movie??) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171609 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tandra" wrote: Has anyone else who's seen the movie gotten this feeling too? Now Lisa: You betcha! My guess is that there's a horcrux somewhere in Grimmauld Place, and Kreacher knows where it is, even if not WHAT it is ... though few consider house-elves to be a threat,so anything could've been said in front of him, really. Lisa From phoenixtears at fuse.net Thu Jul 12 04:39:56 2007 From: phoenixtears at fuse.net (phoenixmum) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:39:56 -0000 Subject: Ultimate Predictions contest (hope I'm doing this correctly) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171610 My Predictions: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No, but he will go through the Veil of Death to remove the piece of Voldemort's soul from him, "dying" in a way; since he has two "souls" in him, he can give up one and still be alive. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark on his arm 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Araella Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? New character; another former colleague of Dumbledore d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? For revenge against Voldemort because he killed the women he loved; and to Dumbledore because AD's goal is the defeat of LV. Snape sees AD's plan as his best chance for revenge against LV. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Hufflepuff's cup e. something of Ravenclaw's (possibly the wand in Ollivander's shop window) f. something of Gryffindor's (a clue to this will be found in Godric's Hollow) g. the snake, Nagini h. a piece in Harry (by the scar); Voldemort was not aware of this piece before he made the other seven horcruxes. i. Voldemort still has a piece of soul in his body; he must have to still be "alive;" but this piece cannot be killed until all other pieces are destroyed, including the piece in Harry. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus = snake; boggert is Lord Voldemort realizing Snape's duplicity Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Room of Love, because it is the most powerful and dangerous; Hary will gain access to it through a colleague of his mother, who was an Unspeakable; there Harry will find out information essential to making the love charm that will protect him in the final confrontation with Voldemort. Additional Predictions: 1) Obsessive love will be a key component of defeating Voldemort: This is why Slughorn talks about the power of obsessive love in HBP. Snape is committed to the downfall of Voldemort because of Snape's obsessive love of a woman that Voldemort killed, probably Lily Potter. (This is why Voldemort says to Lily that she should step aside, and tells Harry that his mother did not need to die: Voldemort promised Snape that he would not kill Lily, since it was only her son that Voldemort needed to kill.) Snape hates Harry because he looks like James Potter, who "took" Lily's love, and because Harry is a constant reminder that Snape "lost" the chance to have love. When Bertha Jorkins saw someone kissing behind the greenhouse, it was Snape kissing (or trying to kiss) the woman he loved, Lily or an unknown character. Also, the reason that the memory Harry observes from the pensive is "Snape's worst memory," is because in his embarrassment over James' jinxes, he struck out at Lily when she was trying to help him, thus ruining any chance he might have had for having a relationship with her. (He never had a chance, but Snape doesn't know this.) 2) Dumbledore's ironclad reason for trusting Snape is that Snape made an unbreakable vow to protect the child of the prophecy (Harry) with his life. 3) Dumbledore will have left his pensive and some bottled memories for Harry, and/or will provide information through his portrait. One piece of information will be how he destroyed the ring horcrux and blackened his hand. This information will help Harry destroy other Horcruxes. 4) -Because Harry saved Wormtail's life, Wormtail will do something at the end that will help Harry. 5) There will be a complex spell that utilizes others love for Harry and his for them in creating some form of protection to be used in the final confrontation with Voldemort. -Harry will learn to do silent magic. This combined with his ability to do wandless magic, and his ability to make quick decisions and do actions without thinking will allow him to do something unexpected to defeat Voldemort. -Bill will provide a charm to break some protection guarding one of the Horcruxes; Fred and George will provide items from their joke shop that will prove helpful in the quest for the Horcruxes and the confrontation with Voldemort; Charlie will provide a dragon, probably Norbert, which will be used in the search for the horcruxes. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Jul 12 05:06:55 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:06:55 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171611 > houyhnhnm: > > Rowling may have said something about Snape being unable to fall in > love, though it doesn't ring any bell with me. The quote I am > familiar with is: > JKR: Yeah? Who on earth would want Snape in love with them, that is > a very horrible idea. Erm ... > Who would want Snape in love with them is quite different from > Snape himself being unable to fall in love. > Jen: JKR didn't say Snape was unable to fall in love, no. My original post was an idea about why JKR expressed feeling 'stunned' at the question: "Er - one of our connec-... one of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love?" When I listened to the audio as opposed to reading the quote, JKR's answer to the question, "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," struck me as possibly surprise to hear Snape characterized as someone who might be interested in and capable of falling in love during the series. (I've personally not seen much to indicate he's motivated by love; wearing his heart on his sleeve could mean any emotion shown too freely.) I realize the odds-on favorite intepretation for the quote is Snape loved Lily, that JKR was expressing surprise someone picked up on this plotline as quickly as POA. I've always thought that was the explanation until hearing the audio, when JKR's tone and the way she organized her words made me wonder if she was addressing the more nebulous idea of Snape falling in love rather than suggesting a specific plot of Snape loving someone would be revealed in book 7. Jen From PenapartElf at aol.com Thu Jul 12 05:26:50 2007 From: PenapartElf at aol.com (penapart_elf) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:26:50 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: 9 days to go - imagine If You Had To Wait! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171612 Support Harry Potter in Braille With bated breath, we are awaiting the publication of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Now that the countdown has shrunk to a single digit, imagine... If You Had To Wait! Blind bookworms who prefer Braille have historically suffered such a sorry fate. Only a tiny percentage of books available in print are ever made into Braille and usually the publication takes place long after the ink-and-paper edition sees the light of day. Aside from the wait, these books are really expensive: each copy of HP7 in Braille costs $65 to make. But the HP fans who read Braille are extremely lucky because Jo and Scholastic Press have done their part so that the National Braille Press's edition of HP7 will magically be ready on the same day as the print edition. No less magical is the non-profit publisher, NBP's commitment to match the typical pre-sale and retail prices. NBP cannot do this alone and need help making HP7 this accessible. A grand total of $53k's worth of help. With this appeal to the HPfGU community, your List Elves are supporting the sponsorship drive at http://firstgiving.com/hp7 Imagine if you had to wait for weeks to find out if Snape is Dumbledore's Man, Voldemort's Faithful Servant, or on no one's side but his own?! Imagine trying to avoid the spoilers because your friends had access and you didn't? Can you spare a few knuts (nay, a few galleons!) to help make the conclusion to Harry's saga more accessible to fellow fans? Because the NBP is a section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, donations are tax deductible in the US to the full extent of the law and you may be eligible for a matching grant from your employer. Please consult your HR dept. to find out if you can pseudo- alchemically turn your sickles into galleons for NBP. Please join us in support of this cause - many thanks! Petra, aka Penapart Elf, on behalf of the List Elves a n :) PS: If you have questions please email the list elves at HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com (minus that extra space). If you would like to discuss this, please do so at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP7 or Feedback rather than onlist at Main. An intro from the National Braille Press: National Braille Press's guiding purposes are to (1) to promote literacy for blind children and (2) to provide braille books and information to equip blind readers of all ages for success in school, work and life. Since 1927, the year we were founded, we have been publishing books and educational materials for both children and adults, we produce braille books and magazines for the Library of Congress, and we act as advocates for the necessity of braille literacy. www.nbp.org www.braille.com From ccairns2005 at yahoo.ie Thu Jul 12 08:55:34 2007 From: ccairns2005 at yahoo.ie (charlie cairns) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:55:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Importance of Pettigrew? Message-ID: <344769.44117.qm@web26305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171613 As an inactive member of this group I've probably missed this, but has there been discussion on the importance of Pettigrew's silver hand? And his debt to Harry? Charlie From jnferr at gmail.com Thu Jul 12 11:23:21 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 06:23:21 -0500 Subject: Rosmerta Message-ID: <8ee758b40707120423w7f627af5wa450dde34bf3b6e0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171614 montims: OK - I have finished rereading HBP, and was struck by the fact that towards the end of the book, when they see the Dark Mark over Hogwarts and DD asks Rosmerta if they could borrow a couple of brooms, she makes as if to run in to get them. DD says no need, and Harry accio's them. So my conclusion and prediction is that Rosmerta is a squib, and she's the one who performs magic late in life (maybe provoked by anger at having been Imperiused, and having potentially caused such harm with the bottle and the necklace?) And now I will start bowing out - I will be going to see OotP on Saturday at the IMAX, and picking up DH at midnight the following Saturday at the local B&N... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 12 13:34:36 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 13:34:36 -0000 Subject: Importance of Pettigrew? In-Reply-To: <344769.44117.qm@web26305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171615 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, charlie cairns wrote: > > As an inactive member of this group I've probably missed this, but > has there been discussion on the importance of Pettigrew's silver > hand? And his debt to Harry? > Oh, I am sure there have been many if you search on them. Both items are so striking that most of us expect them to be significant. As usual I doubt that any two of us agree on what they mean. Someone on this list (she knows who she is) prodded me into buying Christopher Tolkien's history of the LotR. As I started my final re-read of Harry Potter way, way too early I've had time to dig into the history and indeed it looks like I will have time to finish that and the Jean Shepherd book my wife wants me to read before DH comes out. The relevance here is that I've recently come to the last but one appearances of Saruman and that naturally reminds me of the last one. Wormtongue kills his master, the dark wizard Saruman. Wormtail kills his master, the dark wizard Voldemort? Maybe it isn't as straightforward as art imitating art but like many I expect Peter to play a significant role in Voldemort's demise. If Harry manages to defeat Voldemort without tarnishing his soul by killing him, as so many here hope, then either Snape or Pettigrew seem the most likely to do the deed in his stead. Ken From Adam.Chase at charter.net Thu Jul 12 12:12:16 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (Adam Chase) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:12:16 -0400 Subject: is Dumbledore really dead? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46961AA0.80402@Charter.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171616 Frankly I'm not really sure he is. (please forgive me if these suggestions were made before, I finally organized my thoughts and if I don't type it and send it I'll never manage it) To begin with when Rowling was asked if Dumbledore would be back her response was something to the effect of "he will not be another Gandalf" (not sure if that is the wording). This is like how she dodged the question about what Harry would do after he got out of school and she said "Who says he'll finish school?" There are many possible ways that Dumbledore could still be alive, or somehow return from the dead. I have two theories about what could have happened. The first is that Snape did not actually cast the killing curse, or cast it without the required focus. In book 4 the fake Moody tells the 4th years that they could point their wands and cast the spell at him and he wouldn't even receive a nosebleed. So if Snape were to have omitted the focus needed the spell would have failed to kill him. For those of you who wish to retort with "what about the fall from the tower" don't forget that Dumbledore is a powerful wizard, and I believe he is capable of performing some decent magic without his wand so he could have used a spell to cushion his fall. Snape also appears to be a master of non-verbal spells, so he could have said Avada Kadavra while using a non-verbal spell that could imitate all of the visible effects of the killing curse. My second theory is that Dumbledore is an animagus. I know this is a very far fetched theory but this thought has been bouncing in my skull since I first read book 6. I think that Dumbledore might be able to transform into a phoenix. Such a transformation would coincide with his other connections: his pet phoenix Fawkes and then there is his patronus, the description of it from book 4 makes me believe it is also a phoenix. Some of the other signs that point to this thought include Dumbledore's flight from the minister and his entourage in book 5, he grabbed onto Fawkes' tail and they both disappeared in a burst of fire. The way he vanished makes me wonder if another person could do that or if there was something special about Dumbledore that allowed him to do it. The biggest clue I believe is towards the end when Dumbledore's tomb was created by being engulfed in flames and Harry thought he saw a phoenix fly from it. For those who say that it was most likely Fawkes I will respond with what Harry concluded. When the phoenix lament ended Harry came to the conclusion that Fawkes had left Hogwarts for good. I hope to hear responses from everyone for and against my opinions. I wanted to get this out before the last book came out and everyone submits messages about what really ticked them off about the book. drax_orion From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 12 14:00:57 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:00:57 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Alternate Titles Message-ID: <6733603.1184248857691.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171617 From: aorta47 >Harry Potter: Egg >Harry Potter: Enter the Chamber >Harry Potter: Escape from Azkaban >Harry Potter: Enemy at the Gate >Harry Potter: Exile >Harry Potter: End of Time >Harry Potter: Exit Planet Horcrux Bart: If the series was published in the 1950's: Harry Potter and the Magic School Harry Potter and the Magic Room Harry Potter and the Magic Fugitive Harry Potter and the Magic Tournament Harry Potter and the Magic Conspiracy Harry Potter and the Magic Textbook Harry Potter and the Magic Showdown If the series was published in the 1960's: Harry Potter Gets Stoned Harry Potter: Stoned, Again. Harry Potter: Getting Demented Harry Potter Plays Games Harry Potter: Officially Insane Harry Potter's Experiments with Potions Harry Potter Meets the Dark Side Bart From percafluvia at gmx.net Thu Jul 12 14:18:36 2007 From: percafluvia at gmx.net (laperchette) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 14:18:36 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171618 > > Sue wrote: > Just because no one generally desirable wouldn't want him, doesn't > mean no one would. BTW.. remember when she said Snape Doesn't have > a daughter? What about a son? > > Julie: > I've always found that a rather interesting answer to the > question posed ("Is Luna Lovegood Snape's daughter?") Saying > Snape doesn't have a daughter could just have been a very > direct way of answering the question, rather than the more > likely answer to pop out of JKR's mouth (to me, anyway), "No, > Snape doesn't have any children! Do you think I would do > that to a child?!" Or something equally pithy. So a son is > not definitively ruled out, but neither do we have any > direct evidence that a son of Snape does or did exist. laperchette: I think this was a very odd answer! As if she wanted to create rumors and suspicions - perhaps she loves it too much to read fan-theories? About the questions. Was there ever once this crazy idea going around that Luna could be related to Snape? There's nothing absolutly nothing, which would point in this direction! Not the looks, not the character, not the house, not the skills - nothing! I googled it and I couldn't find a reference older than Rowlings statement. Was she delibaretly giving a red herring? One no one asked her this question? But why in this direction? Or was there some crazy kid who hadn't read any Potter-book asking this? It's hardly believable... Have you any ideas? From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 12 11:50:59 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:50:59 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Rosmerta In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707120423w7f627af5wa450dde34bf3b6e0@mail.gmail.com> References: <8ee758b40707120423w7f627af5wa450dde34bf3b6e0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171619 > montims: > > OK - I have finished rereading HBP, and was struck by the fact that > towards > the end of the book, when they see the Dark Mark over Hogwarts and > DD asks > Rosmerta if they could borrow a couple of brooms, she makes as if > to run in > to get them. DD says no need, and Harry accio's them. > > So my conclusion and prediction is that Rosmerta is a squib, and > she's the > one who performs magic late in life. Jadon: If she were a squib, would she have been able to curse Katie, even under Imperius herself? It's possible that she is muggle-born, and, like Hermione in PS, thinks in a muggle sort of way when flustered, or that she simply never learnt accio properly - Harry only masters it in GoF after special coaching by Hermione and under threat of a dragon. (Otherwise, I like your theory.) From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 15:38:40 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:38:40 -0000 Subject: is Dumbledore really dead? In-Reply-To: <46961AA0.80402@Charter.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171620 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Adam Chase wrote: > > Frankly I'm not really sure he is. Lisa: I think JKR wrote the funeral scene to hammer home that yes, Dumbledore is indeed dead. There was such an uproar over whether Sirius was dead or not (and even though she has definitively answered that he IS, there are those who still insist that he's not), I think she wanted the readers to be absolutely certain of Dumbledore's death. I think we'll see Dumbledore again, be it in his portrait, pensieve memories, etc. But dead? Yes, I do believe he's quite dead. Further, I think the phoenix shape that Harry saw arise from Dumbledore's tomb was Dumbledore's patronus, flying away with a message from Dumbledore from beyond the grave that the Order needs to still trust Snape ... and hopefully why. Lisa From Pouncevil at PeoplePC.com Thu Jul 12 15:57:56 2007 From: Pouncevil at PeoplePC.com (pouncevil) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:57:56 -0000 Subject: Spoilers?? Where are They Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171621 Is it just me or is there a lack of LOST/Missing/Found compies of the Deadly Hallows. Unlike the other books there was always leaks in some cases floods of informatin about the books. This time there are NONE. Anyone care to wade into this. Pouncevil From AntaresCheryl at aol.com Thu Jul 12 17:20:54 2007 From: AntaresCheryl at aol.com (antarestch) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:20:54 -0000 Subject: Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171622 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pouncevil" wrote: > > Is it just me or is there a lack of LOST/Missing/Found compies of the > Deadly Hallows. Unlike the other books there was always leaks in some > cases floods of informatin about the books. This time there are NONE. > Anyone care to wade into this. > > Pouncevil > Heck no! I think it's a major miracle that the plot has not been leaked and I'm really happy about it. I was really upset when the news of magical death in HBP was actually featured on the evening news weeks before the book was released. Now now one at the bookstore had better peek at the end and say anything in the store when we go to pick up our copies!! AND I don't want to have to race through it just to avoid hearing or seeing any spoilers on tv or when I sign onto AOL on my computer. Grrrrr. Cheryl Warren, Mi SAVE HARRY, SAVE THE WORLD From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 17:34:45 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:34:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <725703.81075.qm@web55701.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171623 pouncevil wrote: Is it just me or is there a lack of LOST/Missing/Found compies of the Deadly Hallows. Unlike the other books there was always leaks in some cases floods of informatin about the books. This time there are NONE. Anyone care to wade into this. Pouncevil ********************************** Chancie: That's soooo funny that you wrote that, I actually said almost that same thing yesterday! I'm TK's Minion of Spoilers, and to help keep the contest (Ultimate bragging rights....BTW if you plan to enter you must reply to the main list with your predictions as well as send your entry to tigerpatronus at yahoo.com before the dead line!!!!) fair, it's my job to keep up with what is posted and when. Well I had the same job last year, and I was CONSTANTLY finding stuff to post, this time I've had a whoping 3...and those weren't even really much, since they were things that we all pretty much assumed, and not much in the way of details. I'm also confused as to why we STILL don't have a new FAQ, excerpt, or ANYTHING from Jo... We at least had that going for us leading up to the HBP release. At least for me that made the wait easier, because I had questions to focus on... Chancie . Have A Great Day! Chancie --------------------------------- Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware protection. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 17:43:01 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:43:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <147773.70254.qm@web55703.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171624 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pouncevil" wrote: > > Is it just me or is there a lack of LOST/Missing/Found compies of the > Deadly Hallows. Unlike the other books there was always leaks in some > cases floods of informatin about the books. This time there are NONE. > Anyone care to wade into this. > > Pouncevil > Heck no! I think it's a major miracle that the plot has not been leaked and I'm really happy about it. I was really upset when the news of magical death in HBP was actually featured on the evening news weeks before the book was released. Now now one at the bookstore had better peek at the end and say anything in the store when we go to pick up our copies!! AND I don't want to have to race through it just to avoid hearing or seeing any spoilers on tv or when I sign onto AOL on my computer. Grrrrr. Cheryl Warren, Mi SAVE HARRY, SAVE THE WORLD *********************************************** Chancie: I wasn't too concerned with the "news" that told us that Dumbledore was going to die last time around. I figured it was likely to happen at some point durring the series, but I didn't nessisarily believe it when it started popping up. I like clues as to what to expect, but nothing more than that. I would really like to hear something from JK! If nothing else at least an FAQ or something! . --------------------------------- Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Pouncevil at PeoplePC.com Thu Jul 12 17:45:40 2007 From: Pouncevil at PeoplePC.com (pouncevil) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:45:40 -0000 Subject: Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antarestch" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pouncevil" wrote: > > > > Is it just me or is there a lack of LOST/Missing/Found compies of the > > Deadly Hallows. Unlike the other books there was always leaks in some > > cases floods of informatin about the books. This time there are NONE. > > Anyone care to wade into this. > > > > Pouncevil > > > > Heck no! I think it's a major miracle that the plot has not been leaked > and I'm really happy about it. I was really upset when the news of > magical death in HBP was actually featured on the evening news weeks > before the book was released. > > Now now one at the bookstore had better peek at the end and say > anything in the store when we go to pick up our copies!! AND I don't > want to have to race through it just to avoid hearing or seeing any > spoilers on tv or when I sign onto AOL on my computer. > > Grrrrr. > Cheryl > Warren, Mi > SAVE HARRY, SAVE THE WORLD > I agree that the lack of spoiler only makes me want to get the book. I is just odd that no one has tried to spoil the resleas. Pouncevil From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 17:52:58 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:52:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <147085.95137.qm@web30001.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171626 Cheryl wrote: Now now one at the bookstore had better peek at the end and say anything in the store when we go to pick up our copies!! AND I don't want to have to race through it just to avoid hearing or seeing any spoilers on tv or when I sign onto AOL on my computer. >> I actually remained unspoiled before the book was released last time which was a miracles beyond miracles. However, when I was waiting in the bookstore the guy first in line decided to announce really loudly to everyone in our house (they broke the store into the four houses to distribute the books) that two chapters were entitled "The White Tomb" and "The Pheonix Lament." I have never been so mad in all my life because clearly Dumbledore was dying if thier was a white tomb and a lament from Fawkes. ~Melanie --------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dwalker696 at aol.com Thu Jul 12 17:20:14 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:20:14 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171627 THANK YOU, THANK YOU: To TK for the hours you have (and undoubtedly will continue to) spend on this! Disclaimer: I haven't been reading or catching up on theories until last week when I read some of the bragging rights posts, so if my thoughts are completely bizarre, don't laugh, I actually don't intend for them to be comedic though I am sure some sound rather riddikulus. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Oh geez, I think there is evidence for both .I am going to say yes. Rather, he won't return to the living world we enjoy, but will be sharing an existence along with others who have died. Afterlife, whatever you want to call it. "After all, to the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure" (SS p297) 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Well, kind of . "We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness" (oop p814) Voldemort will not be among the living, but will be dead, but also will be in a tortured, solitary existence worse than death. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Prominent being subjective, I will say Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark ? though possibly a "fake one" Draco put on himself. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? YES b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Aberforth Dumbledore 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? NO ONE wants this job ? I believe Harry will be asked to fill in for some classes; this will also end the `curse' on the position. d. Potions Master or Mistress? New character e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Against Voldemort. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort's current body b. Diary - destroyed c. Marvolo's Ring - destroyed d. Slytherin's locket ? now in Kreacher's cupboard behind the boiler in the kitchen at 12 Grimmauld Place e. Hufflepuff's cup f. Something of Ravenclaw's, hidden in the collapsed passageway behind the mirror on the fourth floor (POA p193, and other references in later books) either a wand or a piece of jewerly, something ornamental (zero points for this lame stab at a prediction as to what the specific thing is) g. Harry's scar. Voldythingy, unable to find access to Godric Gryffindor's only known relic, finds that Harry is a descendant of GG. Putting a horcrux into an already living thing is a concept DD introduces to Harry ? I think it possible DD already suspects Harry's scar is a horcrux, bc 1. Avada Kedavra leaves no mark 2. The repetition that the scar is a connection to Voldemort is more than established, (whether it is actually evidence that supports scar=horcrux is of course just MHO, but no one can deny that scar=direct link to Voldemort) 3. By introducing the concept of Nagini, and that a living thing being a horcrux, DD could be warming up Harry to the idea that a living thing can have a horcrux inflicted upon them, and hope Harry figures it out, rather than shocking him with the information 4."I am sure that he was intending to make his final horcrux with your death" (HBP p. 506) Perhaps Voldythingy planned to kill Harry and make him the horcrux at the same time, because certainly putting a horcrux into a dead body which would then be buried in the ground certainly makes for safekeeping of the horcrux. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Bat Boggart: Voldemort discovering his allegiance to DD But I do not believe we will see either of these. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love in all of it's manifestations, examples, and powers. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. The big question JKR asks, and wonders why no one else has: Why does DD have James' invisibility cloak at the time of his (James') death. I don't know! But it certainly seems that it must be significant. The best I can do is this: DD's twin, Aberforth, has not been discussed as being wizard or squib (assuming DD's parents were wizards) and IMHO he is not a wizard, and might have needed some protection .? 2. Tom Riddle hid (or re-hid) a horcrux while possessing Ginny during the winter ? it is in the collapsed passage on the fourth floor, and part of getting into it is using the mirror Erised. 3. "The Deathly Hallows" refers to the horcruxes, which I believe Harry must only find and destroy 4 objects ? 2 already destroyed, and 1 is in Voldemort. Celtic mythology includes The Four Treasures, or The Hallows of Ireland. Those 4 relics were a stone (the black stone in Marvolo's ring?) a cauldron (Hufflepuff's cup?) a sword (Godric's sword isn't available, so use Harry?) and a spear ? a spear ? a stick - a wand? Or a spear ? a lance ?an axe? Like the bloody one in the room of requirement? (and perhaps responsible for Nick being Nearly Headless?) Of course, since the stone (ring) has already been destroyed, we have to substitute the locket 4. Vernon is going to make some greedy attempt at Harry's gold (how cool would it be if he were sucked into a vault at Gringott's and trapped? SS p76 but I don't think he actually will) or Harry's property, 12 Grimmauld Place. Petunia is going to apologize to Harry, though. 5. The way to destroy the horcruxes is to take them behind the veil in the Death Chamber. DD stuck his hand through the veil to destroy the ring, and his hand came back dead. But ? it shows that a body (or a limb attached to a body) CAN at least come back out in its corporeal (albeit dead) form ? so what is the trick Harry must learn to come back out whole AND alive? If that is possible (but I don't believe it is) the answer comes from the locked "love room" in the Dept of Mysteries . 6. I suppose Harry and Ginny will have to have "I'm off to battle Voldemort never to return so let's not die virgins" sex, but I am sure JKR will word it discreetly, even cryptically for our younger audience. Similar to how Alice Walker wrote the love scene between Celie and Shug in The Color Purple? if you are of a certain age and maturity, you get it, it you're 10, hopefully not so much. dwalker696 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 18:19:11 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:19:11 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171628 zgurnius wrote: > > I think the comment was a somewhat flippant remark based on Snape's personality. I, of course, and a convinced LOLLIPOPs believer...so this answer seems also a dodge of further discussion of Snape being in love with someone. And an honest one. If Snape was indeed in love with Lily Evans, it sure worked out badly for her. > > > > Julie: > I agree that it was a flippant remark on JKR's part. Just as she calls him horrible, and says "you wouldn't want to think he's too nice," she simply doesn't want to give away too much about the character. Remember, she's always known that Snape would be the one killing Dumbledore in HBP, and that 6th book would end with the whole of the WW (and many readers) seeing Snape as ESE. Whether Snape really is that bad, or whether he turns out to be DDM, she has to maintain as a negative an impression about him as possible to prepare for his betrayal scene (real or apparent) in HBP. > > That said, I'm not certain about Snape being in love with Lily, but I do think love played a part in his defection from Voldemort, as reflected in his "fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves..." speech. Lily, Narcissa, (Florence, anyone?), I'm not sure the identity matters that much. (And Snape could-and apparently-did have some sort of relationship/contact with Lily without it being based on romantic love.) Carol responds: I think it's time to quote the whole interview segment. Lydon: What about Snape? JKR: OK. Snape is the - er - very sadistic teacher loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. Erm .. I think it ... Children are very aware - and we ... we're kidding ourselves if we don't think that they are - that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher /does/ abuse his power. He is not a - he is not a particularly pleasant person at all. /However/, everyone should keep their eye on Snape, I'll just say that, because there's more to him than meets the eye, and you will find out part of what I'm talking about if you read book four. And no, I am not trying to drum up more sales; go to the library and get it out, I'd rather people read it. 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. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/1099-connectiontransc2.htm#p13 (Slashes in the transcript indicate italics, words emphasized by JKR in the audio interview) Carol again: I think first, that it's important to hear the whole segment, which is quite short and takes only a few seconds. http://www.accio-quote.org/audio/connection-1999/13-Snape.mp3 One thing that's important, IMO, is JKR's emphasis on "however" in the first part of her response. She seems to be making a concession--yes, he's a sadistic teacher who abuses his power--and then turning it around: *However*, everyone should keep their eye on Snape because there's more to him than meets the eye. That to me indicates that the Snape Harry sees is not the real Snape; he sees only the superficial sadism and not Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore or his constant efforts to protect Harry. As for what we learn about Snape in GoF, surely it's that he was a DE but turned spy for our side at great personal risk, a role that he returns to at the end of that book. The second important thing, IMO, is that JKR and Lydon are talking over each other in the second segment (not clear from the transcript). She seems to be simultaneously responding to his interjected remark about the redemptive pattern to Snape and the reader's question about Snape in love. Obviously the part about someone wanting Snape in love with them being a horrible idea is her attempt to evade the question, and we can interpret it any way we like (I think she just finds the idea of hook-nosed, "sadistic" Snape romantically unappealing), but IMO--and I realize that many posters disagree with me--the next part of her response relates to Lydon's "redemptive pattern" idea. that, I think, is what she's responding to when she says, addressing him as "you," "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 . . ." At that point, she returns to the Internet correspondent's question about Snape falling in love, answering it with "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." So she seems to concede the redemptive pattern, which she can't expand on because it would ruin the plot, and then she says she's stunned that someone asked the question about Snape being in love, which again relates to Book 7. Much as I hate the idea, it does sound as if he was in love with Lily, which would relate to or even cause his remorse when he found out how Voldemort interpreted the Prophecy. I don't think for a moment, however, that Voldemort would tell Lily to stand aside because Snape asked him to do so. I think that, like Cedric in GoF, she was simply in Voldemort's way. (There's a Time magazine inteview in which she describes Cedric's death in exactly that way.) Nor do I think that Lily was in any way involved in the creation of the HBP's spells or potions hints, all of which are in *his* small cramped handwriting, first seen on his DADA OWL in OoP. And it would be scarcely forgiveable if she had betrayed his trust by reading his marginal notes and passing on the nonverbal Levicorpus and its countercurse to James. FWIW, they would not have been using the NEWT Potions book for fifth-year Potions, nor do I think it likely that a Gryffindor and a Slytherin would be Potions partners or that James would have a crush on a girl who was friends with Severus. While I'm at it, I think JKR's saying that Snape is "in some ways . . . more culpable even than Voldemort, who never has [been loved" http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-3.htm means simply that Snape knows what love is, so *in some ways* he's more responsible for his misdeeds and mistakes. It certainly doesn't mean that he's more evil or that his crimes (joining the DEs, leaking the partial Prophecy, killing DD for whatever reason) are worse than Voldemort's (lying, stealing, and torturing other children as a boy, releasing the Basilisk, murdering his father and grandparents, framing his uncle for the murder, murdering Hepzibah Smith, framing Hokey for the murder, committing various other murders, creating five or six Horcruxes with some of those murders, attempting to murder a toddler, organizing the DEs and ordering them to engage in coercion, torture, and murder, including the murder of a teenage boy). Evidently, the difference is that Voldemort really believes that "there is no good and evil, only power and those to weak to seek it," while Snape, who has been loved (by his mother?) knows that good and evil exist and, for a time, willing chose evil (which, IMO, he has since rejected). Carol, agreeing that "Who would want Snape in love with them?" was a flippant remark and believing that the "redemptive pattern" is more important, or at least as important, as whether Snape was in love (with Lily or anyone else) From ithinkhard at gmail.com Thu Jul 12 18:44:12 2007 From: ithinkhard at gmail.com (Tom) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:44:12 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <0755CA1B7D0C9A4B81F4AA2D9178012C02B3F1@zeus.rsmnetworks.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171629 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Depends on what you mean by "dead"--I think he will suffer a fate worse than death: a half-life without any soul at all. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? NOT a Dark Mark, but something from Voldie 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? YES b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Aberforth Dumbledore d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonnigall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Snape 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. Riddle's diary c. The Gaunt ring d. Slytherin's locket e. Hufflepuff's cup (possibly transfigured into Tom Riddle's "service to the school" cup) f. Ravenclaw's tiara (in RoR) g. Harry's scar In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS: Fox BOGGART: Lily Potter Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Room of Love (most importantly, love separated from fear--"pure" love) Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. The "key" to opening the locked door in the DoM is a patronus (actually I suspect it will take more than one and that it will be opened by the patronuses of Snape and Harry). 2. The defeat of Voldemort will be the *first* of two climaxes in the book. It will take the combined forces of all four Hogwarts' houses to accomplish this (yes, including Draco and cronies). The second climax will be the defeat of Snape, who will experience the Dementors' kiss. 3. Viktor Krum will provide some general though valuable information about horcruxes (such as how they are created). This will take place at the wedding of Fleur and Bill. 4. Petunia will provide Harry with the exact location of the house in Godric's Hollow. She will have received this information in writing from "that dreadful boy"--Peter Pettigrew. I'll even go so far to say that she is hiding this piece of writing under the step that creaks on the stairs. 5. Lily Potter was not killed by the AK curse, but by blocking the curse used to create a horcrux. And one extra: Ron will go through the veil (pre-forecast in the movie of PoA), but will communicate from the great beyond by using the two-way mirrors . Harry will go after him to retrieve him. This is what JKR meant when we see just how close to death (without dying) you can get in the Potterverse. Tom From xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 18:56:46 2007 From: xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com (xxneuman07xx) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:56:46 -0000 Subject: FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171630 De-lurking for the first time since HBP... don't mind me. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? No d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? No f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? No 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Harry/Ginny in the epilogue 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Not said b. Head Girl? Not said c. DADA Instructor? Shared among existing teachers. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself, but he is trying to defeat LV 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. Diary of Tom Riddle (Destroyed) c. Peverell ring (Destroyed) d. Slytherin's locket (With Aberforth) e. Hufflepuff's cup f. Nagini (With LV) g. McGuffin (With Bella) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Insufficient information to answer. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The room on the US cover. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Harry kills LV without murdering him the same way he did when he was a baby- a rebounding AK. He's probably trying to protect Ginny. 2. Mundungus stole the Locket from Grimmauld Place and sold it to Aberforth. 3. The Phoenix that Harry thought he saw fly out of the tomb will give him nudges in the right direction throughout the book, mostly in dreams. It won't take physical form until near the end of the book, if then. 4. Draco, Snape or both redeem themselves by bringing a known Horcrux to wherever Harry is staying at the time. 5. Hogwarts will be open, but with a skeleton crew (the heads of houses and teachers that can't leave) and very few students. OWLs will held at the MoM. xxneuman07xx From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 19:12:56 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:12:56 -0000 Subject: Importance of Pettigrew? In-Reply-To: <344769.44117.qm@web26305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171631 charlie cairns wrote: > > As an inactive member of this group I've probably missed this, but has there been discussion on the importance of Pettigrew's silver hand? And his debt to Harry? Carol responds: Oddly, almost no one seems interested in Pettigrew and his silver hand, maybe because he's so transparently cowardly, self-serving, and treacherous that there's no point in exploring his loyalties (unless you're Pippin advocating ESE!Lupin and two Wormtails ;-) ). I posted on the life debt in relation to the silver hand in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/168297 and received no response (possibly because I brought Snape into the fanciful scenario I proposed. I still like the idea of Pettigrew in Snape's pocket as an ace up his sleeve, but he's not an essential component of the scenario). Seriously, however, aside from what we know about Wormtail (he was a Marauder, he's a rat Animagus, he spied on the Order for DD and betrayed the Potters to their deaths and then faked his own, he lived twelve years as a rat and then escaped to Voldemort and provided him with a fetal form, he kidnapped Bertha Jorkins, he aided in the Harry kidnap plot, he killed Cedric Diggory on LV's orders, he "gave his right hand" to restore Voldemort, he was assigned to "assist" supposed-DE Snape and apparently to spy on him as well, etc.), two Pettigrew motifs stand out as unresolved--the life debt and the silver hand that we know can crush a twig to powder and which he strokes fondly in HBP (it appears to be his "precious," the only thing in his wretched life that he values). The silver hand must have been introduced for a reason--it's a Chekhov's gun waiting to be fired. The same is true for the life debt: We can be sure that DD's prediction that LV may one day regret having a servant indebted to Harry Potter will prove true. Simplicity dictates that these two Chekhov's guns will be fired together, IOW that the silver hand will be used to pay the life debt. Given the association of silver with werewolves, it seems logical (to me) to anticipate Wormtail's repaying his lifedebt by saving Harry from a werewolf, which Wormtail kills with his silver hand (dying in the process--we can't have a living Wormtail once he's redeemed himself, now can we?). JKR has said that Wormtail won't kill Lupin, but there's always the odious Fenrir Greyback, who may be in Azkaban as of the end of HBP but probably won't be there long, and who needs to be dispensed with. What better way than to have PP do it, as foreshadowed by his previous "noble" act, biting Gregory Goyle? One more thing we know about Peter Pettigrew, who BTW is more talented than either his friends or his enemies give him credit for: He was sorted into Gryffindor, and that, too, must have happened for a reason (other than allowing him to be a ragtag follower of the other Marauders who learned to become an Animagus). There is a seed of courage buried deep inside the fattest and most timid Hobbit, erm, Gryffindor, even one as scummy as Peter Pettigrew. Carol, hoping that JKR will not force us to endure a Boromir-style redemption scene involving Wormtail From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 20:11:58 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:11:58 -0000 Subject: Croaker and Bode Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171632 As we know, minor characters mentioned in passing sometimes show up later in the books. As we also know, characters' names also sometimes reflect their character--or, it seems, their fate. In GoF, Arthur Weasley points out people he knows to the kids as they wait for the QWC to begin. Two of these people are Croaker and Bode, whom Mr. Weasley identifies as Unspeakables ("No idea what they get up to"). We later learn that they work in the Department of Mysteries, which studies such mysteries as Love, Time (including Prophecies foretelling the possible future), the Mind, and Death. Neither name bodes well for the character, "Bode" meaning to foreshadow or portend a future event, usually something bad, and "Croaker" suggesting "croak" (to die). (The Lexicon suggests that "croak" means to habitually predict evil, but I like my etymology better.) Broderick Bode, reintroduced in OoP, lives up to his name, having been Imperio'd by Lucius Malfoy and ordered to remove the Prophecy orb from its shelf. Knowing that he can't remove the Prophecy, Bode fights the curse, temporarily loses his mind, and is sent to St. Mungo's, where he starts to recover but is strangled by a Devil's Snare given to him as a Christmas present, no doubt by a Death Eater (Lucius in disguise?). Given his name and Malfoy's expectation that he could obtain the Prophecy orb, I'm guessing that he worked in the Hall of Prophecy. It seems odd to me that JKR would introduce Bode and Croaker together but follow up only on Bode. Given Croaker's name, it seems likely that he works in the Death room and somehow studies what's behind the Veil. (Either that, or he's just going to live up to his name by dying, which seems hardly worth the trouble of bringing him into the story.) Does anyone think that Croaker will somehow aid Harry in passing through the Veil without dying? Any other thoughts on why JKR mentioned him along with Bode in GoF? Carol, thinking that if Lily was an Unspeakable, Croaker probably knew her (and, like Slughorn, would recognize her eyes in Harry's) From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 12 20:58:18 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 16:58:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Importance of Pettigrew? Message-ID: <29682835.1184273898608.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171633 From: justcarol67 >Carol, hoping that JKR will not force us to endure a Boromir-style >redemption scene involving Wormtail Bart: Not Boromir. The One Ring, after all, used his own altruism to tempt him and try to corrupt him. That is why he was redeemable; the Ring tried to reach him through his good side, not his evil side (the reason why Frodo was given the One Ring was because he did not have strong enough desires to be tempted, except his desire to destroy the Ring, making it more difficult for the Ring to corrupt him). It's hard to tell Pettigrew's motivations. As you (and I) have pointed out, he must have gotten into Griffyndor for SOME reason. My speculation was that hanging around the Maurauders gave him an inferiority complex; in SNAPE'S WORST MEMORY, they were depicted as putting him down. It reminds me of a vampiric technique that is used by some men to control women: say things to break the woman's confidence, and remind her how lucky she is that the man is willing to accept her in spite of her inferiority (in one of my many trades, a counselor, I ran into a LOT of that). These relations usually lead to physical abuse, as well, although I'm not sure in the case of Pettigrew. You notice that Voldemort used the same technique on him; making it appear that Pettigrew was lucky that Voldemort took him in as a servant, when it was clear that Voldemort was the lucky one. From my own experience it is REALLY hard to break a victim out of the mindset (while it might have been my own skills that were lacking, the literature on the subject confirms my experience). I can even see how Voldemort (or the DE's) might have managed to recruit Pettigrew. It starts out with, "You're much too good to be taking that kind of s***e from that crew. You're much better than that!" Then, "Come on and join us, we'll give you the respect you deserve!" Then, "Of course, you have to prove yourself!" followed by criticism of his performance, no matter how well he does, until it's, once again, "You're so incompetent that you're lucky that we're willing to let you hang around us!" until Pete will do ANYTHING to get their respect, and, as long as he's willing to do that, he will never get their respect. The thing is, sometimes, the vampire pushes a little too hard, and his victim breaks (in a good way). For example, one young woman was firmly in the clutches of a vampire, when he made the mistake of hitting her mother. He was tossed, and never allowed back again, and the young woman found someone who did NOT suck her life out of her. There were hints of that in GOF, when Pete tried to convince Morty to take someone other than Harry. Of course, it might have been a more practical solution, but I saw it as the life debt, trying to force its way past Pete's addiction (one way a "psychic" vampire resembles a gothic vampire is that the victim gets addicted to being fed upon). This means that, if JKR has her psychology right, and I believe she does, at some point Morty is going to push Pete a little too far, and Pete is going to recover his self-respect, if only for long enough to help Harry. Bart From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Jul 12 21:09:45 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:09:45 -0000 Subject: Importance of Pettigrew? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171634 > charlie cairns wrote: > > > > As an inactive member of this group I've probably missed this, but > has there been discussion on the importance of Pettigrew's silver > hand? And his debt to Harry? > > Carol responds: > > Oddly, almost no one seems interested in Pettigrew and his silver > hand, maybe because he's so transparently cowardly, self-serving, and > treacherous that there's no point in exploring his loyalties (unless > you're Pippin advocating ESE!Lupin and two Wormtails ;-) ). Pippin: Unless you're Pippin? Is this a two Pippins theory? Reminds me of the days when Pip!Squeak posted as Pip and people got us confused. But yes, I find it a mite suspicious that JKR has made Pettigrew so unattractive that no one speculates about him very much. It seems to me that the 'hand of the other' could be Pettigrew's silver hand which Voldemort made. Could Harry somehow use it to destroy LV? Pippin From karen.l.evans at wmich.edu Thu Jul 12 23:10:05 2007 From: karen.l.evans at wmich.edu (karen) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:10:05 -0000 Subject: Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: <147085.95137.qm@web30001.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171635 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie wrote: > > Cheryl wrote: > Now now one at the bookstore had better peek at the end and say > anything in the store when we go to pick up our copies!! AND I don't > want to have to race through it just to avoid hearing or seeing any > spoilers on tv or when I sign onto AOL on my computer. >> Karen: I don't plan to turn on my tv or computer till i'm done. I think I'm going to the bookstore at midnight and then going home to read it alone because I don't want to have a friend be in a different place than I am and be sobbing or vise versa. Perhaps I will purchase a case of butterbeer along with my book! From nerdie55 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 23:07:00 2007 From: nerdie55 at yahoo.com (nerdie55) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:07:00 -0000 Subject: Ollivander In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171636 > wish4puppy wrote: > > His disappearance from his shop is suspicious, regardless of > > the meaning behind his name. > Carol, hoping that Ollivander is alive and well and related to Luna, whose silvery eyes resemble his --- After reading the Half Blood Prince again just a few days ago, I realised that Harry's ideas were spot on every time. Everything he suspected or felt came true in the end. And in the first book he disliked Ollivander because he said that Voldemort did "great things" with his wand. "Terrible things,yes, but great nonetheless" he added if my memory serves me right. It gave Harry a very unpleasant feeling. So I am inclined to follow Harry here. Ollivander is making new wands for the Death Eaters out of free will. (It would of course be nice if he did not do it out of free will. In that case he might sabotage the news wands.) We'll know soon in any case. Nerdie From nerdie55 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 23:13:50 2007 From: nerdie55 at yahoo.com (nerdie55) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:13:50 -0000 Subject: Fawkes: perhaps it was Godric Gryffindor's bird? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171637 > > Nerdie: > > Perhaps Fawkes knows where the Gryffindor horcrux is and will > > lead Harry to it. (I don't think it is the sword; would one > > horcrux be able to destroy another as the sword destroyed the > > diary-horcrux?) > > > Sue: > Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Harry use the fang of the > Basilisk to destroy the diary? Sue, you are right about the fang of the basilisk, it was not the sword that pierced the diary. I wonder if the basilisk was a horcrux as well. That means one less for Harry to destroy. But didn't Harry kill the basilisk with the sword? We'll see. So much conjecture, and I really, really do hope that JKR will give us the answers we seek and won't leave loose ends dangling.... Nerdie--- From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jul 12 23:39:25 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:39:25 -0000 Subject: Alternate Titles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171638 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jelly92784" wrote: > > jelly92784 wrote: > If you could rename each of the already published > Harry Potter Books, what would you call them? > > Here's what we came up with: > SS: Harry Potter and Hogwarts School of Witchcraft > and Wizardry > CS: Harry Potter and the Heir of Slytherin > POA: Harry Potter and the Servant of Voldemort > GOF: Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament > OOP: Harry Potter and the Department of Mysteries > HBP: Harry Potter and the Unbreakable Vow > > Bart: > But what is your goal in renaming them? How are the new > names superior to the old names? > > ... > > > Jelly92784: > > I wouldn't say that there is anything necessarily > "wrong" with the titles, in fact, for the most part, > I like them all! The topic came > up as we were discussing the titles JKR said she had > prior to Deathly Hallows and wondering what they > could've been, which led us to wondering what other > titles she may have had for the other books. It was > really just meant as a fun exercise. > > ... bboyminn: Now that you mention it, I occurred to me that the title of each books is actually - 'Harry Potter and the McGuffin' A McGuffin is a plot device, it is the thing that all the characters are concerned about, but the readers have very little concern for. For example, 'Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone'. All through the story Harry is concerned about the Stone, first finding out about it, then protecting it, then getting his hands on it. We as the readers don't necessarily care about the Stone, but we do care that Harry cares about it. Our concern as readers is for the feelings, adventures, and safety of our hero. In light of 'Harry Potter and the McGuffin', we can see how that applies to HP and the Chamber of Secrets Harry is concerned about the Chamber and finding it, and just when he has it figured out, circumstances call for him to go their. HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban On the assumption that Sirius Black wants to kill him, Harry is very much concerned with Sirius Black - the Prisoner of Azkaban, as is everyone else in the story. HP and the Goblet of Fire This one fall slightly short, but the whole Tri-Wizard's Tournament centers around the decision made by The Goblet. In a sense, the Goblet is the instigator of everything that happens. It sort of represents the pivotal moment in the story; the point at which 'the game is afoot'. HP and the Order of the Phoenix This one is close enough. The Order and it's action, and the result of knowing about the Order stimulate the action for the rest of the story. HP and the Half-Blood Prince This one is clear; Harry is totally obsessed with the Half-Blood Prince throughout the entire books. Yet, while the revelation of who the Half-Blood Prince is is interesting, it really doesn't add much to the overall story or plot. It is simply a fact revealed at the end. Half-Blood Prince=Mystery becomes Half-Blood Prince=revealed. HP and the Deathly Hallows If the theme carries through, everyone, especially Harry, will be obsessed with the 'Deathly Hallows' but in the end, I don't think they will really mean much. Do we still really care about the Sorcerer's Stone or the Chamber of Secrets or the Half-Blood Prince? The real question is, are the Deathly Hallows simply another name for something we already know about, like the Horcruxes, or are they a whole new plot element being revealed in the story? Or maybe a combination of the two; a new and unsuspected aspect of known objects. And if they are a whole new element, how will they be introduced? ...by accident? ...by legend? ...by exposition? ...found in a book? ...found on the back of a secret treasure map? Harry Potter and the McGuffin want to know. Steve/bboyminn From navyhelm at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 01:31:18 2007 From: navyhelm at yahoo.com (navyhelm) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 01:31:18 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171639 I have not read all of the messages posted so forgive me if this was brought up before now but I wonder why the idea of Eileen Prince being Snape's mom is mentioned. I too think Snape is a horrible man but I love him for being so mean. But, if my calculations are correct, based upon the Chamber of Secrets with the diary, then Voldemort had to be in school with Eileen Prince since the HBP also listed the date of the DADA book from the HBP to be 50 yrs prior. I think it is true that JK Rowlings often mentions people that will come back later. So, although Dumbledore does see the best in people, he never trusted Tom Riddle but did trust Snape. Snape was a DE and Tom Riddle was just a teenager who did mean things. So, why would Dumbledore trust Snape when he never trusted TR. So, I do not believe the only reason that Dumbledore trusted Snape was because of some regret of the Potters' death. The whole idea of the original DE killing mudbloods when Voldemort was in power also does not make sense. It would have been known to all that Snape was half muggle. I don't see why he would have been so close to Voldemort unless Snape tried to get in with him. We do know that Snape was very good at creating dark magic as well as Occlumency. So, maybe Snape was always trying to get in with the DE and Voldemort because of something that happened with his mother. Just a thought. navyhelm From sbu89 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 02:40:44 2007 From: sbu89 at yahoo.com (sbu89) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:40:44 -0000 Subject: The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171640 I don't mean to be daft, but the cover has been intriguing me. If you look at it in full-length (Border's is offering a poster of this), one notices that Harry and (what appears to be) Voldemort are not facing each other, as if in battle. Instead, they almost appear to be doing something TOGETHER, ALMOST COOPERATIVELY. It appears they are trying to ward off something or summon something? Perhaps one is trying to summon, the other ward off? My initial glance had me thinking these stray thoughts...wondering of others' reactions... sbu89 From harryp at stararcher.com Fri Jul 13 03:15:34 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 03:15:34 -0000 Subject: I think Kreacher might play a BIG roll in the last book (spoiler on the movi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171641 > TKJ: > Now, after watching the movie I think that character might be > Kreacher. He was in the 5th movie but his role was SO small that it > makes me feel it was added in hindsight, or just to say, "ok, yes this > character exists." but that seems about it. > > Has anyone else who's seen the movie gotten this feeling too? Eddie: The movie versions are problematic for this forum. And not only because it's general policy to not discuss the movies here. But also because the movie makers don't really know much better than we do what will or will not be important. Jo Rowling may just as easily be trying to preserve her red herrings in the movies as well as her "important" characters. Also, for example, Lupin had NO speaking lines in the OOTP movie but I find it unbelievable that he wouldn't be important in book 7. He certainly was in book 6, but that didn't stop him from virtually disappearing in the OOTP movie. So given the same movie evidence I could conclude JKR meant Lupin. Shucks, even Hagrid and Grawp's appearances felt like cameos. Having said all that as a way of protecting myself from the list elves ("Protego!") I'll say this: we haven't seen the last of Kreacher or Lupin or Hagrid or Grawp, and not failing to mention Dobby or Gilderoy Lockhart or Madame Maxime or Krum, none of whom appeared in the OOTP movie at all. Eddie, who thought the movie was interesting in the ways it varied from the book, but not so interesting as a movie. From ebaith at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 02:55:58 2007 From: ebaith at yahoo.com (Jessica) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:55:58 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171642 > navyhelm: > I have not read all of the messages posted so forgive me if > this was brought up before now but I wonder why the idea of > Eileen Prince being Snape's mom is mentioned. I too think Snape > is a horrible man but I love him for being so mean. But, if my > calculations are correct, based upon the Chamber of Secrets with > the diary, then Voldemort had to be in school with Eileen Prince > since the HBP also listed the date of the DADA book from the HBP > to be 50 yrs prior. I have also thought long and hard about how Eileen Prince fits into the picture. I have even entered the thought that she may have become pregnant to Tom Riddle. So, Snape could be his son. In my theory she was too afraid to tell Tom that she was pregnant so she marries a muggle out of desperation who isn't nice to her. So, Dumbledore finds out about it later and reveals this to Snape. When Snape finds out whatever circumstances this happened under, he hates Voldemort and turns to the good side. This could be Dumbldore's powerful motive for believing Snape. Also explains Snape's very powerful magical ability. Crazy theory, I know. Jessica From chaomath at hitthenail.com Fri Jul 13 04:18:04 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:18:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Final thoughts on Harry surviving.... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171643 On Jul 11, 2007, at 6:35 PM, bgrugin wrote: > MusicalBetsy here: > I understand exactly how you feel, Geoff. In the US it has been the > same - many more boys AND girls are reading than before, and it's been > great to have a role model like Harry. Unfortunately, the facts don't entirely back up this commonly-held opinion. According to a New York Times article: "But in keeping with the intricately plotted novels themselves, the truth about Harry Potter and reading is not quite so straightforward a success story. Indeed, as the series draws to a much-lamented close, federal statistics show that the percentage of youngsters who read for fun continues to drop significantly as children get older, at almost exactly the same rate as before Harry Potter came along." http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/11/books/11potter.html? _r=1&hp&oref=slogin While I'm happy with any book that encourages a kid to read or set foot in a bookstore or library, we shouldn't overstate the effect the Harry Potter phenomenon has had. To get back to the main point of the thread, I find it difficult to believe that JKR would kill off Harry. Personally, I believe I could find it a satisfying ending and eminently logical (not that I want poor Harry to die!). But JKR's too savvy to do something this brutal to her franchise. It just doesn't fit with the way this children's series has been written. I'm much more afraid of her killing Snape or Lupin (two of my faves). Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From kamilaa at gmail.com Fri Jul 13 05:02:35 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:02:35 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171644 I have not read all of the messages posted so forgive me if this was brought up before now but I wonder why the idea of Eileen Prince being Snape's mom is mentioned. I too think Snape is a horrible man but I love him for being so mean. But, if my calculations are correct, based upon the Chamber of Secrets with the diary, then Voldemort had to be in school with Eileen Prince since the HBP also listed the date of the DADA book from the HBP to be 50 yrs prior. I have also thought long and hard about how Eileen Prince fits into the picture. I have even entered the thought that she may have become pregnant to Tom Riddle. So, Snape could be his son. In my theory she was too afraid to tell Tom that she was pregnant so she marries a muggle out of desperation who isn't nice to her. So, Dumbledore finds out about it later and reveals this to Snape. When Snape finds out whatever circumstances this happened under, he hates Voldemort and turns to the good side. This could be Dumbldore's powerful motive for believing Snape. Also explains Snape's very powerful magical ability. Crazy theory, I know. Luke, I am your father. Oy. That snarked I would almost prefer something like that to the so-far stated reason for Snape's supposed change of sides, because I do not believe that he would care what happened to James Potter under any circumstances. Let me restate that: if that ends up being the sole/most important reason, then yes, of course I'll believe it, because Jo tells me to in the text. But I won't like it. At all. If that is the very worst memory of Snape's life, then he's had a damned easy life. There simply must be a more compelling reason (assuming he's actually returned to the right side, of course), I can't imagine JKR will leave it as it stands now. But if Tommy took forceful advantage of Eileen after she'd turned him down, or seduced her once and then never looked at her again, or however JKR sees fit to write it and Snape was the result, that might be a good twist. Especially if Lord Thingy found out about Snape at a later date and came after Eileen. He might have killed her for keeping the information from him, or perhaps she turned into one of the first gen 'they can't kill you if they think you are already dead' war refugees and has been intimidating students in her library for all the long years since. And if Snape was a mamma's boy and his adored mother is killed/almost killed by the man he's been so faithfully serving . . . yeah, he'd feel pretty damn betrayed and more than just a little angry. Enough to switch sides certainly. Either way would be a much more palatable reason for Snape's return to me. And I can see where Dumbledore might have decided that the sordid details weren't really anyone else's business. But actually I don't really care what the reason is, so long as there is a much more believable reason offered. Because the one we have right now really isn't working for me. And so long as that is the only reason on the table, I find myself unable to believe in Snape's return to the side of the angels. Kamil From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jul 13 09:39:20 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:39:20 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <34067A7D-5AFA-4D5F-A0DC-B9AB3B578F85@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171645 sbu89 wrote: > I don't mean to be daft, but the cover has been intriguing me. If you > look at it in full-length (Border's is offering a poster of this), one > notices that Harry and (what appears to be) Voldemort are not facing > each other, as if in battle. Instead, they almost appear to be doing > something TOGETHER, ALMOST COOPERATIVELY. Jadon asks: Do you have a link to the cover you're talking about? My spot-the- Dark-Lord skills are failing me. From bearhug at tpg.com.au Fri Jul 13 07:31:29 2007 From: bearhug at tpg.com.au (The Cuthills) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:31:29 +1000 Subject: Croaker and Bode References: Message-ID: <001401c7c51f$d5157600$0301a8c0@userb26c5552b3> No: HPFGUIDX 171646 I always read Bode and Croaker as "Code and Broker"...or Breaker, if one wants to be linguistically accurate. They are Unspeakables, so it fits, too. Love, love, love the way JKR plays with language Anne From kennclark at btinternet.com Fri Jul 13 10:04:08 2007 From: kennclark at btinternet.com (Kenneth Clark) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:04:08 -0000 Subject: is Dumbledore really dead? In-Reply-To: <46961AA0.80402@Charter.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171647 > drax_orion: > There are many possible ways that Dumbledore could still be > alive, or somehow return from the dead. > I think that Dumbledore might be able to transform into a > phoenix. Such a transformation would coincide with his other > connections: his pet phoenix Fawkes and then there is his > patronus, the description of it from book 4 makes me believe > it is also a phoenix. Ken says: As I've said before here it could well be that Dumbledore's relationship with Fawkes(and with Phoenixes in general?) is such that he has taken on their attributes. He has indeed died but subsequently arose from his ashes - remember his mausoleaum went up in flames and the phoenix shape seen flying out of them. If this is the case then has he returned with all his adult faculties, memories and skills intact or will he have to learn them anew? From lauren1 at catliness.com Fri Jul 13 08:42:03 2007 From: lauren1 at catliness.com (Lauren Merryfield) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 01:42:03 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: 9 days to go - imagine If You Had To Wait! References: Message-ID: <05a101c7c53a$17319950$0200a8c0@laurenye0o5w8x> No: HPFGUIDX 171648 Support Harry Potter in Braille (snip) Thanks! I am one of those who reads the books in braille. I am rereading them on CD now, but my preference is still braille! Thanks Lauren [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lauren1 at catliness.com Fri Jul 13 09:31:28 2007 From: lauren1 at catliness.com (Lauren Merryfield) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:31:28 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spoilers?? Where are They References: Message-ID: <05af01c7c53a$1c12d600$0200a8c0@laurenye0o5w8x> No: HPFGUIDX 171649 Karen: (snip) Perhaps I will purchase a case of butterbeer along with my book! Hi, That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids to drink it but then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it this made me wonder about it. Thanks Lauren [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kennclark at btinternet.com Fri Jul 13 10:33:41 2007 From: kennclark at btinternet.com (Kenneth Clark) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:33:41 -0000 Subject: The One Character Who Must Not Die Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171650 There are going to be further deaths in Deathly Halloows, we know that, and personally, I'm not too bothered about who they are. But there is one character who simply must not be allowed to die and that is Hermione. I say this not because of any personal infatuation but because her death would be the most reactionary ending to the series imaginable. Only two characters have roused themselves out of the historical rut that the wizarding world has got itself into, Dumbledore and Hermione. Here we have a world where blood purity still persists amongst a significant section, where hatred and fear of other magical creaures is the norm, where foreigners, even magical ones are stereotyped and where elf enslavement is regarded as "natural". Almost all our heroes are to some extent critical of some of the above but only Dumbledore and Hermione are shown as questioning the corrosive effect of these beliefs on wizard society. Dumbledore calls for unity across the wizardimg world, for alliances with the Giants, accepts Dobby as a "free elf" and condemns blood purity. Hermione rails against all of these in even more strident terms. Both are acutely aware of what such beliefs are doing to their fellow wizards and witches. These two are the true revolutionaries in the Potterverse. Most others are barely conscious of most of these 'problems'. We have already 'lost' Dumbledore. If Hermione were likewise to die JKR will have cemented the series as, ultimately, a backward looking conservative, reactionary tome where, after the defeat of Voldemort, it is 'business as usual', a happy-ever-after where none of the real ills that the books so mercilesssly expose, can ever be dealt with. The very last thing we need is a dead martyr whose ideals (and ideas) for the future are left for others to 'take up'. Only by ensuring that Hermione triumphs will we be assured that she will continue to trumpet the defects of the Potterverse, the need to radically examine the beliefs of her fellow wizards, beliefs which have directly led not merely to the rise of Voldemort but to the fragmented response to him, the failure to unite across all the magical boundaries and to continue the fight for freedom and equality. I can't believe that JKR can possibly be contemplating Hermione's death. More than one generation of readers would be betrayed. Ken From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 11:27:32 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:27:32 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) In-Reply-To: <05af01c7c53a$1c12d600$0200a8c0@laurenye0o5w8x> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171651 > Lauren: > That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids > to drink it but then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it > this made me wonder about it. Goddlefrood: I've had a large number of different kinds of beverages, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic, in my life, but have never come across butterbeer so far. I do know that if one adds milk to beer they really do not mix well. However I'm no wizard, so what do I know? It is a popular drink amongst younger wizards and witches. On the question of why it affects Winky as it does, and she's never to be cured of her addiction, alas, I would suppose that as well as having a different kind of magic House Elves have a different kind of sobriety. In other words, butterbeer affects elves in a quite differing way to how the same innocuous drink affects wizards and witches. Goddlefrood, who would not recommend trying any of the above referred drinks at home. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Jul 13 11:45:10 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:45:10 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171652 > Jen: > I'll be very disappointed if we don't get an illuminating > backstory for Snape like we did for Sirius. Dungrollin: Hey, she said we won't need prequels about the marauders and Snape because we'll get all the juice in book 7. ::takes moment to breathe deeply and calm down:: > Jen: Insightful paragraph here, Dung. There are times the Snape > character makes me boil, especially when he appears to be using his > position as an adult and authority figure (with Dumbledore's > permission by omission if nothing else) over those in lesser > positions by age, circumstance or power. It feels like injustice to > me and not something others should have to tolerate. Dungrollin: I have to admit that I don't engage at such an emotional level with the books; I think the only time I got annoyed with a character was with Harry in the Occlumency lessons because I read Snape as having made a massive effort (not entirely successful, granted, but a massive effort all the same) and Harry didn't even notice, let alone make any kind of effort in return. I can dispassionately see that Snape's nasty and cruel and emotionally retarded, but I would react to someone like him so differently to the way that Harry reacts that I find it difficult to take his nastiness personally, all I feel is pity. (Mingled with admiration for his way with words...) Jen: However, > there's always the truism we can't escape ourselves! Snape is no > different; he has to live inside his mind with all those thoughts of > the past and feelings of anger, hatred and whatever else sours inside > him. Sometimes a tormented mind IS the worst punishment. Dungrollin: Absolutely; you don't need to be locked up in a fortress if you're trapped inside your own head. > Jen: > You know, I did think of a plot purpose if JKR was surprised someone > thought Snape could fall in love: If his ability to love is damaged, > he's not protected from Voldemort should his Occlumency fail. I'm > pretty sure that fits in with the idea Dumbledore expressed, that the > ability to love is the "only protection that can possibly work > against the lure of power like Voldemort's!" It doesn't protect a > person from pain or death, but the ability to love is one power > Voldemort can't penetrate. Dungrollin: Hmm... I'm not sure that Occlumency is a protection against temptation in the same way as love is for Harry. Snape's Occlumency (assuming he's DDM) is protecting him from discovery and death, he's already succumbed to the temptation of the Death Eaters and Dark Arts, so presumably his ability to love (at the time he joined the DEs) was already damaged. Here's a question: Draco loves his parents, but that didn't protect him from Voldemort; why not? I think I have an answer of sorts, but I'm not sure it's worth organising my thoughts on it unless other people are interested too. > Jen: > One weakness for me with the series is not getting the > full picture of just how fearsome LV is meant to be, how evil and > manipulative he is that he's capable of forcing people to give up > everything to follow him. Dungrollin: To a certain extent that must be because we are seeing through Harry's eyes, and if he is protected from making the mistakes which lead people to follow Voldemort, it's natural that he can't understand those kinds of mistakes or temptations, and doesn't even wonder what motivates people to join Voldemort. And given the setup of the books, that they're mysteries, often with who-is-the-secret- villain? plots, so Harry's not a witness to how people fall for Voldemort. Where Harry differs from DD is that he doesn't *try* to understand, and only begins to when he's *forced* to, quite literally immobilised and unable to close his eyes to what Draco says and does (or doesn't do) on the tower, which gives him a little insight into his motivations, fears etc, and results in Harry starting to empathise. But Harry will never seek out such information, he's very willing to chalk people up as bad'uns without questioning how they got that way (as, of course, is Snape ? he doesn't give second chances even though he's benefited from DD's). I hope we will see this turned around in the last book. Jen: > Re: young Snape, I'm re-reading HBP and can identify with the HBP. I felt sympathy for the boy in the Pensieve scene. I don't believe > Snape was always the person Harry knows as an adult. But I'm not > sure how much of the other person is left or if Harry will find out > if Snape dies. Dungrollin: We *must* have answers. She promised! So Snape can't die! Hooray! From colwilrin at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 12:57:42 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:57:42 -0000 Subject: The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171653 sbu89 wrote: > I don't mean to be daft, but the cover has been intriguing me. If you > look at it in full-length (Border's is offering a poster of this), one > notices that Harry and (what appears to be) Voldemort are not facing > each other, as if in battle. Instead, they almost appear to be doing > something TOGETHER, ALMOST COOPERATIVELY. It appears they are trying > to ward off something or summon something? Perhaps one is trying to > summon, the other ward off? My initial glance had me thinking these > stray thoughts...wondering of others' reactions... > > sbu89 > Colwilrin: I think Harry is summoning those behind the veil to help him vanquish Voldy...Voldy is resisting, though I'm not sure why he wouldn't jump back, disappear, etc... Maybe he has been subdued in some way. Voldy definitely looks fearful...so, IMO, he is either looking at death or love, the two things he fears. Harry, on the other hand, looks confident and determined, as if he were in control. I am starting to wonder about the locket around his neck though. If it was the Slytherin Horcrux locket...why would he be wearing it? Wouldn't he just destroy it and move on? Perhaps there are powers in that locket that he needs. And just who are all the people in the background?...here is a thought that just occurred to me: What if Voldy and Harry are on the other side of the veil. They went through together...Harry trying to take the locket with him to destroy it (the last horcrux...would explain its importance to the UK cover)...with Voldy following behind to save it...or Voldy could have been pushed through it by Harry's buddies. Now, they are on the other side of the veil...would explain why the veil is "white"...it is black on the living side because people fear death. It is white on the "dead" side, because it is love and paradise there. So, the people in the background are all of those who have passed along. Sirius, Lily, James, DD...and countless anchestors. Harry and Voldy both realize where they are. Voldy is scared because he is "facing death...love...and all those he has harmed"....Harry is looking up at them all...realizes that he is very safe, has an army of love behind him...and summons for them to help him vanquish Voldy and possibly get him to pass back through the veil. Is it too late to add this one to the contest???? I am feeling pretty good about this predicition. From mros at xs4all.nl Fri Jul 13 13:11:33 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:11:33 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) References: Message-ID: <000701c7c54f$57671490$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 171654 > Lauren: > That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids > to drink it but then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it > this made me wonder about it. Goddlefrood: I've had a large number of different kinds of beverages, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic, in my life, but have never come across butterbeer so far. I do know that if one adds milk to beer they really do not mix well. However I'm no wizard, so what do I know? It is a popular drink amongst younger wizards and witches. Marion It's probably a wink-eyed reference to the 'lashings and lashings of ginger beer' that was always drunk in pre-war schoolstories. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 13 13:16:26 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:16:26 -0000 Subject: Importance of Pettigrew? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171655 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Given the association of silver with werewolves, it seems logical (to > me) to anticipate Wormtail's repaying his lifedebt by saving Harry > from a werewolf, which Wormtail kills with his silver hand (dying in > the process--we can't have a living Wormtail once he's redeemed > himself, now can we?). JKR has said that Wormtail won't kill Lupin, > but there's always the odious Fenrir Greyback, I guess the thing is that Wormtail's new hand is silvery in appearance but we don't know that it is actually silver. In our world our imaginary werewolves can be killed with silver and vampires with wooden stakes but is that true of the "real" ones in the Potterverse? It is a good observation but as with so many hints in the books there is little to go on. Or am I embarrassed that for once my powers of spinning out wacky theories have failed me? Dumbledore said much the same thing about Pettigrew as Gandalf said about Gollum so it seems certain he will be important in the conclusion. And in that sense Dumbledore has *already* "pulled a Gandalf"! That silver or silvery hand is just screaming out to figure in Voldemort's demise somehow. I think it will be more directly than to kill Fenrir but you could be right. I kind of like the thought expressed long ago, maybe it was yours, that he will crush Voldemort's wand to dust as he did that twig. Ken From colwilrin at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 13:25:03 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:25:03 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171656 > > > I have also thought long and hard about how Eileen Prince fits > into the picture. I have even entered the thought that she may > have become pregnant to Tom Riddle. So, Snape could be his son. > In my theory she was too afraid to tell Tom that she was pregnant > so she marries a muggle out of desperation who isn't nice to her. > So, Dumbledore finds out about it later and reveals this to Snape. > When Snape finds out whatever circumstances this happened under, > he hates Voldemort and turns to the good side. This could be > Dumbldore's powerful motive for believing Snape. Also explains > Snape's very powerful magical ability. > > Crazy theory, I know. > Colwilrin: I love this theory...and I think you might be on the mark. His name is Severus Snape...SS...like Salazar Slytherin. Maybe Ellen named him with the same initials as his father's claim to fame as being the heir of Slytherin! From vinsri83 at gmail.com Fri Jul 13 12:30:02 2007 From: vinsri83 at gmail.com (Vinita Srivastava) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:00:02 +0530 Subject: [HPforGrownups] is Dumbledore really dead? In-Reply-To: <46961AA0.80402@Charter.net> References: <46961AA0.80402@Charter.net> Message-ID: <754c449b0707130530t25bd2ad0of7b7fdae0b31fddd@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171657 drax_orion wrote: > > Frankly I'm not really sure he is. > My second theory is that Dumbledore is an animagus. I know this is a > very far fetched theory but this thought has been bouncing in my > skull since I first read book 6. I think that Dumbledore might be > able to transform into a phoenix. Vinita: After reading all the feedback you have got, I have another view about the role which the phoenix is going to play in the DH. Acccording to me the phoenix will come to Harry. Because in one of the books, not sure which one, Dumbledore mentions that it is only to that person who is the most loyal to him that the Phoenix will come. And if you look at HBP there is again and again the mention of one thing in every interaction HP has with the Rufus Scrimgeour he makes this statement "Dumbledore's man through and through." And it is my opinion that it is through this phoenix that Dumbledore will play a major role in DH. From Adam.Chase at charter.net Fri Jul 13 13:50:53 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:50:53 -0000 Subject: is Dumbledore really dead? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171658 drax_orion: > > > There are many possible ways that Dumbledore could still be > > alive, or somehow return from the dead. > > > I think that Dumbledore might be able to transform into a > > phoenix. Such a transformation would coincide with his other > > connections: his pet phoenix Fawkes and then there is his > > patronus, the description of it from book 4 makes me believe > > it is also a phoenix. Ken says: > As I've said before here it could well be that Dumbledore's > relationship with Fawkes(and with Phoenixes in general?) is such that > he has taken on their attributes. He has indeed died but subsequently > arose from his ashes - remember his mausoleaum went up in flames and > the phoenix shape seen flying out of them. If this is the case then > has he returned with all his adult faculties, memories and skills > intact or will he have to learn them anew? drax_orion: Personally I think if he has been reborn in that matter, he would have retained his memories. If that is true, it may be possible that he is actually Godric Gryffindor (yeah, that is a super sized stretch) or he is just as old as his old friend Nicholas Flamel. Makes you wonder if maybe Dumbledore's so called brother is maybe actually his son, grandson, or even more distant decendant. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 13 14:39:35 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:39:35 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171659 Jessica Wrote on July 12 > I have even entered the thought that she > may have become pregnant to Tom Riddle. > So, Snape could be his son. In my theory > she was too afraid to tell Tom that she > was pregnant so she marries a muggle out > of desperation who isn't nice to her. So, > Dumbledore finds out about it later and > reveals this to Snape. When Snape finds > out whatever circumstances this happened > under, he hates Voldemort and turns to > the good side. This could be Dumbldore's > powerful motive for believing Snape. > Also explains Snape's very powerful > magical ability. That is an interesting theory. If could also explain Snape's fondness for his nickname, "Prince" because he wanted to emphasize his mother's side of the family, and "Half Blood" because he's rather be known as the son of a Muggle than the son of Voldemort. However I'm not convinced Snape turned to the good side, a slight tilt in that direction over the years maybe. In my theory Dumbledore trusts Snape because years ago Snape made an Unbreakable Vow to protect the life of Harry Potter. Dumbledore did not know that Snape made this noble sounding vow for less than noble reasons. Suppose Snape heard every word of the entire prophesy but Dumbledore sincerely believed he only heard half; we know for a fact he only told Voldemort half but I think the reason is that Snape knew attacking the baby Harry would be very dangerous and he wanted Voldemort dead. Suppose Snape wants to rule the world but 2 wizards stand in his way, Dumbledore and Voldemort. One down one to go, and that's why he needs Harry alive until he can finish off the Dark Lord. Eggplant From Adam.Chase at charter.net Fri Jul 13 14:33:50 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:33:50 -0000 Subject: Why Harry Potter (or his scar) is NOT a Horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171660 In a message dated 7/11/2007 4:56:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, justcarol67 at ... writes: > > Carol, conceding that Harry *could* have a soul bit in his scar > > but not believing that such a soul bit makes the scar a Horcrux > > or requires Harry to sacrifice himself, leaving no one with "the > > power to vanquish the Dark Lord" since the Chosen One would be > > dead Neil > > How many times has Voldemort tried to kill Harry in the series thus > far; SS, CS, GF and OotP? Not once did he show any concern for a > part of him residing in the boy. Plus, how is Harry suppose to > destroy himself and then still be around to kill Voldemort. Drax: Well keep in mind that Tom Riddle (still not publically known as Voldemort) was the one who tried to kill Harry in CoS, so he would not know about Harry being a horcrux, if he is one of course. It is very possible that Harry is a horcrux too, and that Voldemort will not die at the end. It is possible that a total of 5 horcruxes wil be destroyed, and when Harry destroys Voldemort's body his spirit will be somehow forced to merge with the piece inside Harry, forever forcing Voldemort to suffer the pain he received when attempting to possess Harry in OotP. I do not really agree with this theory because Harry would also likely wallow in pain because of it too. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jul 13 14:49:59 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:49:59 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171661 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jessica" wrote: > I have also thought long and hard about how Eileen Prince fits > into the picture. I have even entered the thought that she may > have become pregnant to Tom Riddle. So, Snape could be his son. Pippin: Sorry to shoot this down in flames, but JKR is emphatic that Voldemort is the *last* surviving descendant of Salazar Slytherin, and that Voldemort is not a father. Harry: Has Voldermort any children? JK Rowling replies -> No. Voldemort as a father... now that's not a nice thought. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2004/0304-wbd.htm Me, I wonder if the trigger for Snape's defection wasn't Voldemort's choice of the half-blood Harry instead of the pureblood Neville. As Dumbledore points out, if Voldemort really believed in pureblood supremacy, he wouldn't have done that. Somehow, I don't think Snape has a high tolerance for hypocrisy (in other people, that is, he shows plenty of it himself.) I've got a great fondness for the I'm A Prince = Irma Pince anagram. If Snape accepted Dumbledore's protection for his mother, then he would, IMO, never betray Dumbledore. Pippin From jlenox2004 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 14:51:47 2007 From: jlenox2004 at yahoo.com (jdl3811220) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:51:47 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171662 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: SNIP > > Suppose Snape heard every word of the entire prophesy but Dumbledore > sincerely believed he only heard half; we know for a fact he only told > Voldemort half but I think the reason is that Snape knew attacking the > baby Harry would be very dangerous and he wanted Voldemort dead. > Suppose Snape wants to rule the world but 2 wizards stand in his way, > Dumbledore and Voldemort. One down one to go, and that's why he needs > Harry alive until he can finish off the Dark Lord. > > Eggplant Jenni from Alabama: I find that theory fascinating! I always thought that even if Harry defeated Riddle, another evil lord or mistress would rise in his place. Snape has always come to my mind. Another is Bellatrix. Jenni From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 13 15:28:53 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:28:53 -0000 Subject: RAB Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171663 I don't know if anyone already said this: When I first read HBP my first guess was that RAB is regulus black. However I have a differnet theory now, and I want to ask you to comment on in: I think RAB might be Burkes from Borgin& Burkes. We never hear of Burkes, and we know the locket was stollen by TR when he was still working for B&B. I think the necklace seen at B&B by Hermione, might be the celebrated locket of Slytherin (and hence a former horcrux). That is the reason for the unreasonable price. I'm not sure, but I think Hermione is mistaken at recognizing it as the same necklace in the Katie Bell scene. From lyraofjordan at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 15:29:02 2007 From: lyraofjordan at yahoo.com (lyraofjordan) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:29:02 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Bragging Rights contest. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171664 1.Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? He will be vanquished, whatever that means, probably dead 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Not sure, so to be contrarian, I'm going with "not a Dark Mark" 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes (tho rarely in class) b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie McMillan b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? Aberforth Dumbledore d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? with Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. one piece in Voldemort b. Riddle's Diary (destroyed by Harry) c. Marvolo's Ring (destroyed by DD/Snape) d. Slytherin's Locket e. Hufflepuff's cup f. Ravenclaw's wand (possibly missing from the display window at Ollivander's) g. Nagini In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus ? phoenix; boggart ? dead Harry Potter (because it means the one who could vanquish the Dark Lord failed or won't get a chance to try) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love, or some form thereof Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. My divination skills are about as good as Trelawney's on a typical day, but here goes. 1) All that work Hermione put into learning Ancient Runes and/or Arithmancy will finally be useful to Harry in finding or disarming a horcrux. And since Arithmancy sounds like it might involve the dreaded "maths," I'd place the serious money on Ancient Runes. 2) Bill Weasley will break the curse on the DADA position, although probably not until near the end of the book. 3) At least one, and possibly two, Horcruxes will be found at Hogwarts. Likely locations are the Room of Requirement and/or the Trophy Room (where I think the Hufflepuff Cup may be hiding in plain sight). 4) Neville will have a chance to avenge his parents by killing Bellatrix, but ? like Harry with Wormtail ? will decide to turn her over to the authorities. 5) Wormtail will repay his life debt, but in a way that is inadvertent or typically rat-like, not in a heroic manner. (Please, Jo, don't make Wormtail look good after all his treachery.) Lyra From jlenox2004 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 15:29:48 2007 From: jlenox2004 at yahoo.com (jdl3811220) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:29:48 -0000 Subject: Ginny a possible horcrux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171665 Jenni from Alabama: In CoS pg. 310 US edition it states and I'm quoting it word for word here: "If I say it myself, Harry, I've always been able to charm the people I needed. So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be exactly what I wanted....I grew stronger and stonger on a diet of her deepest fears, her darkest secrets. I grew powerful, far more powerful than little Miss Weasley. Powerful enough to start feeding Miss Weasley a few of my secrets, to start pouring a little of my soul back into her..." If there are other ways to create a horcrux, could Voldemort have possibly made Ginny one? That just seemed to leap out at me when I was reading it the other day! Just a side note, there was one part of that that made me laugh. Voldemort said he'd grown far more powerful than little Miss Weasley. She was eleven years old! More powerful than an eleven year old? How impressive! Jenni From Adam.Chase at charter.net Fri Jul 13 15:07:27 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:07:27 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) In-Reply-To: <000701c7c54f$57671490$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171666 Lauren: > > > > That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids > > to drink it but then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it > > this made me wonder about it. Goddlefrood: > > I've had a large number of different kinds of beverages, both > alcoholic and non-alcoholic, in my life, but have never come > across butterbeer so far. I do know that if one adds milk to > beer they really do not mix well. However I'm no wizard, so > what do I know? It is a popular drink amongst younger wizards > and witches. > Marion > > It's probably a wink-eyed reference to the 'lashings and lashings of > ginger beer' that was always drunk in pre-war schoolstories. I tried a recipe someone made up, but it's more like a hot vanilla malt than anything else. Anyways I think butterbeer is a low alcoholic (termed non-alcoholic) beverage that was derived from a normal alcoholic beverage. Remember that in ancient and medieval times the consumption of mead, beer, and other low quality alcoholic beverages was common to drink even at a young age. drax_orion From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 15:36:35 2007 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:36:35 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171667 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? no: powerless ghost 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? the locket 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? No d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? No f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Bill/Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie MacMillan b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? The Real Moody d. Potions Master or Mistress? Not Slughorn? e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? snape is evil, but something about the fact that james potter saved his life means that he can't do the harm he wants to do. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Cup d. Locket e. Ravenclaw Wand f. Gryff. Sword g. In Voldemort at this point he may have replaced the diary with nagini. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus: stag boggart: someone reading his mind Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? clearly love. Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. there is special good magic surrounding saving/sparing another person from death. 2. wormtails's life debt to harry was transferred to voldie during the flesh blood bone ceremony. 3. snape's life debt to james is transferred to harry at birth. 4. the fact that harry and voldie have the same blood will be a password to a horcrux 5. snape kills lupin, wormtail switches sides and kills snape. From Adam.Chase at charter.net Fri Jul 13 15:24:14 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:24:14 -0000 Subject: I think Kreacher might play a BIG role in the last book (spoiler on the movi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171668 Tandra wrote: > > > Has anyone else who's seen the movie gotten this feeling too? > Lisa: > > You betcha! My guess is that there's a horcrux somewhere in > Grimmauld Place, and Kreacher knows where it is, even if not WHAT > it is ... though few consider house-elves to be a threat,so > anything could've been said in front of him, really. drax_orion: I'm sure this has been said dozens of times, but the "locket" they found while cleaning in OotP has a high probability of being Slytherin's locket and R.A.B. is Regulus A. Black. I agree with the comments about how so many people seem to be missing, though I think it happened just because the movie people are such lackwits and penny pinchers (though they seemed to be ok with paying the 3 stars 4 mil each) that they cut out scenes that would have required extra setups or special equipment. I know I'm starting to rant about the movies but I have to get this off my chest or I'll burst. The big problem with making the movies now is that they don't know how it all ends, so they can't make intelligent choices on what to remove or change in each movie. They should have waited until the last book was released before doing the first movie (then the first DD actor would already be dead and we'd have never known~and we might of actually gotten Ian McKlellen to play DD). drax_orion ELFY NOTE: If you would like to respond to the portion of this post which pertains to the locket, Kreacher & R.A.B., please do so here at the main HPfGU list. If, on the other hand, you would like to respond to the portion of this post which pertains to how best to make the movies, please do so at our sister list: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/ Shorty Elf, for the HPfGU List Elves From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 15:31:58 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 08:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DH being sold early???? Message-ID: <385042.28731.qm@web55708.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171669 It has emerged that some book stores in the UK are not required to keep a written agreement preventing them from selling Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows before its release next Friday. "It's quite possible one will break the embargo," says Katherine Rushton from The Bookseller magazine. "They'd do it to be first, and for all the PR." Bloomsbury replied saying that there is "no reason to believe anyone would want to ruin the excitement. If such a thing were to happen, we believe that the public would make their feelings known by not buying it from such a spoilsport retailer. [However] it is our intention to vigorously enforce the embargo if required." Chancie: Ok I know we were talking about the lack of spoilers yesterday, but I didn't want that! That would be absolutely awful! I know I said that I like spoilers, but that's not entirely accurate. I much more prefer Spumors... (Spoilers and Rumors mixed, so you can't tell which is which) That way I still don't KNOW what's actually going to happen, but I have something to ponder while waiting for the book! But to actually have the possibility of having the ending released early?? That would defiantly make it harder to rationalize my "it's a fake" or whatever defense.... Chancie --------------------------------- Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 13 15:45:03 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:45:03 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spoilers?? Where are They Message-ID: <27875000.1184341503889.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171670 Karen: >(snip) >Perhaps I will purchase a case of >butterbeer along with my book! Lauren: >Hi, >That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids to drink it but >then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it this made me wonder about it. Bart: In the "real world", I have come across a number of hispanic sodas (particularly "sangria" flavored) that contain tiny amounts of alcohol (I'm talking 1/2-1 proof). Now, for comparison, to get as much alcohol as you do from a can of beer, one would have to drink about a dozen bottles of the soda. And note that, in countries such as Germany and France, children frequently have small servings of beer or wine on a regular basis. I, myself, cannot drink alcohol because of a metabolic problem (from what I've been told, many non-drinkers have the same problem, but are frequently unaware that it is the cause of their non-drinking), but I have drunk the sangria a couple of times without ill effect (mind you, it was the second time I drank a bottle that I read the fine print and learned of its alcohol content; I figured better be safe than sorry, and never drank it again). In any case, I have seen hints (such as Lupin's comments when giving Harry butterbeer in POA, or the description of butterbeer having an effect on house elves which was different quantitatively rather than qualitatively from humans in regard to Winky) that butterbeer is similar; it has some alcohol (or maybe some potion similar to Star Trek's synthehol), but not enough to be even noticeable to human children, at least over a certain age, similarly to the sangria soda. In other words, a bottle of butterbeer will have as much effect on a 12 year old as a sip of regular beer. Bart From sam2sar at charter.net Fri Jul 13 15:55:57 2007 From: sam2sar at charter.net (Stephanie) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:55:57 -0000 Subject: Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171671 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pouncevil" wrote: > > Is it just me or is there a lack of LOST/Missing/Found compies of the > Deadly Hallows. Unlike the other books there was always leaks in some > cases floods of informatin about the books. This time there are NONE. > Anyone care to wade into this. > > Pouncevil > Sam says, There are plenty of spoilers out there now. Just be carefull were you go. Stick to the reputable sites and you will remain spoiler free. STAY AWAY from everywhere else. The spoilers are getting pretty thick out there. One plus, they contradict each other so it's hard to believe if they are real. Good luck. From muellem at bc.edu Fri Jul 13 16:04:32 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:04:32 -0000 Subject: Spoilers?? Where are They In-Reply-To: <27875000.1184341503889.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171672 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Karen: > >(snip) > >Perhaps I will purchase a case of > >butterbeer along with my book! > > Lauren: > >Hi, > >That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids to drink it but > >then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it this made me wonder about it. > colebiancardi: When I think of butterbeer, I think of two things: 1. It is like today's Root Beer - it doesn't contain alcohol, despite its name. 2. The effects that butterbeer has on house elves is similar to the effects that catnip has on cats. Cats get stoned on catnip. Yet we humans drink catnip tea with none of the side effects that cats get. Humans don't get drunk on butterbeer, but house elves do - they do have a different body type than humans and that makes sense to me colebiancardi From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 16:22:26 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:22:26 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) In-Reply-To: <000701c7c54f$57671490$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171673 Lauren: > > > That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids to drink it but then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it this made me wonder about it. > > Goddlefrood: > > I've had a large number of different kinds of beverages, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic, in my life, but have never come across butterbeer so far. I do know that if one adds milk to beer they really do not mix well. However I'm no wizard, so what do I know? It is a popular drink amongst younger wizards and witches. > > > Marion > > It's probably a wink-eyed reference to the 'lashings and lashings of ginger beer' that was always drunk in pre-war schoolstories. Carol responds: And/or butterscotch, which sounds as if it has liquor in it but doesn't. I've always imagined butterbeer as butterscotch-flavored rootbeer, with just the tiniest amount of liquor in it--not enough to affect a 120-pound thirteen-year-old (except possibly to make him even giddier than usual, if he happens to be Ron), but more than enough to affect a thirty-pound house-elf, especially if she's drinking six bottles a day. Body weight is surely the main factor here. Carol, who thinks that hot butterbeer might taste rather like hot buttered rum only milder and sweeter From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 16:30:21 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:30:21 -0000 Subject: I think Kreacher might play a BIG role in the last book (spoiler on the movi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171674 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "drax_orion" wrote: I'm sure this has been said dozens of times, but the "locket" they found while cleaning in OotP has a high probability of being Slytherin's locket and R.A.B. is Regulus A. Black. ============================ Lisa: It has, but I still agree with it! ;0) From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 13 16:57:23 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:57:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) Message-ID: <14948178.1184345843414.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171675 From: Goddlefrood >I've had a large number of different kinds of beverages, both >alcoholic and non-alcoholic, in my life, but have never come >across butterbeer so far. I do know that if one adds milk to >beer they really do not mix well. However I'm no wizard, so >what do I know? It is a popular drink amongst younger wizards >and witches. Bart: Ah, in my speculations as to what butterbeer HAS, I forgot to make speculations as to what butterbeer IS. Of course, there is virtually no canon that helps us in this regard. However, it does appear that it is a drink that mainly appeals to adolescents, but that adults can enjoy, as well. That implies, at least to me, that it is a sweet drink. As "beer" is in the name, one can assume a level of carbonation. Now, there IS a beer, popular in some parts of the real world, made from honey, called "mead" (as a matter of fact, the reason why kosher wines had, for years, a reputation of being cloyingly sweet is because many of the Jews who came to England and the United States came from areas where grapes were rare and mead was popular, so when they were able to make grape wine, they made it taste similar to the mead they were used to; at least that's what long-time New York food columnist/radio host Arthur Schwartz has said. Now, there is a popular sweet made from butter, cream and sugar melted together, called "butterscotch". It is related to caramel and toffee, differing mainly in the way it's heated. Now, I have made home-brewed root beer (and birch beer) several times. It can be made anywhere from virtually non-alcoholic (by sealing the bottle carefully) to somewhat alcoholic (by letting some of the carbon dioxide to escape, so it doesn't kill the yeast before they make much alcohol). Now, JKR apparently said in an interview with Bon Appetit magazine, that she imagines it "to taste a little bit like less-sickly butterscotch" (note: I saw this quote in several places, but cut and pasted from Wikipedia, which was the first place I found to identify the source). One other bit of historical background: Butterscotch used to frequently be made with Scotch Whiskey, at least before the 2nd World War. This may or may not be relevant, here. In any case, I am going to assume that butterbeer is a fermented product, using butterscotch syrup and water as a base, made in sealed casks so that a minimal amount of alcohol gets formed. As it is supposed to have a warming effect (Lupin on POA, among others), it may be that SOME of the carbon dioxide is allowed to escape, increasing the alcohol content, and reducing the sweetness further. Looking through the Internet, I have found that the Hires root beer kit (which I used for my initial efforts) hasn't been available for a couple of decades (boy, do I feel old!), and most of the root beer recipes on the Internet are not the fermented product. Here's a site with a technique similar to the one I used when I made it from scratch (using a birch beer recipe from a late 19th century medicinal cookbook): http://www.greydragon.org/library/brewing_root_beer.html Bart From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 17:00:06 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:00:06 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171676 Eggplant wrote: I'm not convinced Snape turned to the good side, a slight tilt in that direction over the years maybe. In my theory Dumbledore trusts Snape because years ago Snape made an Unbreakable Vow to protect the life of Harry Potter. Dumbledore did not know that Snape made this noble sounding vow for less than noble reasons. > > Suppose Snape heard every word of the entire prophesy but Dumbledore sincerely believed he only heard half; we know for a fact he only told > Voldemort half but I think the reason is that Snape knew attacking the > baby Harry would be very dangerous and he wanted Voldemort dead. > Suppose Snape wants to rule the world but 2 wizards stand in his way, > Dumbledore and Voldemort. One down one to go, and that's why he needs > Harry alive until he can finish off the Dark Lord. Carol responds: I've said this before, but here I go again. Trust is not based on compulsion. It's the belief that the other person will do the right thing of his own volition. Note that DD did *not* trust Tom Riddle, but he trusts Hagrid "with his life" and Snape "completely." (Probably, he doesn't trust Hagrid with secrets--that would be utterly foolish--unless he for some reason wants those secrets to "slip.") Nor do I think that Dumbledore, who believes in Love as the most powerful form of magic and in the importance of choices, would bind *anyone* with an Unbreakable Vow, which not only involves compulsion but, AFAWK, the death of the vow breaker. That sounds like Dark Magic to me--the sort of thing that DE supporter Narcissa and DE Bellatrix think nothing of, but DD would, IMO, never consider, especially if McGonagall is right that there are kinds of magic he would never use. I agree that Snape is protecting Harry because he knows that Harry is the only one who can vanquish the Dark Lord. Perhaps that, in itself, is the basis for DD's trust. He knows that, for some reason known to him but not to us, Snape wants LV dead. And, IMO, it's most unlikely that Snape wants to be a Dark Lord himself. While he does enjoy his power over his students in the classroom and for some reason the DEs cowered when they saw him on the tower (did they sense that his power was greater than theirs? Did they fear his anger? Was it just that they thought he was LV's "favorite"?) I see no evidence anywhere that he's recruiting followers or trying to take LV's place. Surely he would have done so long before when LV was powerless and the DEs were looking for a new Dark Lord to rally around if that were the case. (I see no evidence, either, that he sees the "mediocre" Harry as a rival for anything except Dumbledore's trust and affection--sibling rivalry with favorite son James transferred to new favorite son Harry.) Carol, quite sure that Snape is loyal to DD and that DD's trust was justified and hoping that the chapter near the end that made JKR cry is Snape telling his story--and Harry believing him From technomad at intergate.com Fri Jul 13 17:01:55 2007 From: technomad at intergate.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:01:55 -0500 Subject: Voldemort babyfied? Message-ID: <000b01c7c56f$85741ed0$a1570043@D6L2G391> No: HPFGUIDX 171677 Several people have raised the question of what happens in Book 7 if Voldemort gets hit with whatever hit that DE in OotP, and gets reverted back to a baby. Most of you seem to think that Harry will kill him anyway. If you refer back to that scene, I think you'll find a clue about what would happen if Voldemort were babyfied. Like so: --Harry raised his wand. At last, he had Voldemort where he wanted him! The Dark Lord had blundered into the Time Room at the Ministry and had fallen into a time-warper; he was now nothing but a helpless baby, wriggling on his back in a pile of robes and crying. Harry poised himself to kill, to free himself and the Wizard World from a menace that had brooded over them for decades... --and found himself staring down the business end of a wand. Behind that wand was Hermione Granger; her eyes were like two chips of obsidian. "Put down that wand, Harry Potter!" she hissed. "Put it down, _now!_" "But---he's Voldemort!" "_You can't kill a baby!"_ And I can see Hermione's point. Granted, genetically the Gaunts weren't a great risk, but a lot of Merope's problems were likely to be due to her upbringing, and AFAWK the Riddles were all right on that score. Also, despite the best efforts of the orphanage, we have Herself's word that he was never loved, and that might well have contributed to his, er, _problems_ dealing with people. Being raised by a loving adoptive family might make a big difference, and even if problems arise, this time people'd be forwarned. From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Fri Jul 13 17:14:52 2007 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:14:52 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171678 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Ginny (JKR won't have to kill Harry then. He will refuse to be seen in public again without Ginny there) I also wonder if Salazar Slytherin has a surviving Horcrux which will be destroyed during this book. (After all, no-one knows what happened to that Hogwarts founder once he left the school 1000 years ago) 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Death Eater's Death Head on his forearm (I don't think we will see more evidence of this in Deathly Hallows) 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes But even though Hogwarts reopens, we will see no more Quidditch games. Luna's commentating was the last game for JKR to write 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Harry b. Head Girl? - Hermione c. DADA Instructor? - New character (either a recruit from the Dragon Sanctuary, a friend of Charlie Weasley's or the wizard/witch that helped Sirius after escaping Hogwarts, the one with the tropical bird doing owl deliveries) d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Snape He plays both sides for his own goals. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaws wand f. Snitch g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus : Snake Boggart: the Bloody Baron Mirror of Erised: Eliane Prince Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Known present and past Horcruxes Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. - Draco will betray the Dark Lord after his mother and/or father are killed. He will repeat RAB's path - RAB (Regulus) was given the task to kill his own brother, Sirius Black. That is why he left the Death Eaters. - One Horcrux will be hiding in Aragog's lair (for 3 reasons: A/ The traveller that gave Hagrid the Acromancia egg was the same dark wizard, Grindelwald, that told Tom Riddle about Horcruxes, and gave him enough information to find and kill his father, Tom Riddle Snr. B/ Tom knew Hagrid had the Acromancia somewhere and Tom also knew the spell to repel it. C/ Acromancias were bred to protect Wizard treasure according to Fantastic Beasts) - Non-humans will assist the Trio in the quest for the Horcruxes (house elves, centaurs, maybe Goblins) - It is not just giant's blood that protects Hagrid. His great coat is lined with Graphorn hide which repels most spells (see Fantastic Beasts) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 17:18:14 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:18:14 -0000 Subject: Voldemort babyfied? In-Reply-To: <000b01c7c56f$85741ed0$a1570043@D6L2G391> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171679 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eric Oppen" wrote: > > Several people have raised the question of what happens in Book 7 if Voldemort gets hit with whatever hit that DE in OotP, and gets reverted back to a baby. Most of you seem to think that Harry will kill him anyway. > > If you refer back to that scene, I think you'll find a clue about what would happen if Voldemort were babyfied. Like so: > > --Harry raised his wand. At last, he had Voldemort where he wanted him! The Dark Lord had blundered into the Time Room at the Ministry and had fallen into a time-warper; he was now nothing but a helpless baby, wriggling on his back in a pile of robes and crying. Harry poised himself to kill, to free himself and the Wizard World from a menace that had brooded over them for decades... > > --and found himself staring down the business end of a wand. Behind that wand was Hermione Granger; her eyes were like two chips of obsidian. > > "Put down that wand, Harry Potter!" she hissed. "Put it down, _now!_" > > "But---he's Voldemort!" > > "_You can't kill a baby!"_ > > And I can see Hermione's point. Granted, genetically the Gaunts weren't a great risk, but a lot of Merope's problems were likely to be due to her upbringing, and AFAWK the Riddles were all right on that score. Also, despite the best efforts of the orphanage, we have Herself's word that he was never loved, and that might well have contributed to his, er, _problems_ dealing with people. Being raised by a loving adoptive family might make a big difference, and even if problems arise, this time people'd be forwarned. > Carol responds: Interesting theory, but it doesn't fit well with the Prophecy ("either must die at the hand of the other") and Harry has seen what LV was like as a boy. He's even heard Mrs. Cole say that he never responded to affection or attention even as a baby. He was strange from the first. Harry would know that they'd be just repeating history--not to mention that this baby would have one-seventh of a soul (JKR's math, not mine) and would probably be just as snake-faced an horrible as the Fetal!mort who required Nagini's "milk" for sustenance. And we saw how Harry reacted to *that* "baby": "Let it have drowned. . . . let it have gone wrong. . . . It's gone wrong. . . . it's drowned . . . . please, please, let it be dead. . . ." (GoF Am. ed. 643). Carol, who believes that Love will destroy, not save, Voldemort, who, as we know from OoP, can't endure it From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 13 17:22:33 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:22:33 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Goddlefrood" wrote: > > > Lauren: > > > That reminds me: What is butterbeer? I know they allow the kids > > to drink it but then when some refer to Winky getting drunk on it > > this made me wonder about it. > > Goddlefrood: > > > On the question of why it affects Winky as it does, and she's > never to be cured of her addiction, alas, I would suppose that > as well as having a different kind of magic House Elves have a > different kind of sobriety. In other words, butterbeer affects > elves in a quite differing way to how the same innocuous drink > affects wizards and witches. > > Bart: > In any case, I have seen hints (such as Lupin's comments when giving Harry > butterbeer in POA, or the description of butterbeer having an effect on house > elves which was different quantitatively rather than qualitatively from humans > in regard to Winky) that butterbeer is similar; it has some alcohol (or maybe > some potion similar to Star Trek's synthehol), but not enough to be even > noticeable to human children, at least over a certain age, similarly to the > sangria soda. In other words, a bottle of butterbeer will have as much effect on > a 12 year old as a sip of regular beer. Ken: Somehow, somewhere I got the impression that it is a mildly alcoholic drink although initially I assumed it was like non-alcoholic like root beer. Even a mild alcohol content would be more intoxicating for a small creature like an elf and the notion that they might have a different metabolism certainly applies too, one doesn't even have to suppose that it has anything to do with magic. It is standard science fiction convention #7 that alien creatures will either a) use intoxicants that would be deadly poison to humans or b) get four sheets to the wind on substances that have no such affect on humans. You can't have a good ET story without that, your readers expect it. Of course these differences among species are common in the real world, the catnip example is a good one involving an intoxicant. I used to sit and eat half a pound of grapes at a time with my American Eskimo dog, one for me, one for her, one for me, .... She didn't get drunk on them but we eventually heard that grapes (and raisins) can be quite toxic to some dogs and breeds so we stopped giving her grapes years ago. Luckily, at age 14 she is still with us and still begging for treats. It is totally plausible that butterbeer, whatever it is, would intoxicate elves and not the Hogwarts students. Ken From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 17:24:05 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:24:05 -0000 Subject: Emotional connections with the characters WAS: Re: Connections Interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171681 > > Jen: Insightful paragraph here, Dung. There are times the Snape > > character makes me boil, especially when he appears to be using his > > position as an adult and authority figure (with Dumbledore's > > permission by omission if nothing else) over those in lesser > > positions by age, circumstance or power. It feels like injustice to > > me and not something others should have to tolerate. > > Dungrollin: > I have to admit that I don't engage at such an emotional level with > the books; I think the only time I got annoyed with a character was > with Harry in the Occlumency lessons because I read Snape as having > made a massive effort (not entirely successful, granted, but a > massive effort all the same) and Harry didn't even notice, let alone > make any kind of effort in return. I can dispassionately see that > Snape's nasty and cruel and emotionally retarded, but I would react > to someone like him so differently to the way that Harry reacts that > I find it difficult to take his nastiness personally, all I feel is > pity. (Mingled with admiration for his way with words...) Alla: Hey Dung. Are you sure though that you do not engage on such emotional level with the books or you are just engaging with the different character then Jen does and myself does as well? Now, this is not meant to be doubting your words - I do not like when somebody tells me that I do not really mean what I write and I would not do it to you or anybody else myself. The only reason why I am asking is because this statement of yours to me stands in contradiction with you saying at the end of the paragraph that you feel pity for Snape and with your earlier statement that you really do not want Snape to die. If after reading my post, you will still tell me that you do not engage on emotionl level with the books, I will absolutely accept it. I guess this is just asking for clarification, I suppose. Now, as I said many times I am absolutely emotionally attached to several characters in Potterverse and see nothing wrong with it. I think a lot of people are, hehe. I mean, that is how I read books, that is among other things how I figure whether the fiction book is good or not - if author makes me feel for the character as if the character is real person, that is for me the first sign when the author succeeded, hehe. In "War and peace", no matter how many times I read it, I still do not want prince Andrew to die and I cannnot ever like Natasha as much because she betrayed him, hehe. Yes, the book is fascinating as the encyclopedia of russian life in the 19 century of the sort, but without emotional connection with the characters, the book would never be as good for me as it is right now. So, to go back to Potterverse - absolutely I am attached to Harry's character, want him to survive and be as happy as possible and want his tormentor to suffer a lot, as I said gasillion times. I mean, what does it mean for you to engage with the book on the emotional level? Certainly I do not think about Harry's character 24/7 - there is that RL stuff going on and all that ( okay, maybe few days before book 7 comes out I think about the book a lot LOL, but you get what I mean), but when I do, I feel for him and I want him to to triumph. So, when you are saying that you feel pity for Snape and do not want him to die, do you not think that you are engaging on the emotional level with the books? I mean, if you were just saying that Snape is amusing for you on the intellectual level, his gift with words, etc, I would understand that this is not the emotional level connection, you know? Thanks Dung. Alla From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 13 18:03:57 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:03:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape. Message-ID: <29220022.1184349837332.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171682 Carol responds: >I've said this before, but here I go again. Trust is not based on >compulsion. Bart: Tell that to Bill Gates. Carol: >It's the belief that the other person will do the right >thing of his own volition. Bart: And compulsion is a great way to ensure that. Carol: >(Probably, he doesn't trust Hagrid with secrets--that would be utterly >foolish--unless he for some reason wants those secrets to "slip.") Bart: I wonder if Hagrid ever actually let a secret slip that he wasn't supposed to. Carol: >Nor do I think that Dumbledore, who believes in Love as the most >powerful form of magic and in the importance of choices, would bind >*anyone* with an Unbreakable Vow, which not only involves compulsion >but, AFAWK, the death of the vow breaker. Bart: I don't think DD would trust an Unbreakable Vow. He makes it quite clear that, from his point of view, there are worse things than death. Which implies that, whatever reason DD has for trusting Snape is STRONGER than an Unbreakable Vow. Bart From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 13 18:09:03 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:09:03 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort babyfied? Message-ID: <12525885.1184350143602.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171683 From: Eric Oppen >--Harry raised his wand. At last, he had Voldemort where he wanted him! >The Dark Lord had blundered into the Time Room at the Ministry and had >fallen into a time-warper; he was now nothing but a helpless baby, wriggling >on his back in a pile of robes and crying. Harry poised himself to kill, to >free himself and the Wizard World from a menace that had brooded over them >for decades... > >--and found himself staring down the business end of a wand. Behind that >wand was Hermione Granger; her eyes were like two chips of obsidian. > >"Put down that wand, Harry Potter!" she hissed. "Put it down, _now!_" > >"But---he's Voldemort!" > >"_You can't kill a baby!"_ Bart: "A baby what?" Harry countered. "Remember, baby or not, he has no soul! He stopped being human when he created his first horcrux!" "Can you REALLY be sure?" demanded Hermione. "He looks so innocent!" And the baby picked up the wand next to him, pointed it directly at Harry, and said, "Avera..." Bart From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 18:11:40 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:11:40 -0000 Subject: Connections Interview re: Snape (1999) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171684 > Sue(hpfan): > I agree that if no one would want Snape, it would have to be for a > really terrible reason. Although, Draco doesn't have any trouble > and he is just as foul, some times more foul. I wonder if her > comment was to throw everyone off. He is "creepy" but I think it is > too late and too cheap to make him different in some way. I think > if posed the question pre-Pansy Parkinson, JKR might have said the > same thing about Draco. > > Sue(hpfan0 lizzyben: I totally agree that JKR's comment was meant to throw people off about Snape's past history & motivations. In another early interview, JKR suggested that DD didn't give Snape the DADA job because DD was afraid it would make Snape relapse back to the Dark Arts. But, now we know that wasn't true (or wasn't the whole truth). DD actually didn't give Snape the DADA job because the position was cursed, and he wanted to keep Snape around. So, there's actually 3 collaborators in selling Snape's cover story - DD, Snape, & JKR: JKR presented the exact same DADA cover story to readers that Snape later presented to the Black sisters. For many reasons, JKR doesn't want readers to know the truth before the last novel. This is why, IMO, JKR's quotes are pretty useless when it comes to learning new clues or revelations about the storyline. There's no way she'll reveal anything in an interview - all we'll get is the cover story. Her answer to the "Snape in love" question was snarky, but it also cleverly avoided answering the question. And it also helped send readers down the wrong path (Snape is creepy, ever so evil & unloveable). She could've just said yes or no, but the way she evaded answering indicates that the real answer will be an important element of the plot. And IMO it'll be "Snape loved Lily", as hokey as that plot might seem. lizzyben From mros at xs4all.nl Fri Jul 13 18:35:23 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:35:23 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) References: Message-ID: <000b01c7c57c$9401f000$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 171685 Carol responds: >>>And/or butterscotch, which sounds as if it has liquor in it but doesn't. I've always imagined butterbeer as butterscotch-flavored rootbeer, with just the tiniest amount of liquor in it--not enough to affect a 120-pound thirteen-year-old (except possibly to make him even giddier than usual, if he happens to be Ron), but more than enough to affect a thirty-pound house-elf, especially if she's drinking six bottles a day. Body weight is surely the main factor here.<<< Marion And/or maybe Elves get all tiddly on sugar, not on alcohol. We don't even know *what* Elves eat (they could, for all we know, live on woodpulp and sulfur and think a box of matches a gourmet meal) so the joke might just be that the kids drink this ginger beer/ root ale/ butterscotch (good catch, that, the butterscotch connection) harmless-to-humans sugary fizzy drink, and a House Elf gets all sloshed on it. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 18:44:15 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:44:15 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape. In-Reply-To: <29220022.1184349837332.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171686 Carol earlier: > >I've said this before, but here I go again. Trust is not based on >compulsion. > Bart responded: > Tell that to Bill Gates. Carol again: Sorry. I don't understand. In any case, we're talking about DD. > > Carol earlier: > >It's the belief that the other person will do the right thing of his own volition. > > Bart: > And compulsion is a great way to ensure that. Caraol again: Compulsion is a great way to ensure that some does something *of his own volition*? Sorry. No. They're opposites. Voldemort uses compulsion to ensure that his DEs do his will specifically because he *doesn't* trust them. Narcissa, for all her tears and flattery, uses an Unbreakable Vow because, much as she hopes that Snape will protect Draco, she doesn't fully trust him. (Bellatrix doesn't trust him at all, with or without the UV) Dumbledore, OTOH, trusts Snape completely. To me that suggests something in snape himself that makes him *trustworthy.* "I know he'll do what I want him to because he's compelled to do so by a vow that will kill him if he breaks it" is not the same as "I trust him." ("I would trust Hagrid with my life" certainly doesn't suggest that he made a UV with Hagrid to protect him. The basis for his trust in Hagrid is Hagrid's loyalty (and gratitude) to him. I suspect that his trust in Snape has a similar basis. He *knows* that snape is loyal to him, or at least he *knows* that Snape is adamantly opposed to Voldemort and therefore determined to protect the Chosen One at all costs.) Again, compulsion and trust are opposites. A trustworthy person does not require compulsion, nor does a person who trusts use compulsion as a motivator. If you trust your kid to do his homework, you don't stand over him threatening to take away his computer privileges if he doesn't do it right now. And if he's trustworthy, he'll do the homework without compulsion. (If he's not trustworthy, of course, you both have a problem.) Carol earlier: > >Nor do I think that Dumbledore, who believes in Love as the most powerful form of magic and in the importance of choices, would bind anyone* with an Unbreakable Vow, which not only involves compulsion but, AFAWK, the death of the vow breaker. > > Bart: > I don't think DD would trust an Unbreakable Vow. He makes it quite clear that, from his point of view, there are worse things than death. Which implies that, whatever reason DD has for trusting Snape is STRONGER than an Unbreakable Vow. Carol again: Hm. I guess we agree here, sort of. At least, neither of us thinks that DD would resort to an Unbreakable Vow. But my point is that DD would not force another wizard to do his will. That isn't trust; it's compulsion, a Voldemortian tactic. And DD is all about choices, second chances, and trust--the antithesis of Voldemort. Carol, who thinks that DD had a good reason to trust--really trust, not compel--Snape, which we'll learn about in DH, and that Snape was indeed worthy of his trust From doliesl at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 19:57:51 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:57:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Message-ID: <163442.75463.qm@web82211.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171687 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Moody, Luna, Tonks (do they count as prominent?) 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? No d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? No f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Bill/Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Zackery Smith b. Head Girl? Pansy c. DADA Instructor? subject cancel d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Snape 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Wand e. Coin f. Sword g. Crown Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus: stag boggart: dead body of James and Lily (or some other symbols of great failure) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. The ending is Harry and Ginny getting back together. Harry married into Weaseley family, gaining a big family even though the story started with him losing his family, alas, circle of life. 2. Hermione and Ron will end up together after what they've been thru. together. 3. Bellatrix will who shield LV from attack and died for her man, or if LV died first, Bella commit suicide to follow him. A twisted frightening love that LV didn't really comprehend. (really likes Bellatrix after watching the movie :D) 4. The final battle will be held back at Hogwarts. 5. (I'm convinced by puppetmaster DD people here :D). Dumbledore is the one who instruct Snape to tell Voldemort's half of the propehcy (Snape either heard the whole thing or not, doesn't matter), DD wanted to plan LV downfall. That's what the crytic regret and anguish DD was crying about when Harry force him to drink the potion. DD is the real person who felt guilty of really causing the death of James and Lily (ie: the "it's my fault" screaming in cave). Well along with Snape anyway. They're partners in crime, that's why DD trust Snape. D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 15:20:23 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:20:23 -0000 Subject: Potter and Reading (was Re: Final thoughts on Harry surviving....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171688 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maeg wrote: > Indeed, as the series draws to a much-lamented > close, federal statistics show that the percentage of youngsters who > read for fun continues to drop significantly as children get older, > at almost exactly the same rate as before Harry Potter came along." > > While I'm happy with any book that encourages a kid to read or set > foot in a bookstore or library, we shouldn't overstate the effect the > Harry Potter phenomenon has had. Which matches with statistics for reading and booksales in general. The reading public continues to decline in numbers at a steady rate, much to the frustration of booksellers. Indeed, many booksellers are not particularly happy about the way the Harry Potter phenomenon has developed, as the heavy discounts imposed by the various distribution and sales markets, combines with the trouble and expense of readings, launching parties, late night events, etc., mean that their profits are only a small fraction of what one would expect. More importantly, the subsidiary sales (i.e. people who come to buy Harry Potter and grab a couple of other books off the shelf that they wouldn't have ordinarily bought), once expected to be relatively high, are extremely disappointing when measured against the copies of Potter sold. All of which lines up with a presentation I heard from a literary agent a year or so ago. He said (paraphrasing), "Best seller lists and sales numbers are very misleading. Best sellers are by definition an extreme exception to market conditions, and extraordinary best sellers like Stephen King's books or the Harry Potter series are especially misleading. One would think from their sales that the readership of fantasy, horror, and sci-fi is booming. In fact, the sales numbers are overall dismal for all types of fiction, and the young adult market is almost completely stagnant with the exception of Harry Potter. King and J.K. Rowling and a few others manage briefly to monopolize a corner of the market, making incredible sales for one product over a given period of time. But that doesn't mean that the market as a whole is doing well or that readership isn't decreasing. It just means that a very high percentage of the people who are still buying books happen to be buying a few products. Ninety-five percent of all books still sell less than a hundred copies, and that includes non-fiction which sells much better, on average, than fiction. The number of books that make anything like a return on total investment (i.e. the time and expense of the author, agent, publisher, and seller) is vanishingly small -- a fraction of a percent. In essence, authors like Rowling, Clive Cussler, King, and a few others are subsidizing the entire market by keeping the infrastructure afloat." Which is why, if JKR kills off Harry, there will be lots of extremely angry people willing to go shares on a hit man for reasons having absolutely nothing to do with sentiment. Lupinlore From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 13 20:14:26 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:14:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape. Message-ID: <32317999.1184357666207.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171689 From: justcarol67 Carol earlier: >> >I've said this before, but here I go again. Trust is not based on >>compulsion. >> >Bart responded: >> Tell that to Bill Gates. > >Carol again: >Sorry. I don't understand. In any case, we're talking about DD. Bart: I'm talking about trust. The current design philosophy of Microsoft's products, especially the operating system, is to take control of the computer away from the user, and give it to Microsoft. It's called "trusted computing", and it allows Microsoft to trust your computer by compulsion. Now, to apply it to the WW: Carol earlier: >> >It's the belief that the other person will do the right thing of >his own volition. >> >> Bart: >> And compulsion is a great way to ensure that. > >Caraol again: >Compulsion is a great way to ensure that some does something *of his >own volition*? Sorry. No. They're opposites. Voldemort uses compulsion >to ensure that his DEs do his will specifically because he *doesn't* >trust them. Bart: Or, more precisely, so he CAN trust them. >Again, compulsion and trust are opposites. A trustworthy person does >not require compulsion, nor does a person who trusts use compulsion as >a motivator. If you trust your kid to do his homework, you don't stand >over him threatening to take away his computer privileges if he >doesn't do it right now. And if he's trustworthy, he'll do the >homework without compulsion. (If he's not trustworthy, of course, you >both have a problem.) Bart: There's an old Russian saying, popularized in the U.S. by Ronald Reagan: Trust, but verify. It means that people suddenly become much more trustworthy if they know they're getting checked on, and that there are penalties for violating the trust greater than the gains to be made. Bart: >> I don't think DD would trust an Unbreakable Vow. He makes it quite >clear that, from his point of view, there are worse things than death. >Which implies that, whatever reason DD has for trusting Snape is >STRONGER than an Unbreakable Vow. > >Carol again: >Hm. I guess we agree here, sort of. At least, neither of us thinks >that DD would resort to an Unbreakable Vow. But my point is that DD >would not force another wizard to do his will. That isn't trust; it's >compulsion, a Voldemortian tactic. And DD is all about choices, second >chances, and trust--the antithesis of Voldemort. Bart: He has been demonstrated as doing so. Can you say 12 Grimmauld Place? Well, a bunch of members of the OOP can't. The difference is prior agreement (actually, he did NOT get prior agreement from Harry). Bart From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 13 20:22:07 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:22:07 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171690 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? -- No b. Draco? -- No c. Hermione? -- No d. Luna? -- Yes e. Ron? -- No f. Neville? -- Yes g. Ginny? -- No 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg, when the Death Eaters come calling at Privet Drive on or after Harry's 17th birthday. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Ernie MacMillan b. Head Girl? - Lavendar Brown, but only because Hermione is not there c. DADA Instructor? - Moody (the real one this time) d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - McGonnagal (enrollment will be so low that she can continue to teach Transfiguration and be headmistress) 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With the person whose death was the inadvertent result of Snape's decision to join the Death Eaters. He is on Dumbledore's side because that is the side against Voldemort. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. in Voldemort b. the diary c. the ring d. the locket e. the Hufflepuff Cup f. Something of Ravenclaws g. Something of Gryffindors (but *not* the sword. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: a spider Boggart: himself, being legillimised (legillimenced?) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1.) Harry will consult Bill Weasley for advice on various methods of curse breaking 2.) A Weasley (but not Ron, Ginny, or Bill) will be killed 3.) It will be revealed that Regulus Black and Snape were friends during their Hogwart's days. 4.) There will be a point in the story when Harry has to choose between pursuing Snape and pursuing a horcrux: he will choose Snape, and it will cause a setback in the horcrux hunt, making him rethink his desire for revenge against Snape. 5.) Petunia will give Harry something relating to his past when he leaves Privet Drive for the last time. Either the orginal letter left by Dumbledore or something written by Lily. From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 13 20:30:27 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:30:27 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171691 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: Me, I wonder if the trigger for Snape's defection wasn't Voldemort's choice of the half-blood Harry instead of the pureblood Neville. As Dumbledore points out, if Voldemort really believed in pureblood supremacy, he wouldn't have done that. Somehow, I don't think Snape has a high tolerance for hypocrisy (in other people, that is, he shows plenty of it himself.) I've got a great fondness for the I'm A Prince = Irma Pince anagram. If Snape accepted Dumbledore's protection for his mother, then he would, IMO, never betray Dumbledore. va32h: Oh I don't think Voldemort ever really believed in pureblood supremacy - that's just a convenient platform for his terror campaign. I have a hard time imagining Snape defecting over the pureblood issue since 1) Snape is a half-blood himself, and seemingly proud of it (although he does keep it quiet) and 2) Snape is too savvy not to realize that Voldemort is just using the pureblood manifesto for his own gain. I've read the Irma Pince theory, and I'm not convinced based on their arguments (too much reliance on wildly extrapolating from very scant information for me). I do think that Snape's relationship with his family is relevant to the issue of Snape's loyalties, but I don't think Irma Pince is Eileen Snape. Eileen may still be alive though - we have no reason to think she isn't. va32h From mercuryblue144 at gmail.com Fri Jul 13 20:58:07 2007 From: mercuryblue144 at gmail.com (Beth Hartung) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:58:07 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldemort babyfied? In-Reply-To: References: <000b01c7c56f$85741ed0$a1570043@D6L2G391> Message-ID: <1be73e550707131358q431db8btb0e2703963d6e5ec@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171692 Carol: Harry has seen what LV was like as a boy. He's even heard Mrs. Cole say that he never responded to affection or attention even as a baby. He was strange from the first. Harry would know that they'd be just repeating history... MercuryBlue: Something I think you're forgetting is that baby Tom lived in an orphanage. There were dozens of other children needing attention, and the one that got attention was most likely the one that cried the loudest. Tom never cried. Ergo, the staff assumed Tom needed no attention. Ergo, Tom never got attention. Contrast this with a scenario in which Tom is being raised by two parents who know full well he needs attention and a lot of it (possibly with another child or two in the house as well, to demonstrate to Tom that he's not the only one who needs attention). Your points about his fragmentary soul and likely facial structure are taken, though. MercuryBlue [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 21:13:01 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldemort babyfied? In-Reply-To: <1be73e550707131358q431db8btb0e2703963d6e5ec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <323229.28245.qm@web52701.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171693 Carol wrote: Harry has seen what LV was like as a boy. He's even heard Mrs. Cole say that he never responded to affection or attention even as a baby. He was strange from the first. Harry would know that they'd be just repeating history... KATIE RESPONDS: I don't know...I think one of the major themes of the books is the ability to make choices and change one's life - to choose whether to be a good or a bad person... Now, assuming for a moment that taking Voldemort back to babyhood actually gave him back his whole soul, in other words, he doesn't take on just the form of a baby, but actually becomes the baby he once was, I think this could be a great ending. Harry would be relieved of having to be a murderer, Tom Riddle gets the chance to grow up with love (maybe raised by the ever-loving Molly Weasley? or by Harry and Ginny?), and the world is saved in completely non-violent way. I actually really like that idea. Voldemort gets a second chance - a chance to choose to be a good person. Dumbledore would certainly approve, I think. And Tom Riddle would be reborn - not Voldemort. Assuming, of course, that he got a soul back. I think that would fit with the overall themes of the books...the whole idea of scond chances and choice. ALthough I doubt that will actually happen that way. But I like it. Katie . --------------------------------- Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From djklaugh at comcast.net Fri Jul 13 21:37:22 2007 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:37:22 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Ultimate Bragging Rights Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171694 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No though he may experience the effects of the Draught of Living Death until Hermione makes the antidote 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes but not directly by Harry's actions. Harry's soul will remain intact 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Draco Malfoy 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark on his left arm 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? No not on September 1st - but he may arrive later g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Hagrid and Madame Maxine (Bill and Fleur will marry but they are not as prominent to the story as Hagrid and Madame Maxine) 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg (though I think she has already done magic - early in OOP when she was ranting about Mundungus - he heard her - or knew that she was angry - though he was miles away) 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Blaise Zabini b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? Kingsley Shacklebolt (the other minister will get Dolores Umbridge as his new secretary - much to his dismay) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? with Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Tom Riddle's Diary - destroyed b. Peverell's(Slytherin's) Ring - destroyed c. Slytherin's Locket d. Hufflpuff's Cup e. In Voldemort f. Nagini g. In Harry - nullified (see below) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus - Bat Boggert - The Sorting Hat as it would be able to read his thoughts Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? All aspects of Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. There was a piece of Voldemort's soul in Harry though not the scar per se. Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail) withdrew it from Harry when he drew blood in the graveyard the night of Voldemort's return. The bone of the father "renewed" the son, the flesh of the sevant "revived" the master, and the blood of the enemy "resurrected" the foe. Although both renew and revive mean to bring back to a former state and revive can mean to return to life, only the word "resurrect" carries a meaning of returning from the dead. And IMO in order to for Voldemort to be alive again he had to have a piece of his soul restored to him. Whether or not he realized he was destroying or nullifying a Horcrux the effect was the same. 2. Draco will be killed when there is a battle between Lord Voldemort and Harry. He will realize the necessity of Harry winning the battle and at a crucial moment will fling himself between Harry and a thrown AK curse. 3. Kreacher will fall in love with Winkie and decide that having a family and raising them in cleanliness and peace at Hogwarts is much more pleasant that going back to Grimmauld Place. With his change of heart he will reveal to Harry all the secrets of #12 Grimmauld Place including the hiding place for the real locket. 4. Neville will be late coming back to Hogwarts because over the summer his parents have made a miraculous recovery and the family is celebrating. The trainee healer, Augustus Pye, who tried sutures on Arthur Weasley's snake bite will have another inspired idea and will try Muggles' medications and psychotherapy on the Longbottoms with very good results. 5. Snape will be severely injured in the battle between Voldemort and his Death Eaters and Harry and the DAs. Only Hermione's quick thinking and excellent potion making will be able to save him. While delirious with fever Snape reveals how he has been able to play such a complex dual role - of Dumbledore's man and Voldemorte's trusted spy for so long. Because of his superior skills at Occulmancy and Legilimancy he is able to become a split personality at will. Not splitting his soul but splitting his persona with each half being ignorant of what the other half does and thinks. There are code words that only Dumbledore knew that would cause Snape's spy persona to reveal what LV was up to and cause the DM!Snape to become forefront again. Only through Hermione's efforts is this split healed and Snape is able to become a whole integrated person again. Submitted and signed djklaugh (aka Deb) - who is feverishly staving off many offers of attractive activities for July 21 and 22. From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Fri Jul 13 21:44:04 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:44:04 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171695 Pippin: <<< Me, I wonder if the trigger for Snape's defection wasn't Voldemort's choice of the half-blood Harry instead of the pureblood Neville.>>> va32h: <<>> ---- Inge now: I dont get the *Half-blood, Pure-blood* Snape is a 'half-blood' because one of his parents is a witch and the other is a muggle. So why exactly is Harry described a 'half-blood', too - when (just like Neville, who is a 'pure-blood') both of his parents are wizard/witch ?? The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 22:17:44 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:17:44 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171696 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. ============================ Lisa: Neville has no muggle grandparents or great-grandparents. Harry does. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Fri Jul 13 22:28:27 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:28:27 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape Message-ID: <380-220077513222827781@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171697 Inge now: I dont get the *Half-blood, Pure-blood* Snape is a 'half-blood' because one of his parents is a witch and the other is a muggle. So why exactly is Harry described a 'half-blood', too - when (just like Neville, who is a 'pure-blood') both of his parents are wizard/witch ?? The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. Magpie: Harry is a Half-Blood because his mother was Muggleborn and therefore has "Muggle blood." I agree this is one of the most confusing things in canon, particularly since Draco, who is in some ways our mouthpiece for this sort of thing, never once has a problem with Harry's bloodline or insults his mother. He puts him down for being a sort of defender of Muggle-borns, not having dirty blood himself. However, from what we've seen Hal-bloods in general are not the targets of the kind of prejudice Muggle-borns are according to Lucius Malfoy. But still, if Muggle-borns are considered tainted because they are essentially Muggles by birth (Hermione is once called a Muggle in GoF in a hate-letter), it's not unusual that Harry is considered a Half-blood. As was recently quoted on the list, Hagrid defends Harry against the charge of being *Muggle-born* when he tells him he's "not from a Muggle family" since both his parents were magical (and that's all that Draco seems to be asking at first too, whether Harry's parents were magical), but Harry is also identified as a Half-blood many times. Tom Riddle in CoS, Dumbledore in OotP, and I think Hagrid himself in GoF (when he wants Harry to be the Half-Blood champion who beats Pure-blood Cedric because he's insecure about being a Half-Giant). -m From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Fri Jul 13 22:28:42 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:28:42 -0000 Subject: Half-blood vs Pure-blood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171698 Me earlier: The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. Lisa replies: Neville has no muggle grandparents or great-grandparents. Harry does. Me again: So if Neville had one great-great-grandparent he would be considered a 'half-blood'? Hmmm ! From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 13 21:07:27 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:07:27 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171699 While I reread 1-6 and await Book 7, I'm reminded of how well JKR sets up Chekhov's guns and how many loose ends I'm hoping will be resolved in DH. I'm compiling a list -- not of predictions but rather unanswered questions and topics I hope to resurface in DH. Please add on! In no particular order: 1. Lily's/Harry's eyes 2. Lily -- & charms, & potions, & Snape, & Petunia 3. Dudley's reaction to dementers 4. Dumbledore's gleam of triumph 5. *That Night* at Godric's Hollow a. Flying motorbike b. Who else was there? c. Why was Lily offered the choice/chance to live? d. What actually happened?? 6. James & Lily thrice defied Voldemort -- how/what? 7. Hermione & Ancient Runes 8. Squeaky stair at #4 Privet Drive 9. Petunia: "that awful boy" 10. Petunia -- how much does she know? 11. Invisivibility Cloak - when/why was it bequeathed? 12. Pettigrew -- silver hand, life debt 13. Gryffindor's Sword 14. Neville -- memory, toad, herbology 15. Ollivander 16. Sirius' two-way mirror 17. Veil of death 18. Snape's allegiance 19. Locket/horcruxes 20. Molly Weasley's greatest fear (dead Weasleys) 21. Pensieves 22. Occlumency & legilimency 23. SPEW/equality in the WW 24. Hermione's E in DADA 25. WHAT ELSE? Joan of Anarchy, who's been waiting for Book 7 for ten years and now realizes she's not ready for it From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jul 13 22:49:16 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:49:16 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171700 > va32h: > > Oh I don't think Voldemort ever really believed in pureblood > supremacy - that's just a convenient platform for his terror > campaign. > > I have a hard time imagining Snape defecting over the pureblood issue > since 1) Snape is a half-blood himself, and seemingly proud of it > (although he does keep it quiet) and 2) Snape is too savvy not to > realize that Voldemort is just using the pureblood manifesto for his > own gain. Pippin: He's too savvy *now*. How savvy was he when he joined the DE's? Not so much, I should say. But self-hatred is an insidious enemy, as fond of disguises as Snape himself. You realize, don't you, that part of Snape's problem with the Marauders was that part of him felt he *deserved* to be picked on? He bought in to their characterization of him as inferior, or at least he was afraid it was true and needed to prove to himself that it wasn't. Being accepted by the DE's would prove to Snape that he was as good as any pureblood. But if the Dark Lord decided to go after baby Harry as the greater threat despite the fact that Neville's blood was purer, then Voldemort's validation of Snape would become meaningless, and that, I should say, led Snape to re-examine everything he'd been taught to believe. Does that make sense? Pippin From shmantzel at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 23:00:05 2007 From: shmantzel at yahoo.com (Dantzel Withers) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:00:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Half-blood vs Pure-blood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <779824.72127.qm@web56515.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171701 Inge earlier: The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. Lisa replies: Neville has no muggle grandparents or great-grandparents. Harry does. Inge again: So if Neville had one great-great- grandparent he would be considered a 'half-blood' ? Hmmm ! Dantzel replies: Well, people are hardly going to take the time to say 1/16ths-blood or whatever. Besides, this line of thinking has happened in RL, ie Nazis requiring their citizens to be registered if their genealogy contained a single Jew. --------------------------------- Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Jul 13 23:01:58 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:01:58 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: <380-220077513222827781@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171702 > Magpie: > Harry is a Half-Blood because his mother was Muggleborn and therefore has > "Muggle blood." I agree this is one of the most confusing things in canon, > particularly since Draco, who is in some ways our mouthpiece for this sort > of thing, never once has a problem with Harry's bloodline or insults his > mother. Pippin: Oh, but he does. "Or perhaps," said Malfoy, leering as he backed away, "you can remember what *you're* mother's house stank like, Potter, and Weasley's pigsty reminds you of it--" OOP, ch 19. Malfoy and Voldemort use the term 'half-blood' loosely, so does Hagrid, and even Dumbledore, for that matter ("he chose, not the pureblood [...] but the half-blood, like himself") underlining the fact that their purpose is identity politics, not science. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 13 23:13:59 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:13:59 -0000 Subject: Half-blood vs Pure-blood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171703 Inge earlier: > The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. > Lisa replied: > Neville has no muggle grandparents or great-grandparents. Harry does. > > Me again: > So if Neville had one great-great-grandparent he would be considered a 'half-blood'? Hmmm ! > Carol responds: I really hate to waste a post on a question that JKR herself has already answered (probably because so many people were as confused as you are about Harry's blood status). Harry is indeed a Half-blood, as JKR explains in her FAQ: "[Question:] Why are some people in the wizarding world (e.g., Harry) called 'half-blood' even though both their parents were magical? "[JKR;]The expressions 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' have been coined by people to whom these distinctions matter, and express their originators' prejudices. As far as somebody like Lucius Malfoy is concerned, for instance, a Muggle-born is as 'bad' as a Muggle. Therefore Harry would be considered only 'half' wizard, because of his mother's grandparents. [I think she means his mother's parents, Harry's grandparents.] "If you think this is far-fetched, look at some of the real charts the Nazis used to show what constituted 'Aryan' or 'Jewish' blood. I saw one in the Holocaust Museum in Washington when I had already devised the 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' definitions, and was chilled to see that the Nazis used precisely the same warped logic as the Death Eaters. A single Jewish grandparent 'polluted' the blood, according to their propaganda." http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=58 Carol again: As you can see, JKR determined blood status using the Nazi model for determining whether a person was Jewish. (It reminds me of the "quadroon" and "octaroon" designations once used to determine whether a person was white or "Negro" in the American South.) At any rate, because Harry's mother had Muggle parents, she had "Muggle blood," making Harry as much a Half-blood as if she had been an actual Muggle. If he were to marry the pure-blood Ginny, their children would have one "Muggle" grandparent. It's unclear whether they would still be considered Half-bloods. By the next generation, however, I think their blood would be "pure" enough to qualify as marriage material for most pure-bloods, even possibly the Malfoys, if only because pure-bloods who can trace their ancestry back through nine generations of witches and wizards (like Ernie Macmillan) or who have wizarding family trees extending back to medieval times (the black family tapestry and beyond) or farther like the Ollivanders, "makers of fine wands since 382 B.C." or whatever) are increasingly rare. It's important to JKR's story thematically that the Trio consists of a Pure-blood, a Half-blood (raised by Muggles), and a Muggle-born. Each has his or her own particular talents, and the Muggle-born Hermione is in some ways more talented than the pure-blood Ron despite the advantages of his magical upbringing. IOW, despite Draco Malfoy's sneers, she is not innately inferior. Harry has something of both; he's closer to a Pure-Blood than Hermione, but his mother was a Muggle-born like her and he was raised by Muggles. Also, of course, Voldemort is also a Half-Blood (he refers to Harry's "Muggle" mother in the same breath as his own Muggle father), and again it's important thematically that he chooses the Half-Blood Harry, with whom he identifies to some extent, rather than the pure-blood Neville, as more likely to be the Chosen One. (And a certain Half-Blood Prince, who also seems to share some traits and background with Harry, is, of course, also a Half-Blood.) At any rate, it appears that even one Muggle grandparent makes you a Half-Blood in the eyes of the Pure-Blood supremacists. Two Muggle grandparents certainly do (which is why Harry qualifies). Four Muggle grandparents (two Muggle parents), of course, make you a Muggle-born. Both Remus Lupin and Mundungus Fletcher have been referred to as Half-Bloods, one in an interview and the other in HBP, but we don't know whether the non-Pure-blood parent was a Muggle or a Muggle-born. I realize that it's all quite confusing, but Harry is called a Half-Blood by Dumbledore, Voldemort, and JKR herself, and they should know. Carol, hoping that she hasn't muddied the waters by expanding on JKR's definition From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sat Jul 14 00:19:29 2007 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:19:29 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging rights by Tigerpatronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171704 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Ron 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? No d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? No f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Fleur and Bill 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillian b. Head Girl? Susan Bones c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself. Playing Voldemort and Dumbledore against each other 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Locket b. Nagini c. diary d. ring e. Ravenclaw's journal f. Godric's wand g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Boggart is James Potter. Patronus is a Spider Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? I have no idea. Umm...A mystical artifact which can grant ultimate power to Voldemort. That's my guess Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Harry will recieve more memories of his parents curtesy of Dumbledore. 2. Harry and Ginny will not get back together (really more a wish but there you go...) 3. Harry will beat Snape in single combat but will not kill him 4. Luna will play an important role with regards to the ravenclaw Horcrux 5. Neville will become a Teacher at the end of the series. unofficial predictions The book will kick ass Snape will annoy me endlessly but Harry will kick his but so that's okay Draco will surprisingly not annoy me as much as I want. phoenixgod2000 From va32h at comcast.net Sat Jul 14 00:52:55 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:52:55 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171705 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > He's too savvy *now*. How savvy was he when he joined the DE's? Not > so much, I should say. > > But self-hatred is an insidious enemy, as fond of disguises as Snape > himself. You realize, don't you, that part of Snape's problem with > the Marauders was that part of him felt he *deserved* to be picked > on? He bought in to their characterization of him as inferior, or at least > he was afraid it was true and needed to prove to himself that it wasn't. > > Being accepted by the DE's would prove to Snape that he was as > good as any pureblood. But if the Dark Lord decided to go after > baby Harry as the greater threat despite the fact that Neville's > blood was purer, then Voldemort's validation of Snape would > become meaningless, and that, I should say, led Snape to > re-examine everything he'd been taught to believe. > Does that make sense? > va32h: I suppose it makes sense if one agrees with your assessment of Snape, but I don't. Snape struggles with self-loathing *now*, as a result of something he did as a DE, but I disagree that he felt inferior to the Marauders, or deserved to be picked on, even on a subconscious level. Quite the opposite. I think Snape developed a sense of superiority early on. I think Snape was grew up within the Prince family - that the hook nosed man in Snape's memories was his grandfather, not his father. Grandfather Prince was appalled at his daughter's choice of a Muggle husband. For whatever reason, Tobias Snape left the scene, and Eileen returned to her family with her small son, who was derided and tormented for his half-blood status, maybe even sarcastically referred to as "the half-blood Prince", which he is why he found such delight in writing that name on the textbook which demonstrated his magical brilliance. The Princes may have assumed that half-blood Severus would be lacking in magical ability - but he wasn't. Which is something he surely realized early on. Even if we allow for some exaggeration on Sirius' part, Snape arrived at Hogwarts knowing plenty of magic. And he was sorted into Slytherin, which would have been a bit of vindication for Snape, and a slap upside the head to those who thought only purebloods were worthy to study magic. A half blood permitted into Slytherin's house must be worthy, indeed. And at Hogwarts - he was, as the Potions book shows - absolutely brilliant. Improving on published potions recipes, inventing complex, nonverbal spells and their counter spells. I think Snape was an internal, cerebral kid - who enjoyed learning magic for the sake of learning. And the Marauders were - well, they were a band of hooligans. Handsome, charming, hooligans who wasted their tremendous magical talent on pulling pranks. I think that's what disgusted Snape - here he was, derided for his half-blood status, and yet possessing tremendous magical ability and control, as well as inventiveness and an intrinisic love of magic. And there were pureblood poster boys Sirius and James, gifted enough to become Animagi at an amazingly young age, but reckless and foolish enough to use that skill to...goof off! To roam around after hours and play tricks on their fellow students. I am not certain why Snape joined the Death Eaters, but I don't think it was to prove himself as good as any pureblood. He already knew he was not just as good, but better. Perhaps he recognized Voldemort as being someone just like him - a highly talented wizard with a thirst for magical knowledge, welcomed to Slytherin house despite having a Muggle father. Voldemort may have even used that logic in recruiting him. Come on, Severus, you and I will tell these pureblood bigots that it's all about getting rid of the Mudbloods, but once we're in charge, we'll show them what fools they really are. In fact, I think that *is* how Voldemort brought Snape into the fold, and that at some point Snape realized that he'd been duped, that Voldemort tells every Death Eater a different story, designed to appeal to that person's circumstances, desires, and beliefs (which is why he tells Harry that wearing one's heart on one's sleeve is a huge mistake. Actually, I think that's why Snape turned spy for the Order. Angry at Voldemort for fooling him (and angry at himself for being fooled) Snape undertakes the ultimate revenge by tricking the one who tricked him. Well this went on longer than I expected, sometimes I just get on a roll! va32h, who could go on for another three or four paragraphs on how Regulus and the Potters fit into this, but won't. From wileras at gmail.com Sat Jul 14 01:13:30 2007 From: wileras at gmail.com (Jared Cross) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:13:30 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <252305.47899.qm@web56803.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <252305.47899.qm@web56803.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171706 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Prominent is a matter of opinion, but I will answer Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Dark Mark, however I'm not sure that the answer to this will necessarily be revealed on page. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes, he will be convinced to return at least briefly. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? Yes. d. Luna? Yes. e. Ron? Yes. f. Neville? Yes. g. Ginny? Yes. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, *excluding any epilogue*? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry, part of why he is convinced to return briefly. b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? ESE!, while I understand the arguments for both sides, deep down I think I want him to be evil. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. The Ring b. The Locket c. The Diary d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaw's Wand f. Nagina g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus - Bat Boggert - James Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? A room that fills its occupants with the deepest feelings of love such that once entered they would not wish to leave, thus making it a dangerous room for anyone to enter. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Hmm lets try to be different about these. 1. The scene from the chapter "Snape's Worst Memory" will be discussed by Snape, where he reveals that the worst part of the memory was not being tormented by James. 2. Hufflepuff's cup will be hidden in a vault in Gringots forcing the trio to break in. 3. Olivander will contact Harry secretly, possibly at the wedding, where he will provide instructions to where Ravenclaw's wand is hidden. (Helping to reduce the burden of finding all of the horcruxes. The book can only have so many pages after all) 4. Hmm, haven't mentioned Draco yet. Draco will defect in the later half of the book and find the trio. After the traditional misunderstanding, yelling, curses, and what not he will tell the trio where Voldemort is hiding. 5. And for the super jumping out on a limb prediction - Peter will kill Voldemort with his silver hand. The line of the prophecy, "*and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives," * "*hand of the other*" specifically refers to Peter's hand. Ok so the last one is a little out there but at least they are different for the most part. Wileras [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vsteck at gmail.com Sat Jul 14 01:09:21 2007 From: vsteck at gmail.com (vanessa steck) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:09:21 -0400 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171707 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? -- Yes b. Draco? -- No c. Hermione? -- Yes d. Luna? -- Yes e. Ron? -- Yes f. Neville? -- Yes g. Ginny? -- Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fluer 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg, to help Harry 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Ernie MacMillan b. Head Girl? - Hermione c. DADA Instructor? - Moody d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. in Voldemort b. the diary (destroyed) c. the ring d. the locket (destroyed by...someone) e. the Hufflepuff Cup (hidden in the trophy room, I think) f. Something of Ravenclaws g. Harry or Harry's scar--also something of Gryffindors since I think that Harry is distantly related) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: snake Boggart: James Potter Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1.) Fred and George will use their jokes/gags to help Harry find and/or hurt LV. 2.) A Weasley parent will be killed. 3.) We will get some backstory involving Snape and R. Black being friends and making trouble for Dumbledore/teachers at Hogwarts. 4.) Dumbledore's Army will re-form in some manner to help fight LV. 5.) Neville will have a chance to avenge his parents by killing Peter Pettrigrew, but will choose to send to Azkaban (or some other place that is actually a punishment, given that Azkaban is no longer under dementor control) --Vanessa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 01:43:06 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:43:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Dumbledore's gleam of triumph Message-ID: <645239.23901.qm@web55701.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171708 I've assumed since reading HBP, that the "gleam of triumph" was DD's realization that Voldy was using Horcruxes, and as a result, he finally knew how to defeat him. I've seen several other posts refering to this, as still being an unanswered question, so I'm curious as to if I'm alone in that feeling. Any other thoughts? Chancie --------------------------------- Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From unicornspride at centurytel.net Sat Jul 14 03:25:29 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:25:29 -0600 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus References: <252305.47899.qm@web56803.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <042401c7c5c6$a204f9a0$0202a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 171709 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? prominent.. matter of opinion but I think it will be Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? message from Voldermort 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? yes b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? yes f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fluer 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Neville b. Head Girl? Hermoine c. DADA Instructor? Bill d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Harry via Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. ring c. hufflepuff cup d. locket e. ravenclaws wand f. Nagina g. Voldermort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Bat for partonus and himself and a boggert. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? infinite pure love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Draco will at some point come to offer assistance to Harry. Guessing middle to end of the book. 2. Snape will "sacrifice" himself for Harrys benefit. (ever hopeful that he is good) 3. We will find out that Snape went to Lily's house to work on potions together. Snape fell in love with Petunia (maybe even dated)but was rejected by her. 4. Petunia has been involved in the WW as a muggle with either Snape or Lily and has to hide it from Vernon so he doesn't freak out on her. We all know his feelings. 5. Voldermort doesn't die in the end. Prophesies do not always come true. He will be defeated and rendered useless by love. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Jul 14 03:15:32 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 03:15:32 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?FILK:_Snape=92s_Way?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171710 Snape's Way To the tune of My Way, by Frank Sinatra You-Tube performance at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1tGdoA6mCc Dedicated to CV THE SCENE: On the evening of his final appearance upon the Canonic stage, SEVERUS SNAPE reflects upon his illustrious literary career. SNAPE: And now, the end is near, As we approach the final climax Although, sometime next year, I'll live again, on-screen at IMAX. I've lived a life so foul And ev'ry foe, dearly did they pay And poor Al Dumbledore I hit with AK. Death threats and many feuds, I took them to brand-new dimensions I had my malicious moods And countless kids put in detention. I taught my Potion course And student hair, I turned it to gray And spread my fearsome name Across the UK. Yes, there were times, if I'm correct, When you wished you could have wrung my neck. Yet through it all, I fascinate, For I'm the man you love to hate. I did my snark, embraced the Dark, Like the KKK. I've sneered; I've made you wince, When at the Shack, you saw me barge in; And as the Half-Blood Prince I wrote it all in the margins Some think I'm Dumble's man Or maybe I'm in the Dark Lord's pay You've read the pro and con In many essays So I tell my fans, I won't be nice. I'd rather be the plot device Allowing Jo to mess with heads And make our books read and re-read. Have you found out what I'm about? I'd say there's no way!...... Wait `til Saturday! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 04:53:12 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 04:53:12 -0000 Subject: Half-blood vs Pure-blood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > > Me earlier: > The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. > > Lisa replies: > Neville has no muggle grandparents or great-grandparents. Harry does. > > Me again: > So if Neville had one great-great-grandparent he would be considered > a 'half-blood'? Hmmm ! > Lisa: Hmmm indeed. Here it is from JKR's own site: Why are some people in the wizarding world (e.g., Harry) called 'half- blood' even though both their parents were magical? The expressions 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' have been coined by people to whom these distinctions matter, and express their originators' prejudices. As far as somebody like Lucius Malfoy is concerned, for instance, a Muggle-born is as 'bad' as a Muggle. Therefore Harry would be considered only 'half' wizard, because of his mother's grandparents. If you think this is far-fetched, look at some of the real charts the Nazis used to show what constituted 'Aryan' or 'Jewish' blood. I saw one in the Holocaust Museum in Washington when I had already devised the 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' definitions, and was chilled to see that the Nazis used precisely the same warped logic as the Death Eaters. A single Jewish grandparent 'polluted' the blood, according to their propaganda. So there you go. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 04:55:09 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 04:55:09 -0000 Subject: Half-blood vs Pure-blood In-Reply-To: <779824.72127.qm@web56515.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171712 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dantzel Withers wrote: > > Well, people are hardly going to take the time to say 1/16ths-blood or whatever. > > Besides, this line of thinking has happened in RL, ie Nazis requiring their citizens to be registered if their genealogy contained a single Jew. Lisa: JKR's explanation exactly! From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Jul 14 04:59:50 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:59:50 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Half-blood vs Pure-blood Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171713 In a message dated 7/13/2007 5:31:26 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Elvishooked at hotmail.com writes: Me earlier: The way I see it, Harry is as much a 'pure-blood' as Neville is. Lisa replies: Neville has no muggle grandparents or great-grandparents. Harry does. Me again: So if Neville had one great-great-So if Neville had one great-gre a 'half-blood'a 'half-bloo delurking after a long time to offer my opinion. I think that the Voldemort supporters would consider Nevile to be a half-blood in that instance I consider Harry a "full blooded" wizard as opposed to "half" or "pure" blooded. example: Hermione is Muggleborn (as was Lily) . .no magical blood at all in their families Seamus is Half-blooded (was is Tonks). His mum being magical and his dad a muggle. Harry is (IMO) a full blood ..both of his parents were magical. Neville and Ron are Pure-bloods. . .nothing but magical relations on boths sides of the family Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 14 05:42:23 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 05:42:23 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's gleam of triumph. In-Reply-To: <645239.23901.qm@web55701.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171714 Chancie wrote: > I've assumed since reading HBP, > that the "gleam of triumph" was > DD's realization that Voldy was > using Horcruxes, and as a result, > he finally knew how to defeat him. But that can't be the entire story because it doesn't explain why that gleam of triumph only lasted a fraction of a second. I believe it's because an instant after Dumbledore understood how to defeat Voldemort he understood something else, it would involve Harry's death. Eggplant From zzzzzzipppppy at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 14 02:40:18 2007 From: zzzzzzipppppy at yahoo.co.uk (Alan) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 02:40:18 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: <042401c7c5c6$a204f9a0$0202a8c0@Lana> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171715 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? hermione 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? the dark mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? lupin and tonks 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" dudley dursley!! 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? harry b. Head Girl? hermione (who else!!) c. DADA Instructor? tonks (with a little help from harry) d. Potions Master or Mistress? slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? mcgonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? himself, but his love for lily will mean he sides with harry. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. in Voldemort b. the diary c. the ring d. the locket e. Hufflepuffs cup f. ravenclaws tiara (hidden in the room of requirement by voldemort himself just after asking dumbledore for the dada job) g. in harry Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus - bat. boggart - james potter Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? a horcrux. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): 1. lily and snape dated during their time at hogwarts (snape was proud of the fact he was a half blood wizard until james took lily away from him, then he became bitter and twisted against half bloods and muggle born wizards, so he joined the death eaters). 2. fred and george have access to a time turner. 3. towards the end of the book there will be just 2 wizards remaining - harry and voldemort (wizards with magical powers that is, the rest will have their powers taken away). 4. Kreacher and Regalus Black got the locket together, but Black died before he could destroy it... it is now at grimuald place (one of the many items kreacher hid). 5. draco will become harrys partner and help him find and destroy a horcrux not long to go now. alan From winston at selectivehouse.com Sat Jul 14 03:44:18 2007 From: winston at selectivehouse.com (abbey) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 03:44:18 -0000 Subject: Is Harry Potter the Son of God? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171716 ********** SPOILER SPACE ***************************** S P O I L E R * S P A C E ******************** SPOILER SPACE ********************* POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD ******************************************************** According to a MuggleNet article today, Rowling says, regarding "Deathly Hallows," that "Some people will loathe it, they will absolutely loathe it." Could this mean that Harry really is a Christ character? Some people would certainly loathe that - some have already said so in response to my article. Abbey From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 05:59:08 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 05:59:08 -0000 Subject: Seeing Thestrals Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171717 Ok so we know Harry, Luna, and Neville can see them. Can someone refresh my memory and let me know if we were ever told why Neville can see them? (Yes, I know you have to have seen death to see them...were we told who Neville saw die?) TKJ :-) From Adam.Chase at charter.net Sat Jul 14 04:58:36 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 04:58:36 -0000 Subject: Faith Predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171718 > > Neri : > > The green potion from the cave didn't have any additional > > effects beside those stated by Dumbledore: weakening the drinker > > and trying to prevent him from taking the Horcrux by any way > > possible. > > > Catlady: > > So what was that bad dream he was re-living? > > > > Neri: > Where's the canon that he was re-living anything? A bad dream can > be all hallucination, can't it. I don't know any canon that anything > Dumbledore was talking about during his potion experience had > actually happened before, and Dumbledore's canon explanation of the > potion's effect is perfectly adequate. In fact it is considerably > more adequate than the OotP explanation of the bubblegum wrappers, > and yet before HBP Faith had no trouble predicting that all the > grand bubblegum wrappers theories are headed straight for the > bottom of the Bay. Drax: Whats this about bubblegum? Anyways I agree about the hallucination stuff. Most likely the potion induced the same effects as his ministrations on the 2 kids he brought down there when he lived at the orphanage. A thought just occured to me. What if that basin full of potion was something in place from long ago and Voldie simply discovered it. He could have tormented the 2 kids by making them drink the potion. From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 06:26:11 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 06:26:11 -0000 Subject: Seeing Thestrals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171719 > TKJ : > Ok so we know Harry, Luna, and Neville can see them. Can someone > refresh my memory and let me know if we were ever told why Neville can > see them? (Yes, I know you have to have seen death to see them...were > we told who Neville saw die?) Mike: In the scene where Hagrid introduces the Thestrals. Umbridge, doing her inspection of Hagrid asks Neville something like, "You can see Thestrals too, Longbottom? Whom did you see die?' Neville answered his Grandfather - presumedly his "Gran's" late hubby. Check OotP around page 450, US edition. From dignan101 at sbcglobal.net Sat Jul 14 06:08:06 2007 From: dignan101 at sbcglobal.net (Mary Dignan) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:08:06 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Seeing Thestrals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171720 Tandra asked who Neville saw die (in relation to being able to see thestrals). It was his grandfather. In HBP, Umbridge was inspecting Hagrid during the Care of Magical Creatures lesson when Hagrid was introducing the fifth-years to thestrals, and Umbridge asked Neville who he saw die, and he told her it was his grandfather. Mary Dignan From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jul 14 07:28:15 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 03:28:15 EDT Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171721 Pippin wrote: I've got a great fondness for the I'm A Prince = Irma Pince anagram. If Snape accepted Dumbledore's protection for his mother, then he would, IMO, never betray Dumbledore. va32h: I've read the Irma Pince theory, and I'm not convinced based on their arguments (too much reliance on wildly extrapolating from very scant information for me). I do think that Snape's relationship with his family is relevant to the issue of Snape's loyalties, but I don't think Irma Pince is Eileen Snape. Eileen may still be alive though - we have no reason to think she isn't. Julie: I wouldn't say I'm convinced of the Irma Pince (I'm a Prince)=Eileen Prince theory. But I do think it's the likeliest of the several anagram theories I've heard. The Severus Snape=Perseus Evans one I count unlikely because JKR spoke of how she came up with Snape's last name, and because she has said that Harry has no close relatives, especially not on the muggle Evans side, where Petunia was the only one who could provide Harry with the family connection that would allow Lily's blood magic to protect him. The Ollivander=An evil lord one seems unlikely, as how many evil Lords does one series need? OTOH, Irma Pince is a more straightforward anagram, simply by moving the "r" to a new location. It also seems odd for JKR to write into the books two last names so close in sound/spelling, Pince and Prince. (We know she had Prince picked out at or near the beginning too, as CoS was almost called HBP). Irma Pince's name doesn't have any deeper meaning that I've heard of, like many other names in the series (Remus, Rubeus/Albus/Black, Malfoy, Voldemort, star and constellation names within the Black/Malfoy families, etc, etc). Not all the characters have meaningful names of course, but with no logical or canon argument against it (as there is for the other two anagrams above), and some mild logical support for it (including DD's "we can hide you where you'll never be found" argument to Draco quite possibly referencing previous experience with exactly that scenario), it seems a theory with a very solid chance of being correct. Oh, one more thing. If Eileen Prince did elect to hide behind the name Irma Pince, I like the irony of her using the same method as Tom Riddle, her previous schoolmate (and perhaps more). And doing so in front of his face as it were (given Voldemort could easily hear the librarian's name from DE parents of Hogwarts students), assuming he's so full of himself and his own cleverness he'd never even contemplate someone else might make use of his idea! Julie, thinking the extrapolation is quite reasonable, though admittedly canon remains scant--at least for six more days ;-) ************************************** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 14 11:59:54 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 11:59:54 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171722 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH?> Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Many... but Snape is the most prominent. I'm betting on an editional Weasley, and crossing my finger (against my basic feeling) that no- one from the Trio will die. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? -- no b. Draco? -- No c. Hermione? -- Yes d. Luna? -- Yes e. Ron? -- Yes f. Neville? -- Yes g. Ginny? -- Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur, Remus & Tonks 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" My guess is Petunia, (but it might be Dudley...) 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Ernie (or possibly Ron?) b. Head Girl? - Hermione c. DADA Instructor? - no idea... but I'll go for someone from within the Order. Perhaps Tonks (maybe Kinsley or Bill). I don't think anyone who has already been a DADA teacher will be able to return to the post.(It'll be cool to have Mrs. Weasley or Mundungus as DADA teacher, but I don't think it will happen...) d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Snape is complex, so he neither turns out to be DDM or ESE, and has no loyalities for a person, but rather to his own set of beliefs. He is against the Dark Arts, but also has difficulties attaching himself to other people, and is very touchy concerning his Honour (Worst dream scene, Harry calling him a coward etc.). This charachter flaw makes him not entirely "good" in the naive sort of the word (no- one is, BTW).But, all in all, he's OK. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) I believe DD is correct that there are only 6 Horcruxes + VM himself (it's a mistake to call him a Horcrux: He didn't kill inorder to gain his first bit of soul). The oter bits of soul are/were in these following: a. Riddle's Diary b. Slytherins Ring c. Slytherin's locket d. Helga Hufflepuff Cup e. Something of Rowena Ravenclaw (perhaps her wand) f. Harry's scar (made by accident) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: This question is closely related to question #9, for it implies Snape's most important father figure (and in case of witches - father substitute figurs, hence Tonks Patronus). I really believe Snape is incapable of producing a Patronus (which explains why he didn't take credit for scattering away the Dementors in the end of PoA -DD probably knows this). If, however, he is capable of such a thing, his father figure is after all DD, and therefore his patronus a Pheonix. Boggart: Being shamed and dishonoured in some sort of way. It might turn into his original father and disgrace him (somewhat like Ajax in Sophocles' tragedy). Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love - or rather a department investigating love in all sorts of ways. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Harry will retrieve Sirius from behind the archway (as depicted in the Scholastic cover of DH). 2. Peter Pettigrew will help/ save Harry against his will, because of the binding magic formed by Harry's saving his life in PoA. 3. RAB is Burkes, of Borgin & Burkes. Possibly, the Slytherin locket is the one seen in the store by Hermione. He really did die shortly after his visit to the Cave, and that is why we don't ever see him at the shop. 4. Draco Malfoy will crossover to the right side (somewhat like Snape did in his youth). 5. One of the Horcruxes will be found at Gringotts. I also believe that Harry will do serious damage to Snape, realising too late that he has mistaken and was driven by his temper. I really likes the idea of Neville killing or at least evanging Bellatrix. Hope it will happen. Ronnie, who is certain to have forgotten her other very important predictions, and therefore is sure to write again... From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 14 12:16:57 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 12:16:57 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171723 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "joan of anarchy" wrote: > > While I reread 1-6 and await Book 7, I'm reminded of how well JKR sets > up Chekhov's guns and how many loose ends I'm hoping will be resolved > in DH. I'm compiling a list -- not of predictions but rather > unanswered questions and topics I hope to resurface in DH. Please add on! > > In no particular order: > > 1. Lily's/Harry's eyes > 2. Lily -- & charms, & potions, & Snape, & Petunia > 3. Dudley's reaction to dementers > 4. Dumbledore's gleam of triumph > 5. *That Night* at Godric's Hollow > a. Flying motorbike > b. Who else was there? > c. Why was Lily offered the choice/chance to live? > d. What actually happened?? > 6. James & Lily thrice defied Voldemort -- how/what? > 7. Hermione & Ancient Runes > 8. Squeaky stair at #4 Privet Drive > 9. Petunia: "that awful boy" > 10. Petunia -- how much does she know? > 11. Invisivibility Cloak - when/why was it bequeathed? > 12. Pettigrew -- silver hand, life debt > 13. Gryffindor's Sword > 14. Neville -- memory, toad, herbology > 15. Ollivander > 16. Sirius' two-way mirror > 17. Veil of death > 18. Snape's allegiance > 19. Locket/horcruxes > 20. Molly Weasley's greatest fear (dead Weasleys) > 21. Pensieves > 22. Occlumency & legilimency > 23. SPEW/equality in the WW > 24. Hermione's E in DADA > 25. WHAT ELSE? > > > Joan of Anarchy, who's been waiting for Book 7 for ten years and now > realizes she's not ready for it > you forgot: 26. Florean Fortesque 27. DD's visions drinking the potion. 28. how exactly did DD die? 29. DD's tale concerning Slytherin's ring 30. Snape's parantage. 31. reason for Longbottoms being tormented. 32. Snape/Narciss/Unbreakable Vow wow, she does owe us alot of expenations! I'm sure we still haven't covered all ch. guns... I can't imagine that we will really get A L L the answers in about a week... Ronnie From phil at pcsgames.net Sat Jul 14 12:16:55 2007 From: phil at pcsgames.net (Phil Vlasak) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:16:55 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: 9 days to go - imagine If You Had To Wait! References: Message-ID: <0b4501c7c610$e3d7b710$6600a8c0@phil> No: HPFGUIDX 171724 On 21 July 2007, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows will be the first ever novel in the UK to go on sale to the general public in audio formats, braille, large print and standard print simultaneously. The braille and Daisy audio versions, which are being published by RNIB, will enable thousands of blind and partially sighted people to read the same book at the same time as their sighted peers. This is a significant milestone as book fans often wait months, and some times even years, for a new book to be 'translated' into braille or audio format. However, when authors and publishers work in partnership with organisations such as RNIB it is possible to produce the same book, at the same time for blind and partially sighted readers. http://www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/publicwebsite/public_harrypotter.hcsp [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 14 13:17:15 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:17:15 -0000 Subject: Importance of Pettigrew? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171725 > Ken: > I guess the thing is that Wormtail's new hand is silvery in appearance > but we don't know that it is actually silver. In our world our > imaginary werewolves can be killed with silver and vampires with > wooden stakes but is that true of the "real" ones in the Potterverse? Eddie: The characters in Potterverse seem to be much more like regular mortal people, albeit magical. Meaning, if a Potterverse werewolf is cut he shall surely bleed, and if sufficiently bled, shall surely die. I don't think it will require a silver bullet (or hand) to take down Fenrir (for example). But that doesn't mean JKRowling won't find it fitting and amusing to have Fenrir taken down by a certain silver-handed gent. Eddie From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Jul 14 14:42:40 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:42:40 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171726 > > > va32h: > > I suppose it makes sense if one agrees with your assessment of Snape, > but I don't. > > Snape struggles with self-loathing *now*, as a result of something he > did as a DE, but I disagree that he felt inferior to the Marauders, > or deserved to be picked on, even on a subconscious level. > > Quite the opposite. I think Snape developed a sense of superiority > early on. Pippin: But where do we see this in canon? He's proud of his magical ability, but Hermione's proud of hers too, and that doesn't stop her from feeling dreadfully insecure. Snape's brilliance just made him a potions nerd -- and there's no sign anybody but Slughorn ever cared about that. His prowess at curses doesn't seem to have made him special either. He was just, as Sirius said, that greasy little oddball who was good at dark arts. vah32 > In fact, I think that *is* how Voldemort brought Snape into the fold, > and that at some point Snape realized that he'd been duped, that > Voldemort tells every Death Eater a different story, designed to > appeal to that person's circumstances, desires, and beliefs (which is > why he tells Harry that wearing one's heart on one's sleeve is a huge > mistake. Pippin: I agree with this, but if Snape only became disillusioned with the leader, not the cause, then why go to work for someone as zealously against the cause as Dumbledore? After all, Voldemort had lots of enemies among people like the Blacks who agreed with his goals but were revolted by his methods. Pippin From va32h at comcast.net Sat Jul 14 15:42:42 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:42:42 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171727 Julie: I wouldn't say I'm convinced of the Irma Pince (I'm a Prince)=Eileen Prince theory. But I do think it's the likeliest of the several anagram theories I've heard. va32h: Isn't it just as likely that *none* of the anagram theories are true? Just because one character changed his name with an anagram doesn't mean that any other character would do so. Julie: It also seems odd for JKR to write into the books two last names so close in sound/spelling, Pince and Prince. (We know she had Prince picked out at or near the beginning too, as CoS was almost called HBP). Irma Pince's name doesn't have any deeper meaning that I've heard of, like many other names in the series (Remus, Rubeus/Albus/Black, Malfoy, Voldemort, star and constellation names within the Black/Malfoy families, etc, etc). va32h: I think "Pince" calls to mind the word "pincers" which is what spiders have, which evokes an image of Madam Pince scuttling around the library snatching at books (which is in fact, exactly what she does). As for re-using names - Mark Evans anyone? She also has a fondness for characters will alliteraive "P" names. Piers Polkiss, Pansy Parkinson, Parvati and Padma Patil. Or names that sound alike. Riddle, Diggle, Figg. Finch-Fletchley, Fletcher, Filch. Aside from the Patil twins, none of the characters with similar names have any particular relation to each other. Julie: with no logical or canon argument against it(as there is for the other two anagrams above), and some mild logical support for it (including DD's "we can hide you where you'll never be found" argument to Draco quite possibly referencing previous experience with exactly that scenario), it seems a theory with a very solid chance of being correct. va32h: Aside from the issue of whether we feel there *must* be one other anagram lurking out there (I don't), my biggest canon argument for it is that JKR just isn't that subtle. Look at the clues we got for Aberforth Dumbledore. Dumbledore mentions he has a brother with an affinity for goats. He also mentions that is friendly with the staff at the Hog's Head, and we know that Albus has, at least once, conducted business at the Hog's Head. The Hog's Head smells faintly of goats. The description of Aberforth Dumbledore from the original Order photo is similar to that of the Hog's Head barman. Harry recognizes the Hog's Head barman at Dumbledore's funeral. JKR says in an interview that Dumbleodore's family is a profitable line of inquiry. Look at the RAB/Regulus clues. Regulus is name-dropped three times in Half Blood Prince, and never on an occasion when his name needed to be used (since Sirius has no other brother, and Harry already knew Regulus' name, there is no need to specify "Sirius' brother Regulus') We know that Regulus was a Death Eater who turned against Voldemort and was killed for it, and the note from RAB is clearly from a Death Eater ('to the Dark Lord') who intends to turn against Voldemort ('I intend to destroy it') and knows he will be killed for it ('I will be dead before you read this'). The horcrux that was stolen by RAB is a locket, which is similar in description to a locket found in the Black home. JKR says in an interview that Regulus is "a fine guess". So looking at JKR's known style of clue-dropping, if Irma Pince = Eileen Prince, the logical expectation is that we would have clues like - a character mentioning how long Irma has worked at Hogwarts (i.e. exactly as long as Snape has been spying for the Order), or that Snape often visits (or specifically avoids) the library. Or Eileen's description somehow evoking Irma (in fact, Irma is described as having a hooked nose like Snape, while we learn from Snape's memories is a trait he inherited from some male in his family, and not his mother). Or JKR referencing Snape's family in an interview. Now the other type of mystery Jo uses is as with the Scabbers/Pettigew, Fake!Moody plot twists. They are purposely misleading "Gotcha!" twists. We, the reader, are told that Pettigrew and Crouch Jr. are dead. We are given this information by characters we have no reason to believe are lying. The characters are as surprised by the revelation as we readers are. And most importantly, the mysteries of Pettigrew and Crouch Jr. are both brought up and resolved within the same book. If Pince/Prince were to be a similar Gotcha! moment, then the logical expectation would be that we are specifically told Eileen is dead, that other characters speak of their belief that she is dead, and that the name Eileen Prince is introduced in the same book in which she is revealed to be Irma Pince. The biggest predictor of future behavior is past behavior. We have six books in which to analyze JKR's style of clue-revealing and plot twisting. I don't think the Prince/Pince theory follows any of those established patterns. It is certainly possible that JKR could be using an entirely different style of writing/hinting just for this particular plot twist, but I don't think it is probable. va32h From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 15:47:04 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:47:04 -0000 Subject: Half-blood vs Pure-blood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171728 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at ... wrote: > > > delurking after a long time to offer my opinion. > > I think that the Voldemort supporters would consider Nevile to be a > half-blood in that instance > > I consider Harry a "full blooded" wizard as opposed to "half" or "pure" > blooded. ======================== Yet, JKR doesn't see it that way. I'm sticking with her opinion! From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 15:49:13 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:49:13 -0000 Subject: Seeing Thestrals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171729 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tandra" wrote: > > Ok so we know Harry, Luna, and Neville can see them. Can someone > refresh my memory and let me know if we were ever told why Neville can > see them? (Yes, I know you have to have seen death to see them...were > we told who Neville saw die?) For some reason, his grandfather comes to mind, I think I read that somewhere, from a JKR interview. From terrianking at aol.com Sat Jul 14 12:40:27 2007 From: terrianking at aol.com (terrianking at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:40:27 EDT Subject: DH being sold early???? / about spoilers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171730 : It has emerged that some book stores in the UK are not required to keep a written agreement preventing them from selling Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows before its release next Friday. Chancie: > Ok I know we were talking about the lack of spoilers > yesterday, but I didn't want that! That would be > absolutely awful! But to actually have the > possibility of having the ending released early?? Robert: The parents of a friend of mine own a book store and while they agree not to SELL highly anticipated books like the HPs before the announced sale date, nothing stops them or their family members from reading the books as soon as the shipments arrive in the store. (This can be from a week to two weeks ahead in some cases.) This is something my friend does constantly and he does post spoilers at various forums of HP, Star Wars and Star Trek books, and only one Yahoo group that I know of. (Don't worry, not this one.). I would say starting today, definitely after Monday be careful what spoilers you read online if you want to be unspoiled. I'm sure he's not the only bookstore owner's kid who does this. From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 13:51:49 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:51:49 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's gleam of triumph. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171731 > Chancie wrote: > > I've assumed since reading HBP, that the "gleam of > > triumph" was DD's realization that Voldy was using > > Horcruxes, and as a result, he finally knew how to > > defeat him. > Eggplant: > But that can't be the entire story because it doesn't > explain why that gleam of triumph only lasted a fraction > of a second. I believe it's because an instant after > Dumbledore understood how to defeat Voldemort he > understood something else, it would involve Harry's death. Jim: The gleam in the eye made me think that Dumbledore realized something that Voldemort overlooked. Earlier on Dumbledore mentioned that Voldemort didn't pay attention to old magic and that led to his downfall. I would guess that he overlooked something again in his haste to overcome the blood protection that Lily left in Harry. What he overlooked I don't know. Dumbledore's knowledge of blood magic seems superior to Voldemort's. (blood protection at the Dursley's & twelve uses of dragon's blood) Jim From christinazimpfer at hotmail.com Sat Jul 14 14:40:25 2007 From: christinazimpfer at hotmail.com (cmz1213) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:40:25 -0000 Subject: Does Harry LITERALLY have his mother's eyes? (her eyeballs...) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171732 Long time fan, occasional lurker, so speak up if this has been discussed... Maybe Lily's eyes are literally in Harry's head (if anyone has read Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicals, you see where I get the idea). A bit gruesome for JKR, but not out of her league. Not sure who did it, when it was done and the motive, and you folks are much smarter than I, but here's a few scenarios..... 1. Lily knew her eyes had a magical property and switched them with Harry's before she was killed, giving him protection when LV AK'd him. 2. LV was especially smitten with Lily's eyes, because he loved her, or loved the green Slytherin-y color, or whatever, and placed them into Harry's head right before he AK'd him (thought it would make a better Horcrux that way, with 2 generations?). 3. Lily was a Horcrux, and when you make a person a Horcrux, it's the eyes that hold the soul, so someone put the Horcrux eyes into Harry for safe keeping (not sure if it would be a good guy or a bad guy). 4. Dumbledore placed them into Harry after he was AK'd, knowing Lily's eyes were especially magical and they could help him along the way. So, that's what has been bouncing around in my head as I wait for Book 7. Comments/ ideas please! Lupin Lover From va32h at comcast.net Sat Jul 14 16:13:17 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 16:13:17 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171733 Pippin: But where do we see this in canon? He's proud of his magical ability, but Hermione's proud of hers too, and that doesn't stop her from feeling dreadfully insecure. Snape's brilliance just made him a potions nerd -- and there's no sign anybody but Slughorn ever cared about that. His prowess at curses doesn't seem to have made him special either. He was just, as Sirius said, that greasy little oddball who was good at dark arts. va32h: Where do we see secretly-thinks-he-deserves the Marauders' abuse in canon either? At least I don't. Looking at Snape as a teacher suggest to me how he feels about learning magic. He is frustrated with Hermione, because in class, she only follows directions and quotes textbooks. He is frustrated with Neville, because Neville does have the ability, he just lacks the confidence, and aside from being predisposed to loathe Harry - Harry is a wizard with innate talent, but he is lazy and undisciplined. These are all in direct contrast to himself, who showed initiative, confidence in his skills as a potioneer at least, and a great deal of self-discipline. I also found it telling that at the end of HBP, when Snape reveals himself to be the Prince, what sets him off is Harry using one of Snape's own spells, just like his father did. That seems to affront Snape the most - not that Harry or even James would attack him, but that both were too darn lazy to come up with their own curse with which to do it. Pippin: I agree with this, but if Snape only became disillusioned with the leader, not the cause, then why go to work for someone as zealously against the cause as Dumbledore? After all, Voldemort had lots of enemies among people like the Blacks who agreed with his goals but were revolted by his methods. va32h: Well, in the first place, I don't think Snape ever supported "the cause" - that's my point. He didn't join the DE because he secretly loathed the Muggle parts of himself. He was bamboozled by Voldemort. And if Snape discovered Voldemort had tricked him into signing up for a lifetime of service, he wouldn't be "disillusioned", he'd be furious. But Snape being as self-disciplined as he is wouldn't do something impetuous like Regulus Black - a bold move against Voldemort just gets yourself killed. Snape's style would be - as it was when he punished Neville by having him sort toad innards and punished Harry by making him copy out the misdeeds of his father and godfather - to get revenge in a particularly cutting and personal way. So if Voldemort used Snape's personal history to fool him - what better way to get revenge than by fooling Voldemort - and going to work for Voldemort's greatest personal enemy, Albus Dumbledore. Sure, the Blacks were Voldemort's enemies, and the Ministry would naturally be opposing Voldemort. But Voldemort has a particular, personal grudge against Dumbledore. Which makes him the perfect person for Snape to "cheat" with, if he wants to achieve maximum revenge. va32h From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 14 16:26:34 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 16:26:34 -0000 Subject: One more prediction: Harry joins with MoM Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171734 What the heck, here's one more prediction for Book 7: Harry will join forces with the Ministry of Magic in the way Scrimgeour wants, but only because Harry will get something he needs in return: access to the MoM's secrets, the MoM's room of "love", and a way to lure Voldemort. Eddie From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 16:53:17 2007 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 16:53:17 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last bragging Rights by Tiger Patronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171735 My last predictions. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Nope 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? nope 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His new Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Fleur and Bill 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Dudley 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Tonks d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McConogal 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Slytherins Ring b. Riddle's Diary c. Hufflepuff's cup d. the locket e.Riddle's trophy at Hogwarts(the one Ron kept barfing up slugs all over) f.. Harry(not enough pages in a book if he is not one) g. Nagini In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape cannot conjure a patronus..hence his tired lessons about them in HBP; and his nasty remarks towards Tonk' boggart in HBP..Snape's boggart is Petunia Dursley. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? A love memory room...heaven forbid all those who have never known love that step across the threshhold. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1.Harry WAS a HORCRUX....Harry was a made a horcrux that night a Godrics Hollow...Hence his connection with Voldemort--his scar hurting him, his forays into voldy's mind, his speaking parseltongue, his having visions from Nagini's point of view, and his being able to open the chamber of secrets (which apparently only the heir or one possessed by the heir of Slytheryin(like Ginny) can do)...HOWEVER, after Voldy possessed Harry at the end of OOP Harry's scar has stopped hurting and Harry hasn't had any insights into Voldy's mind. Hence the portion of Voldemort's soul in Harry's scar left with Voldemort after his possesion of Harry in the MOM in OOP.(one's soul wants to remain whole ). 2. Snape loved Lily, HOWEVER, Lily NEVER loved Snape...it was PETUNIA that loved Snape(and Lily knew this) and Snape would never, ever, never be with a muggle...what's worse...Snape loved Lily for her magical talent, of which, Petunia had none...and who on earth would want Petunia to be in love with them? 3. Madame Pince and Filch are Snape's parents....(probably the only other anagram of seeming importance after book #2 (Irma Pince=I'm a prince))..Also it is also the only plausible explanation of why Filch would be bandaging Snape's wounds in Sorcerer's/Philosopher's stone...especially after we'd seen him heal Malfoy after his (Draco's) battle with Harry in HBP with wand waving and incantations! Uggh can you imagine Snape's humility his muggle father posing as a "squib"..and Snape purchasing the cheapest Kneazle he can find to assist his muggle dad...who's the janitor at the school he's employed at. .That's why DD thought he could trust Snape...because Snape would never submit to such humiliating circumstances unless he truly loved his parents. 4. Tom Riddle's trophy in the trophy room at Hogwarts is a horcrux....the first horcrux he created after killing Moaning Myrtle. 5. Harry will learn wandless magic..he must..and he may learn a thing or two from Kreacher. 6a.(noticed that we can't make a prediction of someone doing magic, but thought I must mention mention this even if I don't get credit .) The person who will do magic late in life will be Duddley...and Petunia will encorage him to do so..(via telling him, "son, you can do it....save yourself."...) I can almost read the words off the page--Harry telling the Dursleys to go back to the island they took him to when Hagrid came a knocking., and the Dursley's refusing. This is why they spoil Dudley--they believe that if they give him any and everything he desires that he will not do magic. Doddie (who still thinks that there will be more questions than answers at the end of book seven) From BCs at BonniDune.com Sat Jul 14 12:58:20 2007 From: BCs at BonniDune.com (BCs at BonniDune.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:58:20 -0400 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Message-ID: <00ba01c7c616$a8855900$6401a8c0@kelly1h6t6dsid> No: HPFGUIDX 171736 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? DRACO MALFOY 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? DARK MARK ON LEFT ARM 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? NO d. Luna? YES e. Ron? NO f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? NO 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? LUPIN AND TONKS 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" DUDLEY DURSLEY 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? ERNIE MACMILLAN b. Head Girl? CHO CHANG c. DADA Instructor? VIKTOR KRUM d. Potions Master or Mistress? HORACE SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? MINERVA MCGONIGAL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? WITH DUMBLEDORE AND THEREFORE ON THE SIDE OF GOOD 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. RING (DESTROYED) b. DIARY (DESTROYED c. LOCKET (HIDDEN AT GRIMMAULD PLACE) d. HUFFLEPUFF'S CUP e. RAVENCLAW ARTIFACT (PERHAPS TIARA OR WAND) f. NAGINI g. PORTION OF SOUL STILL IN VOLDEMORT In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? PATRONUS IS SNAKE. BOGGERT IS VOLDEMORT. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? THE PUREST FORM OF LOVE (AGAPE). Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. HARRY WILL HAVE TO FORGIVE SNAPE IN ORDER TO LEARN WHAT IT WILL TAKE TO DESTROY VOLDEMORT. 2. NEVILLE AND LUNA WILL WORK TOGETHER USING NEVILLE'S HERBOLOGY SKILLS AND LUNA'S CREATIVITY AND WILL DISCOVER A CURE FOR NEVILLE'S PARENTS. 3. DRACO WILL HELP HARRY AND WILL DIE DOING SO. 4. PETER PETTIGREW WILL HELP HARRY, PERHAPS UNWITTINGLY. 5. BILL WEASLEY WILL BREAK THE CURSE ON THE DADA JOB SO THAT KRUM CAN TAKE OVER AS DADA INSTRUCTOR PERMANENTLY. -BONNIDUNE (coming out of Lurkdom) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 14 18:12:30 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:12:30 -0000 Subject: The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171737 Eddie: This is a possible spoiler because some people avoid looking at the upcoming book covers. ******** POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD ******** *S *P *O *I *L *E *R * *A *H *E *A *D ******** POSSIBLE SPOILER BEHIND ******** > sbu89: > I don't mean to be daft, but the cover has been intriguing me. If you > look at it in full-length (Border's is offering a poster of this), one > notices that Harry and (what appears to be) Voldemort are not facing > each other, as if in battle. Instead, they almost appear to be doing > something TOGETHER, ALMOST COOPERATIVELY. It appears they are trying > to ward off something or summon something? Perhaps one is trying to > summon, the other ward off? My initial glance had me thinking these > stray thoughts...wondering of others' reactions... Eddie: My thought is that Harry's Quidditch skills will come into play before the end. JKRowling mentioned in "Goblet of Fire" that Harry was able to avoid getting hexed/jinxed in the graveyard "with the reflexes born of his Quidditch training, he flung himself sideways onto the ground." But that's nothing compared to being the youngest Seeker in century... skills good for finding and quickly catching bright shiny objects roughly the size of a Snitch: a locket perhaps? So maybe we're seeing the image of Voldemort summoning the final horcrux and Harry reaching to intercept it? If only Harry were riding a broom I'd be certain.... Eddie From celizwh at intergate.com Sat Jul 14 18:30:12 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:30:12 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171738 va32h: > So looking at JKR's known style of clue-dropping, > if Irma Pince = Eileen Prince, the logical expectation > is that we would have clues like - a character mentioning > how long Irma has worked at Hogwarts (i.e. exactly as > long as Snape has been spying for the Order), or that > Snape often visits (or specifically avoids) the library. > Or Eileen's description somehow evoking Irma (in fact, > Irma is described as having a hooked nose like Snape, > while we learn from Snape's memories is a trait he > inherited from some male in his family, and not his > mother). Or JKR referencing Snape's family in an interview. houyhnhnm: We learn that he has a memory of a dark-haired woman cowering before a hook-nosed man. There's no description of the woman's phiz. We don't even know who the people are. That they are Snape's mother and father is a logical assumption, but it is far from proven. I'm not betting my house on Irma Pince being Eileen Prince, but I do think there are a few more possible clues than the anagram. (Of course, the trouble with Rowling is that there is no knowing what is a clue, what is a red herring, and what is just a bit of inattentivenesss on her part until after the mystery is solved.) There is the fact that the Snape boggart turned into an old woman with a vulture on her hat coupled with the vulture imagery associated with Madam Pince. There is the parallel description of Snape's face and Madam Pince's face each illuminated by a lantern/lamp. There is the similarity of their personalities. There is the fact that Madam Pince is the only one veiled at DD's funeral (suggesting that she has a particular reason for grief she must hide from others--That's if it doesn't turn out to be Snape himself behind the veil ) Most of all there are the books in Snape's house. That's what really sold me on the theory. I'm not willing to go so far as to stake my reputation on it, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Madam Pince turns out to be Snape's mother. BTW, has anyone else noticed the similarity between the descriptions of the two people in Snape's memory and the description of Viktor Krum's parents? *** Viktor Krum was over in a corner, conversing with his dark-haired mother and father in rapid Bulgarian. He had inherited his father's hooked nose. (GoF, Scholastic, p. 615) From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Jul 14 18:40:15 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:40:15 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171739 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > The biggest predictor of future behavior is past behavior. We have > six books in which to analyze JKR's style of clue-revealing and plot > twisting. I don't think the Prince/Pince theory follows any of those > established patterns. It is certainly possible that JKR could be > using an entirely different style of writing/hinting just for this > particular plot twist, but I don't think it is probable. > When Harry glimpses into Snape's mind during his Occlumency lessons, he does not recognize the weeping woman as Irma Pince (I'm assuming that the woman in Snape's memory is his mother, which may not be correct.) And though of course people change as they age, Harry has had no problem before recognizing younger versions of Crouch Sr., Bagman, Dumbledore, Snape, the Marauders, Lily, etc. during visits to the Pensieve. - CMC From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Jul 14 18:42:10 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:42:10 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Half-blood vs Pure-blood Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171740 In a message dated 7/14/2007 10:48:36 A.M. Central Daylight Time, sassymomofthree at yahoo.com writes: > I consider Harry a "full blooded" wizard as opposed to "half" or "pure" > blooded. ======================== Yet, JKR doesn't see it that way. I'm sticking with her opinion! Oh not a problem. I would never try to convert anyone. And I can understand why she's using it for Harry and others. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From roxy70072 at cox.net Sat Jul 14 20:12:56 2007 From: roxy70072 at cox.net (artiemd123) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:12:56 -0000 Subject: An idea... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171741 I have been lurking but never posted before. Now, with the excitement of the upcoming new book, I have come up with an idea that I haven't seen mentioned. It seems that Voldy transferred some of himself to Harry when the AK curse backfired. Could it have been magic abilities? Maybe Harry would have been a squib if not for Voldy. Then with Voldy's death, that part of Harry will die also. Maybe, Harry learns that when voldy dies, he will no longer be a wizard. That could be the price of eliminating Voldy. Harry, who has no real place in the Muggle world, places so much importance on being part of the wizarding community that this could be the ultimate sacrifice. What do you think? Forgive me if this has been raised before. RT From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Jul 14 20:27:10 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:27:10 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] An idea... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707141327t67ee1df8y7228c5f8ddf9d7b3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171742 RT: Maybe Harry would have been a squib if not for Voldy. Then with Voldy's death, that part of Harry will die also. Maybe, Harry learns that when voldy dies, he will no longer be a wizard. Lynda: Yep, its been raised before, many times. I don't think so though. In the first book we learn that Harry was down for Hogwarts since birth. Squibs don't get put down for Hogwarts. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Jul 14 20:26:17 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:26:17 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171743 > > va32h: > > Where do we see secretly-thinks-he-deserves the Marauders' abuse in > canon either? At least I don't. > Pippin: If there's anything in Snape's memories that shows social confidence, I must have missed it. And it's social inferiority I'm talking about. Lupin picks up on it, he says James was the person Snape wished he could be. If Snape could have said, "Oh, haha James, very funny" instead of roaring ineffectual curses, he wouldn't have been so much fun to tease. I understand why he didn't; it would have felt crushing. But that's my point. If he had real self-confidence, he wouldn't have cared. Pippin From chaomath at hitthenail.com Sat Jul 14 20:25:41 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:25:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Butterbeer (Was: Re: Spoilers?? Where are They) In-Reply-To: <000b01c7c57c$9401f000$63fe54d5@Marion> References: <000b01c7c57c$9401f000$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: <05C761F1-A115-4E8F-B6C1-280FB173B5AA@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171744 On Jul 13, 2007, at 1:35 PM, Marion Ros wrote: > Marion > And/or maybe Elves get all tiddly on sugar, not on alcohol. We > don't even know *what* Elves eat (they could, for all we know, live > on woodpulp and sulfur and think a box of matches a gourmet meal) > so the joke might just be that the kids drink this ginger beer/ > root ale/ butterscotch (good catch, that, the butterscotch > connection) harmless-to-humans sugary fizzy drink, and a House Elf > gets all sloshed on it. True. There have been references to "elf wine", however. Snape offers it to Narcissa and Bellatrix when they visit him at Spinner's End. And was it elf wine that Slughorn brought to Aragog's funeral? I always assumed it was wine made by elves (not wine made of elves). Regardless, we don't know much about House Elves. And it's always possible that there are more than only type of elf in the Potterverse. Margaret martin at hitthenail.com Design for a Better World www.hitthenail.com From klewellen at shellworld.net Sat Jul 14 20:39:17 2007 From: klewellen at shellworld.net (Karen Lewellen) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 16:39:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] An idea... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171745 artiemd123 wrote: Maybe, Harry learns that when voldy dies, he will no longer be a wizard. That could be the price of eliminating Voldy. Karen asks: But both of Harry's parents are wizards. How could his abilities be tied only to Voldy? Still I do not think that Harry will die. A clear end could mean a lot of things, and JKR is far too brilliant to go with the obvious, no more than Snape being a cut and dry monster. Nice thoughts though, Karen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 20:52:24 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:52:24 -0000 Subject: An idea... In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707141327t67ee1df8y7228c5f8ddf9d7b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171746 RT wrote: > > It seems that Voldy transferred some of himself to Harry when the AK curse backfired. Could it have been magic abilities? Maybe Harry would have been a squib if not for Voldy. Then with Voldy's death, that part of Harry will die also. Maybe, Harry learns that when voldy dies, he will no longer be a wizard. That could be the price of eliminating Voldy. Harry, who has no real place in the Muggle world, places so much importance on being part of the wizarding community that this could be the ultimate sacrifice. > Lynda responded: > > Yep, its been raised before, many times. I don't think so though. In the first book we learn that Harry was down for Hogwarts since birth. Squibs don't get put down for Hogwarts. Carol adds: In addition to Lynda's point, which is probably sufficient in itself to establish that Harry wasn't born a Squib (and Squibs, we know, are very rare in any case) it appears that Harry acquired his natural ability as a Quidditch player from his father. Apparently, they were both talented and James, in particular, seems to have been powerful, if his friends' testimony can be relied on, so Hagrid assumes that Harry, too, will be powerful and talented. Harry, it seems, is talented and powerful in his own right, but in DADA rather than Transfiguration like James or Potions and Charms like Lily (assuming that Slughorn's and Ollivander's words are valid indicators of her talents). But Harry also has other powers not inherited from his parents, notably the scar link and Parseltongue, that distinguish him from other talented wizards, both adults and children. I would not be surprised if he has a third Voldemortian power, possession, which will manifest itself in DH. I suspect that if he loses any powers after defeating Voldemort, it will be those that he acquired from him at Godric's Hollow. Carol, who doubts that Harry will mourn the loss of any powers that connected him with the vanquished Voldemort From va32h at comcast.net Sat Jul 14 20:53:27 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:53:27 -0000 Subject: Prince/Pince Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171747 houyhnhnm: We learn that he has a memory of a dark-haired woman cowering before a hook-nosed man. There's no description of the woman's phiz. We don't even know who the people are. That they are Snape's mother and father is a logical assumption, but it is far from proven. va32h: We do get a description of Eileen when Hermione shows Harry her photo from the back issues of the Daily Prophet. It doesn't resemble the descriptions we've had of Irma Pince. I didn't say the man was Snape's father, but he is described as having a hook nose, just as Snape is always described as having a hook nose, and since that is the feature that JKR makes a point of having Harry describe, the extremely logical inference is that the man is a male relative of Snape's. houyhnhm: I'm not betting my house on Irma Pince being Eileen Prince, but I do think there are a few more possible clues than the anagram. (Of course, the trouble with Rowling is that there is no knowing what is a clue, what is a red herring, and what is just a bit of inattentivenesss on her part until after the mystery is solved.) There is the fact that the Snape boggart turned into an old woman with a vulture on her hat coupled with the vulture imagery associated with Madam Pince. va32h: The boggart was Neville's boggart, not Snape's, and it did not turn into a old woman wearing a vulture-topped hat, Neville's boggart *was* Snape. Neville defeated the boggart by imagining Snape wearing his grandmother's clothes, which included the vulture hat. The boggart also prominently carried a handbag - so what does that symbolise? That Snape's father is the luggage handler on the Hogwart's Express? The vulture represents something significant to Neville - not to Snape. houyhnhm There is the parallel description of Snape's > face and Madam Pince's face each illuminated by a > lantern/lamp. There is the similarity of their > personalities. There is the fact that Madam Pince > is the only one veiled at DD's funeral (suggesting > that she has a particular reason for grief she must > hide from others--That's if it doesn't turn out to > be Snape himself behind the veil ) Most of all > there are the books in Snape's house. That's what > really sold me on the theory. I'm not willing to > go so far as to stake my reputation on it, but I > certainly wouldn't be surprised if Madam Pince turns > out to be Snape's mother. va32h: Hold the phone there. Snape likes books, Pince is the librarian, so that makes Snape her son? Dumbledore likes books too, he's has lots of them in his office. Hermione also likes books. Are they secretly related to Madam Pince also? Arthur Weasley collects Muggle items, but that doesn't make him related to Muggles. Many characaters have similar personalities. Ginny is a lot like Lily. I'm pretty sure JKR isn't going for a incest subplot so I feel confident saying that they are not related. Hermione often reminds Harry of Molly Weasley but again - not related. As for the veil, why would Irma's particular reason for grief require hiding? If anything, it would be perfectly safe to openly cry at Dumbledore's funeral, when you have a perfectly plausible reason *to* cry - even if you were only crying because it meant that your secret identity might soon be revealed. Some people have suggested that Irma wears the veil so no one will identify her at the funeral, but if she looks that much like her "old" self, why didn't Harry recognize her in the Prophet picture, and why don't the older staff members recognize her as their former classmate or student? I just don't get why it's a leap of faith to presume that the adult male who looks like Snape and is yelling at Snape in Snape's memory is a relative of Snape's, but the fact that Pince wears a veil to a funeral is clearly proof that she is Snape's mother, cleverly hidden by Dumbledore for the last 16 years. But the larger issue, and the point of my previous post -- is this the way that JKR gives her clues and hints? No, it isn't. Again, look at the clues for Aberforth Dumbledore. Look how they logically connect. No other character is referenced as having an affinity for goats, so when we learn that the Hog's Head smells of goats there is no other character to connect that to (unlike the vulture, who is connected to Neville's grandmother and Irma Pince). I doesn't matter whether I like the idea of Pince being Prince - it just doesn't jibe with JKR's previously known methods of revealing clues, so it doesn't pass muster with me. va32h From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 14 20:57:31 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 21:57:31 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) In-Reply-To: <864356.44796.qm@web51104.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <864356.44796.qm@web51104.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <895A35C6-1DF7-40A2-A129-9FDAB5F06020@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171748 Susan wrote: > See attached; hope it comes through... Jadon: I see what you mean, but LV's hand is facing downwards and Harry's is facing up - might Harry be trying to raise something (or keep it in the air) and Voldemort to lower it, or keep it on/in the ground? On second thoughts, perhaps LV's thumb is in the wrong position for that - but it does look, to me, as if his palm is facing the audience. Jadon From va32h at comcast.net Sat Jul 14 21:02:33 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 21:02:33 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171749 Pippin: If there's anything in Snape's memories that shows social confidence, I must have missed it. And it's social inferiority I'm talking about. Lupin picks up on it, he says James was the person Snape wished he could be. va32h: You know I always thought that was Lupin projecting his own feelings. James was the person *Lupin* wanted to be. Remus is an insightful person, but since he only spoke to Severus when his friends were tormenting him, I don't know how he'd have acquired this insight into Snape's psyche. Pippin: If Snape could have said, "Oh, haha James, very funny" instead of roaring ineffectual curses, he wouldn't have been so much fun to tease. I understand why he didn't; it would have felt crushing. But that's my point. If he had real self-confidence, he wouldn't have cared. va32h: But is the ability to be goaded equivalent to feeling inferior? Harry and Ron frequently allow themselves to be goaded into action by Malfoy et al - but I never imagined that either of them felt inferior. Quite the opposite, actually. I wouldn't disagree that Snape didn't always have self-confidence (outside a classroom) but I never got the feeling that he felt that he deserved the Marauders' abuse (which was the original premise I was arguing against). va32h From chaomath at hitthenail.com Sat Jul 14 20:26:25 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:26:25 -0500 Subject: The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) In-Reply-To: <34067A7D-5AFA-4D5F-A0DC-B9AB3B578F85@yahoo.co.uk> References: <34067A7D-5AFA-4D5F-A0DC-B9AB3B578F85@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171750 I believe the poster in question can be found here: http://www.bordersmedia.com/harrypotter/hallowsball/ It's near the bottom and appears to be the whole cover of the book, with Harry on the front. ***************************** I just stumbled across a much larger picture of the cover: http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/gallery.dhusfull.html Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sat Jul 14 21:41:54 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 17:41:54 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape Message-ID: <380-220077614214154875@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171751 Pippin: If Snape could have said, "Oh, haha James, very funny" instead of roaring ineffectual curses, he wouldn't have been so much fun to tease. I understand why he didn't; it would have felt crushing. But that's my point. If he had real self-confidence, he wouldn't have cared. va32h: But is the ability to be goaded equivalent to feeling inferior? Harry and Ron frequently allow themselves to be goaded into action by Malfoy et al - but I never imagined that either of them felt inferior. Quite the opposite, actually. Magpie: Actually--and I think this is kind of a side issue and not a general point about Harry or Ron, but yes I would say they feel inferior. Because explicitly, when Harry especially feels confident about something, Draco can't get a rise out of him. It's only when he says something that hits one of Harry's buttons (which is often) that Harry is goaded into responding--sometimes he doesn't even have to be trying to goad him. Ron, too, responds to Draco on things that make him feel insecure. I will say about Snape that while he obviously didn't feel inferior to MWPP in all ways, I do think they were able to make him feel weak and inferior in some ways, and that was when he hated the most. In the Pensieve I've always felt that the reason that memory was so important to him (though I've since begun to think there's a Lily-factor there too) was that he hated himself in it--he's helpless. Also I think MWPP, like Draco, figures out where the weak spots are. I remember in PoA thinking that the voices in the map went for something very specific about Snape that he didn't like. They didn't say he was a jerk or evil because he was into the DA, which might have made him feel a bit tough. Iirc, they went after him for being ugly and greasy--things that made him very obviously socially inferior to handsome, charismatic, athletic, popular James and Sirius. -m From harryp at stararcher.com Sat Jul 14 21:44:01 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 21:44:01 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171752 > wrote: > > 1. Lily's/Harry's eyes > > 2. Lily -- & charms, & potions, & Snape, & Petunia > > 3. Dudley's reaction to dementers > > 4. Dumbledore's gleam of triumph > > 5. *That Night* at Godric's Hollow > > a. Flying motorbike > > b. Who else was there? > > c. Why was Lily offered the choice/chance to live? > > d. What actually happened?? > > 6. James & Lily thrice defied Voldemort -- how/what? > > 7. Hermione & Ancient Runes > > 8. Squeaky stair at #4 Privet Drive > > 9. Petunia: "that awful boy" > > 10. Petunia -- how much does she know? > > 11. Invisivibility Cloak - when/why was it bequeathed? > > 12. Pettigrew -- silver hand, life debt > > 13. Gryffindor's Sword > > 14. Neville -- memory, toad, herbology > > 15. Ollivander > > 16. Sirius' two-way mirror > > 17. Veil of death > > 18. Snape's allegiance > > 19. Locket/horcruxes > > 20. Molly Weasley's greatest fear (dead Weasleys) > > 21. Pensieves > > 22. Occlumency & legilimency > > 23. SPEW/equality in the WW > > 24. Hermione's E in DADA > > 25. WHAT ELSE? > ronnie: > 26. Florean Fortesque > 27. DD's visions drinking the potion. > 28. how exactly did DD die? > 29. DD's tale concerning Slytherin's ring > 30. Snape's parantage. > 31. reason for Longbottoms being tormented. > 32. Snape/Narciss/Unbreakable Vow Eddie: 33. Weasley's flying car 34. Room of Love at MoM 35. Giants, including Grawp 36. Werewolves, including Fenrir Grayback and Lupin 37. Goblins 38. How did somebody get into the vault at Gringott's? 39. Dragons, including Norbert the Ridgeback There's probably more, but I want to get my list in quick. Eddie From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 22:11:00 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 22:11:00 -0000 Subject: Does Harry LITERALLY have his mother's eyes? (her eyeballs...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171753 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cmz1213" wrote: > So, that's what has been bouncing around in my head as I wait for Book 7. Comments/ ideas please! ================================== Oh, you'll hate my comment: that is literally the most repulsive theory I've ever heard, LOL! I've seen it in another forum, as well, and was surprised that anyone would think JKR would come up with that! LOL, sorry! From Schlobin at aol.com Sat Jul 14 21:42:50 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (Schlobin at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 17:42:50 EDT Subject: Emmeline Vance Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171754 Emmeline Vance is the key. If she's really dead, Snape is evil. I'm over the edge here -- now I'm upset that JKR insists on killing off good guys....doesn't she realize that she has a responsibility not to upset me? (a LITTLE joke here). Susan McGee (If you're interested in a low volume group, and are over 40, email me at SusanGSMcGee at aol.com) ************************************** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From va32h at comcast.net Sat Jul 14 22:46:33 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 22:46:33 -0000 Subject: Teasing, tempers, etc. (was Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape) In-Reply-To: <380-220077614214154875@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171755 Magpie: Actually--and I think this is kind of a side issue and not a general point about Harry or Ron, but yes I would say they feel inferior. Because explicitly, when Harry especially feels confident about something, Draco can't get a rise out of him. It's only when he says something that hits one of Harry's buttons (which is often) that Harry is goaded into responding--sometimes he doesn't even have to be trying to goad him. Ron, too, responds to Draco on things that make him feel insecure. I will say about Snape that while he obviously didn't feel inferior to MWPP in all ways, I do think they were able to make him feel weak and inferior in some ways, and that was when he hated the most. In the Pensieve I've always felt that the reason that memory was so important to him (though I've since begun to think there's a Lily- factor there too) was that he hated himself in it--he's helpless. Also I think MWPP, like Draco, figures out where the weak spots are. I remember in PoA thinking that the voices in the map went for something very specific about Snape that he didn't like. They didn't say he was a jerk or evil because he was into the DA, which might have made him feel a bit tough. Iirc, they went after him for being ugly and greasy--things that made him very obviously socially inferior to handsome, charismatic, athletic, popular James and Sirius. va32h: I do agree that people react to things they are most sensitive about. Ron gets upset when Draco makes fun of his poverty or Quidditch skills, Harry loses his temper when Draco makes fun of him for fainting in the presence of Dementors. And all the boys get outraged if anyone has a go at their mother! (that could be a whole other topic.) Snape apparently is sensitive about his appearance (and yet perversely makes no attempt to improve it?) so MWPP make fun of that. But even very confident people can be provoked into losing their tempers. Arthur Weasley starts a fistfight with Lucius - and I've never gotten the impression that Arthur is sensitive about his family's financial status (Molly yes, but Arthur no.) Snape had a spell like Sectumsempra in his arsenal - if he were angry enough at James, he could have killed him with it (as Harry nearly kills Draco). But he has enough self-control to realize that as personally satisfying as it might be to imagine killing James, that satisfaction isn't worth a life sentence in Azkaban. So instead he gives James a cut on the cheek. That's what I meant by self-control. I have no doubt that young Severus could have poisoned all the Marauders in a pinch, too. But he doesn't. Instead, it's Sirius who resorts to attempted murder - and he doesn't even have the excuse of extreme emotional distress. Just like Harry says to Dudley - real brave when it's five against one, or to Draco - not so brave without your bodyguards - I think the Marauders' need to show off for each other and for the crowd speaks more to their insecurity than Snape's loner status speaks to his. va32h From celizwh at intergate.com Sat Jul 14 22:55:59 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 22:55:59 -0000 Subject: Prince/Pince Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171756 va32h: > We do get a description of Eileen when Hermione > shows Harry her photo from the back issues of the > Daily Prophet. It doesn't resemble the descriptions > we've had of Irma Pince. I didn't say the man was > Snape's father, but he is described as having a hook > nose, just as Snape is always described as having a > hook nose, and since that is the feature that JKR > makes a point of having Harry describe, the extremely > logical inference is that the man is a male relative of Snape's. houyhnhnm: Madam Pince is described as thin, vulture-like with a shriveled, sunken face and a hooked nose. All we know of Eileen Prince's appearance is that she was skinny, had heavy brows, a long pallid face and a countenance both sullen and cross. The shape of her features is not described. I don't see anything in these descriptions that precludes they're being of the same person, especially after the passage of possibly as much as 50 years. I agree that the man in the memory is probably Snape's father, but asserting that Snape inherited his facial features from his father is stretching it a bit IMO. The appearance of the woman in the memory is not described except that she is crouching. Her face may not have been visible if she was crouching. Harry's vision of Snape's memory was brief and fleeting unlike his experience in the Pensieve when he had much greater leisure to observe, and it was of a scene that had taken place 30 years or so earlier whereas the people Harry recognized in the Pensieve memory were only around 13 years younger than their present day selves. va32h: > The boggart was Neville's boggart, not Snape's, and > it did not turn into a old woman wearing a vulture-topped > hat, Neville's boggart *was* Snape. Neville defeated > the boggart by imagining Snape wearing his grandmother's > clothes, which included the vulture hat. The boggart > also prominently carried a handbag - so what does that > symbolise? That Snape's father is the luggage handler > on the Hogwart's Express? houyhnhnm: I was not suggesting some kind of literal, concrete relationship between Neville's boggart and Madam Pince. Rather, Rowling associates imagery of an old woman and a vulture with Snape. It is the imagery that brackets them together, not some kind of causal relationship. The same thing with the books. Snape doesn't just like books. He lives in a house in which (in the parlor at least) all the walls are filled with books from floor to ceiling, like a *library*. va32h: > I doesn't matter whether I like the idea of Pince being > Prince - it just doesn't jibe with JKR's previously known > methods of revealing clues, so it doesn't pass muster with me. houyhnhnm: The only example you give for Rowling's "previously known method" is that of Aberforth. I can think of at least one example of a passage in which she makes connections between two scenes or characters by using similar language to describe them. One is the way in which Dumbledore's death is foreshadowed by the description of the dead unicorn in PS. >>Its long slender legs were stuck out at odd angles where it had fallen and its mane was spread pearly-white on the dark leaves<< Now Dumbledore. >>Dumbledore's eyes were closed: but for the strange angles of his arms and legs, he might have been sleeping<< We don't need to told that his silver hair was spread out on the dark ground. We can see it without being told. There is also the description of Harry asleep against the glass in his bedroom with his glasses askew that mirrors the image of Dumbledore dead. Then there is the similarity of language to describe Harry's feeling of revulsion and self-hatred in the cave and the look on Snape's face on the tower. We don't know the meaning of that yet, but I feel very confident that it has a meaning. It was not a matter of Rowling being unable to think of new words. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 23:12:22 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:12:22 -0000 Subject: Emmeline Vance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171757 Susan McGee wrote: > > Emmeline Vance is the key. If she's really dead, Snape is evil. > Carol responds: Not necessarily. He may have taken more credit for her death than he deserved (or more blame, from our perspective), just as he did with Sirius Black, who died by Bellatrix's hand because of Voldemort's plot, Kreacher's treachery, and Black's own decision to go to the MoM (not to mention brilliantly fighting on the dais to the Veil, taunting Bellatrix rather than paying attention to where he was). Whatever information Snape may have given about him (that he was at Hogwarts after the graveyard incident, for example) could have had only a small role in the chain of events and choices that led to Black's death. I suspect that whatever he revealed about Emmeline Vance was equally insignificant and ought not to have led to her death. After all, Snape as a spy/double agent/triple agent or whatever he is, has to provide some accurate information to Voldemort (probably with DD's preapproval) or he'll be exposed as DD's man and killed. He does not claim to have killed her, only that she died as a result of information that he provided, the same claim that he made (inaccurately) for Sirius Black. Neither Narcissa nor Bellatrix is in a position to argue with him, and Narcissa is too preoccupied with Draco's predicament to care about Snape's past. That said, Emmeline Vance's death *could* be evidence that he's another Wormtail, giving evidence that leads to Order member's deaths, but if that's the case, it's the only instance we know of. Or she could be an unfortunate casualty of the spy game, one who knew the risk of joining the Order, just as Benjy Fenwick and the Prewitts and Marlene McKinnon and all the others knew it in VW1. It's possible, however, that Emmeline Vance isn't dead, that Snape gave her the Draught of Living Death to fake her death and make himself appear loyal to LV. So, while, IMO, her death doesn't prove that he's evil, her being alive through his efforts would certainly be convincing evidence that he's good (meaning DDM or on the good side). I'd be interested in hearing anyone else's thoughts on Emmeline Vance. We don't even know at this point what her job for the Order was, but she's in the photo that Moody shows Harry, so it's the second time around for her. (On a less serious note, I'd also like to know why Dedalus Diggle keeps popping up in every book.) Carol, hoping that Emmeline Vance is the person DD had in mind in his "they can't kill you if you are already dead" speech, which seems to have been edited out because it gave too much away From red-siren at hotmail.com Sat Jul 14 22:41:05 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 22:41:05 -0000 Subject: Horcrux? (Boy I hope not!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171758 A Strange and very frightening thought just occured to me. What if Voldy's ultimate goal was to make Hogwarts castle a horcux. It is the first 'real' home he had, a very important part of his life. I know he's too egotistical to think anyone else could have found out about his horcrux', but what if?? I mean, who would want to destroy Hogwarts? It's a crazy idea I know. Sue From Schlobin at aol.com Sat Jul 14 23:39:38 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:39:38 -0000 Subject: unanswered questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171759 Will Percy apologize to his family? Will Draco be redeemed? Has anyone who has disappeared/died? Did RAB destroy the horcrux? Who will be best man at Bill and Fleur's wedding? Why is it that we never see spouses/partners of Hogwarts' professors? Susan McGee From va32h at comcast.net Sun Jul 15 00:06:43 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 00:06:43 -0000 Subject: Prince/Pince Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171760 You'll have to forgive me if I don't respond further - this post will bring me to the daily max... houyhnhnm: Madam Pince is described as thin, vulture-like with a shriveled, sunken face and a hooked nose. All we know of Eileen Prince's appearance is that she was skinny, had heavy brows, a long pallid face and a countenance both sullen and cross. The shape of her features is not described. I don't see anything in these descriptions that precludes they're being of the same person, especially after the passage of possibly as much as 50 years. va32h: But there's nothing to suggest she *is* the same person either. Scabbers was always described as missing a toe - well before we had the rest of the clues which made that missing toe significant. JKR could have never commented on Scabbers' toes at all, only bringing up, after we know that Pettigrew is missing a finger, "oh by the way Scabbers is missing a toe." But again - that's not how she does things - her clues are of inclusion, not omission. houyhnhnm: The only example you give for Rowling's "previously known method" is that of Aberforth. I can think of at least one example of a passage in which she makes connections between two scenes or characters by using similar language to describe them. One is the way in which Dumbledore's death is foreshadowed by the description of the dead unicorn in PS. >>Its long slender legs were stuck out at odd angles where it had fallen and its mane was spread pearly-white on the dark leaves<< Now Dumbledore. >>Dumbledore's eyes were closed: but for the strange angles of his arms and legs, he might have been sleeping<< We don't need to told that his silver hair was spread out on the dark ground. We can see it without being told. There is also the description of Harry asleep against the glass in his bedroom with his glasses askew that mirrors the image of Dumbledore dead. Then there is the similarity of language to describe Harry's feeling of revulsion and self-hatred in the cave and the look on Snape's face on the tower. We don't know the meaning of that yet, but I feel very confident that it has a meaning. It was not a matter of Rowling being unable to think of new words. va32h: No - in my first post on this subject I referenced Aberforth, RAB, Scabbers/Pettigrew and Fake!Moody as examples of how JKR gives out clues. Aberforth and Regulus are examples of a mystery revealed over multiple books and Pettigrew/Moody are examples of a mystery brought up and resolved in one book. Pince/Prince fits neither of those patterns. I am not going to repeat myself, you'll have to look up my orginal post. While I agree that Harry's look of revulsion in the cave is intended to mirror Snape's look of revulsion on the tower, I don't agree that the dead unicorn is intended to be a clue to Dumbledore's death, or that Harry's having fallen asleep on the window is related to Dumbledore's death. In the case of the unicorn - the only thing similiar in those descriptions is the use of "angles" to describe the position of the legs. You say yourself that Rowling *doesn't* describe Dumbledore's hair as being spread out like the unicorn mane, even though she possibly could. Again, a clue of omission. No, I don't think JKR expected her readers to assume that Dumbledore's hair was spread out like the unicorn's mane was five books ago. She doesn't even expect us to remember that Sirius' brother is named Regulus, even though we learned that just one book previously. I suppose I could buy that Dumbledore's death is similar to the unicorn's death - both were killed because the killer was in desperate circumstances. Both were noble creatures. Killing a unicorn is considered especially repugnant, and obviously everyone but the DE consider killing Dumbledore especially appalling. But foreshadowing and imagery are not clues. We don't re-read the passage with the dead unicorn and immediately think "of course! This is clearly a clue that Dumbledore is eventually killed by Snape." Although when we find out that Scabbers is really Peter, we do think "of course! That's why Scabbers started losing his hair and acting odd when he heard Sirius had escaped Azkaban. That's why the Sneakoscope went off on the train, it was near Scabbers. That's why Crookshanks kept chasing him. That's why Scabbers has always had that missing toe." Do you see the difference? Fake Moody isn't hinted at through similar language, or imagery, it's hinted at by having Barty Crouch's name appear on the Marauder's Map in a place where Fake!Moody happened to be. That Lupin is a werewolf isn't hinted at by describing him in ways that connote wolves, it's hinted at by 1) the most obvious name in all of Potterverse (except possibly Fenrir Greyback) 2) Having his boggart be a full moon 3) having him drink a potion at certain times of the month 4) Having him go missing at certain times of the month and 5) having Snape assign an essay on how to identify a werewolf. Or Hermione and the time turner. JKR flat out shows us Hermione intending to be two places at once when we see her exam schedule. Jo likes to surprise her readers, but not trick them. She plays fair. All her surprises are, in retrospect, entirely possible for even the casual reader to figure out. The Pince/Prince theory depends so much on specific interpretations of words and events that are not given any especial meaning - it is unlikely that even devoted readers would pick up on it, much less casual ones. And as much as I like JKR and her writing, I would disagree that she doesn't sometimes run out of words. In GoF, I remember that she constantly used the word "navel". Harry saw Cho and felt a swooping sensation behind his navel. Travelling via Portkey was described (repeatedly) as feeling a hook behind his navel. Doesn't Harry know any synonyms for navel? In OoTP, Ron started constantly using the word "mate" despite never previously having done so. Now of course in the unlikely event that I am wrong, and Eileen is Irma, I will of course be changing my username and disavowing any knowledge of this va32h person and her complete failure to grasp the author. But in all honesty, I'm not going to spend much time thinking up potential new user names. va32h From sistermegan at yahoo.com Sat Jul 14 23:43:20 2007 From: sistermegan at yahoo.com (sistermegan) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:43:20 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171761 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. But he will lose the use of his magic powers. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark on his forearm. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, *excluding any epilogue*? Bill W. and Fleur D. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Petunia Dursley (or Ms. Figg). 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry, later to be replaced by Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione, later replaced by Luna c. DADA Instructor? Lupin returns (after Harry leaves to discover and destroy the Horcruxii ) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Prof. Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Professor McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Professor Snape is loyal to Dumbledore and has been serving on the side against The Dark Lord since the Potters' deaths. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. The Ring (HBP) b. The Locket (from OotP and HBP) c. The Diary (from CoS) d. Hufflepuff's Cup (HBP) e. Harry's scar (all six so far) f. Nagini (GoF and HBP) g. Voldemort (all six so far) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Snape's Patronus : Spider Snape's Boggart : something to do with ignorance and incompetence people mocking him and/or laughing at him Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Complete, total, unconditional love. It is the strongest and purest form of love, and while it is not harmful in itself, it is so strong that once a person enters into it, they cannot bear to be seperated from it (to do so would cause them to die of grief and sadness). It is equivalent to entering Gan Eden in Medeival Jewish and Catholic Mysticism. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Peter Pettigrew will have to act against Voldemort to help save Harry at some point; this will lead to the death of Pettigrew. 2. Snape was acting under the orders of Dumbledore, but we will only learn of his full involvement in the OotP after his death. When all the facts come to light, Hermione will remind Harry and Ron that she always thought that he was on their side, despite how things *seemed* from the perspective of Ron and Harry. 3. Luna and Neville will prove to be key in both the quest to destory the Horcruxii and to fight Voldemort to the death. Luna's knowledge of esoteric subjects and Neville's acumen at Herbology will prove to save the members of Dumbledore's Army. 4. We will find out what happened at Godrick's Hollow as well as the 24 hour gap between Hagrid's rescue of Harry from the ruins to his being left on the Dursley's Doorstep. (I think the 24 hours were to put protective charms and spells on both Harry and the Dursley's abode as well as to perform memory charms on the infant so that he would not be scarred for life by the image of witnessing his parent's deaths. I likewise believe that Neville had memory charms performed on him, but that something went wrong -- either accidentally or because the DEs/Voldie wanted his memory to be faulty -- and that is why he is so absent-minded and fuddled.) 5. We will finally learn the *real* reason that Petunia knows so much about the Magical World, as well as why she is repressing/in denial of her magickal nature. JKR will also answer why Dudley was pampered while Harry suffered neglect and abuse from the Dursleys. -- sistermegan From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Jul 15 00:33:50 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:33:50 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] An idea... In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707141327t67ee1df8y7228c5f8ddf9d7b3@mail.gmail.com> References: <2795713f0707141327t67ee1df8y7228c5f8ddf9d7b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46996B6E.2050207@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171762 Lynda: > Yep, its been raised before, many times. I don't think so though. In the > first book we learn that Harry was down for Hogwarts since birth. Squibs > don't get put down for Hogwarts. Bart: They did in the 70's. Bart (to LE's: it's a joke. If you're over 35, you'll probably get it). From ekrdg at verizon.net Sun Jul 15 01:37:32 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 21:37:32 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions References: Message-ID: <007d01c7c680$b8258a50$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 171763 > wrote: > > 1. Lily's/Harry's eyes > > 2. Lily -- & charms, & potions, & Snape, & Petunia > > 3. Dudley's reaction to dementers > > 4. Dumbledore's gleam of triumph > > 5. *That Night* at Godric's Hollow > > a. Flying motorbike > > b. Who else was there? > > c. Why was Lily offered the choice/chance to live? > > d. What actually happened?? > > 6. James & Lily thrice defied Voldemort -- how/what? > > 7. Hermione & Ancient Runes > > 8. Squeaky stair at #4 Privet Drive > > 9. Petunia: "that awful boy" > > 10. Petunia -- how much does she know? > > 11. Invisivibility Cloak - when/why was it bequeathed? > > 12. Pettigrew -- silver hand, life debt > > 13. Gryffindor's Sword > > 14. Neville -- memory, toad, herbology > > 15. Ollivander > > 16. Sirius' two-way mirror > > 17. Veil of death > > 18. Snape's allegiance > > 19. Locket/horcruxes > > 20. Molly Weasley's greatest fear (dead Weasleys) > > 21. Pensieves > > 22. Occlumency & legilimency > > 23. SPEW/equality in the WW > > 24. Hermione's E in DADA > > 25. WHAT ELSE? > ronnie: > 26. Florean Fortesque > 27. DD's visions drinking the potion. > 28. how exactly did DD die? > 29. DD's tale concerning Slytherin's ring > 30. Snape's parantage. > 31. reason for Longbottoms being tormented. > 32. Snape/Narciss/Unbreakable Vow Eddie: 33. Weasley's flying car 34. Room of Love at MoM 35. Giants, including Grawp 36. Werewolves, including Fenrir Grayback and Lupin 37. Goblins 38. How did somebody get into the vault at Gringott's? 39. Dragons, including Norbert the Ridgeback There's probably more, but I want to get my list in quick. Eddie Kimberly: 40. Droobles Gum wrappers from Alice Longbottom ! 41. What was Dumbledore thinking/feeling during the Cave scene ? 42. How did Merope get Tom Riddle to stay with her for that brief period ? Love potion or Imperius Curse ? 43. Does Snape love ANYone ? Who ? 44. Krum !! 45. Will Pettigrew repay his life debt by turning against LV and helping Harry ? 46. Just how mad IS LV at Lucius for the foul up at the ministry and now Draco's failure to kill DD himself ? Kimberly Recent Activity a.. 58New Members b.. 1New Files Visit Your Group SPONSORED LINKS a.. Harry potter spoiler b.. Harry potter c.. Harry potter birthday party d.. Harry potter collectible e.. Harry potter hat Yahoo! TV Staying in tonight? Check Daily Picks & see what to watch. Yahoo! News Fashion News What's the word on fashion and style? Yahoo! Groups Moderator Central get help and provide feedback on Groups. . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sun Jul 15 02:23:42 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:23:42 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Does Harry LITERALLY have his mother's eyes? (her eyeballs...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707141923tabe84eeofc9e6831d1f6e0a3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171764 So, that's what has been bouncing around in my head as I wait for Book 7. Comments/ ideas please! ================================== Well that's one idea that would completely turn me off the books... Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jeopardy18 at comcast.net Sun Jul 15 03:14:33 2007 From: jeopardy18 at comcast.net (seanmulligan2000) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 03:14:33 -0000 Subject: Will any new characters be introduced. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171765 Will any new characters be introduced in the new book or does everyone think that there are enough of them already? seanmulligan2000 From muellem at bc.edu Sun Jul 15 03:41:38 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 03:41:38 -0000 Subject: Will any new characters be introduced. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171766 > "seanmulligan2000" wrote: > > Will any new characters be introduced in the new book or does everyone > think that there are enough of them already? > colebiancardi: JKR stated that she will not be introducing new characters in DH. However, I feel she will expand on characters that have been briefly mentioned, like Regulus Black and DD's brother, and they will play a bigger role, dead or alive, in the 7th book From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 15 04:30:42 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 04:30:42 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171767 According to the Guardian newspaper in the UK the first paragraph of book 7 has been released. I wouldn't call it a spoiler since it's the first paragraph not the last, but if you don't want to know it then read no more of this message. Chapter One. The Dark Lord Ascending. The two men appeared out of nowhere, a few yards apart in the narrow, moonlit lane. For a second they stood quite still, wands pointing at each other's chests: then, recognizing each other, they stowed their wands beneath their cloaks and set off, side by side, in the same direction. "News?", asked the taller of the two. "The best," replied Snape.' From sl_2010 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 04:40:01 2007 From: sl_2010 at yahoo.com (sl_2010) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 04:40:01 -0000 Subject: Is Harry wearing Slytherin Locket??? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171768 Hi I have just noticed in this link http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry- potter/gallery.dhusfull.html regarding the book cover, that Harry is actually wearing some kind of a locket. Is it the slytherin's locket?? Any ideas?? Sorry if this topic is already discussed.. Latha From juli17 at aol.com Sun Jul 15 05:07:54 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 05:07:54 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171769 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > According to the Guardian newspaper in the UK the first paragraph of > book 7 has been released. I wouldn't call it a spoiler since it's the > first paragraph not the last, but if you don't want to know it then > read no more of this message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chapter One. The Dark Lord Ascending. > > The two men appeared out of nowhere, a few yards apart in the narrow, > moonlit lane. For a second they stood quite still, wands pointing at > each other's chests: then, recognizing each other, they stowed their > wands beneath their cloaks and set off, side by side, in the same > direction. > "News?", asked the taller of the two. > "The best," replied Snape.' Julie: What?! Does this mean that Snape is SHORT? Noooo.... Seriously, I couldn't resist reading this first paragraph, and it is intriguing. Clearly the first chapter of DH will be one of the few not told from Harry's viewpoint. (And I'm assuming it will be a third person objective narrative, as I can't see JKR giving us readers access to Snape's thoughts- thus presumably revealing his true loyalties-so early in the book.) Now I will begin pondering on the "narrow, moonlit lane." Could it be Privet Drive on July 30th, say around 11:59pm? And the taller person (boo) with Snape...a DE, or someone from the Order, or perhaps Aberforth? And will that person's identity even be revealed in the first chapter? Hmmm... Julie From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Sun Jul 15 05:20:22 2007 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 22:20:22 -0700 Subject: Dedalus Diggle (was: Emmeline Vance) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1805049875.20070714222022@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171770 Carol: j> (On a less serious note, I'd also like to know why j> Dedalus Diggle keeps popping up in every book.) Dave: I know what you mean -- I haven't quite (but almost) given up hope that Dedalus might yet play a significant role. His name suggests he's a good flyer. Possible aerial maneuvering coach for Harry? (I have also almost-but-not-quite given up hope that the final Harry/LV showdown will be airborne.) Dave, who still wonders why Jo gives these significant Mythological names to apparently inconsequential characters -- Andromeda Tonks being another glaring example. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 05:21:31 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 05:21:31 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171771 > Eggplant: > According to the Guardian newspaper in the UK the first > paragraph of book 7 has been released. I wouldn't call > it a spoiler since it's the first paragraph not the last, > but if you don't want to know it then read no more of this > message. Goddlefrood: Curious that The Guardian would mention nothing of this scoop on their website. As at 6 a.m. GMT on 15th July 2007 there's no sign of this, presumably, world exclusive thereat. It's a bad sign if it's genuine, as it suggests that Snape will play a more prominent role than he perhaps deserves after his foul murder of Albus in HBP. If he is to turn out to be good then I for one would want an extraordinarily brilliant explanation for it. I've read this and other lists for some time and have yet to come across an anywhere near adequate reason why Dumbledore was killed. The old wizard has to be got out of the way is about as far as JKR has gone so far. Before I'm accused of being a Snape hater I would add that I do think, and have said many times, that Snape will assist Harry. I choose to believe the first paragraph referred in the post to which this replies isn't genuine, unless there's a page at the Guardian website I missed that a link could be provided to. Goddlefrood, striving to remain spolier free, but resigned to the possibility that there may be some spoliers out there. From jflynn at talktalk.net Sun Jul 15 05:16:39 2007 From: jflynn at talktalk.net (John Flynn) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 06:16:39 +0100 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 References: Message-ID: <00e901c7c69f$5920f3e0$d8a50d54@D2BZQV1J> No: HPFGUIDX 171772 > Eggplant: > According to the Guardian newspaper in the UK the first paragraph > of book 7 has been released. I wouldn't call it a spoiler since > it's the first paragraph not the last, but if you don't want to > know it then read no more of this message. I have not posted on here before but have been reading all of the messages, suggestions and so on for several weeks now. This opening Paragraph. How true is it? let us not jump to conclusions until the actual day itself. Mind you, it does sound real. John Flynn Stepney Green East LONDON United Kingdom From random832 at fastmail.us Sun Jul 15 05:30:36 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 01:30:36 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Does Harry LITERALLY have his mother's eyes? (her eyeballs...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4699B0FC.9020303@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 171773 Lisa wrote: > Oh, you'll hate my comment: that is literally the most repulsive > theory I've ever heard, LOL! Why? I mean, I assumed any such swap would have been done via magic, not with a grapefruit spoon or anything. Except maybe if it was Voldemort who did it. --Random832 From va32h at comcast.net Sun Jul 15 05:34:14 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 05:34:14 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: <00e901c7c69f$5920f3e0$d8a50d54@D2BZQV1J> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171774 According to the Observer, the first chapter was captured on tape during the filming of an interview with JKR, for an ITV documentary. The filming took place in October 2006. So it is entirely possible that the chapter has changed since then. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2126717,00.html From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sun Jul 15 05:34:40 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 01:34:40 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The first paragraph of book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171775 In a message dated 7/15/2007 12:22:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time, gav_fiji at yahoo.com writes: I choose to believe the first paragraph referred in the post to which this replies isn't genuine, unless there's a page at the Guardian website I missed that a link could be provided to Ask and ye shall receive. . (hope the link works): _Harry Potter and the man who conjured up Rowling's millions | UK News | The Observer_ (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2126717,00.html) Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From random832 at fastmail.us Sun Jul 15 05:33:06 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 01:33:06 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4699B192.90602@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 171776 Goddlefrood wrote: > I choose to believe the first paragraph referred in the post to > which this replies isn't genuine, unless there's a page at the > Guardian website I missed that a link could be provided to. Found by googling the first ten words of the passage: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2126717,00.html From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 05:45:16 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 05:45:16 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171777 > va32h: > According to the Observer, the first chapter was captured on > tape during the filming of an interview with JKR, for an ITV > documentary. The filming took place in October 2006. > So it is entirely possible that the chapter has changed since then. > http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2126717,00.html Goddlefrood: The Obs and the Grauniad are, despite being part of the same media group, not the same papers. The Guardian sirte didn't carry the story because the Observer's site did. I'm up to speed now, thanks va32h Your comment that the contents may have changed since October is agreed with and I also offer an alternative that JKR was simply playing a little joke on we readers. Why carry around a copy of a manuscript that one purports to be so desperate not to divulge to anyone, if not for a little jest. As I said earlier I would hope the apparent snippet is false as the potential for the book being devoted more to what should be matters to be resolved nearer the end is not promising otherwise. There are several people taller than Snape in the series, no doubt, one of whom is Ludo Bagman that evil, cunning man. Still, why open with this when a more likely opening is to start back at DE HQ? Not that it real spoils anything, as Eggplant mentioned in the thread starter. Goddlefrood From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 15 05:49:27 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 05:49:27 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171778 "Goddlefrood" wrote: > Curious that The Guardian would mention nothing of this scoop on > their website. As at 6 a.m. GMT on 15th July 2007 there's no sign > of this, presumably, world exclusive thereat. Look near the end of: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2126717,00.html The Guardian may be full of shit, but I'm not. Eggplant From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Jul 15 05:57:48 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 05:57:48 -0000 Subject: Importance of Pettigrew? In-Reply-To: <29682835.1184273898608.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171779 Bart: > This means that, if JKR has her psychology right, and I believe she > does, at some point Morty is going to push Pete a little too far, > and Pete is going to recover his self-respect, if only for long > enough to help Harry. Jen: JKR does weave realistic psychological underpinnings for her characters, meaning some will inevitably be motivated by their greatest weakness instead of strength. Peter doesn't appear to be a character in line to recover his self-respect so much as one who might repay his life-debt out of the belief that Harry has the potential to defeat Voldemort. There are a couple of things Peter could learn in the course of DH leading him to such a conclusion, undoubtledly discovered via spying and snooping as he's done throughout the series in both human and rat form: 1) Learning the full prophecy and perceiving Harry has some literal power that will make him stronger than LV in the end. Or perhaps thinking twice about the potion in the graveyard. Peter can be very shrewd when it comes to his own survival. 2) Learning Voldemort's immortality is due to Horcruxes and that Harry and his allies have already destroyed several in their quest. Attempting to side with Harry as the more powerful of the two could lead to fulfilling the life debt as easily as noble motives; at least, Dumbledore doesn't discount that possibility in his explanation from how I read it. Jen From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 06:32:07 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 06:32:07 -0000 Subject: Will the Prophesy be Fulfilled? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171780 > In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/171679 > > Carol: > Interesting theory, but it doesn't fit well with the Prophecy > ("either must die at the hand of the other") > Mike: You got me thinking about the Prophesy, what *has* come true, what *may* have came true, and whether the remainder *will* come true. OotP p. 841, US edition. The Prophesy: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches..." >From all we know right now, this part *may* have already come true. If Harry was indeed the one with the "power" he was approaching in a manner of speaking. Although he was probably very early in the gestation state, especially if he was conceived and the prophewsy was given on the same night (October 31, 1979). It's ambiguous to use the term "approaches" in place of to-be-born or conceived, but easily construed to be the same thing, imo. "Born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies..." Dumbledore has told us that James and Lily *did* defy Voldemort thrice, we just don't know how. So, since Harry was born at the right time, this one looks to be in the *has* category. The only niggler here, for me, is that the first "Born" seems like past tense to me. But the second "born" sounds like future tense, and they have to be referring to the same person, don't they? Well, anyway, the last sentence is a repeat of the first sentence and this second clause, except it says "will be born". Clears it up for me. :) "and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not..." Another case of probably *has* occurred. Harry was certainly "mark"ed in both the physical and magical sense. Was he marked as his "equal", I guess we'll soon see? Does the fact that the "mark"ed clause comes before the "power...knows not" clause mean that the marking will *cause* Harry to acquire this power? IOW, does Voldie's attempting to kill Harry trigger Lily's ancient love magic and thereby cause Harry to gain the "power" of love? Or was Harry born with this power and Lily's sacrifice added a new protection? And is Lily's love protection temporary? IMNSHO, Harry was born with the power of love. Nothing Voldemort did nor anything Lily did was required to give him that. And this fits the prophesy as far as the first sentence saying the "one **with** the power", not the one to *receive* the power. As to the *temporary* love protection, I'm still not understanding why it's temporary. Dumbledore admits he built upon it to protect Harry at #4 Privet, but that's DD's protection using Petunias blood. And just as obviously, Harry can't be hit by another AK and have it rebound to prove it wasn't temporary - that would give everything away too soon. But I digress. "and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives..." Let the debate begin! LOL. First, let's get this "other" thing out of the way. Put any third name in place of "other" and the sentence makes no sense. Put in Neville and you have either dying via Neville because neither can live while Neville survives. Huh? There is also a faction that wants to use Harry, Tom, and LV in a three-part mixture for this sentence. Sorry, that still doesn't work, imo. Stick two of them in place of the "either/neither" and the third one in for the "other" and you still get nonsense. "and [either Harry or Tom] must die at the hand of LV for [neither Harry nor Tom] can live while LV survives." So LV must kill Harry or Tom. But neither survivor can live while LV survives. So what, the survivor has to then kill LV to live? I suppose one could figure out how that could happen, but the problem is that's not what the prophesy says. Or more accurately, that's a lot more than the prophesy says and convolutes one of the clauses. The question at hand is whether this sentence *will* come true? And part of that question is in the "at the hand", instead of "by the hand". I would say that Myrtle died "at" the hand of Tom Riddle instead of "by" the hand. Tom didn't cast a spell that killed her, he controlled the Basilisk which killed her. So could Harry cast a Patronus which drives a bunch of Dementors to Voldemort and one of them sucks LV's soul? Or, say, Voldemort's last Horcrux is his own wand and Harry told Kreacher to get the wand and break it. When he does so, after Harry has already somehow "vanquished" Voldemort, he loses his last earthly anchor and crosses over, i.e. dies. (These aren't predictions, just examples. But if either occurs, you heard it here first ) Both of these scenarios would qualify as "at" the hand of Harry. And, to give equal time , Steve's (and Carol's) trip to the other side of the veil with Voldemort in tow would also qualify. Not that I don't like any of these outcomes, but I have Dumbledore's words from HBP nagging at me. "You are setting too much store by the prophesy!" (p.509, US) He works very hard to get Harry (and us) to understand that the prophesy only comes true when one acts on it. And though Voldemort is not going to stop acting on it, Harry does. not. have. to. Which means to me that if Harry chooses not to have Voldemort die "at" his hand (and Harry wins) then Voldemort *won't* die. Of course, if Voldemort wins, Harry will die "at" and "by" LV's hand - but we're not going there, that's woodchipper territory. ;) If I were in Harry's shoes, I would prefer that Voldemort had no chance to *recover* his old form. I would prefer that Harry would *permanently* vanquish the Dark Lord. But, I have this suspicion that JKR would rather that Harry not be the cause of Voldemort's permanent demise, that she has some other ending in store for the erstwhile Tom Marvolo Riddle. Mike From darksworld at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 07:01:15 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 07:01:15 -0000 Subject: Worst memory/ MWPP vs. Snivellus WAS:Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > I wouldn't disagree that Snape didn't always have self-confidence > (outside a classroom) but I never got the feeling that he felt that he > deserved the Marauders' abuse (which was the original premise I was > arguing against). > Charles: Why was that Snape's *worst* memory? I have several reasons that I think could be valid: 1.(assuming DDM) He realized that he insulted someone who tried to defend him in the worst way available to him. 2.(works for any Snape) That was one of the few times that he did *not* actually deserve what was being done to him. (excluding the prank) 3. (again assuming DDM) The use of sectumsempra on James showing a descent into the dark arts. 4. As has been stated before, his powerlessness in that situation, which once again works for any Snape. As far as MWPP being as bad as this single memory seems to make people think they were, I am appalled. There was an ongoing rivalry between Snape and the marauders that everyone *including DD* has said resembles the animosity between Harry and Draco. Lupin states that Snape never missed an opportunity to curse James. And let's face it, Lupin was still defending Snape right up to the AK on the tower. Note that Sirius was not defending the actions of the memory. He even states that he wasn't proud of it. The only indication we have that James ganged up on Snape as a regular thing was Snape's word. Which is good for a whole hell of a lot less than a lot of people on this list take it for. Snape keeps calling *Harry* arrogant for Goddess' sake. Harry may be a lot of things, but arrogant he is not. Was it always five on one? I doubt it. Was Snape as innocent as that one memory, and a lot of posts here would make it seem? If you believe that, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks, please, cash and in small bills.# If we are to see the whole Snape redeemed story, we are going to find out more about him at Hogwarts, and a lot of Snape fans are going to be upset at how nasty we find out he was, because if the Snape we have seen throughout the books so far is a redeemed Snape, he used to be worse. And that, to quote DD, "[I]s saying something." #paraphrased from Robert A. Heinlein. Charles, who thinks that the marauders *were* a lot like the Weasley twins, and Severus Snape was a nasty piece of work at Hogwarts- even if we haven't been shown that yet. From jhkepka at msn.com Sun Jul 15 06:53:11 2007 From: jhkepka at msn.com (annknd5) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 06:53:11 -0000 Subject: The motorbike.... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171782 Hello! Longtime reader and always enjoying e-mail posts from this group. I cannot find if I read this in one of the books or I dreamt it. I think the motorbike is cast aside somewhere on the Weasley's property, amongst Arthur's many possessions. jhkepka From toonmili at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 07:41:23 2007 From: toonmili at yahoo.com (toonmili) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 07:41:23 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171783 Toonmili: Hey guys just read the so called spoilers. I must say that I don't think that is part of DH. JK could have written it just for the special but I can't imagine that being part of DH. Here's why. Not only is it poorly written it also does not follow JK's style. When the story is not being told from Harry's POV, no names are said by the narrator until a character says the name. Take HBP for example. The Narrator calls Snape 'A sliver of a man',"A man with long black hair" and then she writes: "Narcissa," said the man. As you can see she calls him 'the man'. However when Narcissa calls him Severus and Bellatrix calls him Snape she begins to refer to him as Snape and not the man. So we can conclude that JK writing style does not have a unknown narrator naming characters. She has an active character name the character before she uses the name. A similar thing was done with Moody in GOF. NEXT>>> The description sucks. JK loves atmosphere. That first paragraph has none, unless you count a little bit about where they were and as far as we can understand it is a narrow alley. It is not only very weak but I can't imagine a first page of a book, even if I wrote it (and I'm not that good at writing) as being so weak. The first page is meant to capture people not make them say: who wrote this. If this is in DH I will be very suprised and dissapointed in the begining. ALSO Can any of you imagine Snape saying: The best. It seems so monosyllabic for Snape. It seems like there would have been some build up. And also Snape's nose and hair always precedes his talking. We never hear Snape say anything unless we know he had long curtained black hair (I left out the greasy because in Spinner's End it was left out so he is not always described as having greasy hair) and how long and hooked his nose is and how pale and sallow his face appears to be. So from a person who pays attention to detail I say this is a fake unless for some reason (that may be very entertaining) the story is being told from Snape's perspective in third person. From josturgess at eircom.net Sun Jul 15 09:11:05 2007 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:11:05 -0000 Subject: Dedalus Diggle (was: Emmeline Vance) In-Reply-To: <1805049875.20070714222022@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171784 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > > Carol: > > j> (On a less serious note, I'd also like to know why > j> Dedalus Diggle keeps popping up in every book.) > > Dave: > > I know what you mean -- I haven't quite (but almost) given up hope > that Dedalus might yet play a significant role. His name suggests he's > a good flyer. Possible aerial maneuvering coach for Harry? (I have > also almost-but-not-quite given up hope that the final Harry/LV > showdown will be airborne.) Well, Dedalus (greek myth) was supposed to have invented the labyrinth (Gringott's anyone?) which was so complicated that even he had trouble finding his way back out. McGonagall in PoS says he never had much sense! In mythology Minerva is Dedalus' sister. So don't give up hope just yet. Regards Jo From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 09:20:35 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:20:35 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: <007d01c7c680$b8258a50$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171785 Goddlefrood: There are many, many as yet unexplained matters in the story, some of which would be explained, as JKR has stated in various interviews relative to a good number of the issues on the snipped out list. She has, however, also stated that not every single little thing would be explained and there is a promised mystery to be left at the end. Who is then to say that she is following any literary rule? We'll all know quite soon what is explained and what is not within the story itself. I would also suggest that if there are any dangling matters that were either overlooked or simply not felt important enough to include in DH then JKR would at some point answer these queries in interviews. There are already several lined up for after the release of DH. One that I note that was not on any of the suggestions so far is the little matter of Grindelwald being defeated by Dumbledore. This would also lead on to expecting that all the dates in canon and their significance being explained. I expect an answer to neither of these two before DH is finished. If, however, Grindelwald does somehow feature then he has at least been set up within the so far published books. From sydpad at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 09:58:21 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:58:21 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171786 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "julie" wrote: SPOILIER SPACE!!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chapter One. The Dark Lord Ascending. > > > > The two men appeared out of nowhere, a few yards apart in the > narrow, > > moonlit lane. For a second they stood quite still, wands pointing at > > each other's chests: then, recognizing each other, they stowed their > > wands beneath their cloaks and set off, side by side, in the same > > direction. > > "News?", asked the taller of the two. > > "The best," replied Snape.' > > > Julie: > What?! Does this mean that Snape is SHORT? Noooo.... Sydney: That HAS to be legit! I've always thought Snape was supposed to be shortish. He just reads with that kind of vibe to me-- like a Al Pacino thing (speaking of fantasy casting.. a British Al Pacino circa 1975 would be my Snape). And YAAAAAAAAAY to Snape in the first chapter! That certainly reads like Rowling's prose to me. Sydney, back from the deeeeeaaaad!! From zzzzzzipppppy at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 15 11:45:25 2007 From: zzzzzzipppppy at yahoo.co.uk (Alan) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:45:25 -0000 Subject: DH cover. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171787 I have just seen the "front cover" of the 7th book - http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/gallery.dhusfull.html and I noticed there appears to be several hooded figures surrounding LV and HP. Could they be death eaters? Will some of them #cough#snape&wormtail#cough# have to help Harry escape? I have to say, I don't fancy Harry's chances very much if they are death eaters. Alan From krisasselin at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 12:33:29 2007 From: krisasselin at yahoo.com (Kristine Carlson Asselin) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 12:33:29 -0000 Subject: Tonks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171788 I'm sure this is neither a new theory, nor a new thought -- but it's one I haven't seen before and I've been lurking on a lot of discussions groups in the last several months. The character of Tonks is very different in HBP than she is in OoTP. Upon my first reading, I had put that down to her being in love with Lupin. But, after reading HBP again, I'm finding her really out of character. Why is she on the 7th floor, outside the room of requirement (p. 465 Am. Ed) -- she really has no business being so far from Dumbledore's office. Is she just wandering the halls or is she doing something else? Looking for Draco? I'm not satisfied with her answer. She also pretty much lets Mundungus get away after the Trio catch him selling off Sirius' stuff in Hogsmeade (p 245). So, is she up to something? Her patronus is different and she can no longer shape shift -- is it really Tonks? I'm starting to think that she might be one of the ones who is helping Draco (they are cousins, afterall). I know she's an auror - but is it possible that she's (or someone disguised as her) is working the inside of the Order for LV? Anyone have any thoughts? Kris (who'll probably go back to lurking after this post) From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 15 14:26:55 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:26:55 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The first paragraph of book 7/Snape's Worst Memroy Message-ID: <380-220077015142655661@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171789 Goddlefrood: The Obs and the Grauniad are, despite being part of the same media group, not the same papers. The Guardian sirte didn't carry the story because the Observer's site did. I'm up to speed now, thanks va32h Your comment that the contents may have changed since October is agreed with and I also offer an alternative that JKR was simply playing a little joke on we readers. Why carry around a copy of a manuscript that one purports to be so desperate not to divulge to anyone, if not for a little jest. As I said earlier I would hope the apparent snippet is false as the potential for the book being devoted more to what should be matters to be resolved nearer the end is not promising otherwise. Magpie: I don't think we can tell that from this snippet. (To disagree with the other poster on the thread, it sounds like a perfectly believable JKR scene to me, prose-wise.) This scene isn't necessarily resolving anything, or if it is it might be going towards a whole different surprise. JKR already "resolved" stuff with Snape killing Dumbledore, after all.:-) Sydney: That HAS to be legit! I've always thought Snape was supposed to be shortish. He just reads with that kind of vibe to me-- like a Al Pacino thing (speaking of fantasy casting.. a British Al Pacino circa 1975 would be my Snape). And YAAAAAAAAAY to Snape in the first chapter! That certainly reads like Rowling's prose to me. Magpie: Me too. And just wanted to add I believe Harry makes a point of saying Sirius is taller than Snape in their scenes together. LOL! British Al Pacino. HE'S GONNA KILL THOSE COCKAROACHES! Charles: As far as MWPP being as bad as this single memory seems to make people think they were, I am appalled. There was an ongoing rivalry between Snape and the marauders that everyone *including DD* has said resembles the animosity between Harry and Draco. Lupin states that Snape never missed an opportunity to curse James. And let's face it, Lupin was still defending Snape right up to the AK on the tower. Magpie: I think that depends on what you mean by "as bad as that single memory might make people think they were." They were as bad as they are in the memory--that's them, and we had seen them "gang up" on Snape via that map in PoA. But we've always had other sides to them as well. We've also seen how bad Snape is--I know some say that Snape has been set up as an innocent victim in the text so far, with the Marauders as nothing more than bullies, but I just don't think that's true at all. We've seen Snape as the bully plenty of times, and we've seen good sides of the Marauders. I think the Pensieve memory was supposed to be a surprising twist on the way we've seen Snape, not more proof he was an innocent victim. Charles: Note that Sirius was not defending the actions of the memory. He even states that he wasn't proud of it. The only indication we have that James ganged up on Snape as a regular thing was Snape's word. Which is good for a whole hell of a lot less than a lot of people on this list take it for. Snape keeps calling *Harry* arrogant for Goddess' sake. Harry may be a lot of things, but arrogant he is not. Magpie: Well, Sirius was defending himself to Harry, not to Snape. It was Harry that made him feel badly about what he did--I'm not so sure he felt badly about it in general or would ever tell Snape that. We actually do have more than Snape's word that he was ganged up on--we saw an example of it in the Pensieve and the map, and that's naturally going to happen given the Marauders were usually together. The Pensieve also showed us James was indeed arrogant just as Snape said. (And while Harry isn't his father, I wouldn't be so sure that Harry can't ever be arrogant. I think he might come across as arrogant to people if we weren't in his head with him.) I think JKR's clearly set it up as Snape being correct and also not correct. Harry was predisposed to think Snape was just wrong or lying about his dad and his friends, and he wasn't. That doesn't make Snape's judgment of them right in the overall sense--the Marauders have given their views of Snape too and I think they are also right. It's a mixture of both. Neither side is objective. Charles: Was it always five on one? I doubt it. Was Snape as innocent as that one memory, and a lot of posts here would make it seem? If you believe that, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks, please, cash and in small bills.# Magpie: As I said, I don't think this one memory makes Snape "seem innocent" at all. In that particular memory he was innocent and James and Sirius went after him 2 on 1 with Lupin tacitly approving and Peter being thrilled. (And Lily, at least, doesn't seem to think it's unusual.) That in no way says that that's the way it always has to be, and I don't think that's been implied anywhere in the book. If anything I would only say it proved that the Marauders were not as innocent as certain scenes in canon and perhaps other posts make it seem. Charles: If we are to see the whole Snape redeemed story, we are going to find out more about him at Hogwarts, and a lot of Snape fans are going to be upset at how nasty we find out he was, because if the Snape we have seen throughout the books so far is a redeemed Snape, he used to be worse. And that, to quote DD, "[I]s saying something." Magpie: I agree. Snape's the one who became a DE. He passed the Prophecy to Voldemort. But we've already seen him doing bad things when his victim is just as innocent as he was in the Pensieve. Charles: Charles, who thinks that the marauders *were* a lot like the Weasley twins, and Severus Snape was a nasty piece of work at Hogwarts- even if we haven't been shown that yet. -m (who thinks that saying the Marauders were "like the Weasley Twins" makes the opposite case than you seem to be making with it, and thinks we've been shown Snape being nasty plenty in canon. From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 15 14:30:39 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:30:39 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Tonks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2C9F77FB-C5D7-45E2-A80E-138067D94DFE@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171790 > Kris: > The character of Tonks is very different in HBP than she is in OoTP. > is it really Tonks? > > I'm starting to think that she might be one of the ones who is > helping Draco (they are cousins, afterall). I know she's an auror - > but is it possible that she's (or someone disguised as her) is > working the inside of the Order for LV? Jadon: My theory is that she's working, much as Draco is, on a secret project which is draining her of all energy. I hadn't previously considered that it could be the _same_ project - I do have one piece of evidence against that idea, though: would Draco be confiding in _Moaning Myrtle_ if he had Tonks, who was not only working with him, but having the same feelings about it? Possibly she is spying on him/ working against him (why?)/helping him without him knowing (but we already have Snape in the role of unwanted helper). I think it's more likely it's a separate project; even that she's being blackmailed into working for LV through a family connection, or suspects that what she's been being asked to do is not entirely for the best (but feeling she has no choice she does it anyway), and it's this that's making her miserable. She definitely seems to be more in the category of overworked/morally torn than lovesick. She's not under Imperius - she's changed and worried, not blissfully unconcerned and on the surface unchanged. Some other enchantment of compulsion? I wouldn't put it past her to feel that whatever she's doing is her problem, to be solved without worrying anyone else, and to be done on top of her normal OotP duties - very Harryish, but she actually goes through with it. I think she _is_ Tonks because, amongst other reasons, her presence at Hogwarts is suspicious. A DE would disguise himself as a student/ teacher/suit of armour/Mrs Norris. A slightly OFH Order member, OTOH, might disguise himself as another Order member (and so I present my grand theory that Tonks is Dumbledore in disguise). Only ... why does Tonks's hair return to pink at the end of the book? What else has happened, other than Lupin, presumably, reconsidering? Jadon From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 14:49:49 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 14:49:49 -0000 Subject: Does Harry LITERALLY have his mother's eyes? (her eyeballs...) In-Reply-To: <4699B0FC.9020303@fastmail.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171791 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Random832 wrote: > > Why? I mean, I assumed any such swap would have been done via magic, not > with a grapefruit spoon or anything. Except maybe if it was Voldemort > who did it. Well, gee, I guess I the idea of swapping eyeballs in any way, shape or form just sounds ... well ... gross to me. I think the importance of Harry having Lily's eyes was simply to remind others of Lily at significant times ... like softening Slughorn to Harry in order to enable Harry to get the desired memory for Dumbledore. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 15:04:30 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:04:30 -0000 Subject: OFF LIMITS SPOILER for Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171792 As many have noted, there appears to be a SPOILER in today's Guardian, as reported on HPANA, Mugglenet, et al. Anything relating to this SPOILER is now off-limits for the purposes of the contest. That means any interpretations, notes on the Chapter title, guesses about the identity of other character, anything. If you have *already submitted* an entry that may seem to be confirmed by this spoiler, that entry *is* still valid. Do nothing. The spoiler is written at the end of this post for those who wish to peruse it, below the Spoiler Space. FIVE DAYS left to enter Tiger Patronus's Ultimate and Last Predictions Contest for Bragging Rights In Perpetuity. Entries must be received by 11:59 PM EDT Thursday, July 19. TK Kenyon -- TigerPatronus! Author of RABID: A Novel *STARRED REVIEW* "[RABID] smoothly metamorphoses into a philosophical battle between science and religion. Kenyon is definitely an author to watch, she juggles all of her story's elements without dropping any of them--and, let's not forget, creates four very subtle and intriguing central characters. This is a novel quite unlike most standard commercial fare, a genre-bending story--part thriller, part literary slapdown with dialogue as the weapon of choice. Kenyon is definitely a keeper." -- David Pitt, Booklist, December 1, 2006 S P O I L E R *** S P A C E *** O *** D O N T *** S P O I L *** U S *** *** THE SPOILER: Chapter One. The Dark Lord Ascending. The two men appeared out of nowhere, a few yards apart in the narrow, moonlit lane. For a second they stood quite still, wands pointing at each other's chests: then, recognising each other, they stowed their wands beneath their cloaks and set off, side by side, in the same direction. "News?", asked the taller of the two. "The best," replied Snape. From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 16:05:28 2007 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:05:28 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Final Predictions 2 - The Trichotomy Theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171793 There have been many possible endings suggested for the Harry Potter septology. All sorts of logical, illogical, and emotional interpretations have been suggested and promoted since the disclosure of the prophecy in OOP, and one opinion was just as valid as another. I was never fully convinced by any of them. I had dissected the prophecy numerous times, and all I got was a headache. If the prophecy were a frog from high school biology class it would have been reduced to subatomic particles. However, persistance does pay off. I finally figured out what was, to me, the most likely scenario based on a solid line of reasoning that starts, of all places, at the end-of-year feast in Sorcerer's Stone. Let us return to the scene ............ Harry arriveed at the feast and heard that Slytherin had the most points and would win the House Cup. However, Dumbledore wasn't through counting points... Neville makes the difference ---------------------------- The procedure used by Dumbledore in awarding the House Cup to Griffindor at the end-of-year feast in Sorcerer's Stone may provide the best clue as to how the conflict with Lord Voldemort will ultimately resolve at the end of Book 7. Though curious at first reading, Dumbledore's saving of his highest praise for Neville for last and awarding him the final ten points that puts Gryffindor over the top to win the House Cup in his first year at Hogwarts was not IMO an accident. Nor was it JKR's attempt at "political correctness" to show that the efforts of a wuss can make a difference. I mean, wasn't it obvious that Harry was the Hero? He was the one the books are about after all, not Neville. So it was easy for me just to ignore that little nudge over the top and go on to the next book and the next to continue Harry's adventures and development. But there is more going on here...... When Gryffindor tied with Slytherin due to the heroic efforts of Ron, Hermione, and Harry, Dumbledore talked about the many kinds of courage - "It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends." He then awarded Neville the 10 that secured the House Cup for Gryffindor. The trio got fifty points or more apiece for performing far more difficult tasks, yet Neville was saved for last. In fact it was Nevilles points that secured the victory in Dumbledore's eyes - not HR or H. Why did Dumbledore do that? What was his message? What clue did JKR leave us ? The clue that just may solve it all............... Neville was a minor character in the first four books --- "I'm nobody" he says to Luna on the train to Hogwarts at the beginning of OOP --- and though rapidly developing his wizarding skills,is still in the shadows of the trio. Until the Prophecy. Neville's ability to stand up to his friends will be critical in saving the wizarding world from the dark lord and his death eaters...... The Trichotomy Theory of the Prophecy (TTOP) (HPFGU 105955) ----------------------------------------------------- Now to the prophecy. On her website, JKR says she worded the prophecy "extremely carefully". In addition, we already have a previous prophecy to refer to and find similarities with. (This is the return of the Dark Lord foretold by Trelawney n POA. More on that in another post to further support TTOP.) Most people assume that the prophecy refers to TWO people - Harry and Voldemort. Though there is a question mark on the orb Dumbledore says that the prophecy does indeed refer to Harry, and not Neville. I found it curious that part of the prophecy (like its predecessor in POA) had some repetition. This was not an accident either (later post for interpre- tation). What this dichotomy reasoning (the prophecy refers only to harry and voldemort) disregarded is that HARRY CAN SERVE TWO DIFFERENT ROLES IN THE PROPHECY!!!! He can be HARRY as we know him, and later in time can be HARRY!MORT after the Dark Lord loses his own body and takes over Harry's. Now before you write this theory off, remember that LV occupied Harry before, though not completely, in OOP..... That said, think of this ........ What if there are THREE people referred to in the prophecy? What if: The one = Harry Potter The Dark Lord = Lord Voldemort The other = Neville Longbottom The Dark Lord will be defeated by BOTH Harry and Neville and this is how it could happen.... 1. Harry confronts Voldemort and defeats him, destroying Voldemort's body in the process. Harry had done this before as a baby, though noone knows quite how he did it. BUT .... this time, instead of disappearing as he had done previously, the non-corporeal Voldemort takes over Harry's body, creating Harry!Mort. LV has already occupied Harry's body in OOP during his battle with Dumbledore at the MOM, so this should not come as a big suprise if it happens again. 2. Harry!Mort raises holy hell all over the wizarding world because noone can bring themselves to kill him. Dumbledore can't -- this is his weakness when Harry merged with the snake at the end of OOP. (DD may not even be around by the time of this prophecy.)Who else would be able to kill Harry!Mort ? Hermione? Ron? The Ministry? I don't think so............ 3. It is left to Neville to "stand up to his friend" when noone else can or will and defeat Voldemort "indirectly" by defeating Harry!Mort in the climactic battle at the end of Book 7. 4 There is still the issue as to whether Harry and/or Neville survive, but that is for a later post. If you disagree with this or find a fatal flaw, please either come up with a better ending or, plow through my logic [or lack thereof] and rip it to shreds just like Evil!Lupin would {just kidding...) From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 16:10:01 2007 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:10:01 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Final Predictions - 1 - Godrics Hollow - what really happened Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171794 James and Lilly Potter were both hired as alchemists by Albus Dumbledore and Nicholas Flamel when they graduated from Hogwarts. They learned all about making a Sorcerers Stone from Dumbledore who had learned about it from Nicholas Flamel. They knew about the prophecy from Dumbledore and knew that Voldemort would try to kill Harry. They also knew that if Harry was made immortal temporarily by drinking the Elixir of Life that if Voldemort tried to kill Harry, the spell just might destroy him instead. Irresistable force (AK spell) vs the immovable object (immortality albeit temporary) Harry was given the Elixir which was precious and not mass producable otherwise the entire order would have used it. Voldemort goes to Godrics Hollow and surprises the Potters. When Voldemort attempts to use the AK spell on Harry, that spell hits an immortal person and bounces back on Voldemort destroying his body. An alternate approach that ties in even better is that Snape finds out the plan and tells Voldemort who agrees to spare Lily in exchange for the information on the Potters whereabouts. When Lily tries to defend Harry, Voldemort kills her. This is the betrayal that so haunts Snape through the years and why he would vow to protect Harry and ultimately kill Voldemort. Note that Snape and Voldemort are never together anywhere in the series. Also using this idea, Voldemort knows the plan to make Harry immortal and does NOT use the avada kedavra spell on Harry. He knows that the AK will not work on an immortal and since his Horcrux approach never really makes him alive (Hagrid quote) he is willing to go the Elixir to achieve immortality like Flamel. Snape is aware of this effect (his stopper death comment in SS to the first DADA class) as no doubt is Voldemort. But Voldemorts soul is scattered .... so he needs a fresh start. And that fresh start would be Harry's soul .... The spell that Voldemort tried to do that failed was a SWITCHING SPELL.... and that did not work from an animate to an inanimate object.... therefore the destruction of Voldemorts body and the house. Voldemort knew later that he can use the Elixir to create a new body..... Thats why the desire of Voldemort to find the Sorcerers Stone started the series. My earlier post of two years ago discussing this with more canon is as below ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The way the Harry Potter series concludes can be guessed at by a careful reading of the SORCERER'S STONE At the time of the first book, we know the following - 1. Albus Dumbledore and Nicholas Flamel are currently partners in their alchemy practice (SS 103 - frog card) 2. When Harry tells Hermione about Dumbledore's frog card, she rushes off to find an "enormous old book" that says that "NIcholas Flamel is the only known maker of the Sorcerer's Stone." (SS 220) 3. If the book is that old, it might have been written ages ago before Dumbledore was Flamel's partner or even a wizard. Ol' Albus is only 150 or so, not quite the 665 that Flamel was when that "old" book was written. 4. Therefore, though we are led to believe that there was only ONE sorcerer's stone, that may have been the case long ago when the book was published. It might not necessarily be the case now. 5. Ron adds "no wonder we couldn't find Flamel in the Study of Recent Developments in Wizardry.... he's not exactly recent if he's 665, is he?" --- and THAT WAS AT THE TIME THE "OLD" BOOK WAS PUBLISHED. So.... since Dumbledore and Flamel are partners it is not unreasonable to conclude that - a- Dumbledore also knows how to make the stone - Nicholas Flamel taught him b- There may be more than just "the one stone currently in existence" - that was at the time of the old book, not now. c- given that Voldemort's soul is split How does this play out? IMPLICATIONS FOR JAMES LILY AND HARRY THE LILY & JAMES ALCHEMIST THEORY -------------------------------------------- 1. After James and Lily leave Hogwarts, they are both hired to work as apprentices for the Dumbledore Flamel Alchemy partnership. There is no canon for this so i am making a reach here .... However, I don't have to reach very far as you may agree by the time you finish reading this. If this occupational choice is valid however, a lot of things fall into place quite nicely........ 2. Because they are apprentices for Dumbledore and Flamel, the pay is quite good (ya think?). They can get all the gold they could ever want from the Sorcerer's Stone, gold that is not Leprechaun's Gold, gold that can be stored in a vault in Gringott's and spent. Or in the Potter's unfortunate case, saved for Harry. And of course the gold would have been kept in Gringott's - houses burn down don't they? (SS 63). Now we have a reasonable guess for how the Potters got their fortune. Remember, it is not the only possible guess, but it is not one that can be ruled out as ridiculous... 3. Being Head Boy and Head Girl and from Gryffindor, Lily and James seem to be the perfect choice for apprentices. But why would they be needed? In fact why are they VITAL for the job? Here is where the second stretch comes in, but once again, if you buy into it, the payoff is huge........ 4. Remember that during the time the Potters graduated rom Hogwarts, Voldemort was near the height of his powers. The wizarding world, and the order in particular (moony's photo and explanation to Harry in OOP supports this) was in deep trouble. As Lupin says to Molly in OOP ch 9 "last time we were outnumbered 20 to 1 by the Death Eaters and they were picking us off one by one.....". Outnumbered and outgunned - the order was indeed in trouble. So what to do ? what to do? Well, now we will find out why the Potter's were REALLY hired as apprentices of the partnership..... 5. Dumbledore had a plan that he had tried once before with mixed results (more on this later .....). Remember that the second property of the SOrcerer's stone is that "It also produced the Elixir of Life, which will make the drinker immortal". Now what if Harry was given the Elixir of Life, and Voldemort has this prophecy that he heard about Harry, and he tries to kill Harry who now is immortal ---- what would happen to the target of that spell -- or its caster??? An irresistable force against an immovable object........ an AK cast on an eternal being !!!!! Would that spell not create an effect similar to a priori incantatum - or better yet, rebound automatically on the caster? So in other words, Dumbledore set a trap for Voldemort -- Harry always was the intended target (or more accurately the weapon). Dumbledore defeats the dark wizard and the Wizarding world is saved. But something goes horribly wrong and James and Lily are killed - despite Hagrid's rant CAR CRASH! roared Hagrid, .... How could a car crash kill Lily an' James? It's an outrage! A scandal. If only he knew..... or did he? And Harry survives as a boy, but a boy who is alchemistically enhanced. Enhanced in such a way that he must be kept away from wizards until he is ready to deal with it - an isolated super-wizard. So now you have the Lily & James are Alchemists Theory as described above, and here is why it makes even more sense....... You might ask why James and Lily would agree to such a thing? Even for all the gold in Gringot's! Two reasons. First, the wizarding world and the order are doomed if nothing is done, and second BECAUSE DUMBLEDORE HAS DONE IT ALL BEFORE AND SUCCEEDED..... almost. ----- more to follow ----- but one last point ... in my original Manxmouse theory I talked about Harry being totally artificial - I am not so sure about that theory now and feel more comfortable with "alchemically enhanced" rather than Pinocchio - though either are supported ...... however, Voldemort does say to Harry (ss 293-294) ".. and ONCE I HAVE THE ELIXIR OF LIFE I WILL BE ABLE TO CREATE A BODY OF MY OWN ...." so there is another little property of the stone we should be aware of. From harryp at stararcher.com Sun Jul 15 16:41:33 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:41:33 -0000 Subject: An idea... In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707141327t67ee1df8y7228c5f8ddf9d7b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171795 > Lynda: > Squibs don't get put down for Hogwarts. Eddie: I don't recall this in canon. In fact I remember that Neville's family thought he might be a squib until his uncle (grandfather?) dropped him out of a window and he bounced. Would his family have known he was already "put down for Hogwarts" and therefore know Neville was no squib? Help? Eddie, who wishes everybody would STOP POSTING NEW MESSAGES because he's having a very difficult time catching up. From shmantzel at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 16:48:23 2007 From: shmantzel at yahoo.com (Dantzel Withers) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:48:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] SPOILER - Final Predictions - 1 - Godrics Hollow - what really happened In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <165504.77340.qm@web56509.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171796 So now you have the Lily & James are Alchemists Theory as described above, and here is why it makes even more sense.... Dantzel asks: How is this a spoiler if it is a theory? Unless you read the supposed leaked copy on the internet and just summarized the book for us? If so, I will find you and make you sorry. Just kidding. Kind of. No really, just kidding. I think. Dantzel --------------------------------- Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jul 15 16:57:42 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 15 Jul 2007 16:57:42 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 7/15/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1184518662.72.33706.m43@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171797 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday July 15, 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 sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 16:57:04 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:57:04 -0000 Subject: An idea... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171798 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: I don't recall this in canon. In fact I remember that Neville's > family thought he might be a squib until his uncle (grandfather?) > dropped him out of a window and he bounced. Would his family have > known he was already "put down for Hogwarts" and therefore know > Neville was no squib? ============================= Lisa: I don't know that any family knows their child is "put down for Hogwarts" at birth -- we don't know that James & Lily knew about Harry. We only know that Hagrid knew that Harry was, and likely that is because Dumbledore told him. From harryp at stararcher.com Sun Jul 15 18:05:54 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 18:05:54 -0000 Subject: Horcrux? (Boy I hope not!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171799 > Sue: > What if Voldy's ultimate goal was to make Hogwarts castle a horcux. Eddie: Intriguing. Perhaps as an ultimate goal, but I suspect not one he accomplished yet, because Hogwarts has always seemed like a place of protection against Voldemort. Eddie From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 18:32:43 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 18:32:43 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171800 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kristine Carlson Asselin" wrote: > > I'm sure this is neither a new theory, nor a new thought -- but it's one I haven't seen before and I've been lurking on a lot of discussions groups in the last several months. > > The character of Tonks is very different in HBP than she is in OoTP. > Upon my first reading, I had put that down to her being in love with > Lupin. But, after reading HBP again, I'm finding her really out of > character. Why is she on the 7th floor, outside the > room of requirement (p. 465 Am. Ed) -- she really has no business > being so far from Dumbledore's office. Is she just wandering the > halls or is she doing something else? Looking for Draco? I'm not > satisfied with her answer. > > She also pretty much lets Mundungus get away after the Trio catch him > selling off Sirius' stuff in Hogsmeade (p 245). > > So, is she up to something? Her patronus is different and she can no > longer shape shift -- is it really Tonks? > > I'm starting to think that she might be one of the ones who is > helping Draco (they are cousins, afterall). I know she's an auror - > but is it possible that she's (or someone disguised as her) is > working the inside of the Order for LV? > > Anyone have any thoughts? > > Kris (who'll probably go back to lurking after this post) > lizzyben: I sort of thought that Draco was impersonating Tonks outside the Room of Requirement. When Harry sees "Tonks" outside the Room, she doesn't use her customary greeting (no Wotcher, Harry), but she does know Harry's name. She's also unconsiously picking at the sleeve of her robe, exactly where a Dark Mark would be located. Finally, she's described as looking thin & terrible, having lank hair, and being on the brink of tears. That's how Draco is described throughout HBP. She looks upset as she asks Harry about rumors of people being hurt by the Death Eaters. Draco's planning to bring Death Eaters into the school, but he might be worried about what they'd do to the students when they arrive. Harry comes across Tonks outside the room, right as he's watching the ROR for Draco to emerge. Basically, I think Draco created a spell that would only allow females to enter the room, thinking that this would keep out Harry (and Snape). That's why Crabbe & Goyle endured the indignity of impersonating girls, & Draco also disguised himself as a woman (Tonks). The real Tonks is listless & depressed, but is never on the brink of tears the way ROR "Tonks" is. Draco's the one who's about to burst out crying. The real Tonks is stationed outside the school, not outside DD's office. That wasn't Tonks. As for the rest of the Tonks weirdness, it might just have been JKR's attempt to show how lovesick Tonks is. Except like most of the other romantic subplots, it pretty much fell flat. For all the talk about the power of love, in HBP love pretty much just made people act vindictive, depressed, petty or jealous. lizzyben From muellem at bc.edu Sun Jul 15 18:38:16 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 18:38:16 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171801 > lizzyben: > > I sort of thought that Draco was impersonating Tonks outside the Room > of Requirement. When Harry sees "Tonks" outside the Room, she doesn't > use her customary greeting (no Wotcher, Harry), but she does know > Harry's name. She's also unconsiously picking at the sleeve of her > robe, exactly where a Dark Mark would be located. Finally, she's > described as looking thin & terrible, having lank hair, and being on > the brink of tears. That's how Draco is described throughout HBP. She > looks upset as she asks Harry about rumors of people being hurt by the > Death Eaters. D colebiancardi: Nice idea, but does Draco even know who Tonks is, let alone know what she looks like? I don't think he has hung out with her - she may be his cousin, but that side of the family was zapped off the Black Family Tree. Who in their family kept in touch with Andromeda and the Tonk's family? From sam2sar at charter.net Sun Jul 15 18:50:15 2007 From: sam2sar at charter.net (Stephanie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 18:50:15 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171802 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > According to the Guardian newspaper in the UK the first paragraph of > book 7 has been released. I wouldn't call it a spoiler since it's the > first paragraph not the last, but if you don't want to know it then > read no more of this message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chapter One. The Dark Lord Ascending. > > The two men appeared out of nowhere, a few yards apart in the narrow, > moonlit lane. For a second they stood quite still, wands pointing at > each other's chests: then, recognizing each other, they stowed their > wands beneath their cloaks and set off, side by side, in the same > direction. > "News?", asked the taller of the two. > "The best," replied Snape.' > Sam says Who an idea just hit me. This isn't thought out yet but I would like an opinion or two. What if this is Snapes worst memory and it involves the night Harry's parents were killed. Snape and LV could be meeting in Godric's Hollow to kill Harry. Snape doesn't know who lives there because of the Fidelis (sp?) charm and is unknowingly responsible for the attack. Then Snape could have been the one to retreive LV's wand. Wow my first real prediction. From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 15 19:08:07 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:08:07 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tonks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7B068151-9E8C-4FED-9977-271BEB549A6B@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171803 > lizzyben: > > Basically, I think Draco created a spell that > would only allow females to enter the room, thinking that this would > keep out Harry (and Snape). That's why Crabbe & Goyle endured the > indignity of impersonating girls, & Draco also disguised himself as a > woman (Tonks). Jadon: And what about Hermione, who Draco knows very well is the cleverest student in the year? McGonagall? Professor Trelawney, who likes to hang around with sherry bottles? I think Draco had Crabbe/Goyle impersonate girls because little first year girls are cute. They aren't threatening. They don't look as if they're guarding, say, a magical chamber. Draco's a Slytherin. This is the sort of calculation and emotional manipulation his house is good at. Besides, if Polyjuice could get you past a 'girls only' barrier, don't you think that dormitory staircase would be a bit obsolete? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 19:09:37 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 19:09:37 -0000 Subject: Snape's height Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171804 I realize that this topic is less than earth-shaking, but I can't bear to speculate wildly at this point. Several posters have wondered whether Snape is actually short. I would say no, simply because JKR never actually applies that adjective to him. If shortness were one of his defining characteristics, she would routinely use it in his descriptions. Instead we have curtains of shoulder-length black hair, sometimes described as greasy, a sallow complexion (occasionally described as pallid or pale), black eyes, and a large hooked nose (along with a thin mouth and long fingers, secondary characteristics that have been mentioned more than once). His voice--cold or silky or dangerously soft--and his facial expressions (inscrutable, calculating, or furious, for example) are important. His height is not. Flitwick, Dedalus Diggle, and the Creevey brothers are always described as "tiny." Wormtail is always described as "short" (slightly taller than thirteen-year-old Harry and fourteen-year-old Hermione but evidently shorter than fourteen-year-old Ron in PoA, so perhaps 5'5" or 5'6"?????). Harry, too, is described as short (and thin). Snape is described as "thin" on several occasions, but never as short. Granted, he's described as shorter than Sirius Black in OoP, but Black is described as tall in PoA. To be shorter than a tall person is not the same as being short. He appears to be taller than Harry as late as the Occlumency lessons in OoP (at any rate, Harry finds his presence threatening, as I doubt he would do if Snape were as short as Pettigrew, even given those penetrating looks). He looks "down" into Narcissa's face in HBP, and she is described as "tall" in GoF (at the QWC). IIRC, the only male characters (other than Hagrid) whom JKR describes as "tall" are Dumbledore, Karkaroff, Ron, and Voldemort/Riddle. The male characters she describes as "short" (or "tiny") have already been listed. Since neither adjective is ever used in relation to the frequently described Snape, I conclude that he's of average height for a thirty-something man, rather thin but evidently in good physical condition considering his long run from the astronomy tower all the way to the gate in HBP, after which he parries all of Harry's curses. (No doubt he stayed in shape by climbing all those stairs every day and prowling the corridors at night. Never again, alas!) Carol, realizing that Snape's allegiances are much more crucial than his height but nevertheless determined to visualize him as about 5'10" (her own height) until informed otherwise From muellem at bc.edu Sun Jul 15 19:16:03 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 19:16:03 -0000 Subject: The first paragraph of book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171805 > "eggplant107" wrote: > > > > According to the Guardian newspaper in the UK the first paragraph of > > book 7 has been released. I wouldn't call it a spoiler since it's > the > > first paragraph not the last, but if you don't want to know it then > > read no more of this message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sam says > > Who an idea just hit me. This isn't thought out yet but I would like > an opinion or two. > > What if this is Snapes worst memory and it involves the night Harry's > parents were killed. Snape and LV could be meeting in Godric's > Hollow to kill Harry. Snape doesn't know who lives there because of > the Fidelis (sp?) charm and is unknowingly responsible for the > attack. Then Snape could have been the one to retreive LV's wand. > Wow my first real prediction. > colebiancardi: Then DD is a fool then for all these years for trusting Snape. Snape was at Hogwarts at this time, and according to DD, was working for DD, not LV. According to DD, Snape already knew that the Potters were targeted when he came to Dumbledore to renounce his ties to LV. So, Snape *did* know that LV was going to take out Harry, so he would know who lives there, even though he was not the secret keeper. Even if Snape was ESE and LV's man, he already knew who Harry's parents were and that LV was targeting the Potters. Peter was the one who spilled the beans for the location and was directly responsible for leading LV to the Potter's residence. Snape was responsible for bringing the first part of the prophecy to LV, but was *redeemed* (at least in my eyes) for then working against LV to prevent the attack. Unless, of course, Snape is really ESE. Which we will know in 6 days! As far as the wand goes, I still think it was Peter who retrieve the wand - he wasn't *killed* by Sirius until later, so he had plenty of time to get the wand and hide it. And this is regardless if Snape is DDM, ESE or OFH. colebiancardi From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 15 19:17:04 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:17:04 +0100 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - plot to make terrible things happen at Hogwarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171806 Apologies if this has been discussed before (Yahoo's search server has been funny all day). At the beginning of CoS, Dobby warns Harry: "If Harry Potter goes back to Hogwarts, he will be in mortal danger [...] There is a plot [...] to make most terrible things happen at Hogwarts [...]. Dobby has known it for months." How does Dobby know -- how does Lucius know -- what Riddle will choose to do, or if Ginny/some other student will try writing in the diary at all? Is opening the Chamber of Secrets the plot referred to? Jadon From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sun Jul 15 19:39:49 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 12:39:49 -0700 Subject: Who's tall: was Snape's height Message-ID: <700201d40707151239p6105a6bakc9f2867bd75706@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171807 possible s p o i l e r so spacing > carol wrote: ... > IIRC, the only male characters (other than Hagrid) whom JKR describes > as "tall" are Dumbledore, Karkaroff, Ron, and Voldemort/Riddle. The > male characters she describes as "short" (or "tiny") have already been > listed. Since neither adjective is ever used in relation to the > frequently described Snape, I conclude that he's of average height for > a thirty-something man, rather thin but evidently in good physical > condition considering his long run from the astronomy tower all the > way to the gate in HBP, after which he parries all of Harry's curses. > (No doubt he stayed in shape by climbing all those stairs every day > and prowling the corridors at night. Never again, alas!) Kemper now: I agree with Snape being of average height. But I would add to you list of 'tall', Aberforth. He's described as tall and thin. Which makes me wonder... JKR said she wasn't introducing anyone new, so it must be someone we know. I'm assuming the paragraph takes place in the present: the summer after DD's death. So, of our list of tall suspects, Aberforth seems the most likely, as the Dark Lord seems to address his servants by their first or last names. He would ask, "News, Snape?" But instead, we get "News?" fwiw Kemper From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 19:47:37 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 19:47:37 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - plot to make terrible things happen at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171808 Jadon: > > How does Dobby know -- how does Lucius know -- what Riddle will > choose to do, or if Ginny/some other student will try writing in the > diary at all? > > Is opening the Chamber of Secrets the plot referred to? Juli now: Remember that Lucius was the one that planted Tom's diary in Ginny's cauldron at Flourish and Botts. He knew that Tom Riddle had opened the Chamber 50 years ago, and I'm sure he told Lucius that the diary will reopen the Chamber. As Dumbledore says he surely didn't know it was an Horcrux, but I bet he knew it contained instructions on how to open the Chamber. The question is, how could he be sure that Ginny would follow the instructions? he must have known that it would cause Ginny to act against herself. Juli From va32h at comcast.net Sun Jul 15 20:05:33 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:05:33 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - plot to make terrible things happen at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171809 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, dracojadon at ... wrote: > At the beginning of CoS, Dobby warns Harry: "If Harry Potter goes > back to Hogwarts, he will be in mortal danger [...] There is a plot > [...] to make most terrible things happen at Hogwarts [...]. Dobby > has known it for months." > > How does Dobby know -- how does Lucius know -- what Riddle will > choose to do, or if Ginny/some other student will try writing in the > diary at all? > > Is opening the Chamber of Secrets the plot referred to? va32h: I would say yes. When discussing the diary horcrux in HBP, Dumbledore says that Malfoy must not have known what it was, or he'd have been more careful with it...he was probably just told that if the diary were to make its way to Hogwarts, it would reopen the Chamber. The icing on the cake for Lucius is that he planned to have a Weasley child take the diary to Hogwarts, which would discredit Arthur Weasley, whom Lucius is furious at for raiding his house. Now while we are on the subject - I have to wonder if Lucius *did* know the diary was a horcrux, and wanted to get rid of it. Lucius got off quite easily after Voldemort's demise, and has secured a very good position for himself, on the board of governors at Hogwarts, close friend of the Minister, able to bribe and buy his way into a prominent position in wizarding society. He has quite a lot to lose if Voldemort does come back. va32h From va32h at comcast.net Sun Jul 15 20:15:40 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:15:40 -0000 Subject: First Chapter/Re: Who's tall: was Snape's height In-Reply-To: <700201d40707151239p6105a6bakc9f2867bd75706@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171811 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kemper wrote: possible s p o i l e r s spacing I agree with Snape being of average height. But I would add to you list of 'tall', Aberforth. He's described as tall and thin. Which makes me wonder... JKR said she wasn't introducing anyone new, so it must be someone we know. I'm assuming the paragraph takes place in the present: the summer after DD's death. So, of our list of tall suspects, Aberforth seems the most likely, as the Dark Lord seems to address his servants by their first or last names. He would ask, "News, Snape?" But instead, we get "News?" va32h: What about the big blond Death Eater with no name who caused such a ruckus at the end of HBP? Or one of the Lestranges - we don't know how tall either of them are. I do think Aberforth is plausible though - because if Snape is going to be redeemed after having killed Dumbledore, I think it's best to start the process right away, but showing that he's still working with the Order and because if Harry is going to believe that Snape is on their side, he's going to need to hear it from someone he would trust. Hmm what about Arthur Weasley? The scariest/most exciting thing about this chapter though, is that the title matches a spoiler scan of the table of contents that appeared on Live Journal a few days ago. The scans are long gone, but I have to say - if they were fake, they were the best fakes I've ever seen. va32h From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 15 20:48:18 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:48:18 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chamber of Secrets - plot to make terrible things happen at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7512E07C-2508-44C7-BF3F-E9D55FC58973@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171812 Juli: > He knew that Tom Riddle had opened the > Chamber 50 years ago, and I'm sure he told Lucius that the diary will > reopen the Chamber. As Dumbledore says he surely didn't know it was an > Horcrux, but I bet he knew it contained instructions on how to open > the > Chamber. Jadon: The thing is, even if LV had mentioned to Lucius that the diary contained the memory, could he really know what his sixteen-year-old self would do? Diary!Riddle has a mind of his own, and nothing but contempt for LV, who has been through so many transformations and pieces of dark magic that he is quite unrecognisable. Does he remember himself as Riddle? I don't think he cares much for the Chamber anymore -- it's Lucius that masterminds the villainy of CoS -- and really, is it much of a 'plot,' that Dobby says has brewing for months? Doesn't Lucius have anything better to do? What on earth does he hope to achieve? He must know that the chances of having the Chamber opened are sketchy; he knows that last time it was opened Slytherin's work was hardly begun. If his aim is really to rid Hogwarts of its muggle-borns (and I'm coming to think that almost no-one actually cares two hoots for the blood ancestry of a bunch of teenagers, it's a cover for all sorts of individual machinations) -- wouldn't he have a far better chance of success using his influence on the board of governors? Using his influence/gold with the Ministry? Using his influence with society? I'm going to have to conclude that Lucius is a bit stupid, really, based on CoS. A ploy to make us sorrier for Draco? A not very well thought out storyline? Now, even if this is all that goes Lucius's head, why is Dobby so anxious to warn *Harry*? Harry is not a muggle-born. Tom Riddle has never heard of Harry. Harry is not in the front firing line. Dobby showers praise on Harry's abilities and bravery. Dobby should know Harry can take care of himself. His story is that Harry is too 'good', 'great,' and 'important' to lose. Are we to think that he is so disgusted with the Malfoys and their allegiances that he's (in secret) whole-heartedly embracing the side of light, and its main symbol, the Boy who Lived? If so, why isn't he embracing some of its other values, and warning people like Hermione, Dean, and Justin? I don't think there can be much more to CoS than we already know -- JKR can hardly rewrite the storyline five books later, in DH. But its logic, at this point, is not convincing me. va32h: > Now while we are on the subject - I have to wonder if Lucius *did* > know > the diary was a horcrux, and wanted to get rid of it. Jadon: That would tie better with my preferred opinion of Lucius: that he's not, actually, stupid; but -- you don't get rid of a horcrux by throwing it into the wild; you destroy it by -- by -- by casting it into Mount Doom! Jadon From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 21:22:44 2007 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:22:44 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Switching Spell that might have been used at Godrics Hollow Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171813 Everyone assumes that the reason that Harry Potter was marked for death by Lord Voldemort was because of the prophecy. But there was another reason as well........ >From the first chapter of SS we are led to believe that Lord Voldemort wanted to kill Harry, and, after killing his parents, indeed tried to kill Harry using the Avada Kedavera spell which backfired and destroyed LVs body while letting his spirit survive. The green light is evidence that such a spell was cast. JKR, for some reason that I cannot fathom, said towards the end of the interview "The first question I have never been asked is "why didn't Voldemort die?" Not "Why did Harry live?" By changing the focus of the question she has raised an entirely new possibility and a new line of questions and possible contradictions - The Avada Kedavera spell is supposedly unstoppable and fatal. We have been told this several times. Yet Harry stopped it and survived. That is the first contradiction. Then the same Avada Kedavera spell is supposed to have rebounded and destroyed Voldemort's body, while leaving his spirit alive. This would contradict Crouch!Moody's statement that Harry was the only survivor -- Voldemort survived too. This is the second contradiction. The basic information on Avada Kedavra comes from Crouch!Moody in GOF pg 216 "Not nice. Not pleasant. And there's no countercurse. There's no blocking it. Only one known person has ever survived it, and he's sitting right in front of me." We then are privy to Harry's thoughts over the next two pages .... jkr describes his memories (GOF pg 216 again)....... "How Voldemort had killed Harry's father first. How James Potter had tried to hold LV off, while shouting at Lily to take Harry and run ... Voldemort had advanced on Lily Potter, told her to move aside so that he could kill Harry .. how she had begged him to kill her instead, refused to stop shielding her son.... " Then in the next paragraph jkr writes "Harry knew these details because he had heard his parents' voices when he had fought the dementors last year ---" He also remembers the green light. OK...... so lets get out copy of POA and find out what Harry heard back in POA ... On page 238-239 "... and his mother's voice was louder than ever, echoing inside his head - "Not Harry! Not Harry! Please - I'll do anything" "Stand aside. Stand aside, girl!" ............then Harry is awoken by Lupin Notice any difference ? Where in Harry's POA memory is it mentioned that Voldemort wanted to KILL Harry? Or at least want to kill him by using an Avada Kedavra curse ???????? IT IS MY CONTENTION THAT THE AVADA KEDAVRA CURSE WAS NEVER USED ON HARRY !!!!! The green light that Harry sees as a baby is the AK curse used to kill his mother - not necessarily the one (if it was cast) that was used to allegedly try to kill him. Harry must have had something or some quality that Voldemort desperately wanted which would have been unattainable by Voldemort if he KILLED Harry directly by using the AK curse. And that quality was a living body with a complete soul -- unlike Lord Voldemorts soul which was fragmented into horcruxes ... and thus Voldemort was not truly "alive" Think about this, now. If Voldemort used the AK on Harry as a baby and as a result was blasted out of his body, WHY WOULD HE TRY IT AGAIN, NOT ONCE BUT TWICE (in GOF at the graveyard and in the MOM) ?? He couldn't be THAT stupid ! Also note that in COS Riddle waited for the basilisk to try to kill Harry rather than use a faster and seemingly more fatal method of the AK curse. This was so even AFTER Harry killed the critter. Well then, what is going on here ? There are spells that we know about but don't know how they are summoned or the impact of what happens if they go wrong. We do know that spells can and do go wrong -- time turner effects, Luna's mom's experiment, the Polyjuice potion - with unforseen and possibly disasterous results. So if the Avada Kedavra curse wasn't used, what curse was? How about a switching curse. Now this is a bit of a stretch, but not too much........ My starting point is the set of quotes below, particularly the very clever play on words by Dumbledore "HE SAW HIMSELF IN YOU before he had ever seen you," (OOP pg 842) Side note -- part of Voldemorts soul inside of Harry ? Hagrid (SS 53) "How could a car crash kill Lily an' James Potter?" Hagrid (SS 57) "Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die." Harry's short life line as described by Trelawney "HE SAW HIMSELF IN YOU before he had ever seen you, ..." "... he did not kill you, as he intended, but gave you powers, AND A FUTURE, ....." baby headed death eater (silly image unless you think of it as a subtle hint.....) So think of a switching spell that went badly wrong...... Why would Voldemort do it ? Maybe Hagrid was right -- there was no human left in him to die, so a switching spell would in effect kill Harry once he gets switched into an already dead body and Voldemort would be switched into Harry's body as a full occupant. (Think of the famous Ray Bradbury story "The Small Assassin" -- a fully cognizant baby who can kill....). So again, baby Harry must have had some special quality that Voldemort desperately needed which would have been gone if he KILLED him directly by using the AK curse. And once again, after LV got his body back in GOF and was able to touch Harry, he had no fear of using the AK curse on Harry. But when Harry was a baby, Voldemort was not as bright as he thought because it appears that the switching spell only works with two LIVING bodies...... and since Voldemort wasn't alive, the spell wasnt fully realized, and for him went horribly wrong............... The spell DID work partially though, Voldemort wasn't totally dead, and part of him was "switched" to Harry in the form of his scar.... Hmmmmmm................. NOTE - I originally posted this theory (as Samnanya) in a slightly less extensive form in HPFGU shortly after JKR's Edinborough interview. I believe that it was the first time anyone had suggested that an AK was NOT used on Harry at Godric's Hollow. From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 15 21:05:41 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:05:41 +0100 Subject: Chamber of Secrets, and powers Dumbledore knows not In-Reply-To: <7512E07C-2508-44C7-BF3F-E9D55FC58973@yahoo.co.uk> References: <7512E07C-2508-44C7-BF3F-E9D55FC58973@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: <5BA00656-10FA-4B37-8F37-B2D129558E99@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171814 Oh! I forgot to add: what are the "powers Dumbledore doesn't ... powers no decent wizard ..." that Dobby talks about? Dumbledore doesn't what -- know about basilisks? Memory preservation? (That strikes me as exactly the sort of thing DD would know about.) He certainly knows about the Chamber of Secrets: he was there last time it was opened. Is Dobby, possibly, talking about horcruxes? (All right, Dumbledore knows about them too, but Dobby would be unlikely to know that.) Parts of HBP were originally to be CoS. Could Dobby have known the diary was a horcrux without Lucius knowing, and been masterminding something of his own? _Was_ there, perhaps, a more complex plot, which didn't unfold? Except, what would be the literary point of that? And in any case, what can a horcrux do on its own? Jadon From sydpad at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 21:20:36 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:20:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's height In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171815 Carol: > I realize that this topic is less than earth-shaking Sydney: What could possibly be more important??! Carol: > Several posters have wondered > whether Snape is actually short. I would say no, simply because JKR > never actually applies that adjective to him. Sydney: I should clarify that by 'short', I'm thinking 'on the shorter side of avarage', not 'Danny DeVito'. Obviously he's not conspicuously short, or, as you say, Rowling would have mentioned it. So, 5'7-8ish? (Al Pacino is 5'7). I don't know why I think this (I though of him as shortish before it came up in GoF), except to say that he has a shorter man's vibe; that's all I can think of! Carol: Wormtail is always described as "short" (slightly > taller than thirteen-year-old Harry and fourteen-year-old Hermione but > evidently shorter than fourteen-year-old Ron in PoA, so perhaps 5'5" > or 5'6"?????). Sydney: The Power of Google tells me the avarage 13-year-old boy's height is 5'1, and given Rowling's penchant for extremes I'd say if she describes someone as 'short' they're *really* short, so 5'3ish for Peter I'd say. Carol: >I conclude that he's of average height for > a thirty-something man, rather thin but evidently in good physical > condition Sydney: Jogging!Snape!! He's canon in the movie, LOL, the way he was bookin' down those stairs. Mind you, the bigness, the age and the height are the main reasons I can't bear Rickman's Snape, despite the fact that, well, it's Alan Rickman. > Carol, realizing that Snape's allegiances are much more crucial than > his height but nevertheless determined to visualize him as about 5'10" > (her own height) until informed otherwise Sydney, assuring Carol that EVERYTHING about Snape is of vital importance, and who for some reason pictures Snape as being slightly over her own height of 5'5... maybe we can compromise on 5'9.5, the height of the avarage British male. From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 21:29:01 2007 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:29:01 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Final Predictions 3 - Lupin killed Sirius Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171816 I have never felt that the fight scene in OOP was fully described -- too much happening there -- and the movie was all wrong on what transpired (not to ruin the film). Lupin knew that Sirius' influence was not good for Harry. As for what happens ...... here are the quotes from OOP with comments .... "Harry flung the prophecy across the floor[1]. Malfoy was blasted off his back. AS Harry scrambled up again he looked around and saw Malfoy smash into the dais [2] on which Sirius and Bellatrix were now dueling. Malfoy aimed his wand at Harry and Neville again, but before he could draw breath to strike, Lupin had jumped between them [3]." Tinglinger -------------- Here are the comments: [1] So, Harry is on the floor below the dais and not yet on any stairs. Malfoy attacks and Harry blasts him [2] Malfoy is on the floor within Harry's sight, and also right BELOW the dais where S & B are fighting [3] Lupin is now on the floor level between Harry and Malfoy, with Malfoy the closest and Harry the farthest from the dais. REMEMBER THAT ALL THREE ARE BELOW THE DAIS! Back to the fight and snipping of some action. Harry and Neville try to climb the stairs but there is no indication that the position of Malfoy or Lupin had changed. "Dumbledore was already at the foot of the steps [4]", so he is also at floor level. Back to OOP ............. Only one couple were still battling, apparently unaware of the new arrival. Harry saw Sirius duck [5] Bellatrix's jet of red light: [6] He was laughing at her. "Come on, you can do better than that!" he yelled, his voice echoing around the cavernous room. The [7] second jet of light hit him squarely [8] on the chest. The laughter had not quite died from his face, but his eyes widened in shock [9]. [snip] It seemed to take Sirius an age to fall. His body curved in a graceful arc [10] as he sank through the ragged veil hanging from the arch.... And Harry saw the look of mingled fear and suprise [11] on his godfather's wasted once-handsome face as fell through the ancient doorway and disappeared behind the veil, .... Tinglinger ------------------------ [5]Ducking means that Sirius was now not directly facing Bellatrix. His chest is facing the ground or is at least at an angle to it (try ducking to see what i mean) [6] Note the rare use of a colon here ..... This would imply that the action continues from sentence to sentence - there is a link between the sentences. To me this indicates that Sirius had not risen again from his duck. [7] Not that if "Her" was substitiued for "The" there would be no question where the second jet of light came from. I don't believe that this was an accident or sloppy writing. [8] "squarely on the chest" of Sirius implies that since Sirius was still crouching BELLATRIX COULD NOT HAVE CAST THE SECOND SPELL! Once again, try ducking and see if you are still facing an imaginary opponent and get hit. I don't think so....... [9] and [11] "shock" "fear" and "suprise" - sounds like there is an extra adjective here. I wonder if he was suprised as to which wand the jet of light emananted from ---- Lupin's ! [10] "curved in a graceful arc" implies that his body arced BACKWARDS, unbowing Sirius and projecting him backwards through the veil. Read the paragraphs slowly and visualize what happens..... Do you see what I mean ? In addition to the above, think about Bellatrix's fear of punishment by Voldemort for not procuring the prophecy orb for him, she says "Master I am sorry. I knew not. I was fighting the Animagus Black!" (oop 812) She doesn't mention KILLING him, just fighting him. Why would she be shy with her accomplishments when she is about to be punished by her master? JKR spends many paragraphs describing who was where in the battle. Everyone else was preoccupied in the battle, incapacitated, unconscious, or getting lassoed by Dumbledore. EXCEPT LUPIN, who as I said, was in perfect position to act anonymously. Malfoy also could have cast the spell but his angle wasn't as good as he was directly under the dais and may not even have had a shot. Interesting, eh ? Makes me wonder about Lupin.... Once again, this is not an argument that events HAD to happen this way. Just don't be surprised if they did. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sun Jul 15 21:32:58 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 14:32:58 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chamber of Secrets - plot to make terrible things happen at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40707151432h148bf72cub70dd88e9e8589a8@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171817 > va32h: > Now while we are on the subject - I have to wonder if Lucius *did* know > the diary was a horcrux, and wanted to get rid of it. Lucius got off > quite easily after Voldemort's demise, and has secured a very good > position for himself, on the board of governors at Hogwarts, close > friend of the Minister, able to bribe and buy his way into a prominent > position in wizarding society. He has quite a lot to lose if Voldemort > does come back. Kemper now: I think if Lucius had known it was a horcrux it would because Voldemort told him. And if that were the case, then Voldemort would have killed Lucius in the Graveyard for not searching him out upon his less than spirit existence. With regards to the Diary, I think the real reason Voldemort wanted it to be slipped in at Hogwarts wasn't to unleash Slytherin's monster, but rather, to take over Hogwarts from the inside. IIRC, JKR has mentioned (I tried quote accio-ing but couldn't find it readily/easily) that had Diary!Tom come to full corporeal form, he would be quite powerful... or something like that. This young Dark Lord could then possibly, if not easily, take Dumbledore unawares. Kemper From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 21:43:45 2007 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:43:45 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Final Predictions - 3 - Luna Lovegood -- unresolved .... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171818 The role of Luna Lovegood has always been an interesting topic of conjecture for me after reading OOP -- though there was a date with Harry in OOP it was eventually overshadowed by his relationship with Ginny. I was kind of ready to write off any future major role of Luna in the series, but there were two things that made me think that something indeed might happen before the series ends.... First, Luna is just about the only person who would accompany Harry through the veil, if that is his destiny.... The veil concept has been mentioned in CS Lewis and His Dark Materials and I dont feel that it will be abandoned. Second, the scene with Luna survived almost intact at the end of the film, not quite canon, but not an accident either imho. That said, i am reposting my argument as to Luna's importance in OOP {and hopefully beyond ....} -------------------------------------------------------------- After Sirius is gone, Harry is in total pain and reaches out to anyone who can help him.... OOP 862-864 (pre Luna meeting) "I am sorry not to have been more help," said Nick gently. "Well ... well, do excuse me ... the feast, you know. . ." And he left the room, leaving Harry there alone, gazing blankly at the wall through which Nick had disappeared. Harry felt almost as though he had lost his godfather all over again in losing the hope that he might be able to see or speak to him once more. He walked slowly and miserably back up through the empty castle, wondering whether he would ever feel cheerful again. tinglinger ------------- At this point, Harry has tried to ease his grief losing Sirius by talking to every friend and mentor available to him. First Dumbledore, who was not only not helpful, but made things worse by showing weakness in his communications with Harry as weell as revealnig that Harry's ultimate destiny was to bear an even heavier burden than any he has borne to date. Second, he was not comforted by Ron and Hermione when he visited them in the hospital ward. "He was not ready to see their expressions when he told them that he must be either murderer or victim, there was no other way ...." Harry then makes up an excuse to get out of there by claiming that he wanted to see Hagrid. So, his friends, though sympathetic, were of no help. Third, Hagrid was no help either. Like DD, he also made matters worse by bringing up Sirius, opening new wounds and allowing Harry's temper to spark. Fourth, even sitting by himself by the lake only dredged up old memories. Harry got sadder the longer he sat there, and ultimately escaped to the castle..... Fifth, the mirror offered false hope, and finally sixth, there was Nearly Headless Nick, who dashed the final hope that Harry had ever to see his godfather again..... And then ............. OOP 862-865 continued, with bracketed footnotes mine ----------------------------------------------------- He had turned the corner toward the Fat Lady's corridor when he saw somebody up ahead fastening a note to a board on the wall. A second glance showed him that it was Luna. There were no good hiding places nearby, she was bound to have heard his footsteps, and in any case, Harry could hardly muster the energy to avoid anyone at the moment [1]. "Hello," said Luna vaguely, glancing around at him as she stepped back from the notice. "How come you're not at the feast?" Harry asked. "Well, I've lost most of my possessions," said Luna serenely. "People take them and hide them, you know. But as it's the last night, I really do need them back, so I've been putting up signs. [2]" She gestured toward the notice board, upon which, sure enough, she had pinned a list of all her missing books and clothes, with a plea for their return. An odd feeling rose in Harry - an emotion quite different from the anger and grief that had filled him since Sirius's death. It was a few moments before he realized that he was feeling sorry for Luna [2]. "How come people hide your stuff?" he asked her, frowning. "Oh ... well. . ." She shrugged. "I think they think I'm a bit odd, you know. Some people call me `Loony' Lovegood, actually." Harry looked at her and the new feeling of pity intensified rather painfully [2]. "That's no reason for them to take your things," he said flatly. "D'you want help finding them? [3]" "Oh no," she said, smiling at him. "They'll come back, they always do in the end. It was just that I wanted to pack tonight. Anyway ... why aren't you at the feast?" Harry shrugged. "Just didn't feel like it." "No," said Luna, observing him with those oddly misty, protuberant eyes. "I don't suppose you do. That man the Death Eaters killed was your godfather, wasn't he? Ginny told me. [4]" Harry nodded curtly, but found that for some reason he did not mind Luna talking about Sirius. He had just remembered that she too could see thestrals [5]. "Have you. . ." he began. "I mean, who ... has anyone you've known ever died?" "Yes," said Luna simply, "my mother. She was a quite extraordinary witch, you know, but she did like to xperiment and one of her spells went rather badly wrong one day. I was nine. [6]" "I'm sorry," Harry mumbled. "Yes, it was rather horrible," said Luna conversationally. "I still feel very sad about it sometimes. But I've still got Dad. [7] And anyway, it's not as though I'll never see Mum again, is it?" "Er - isn't it?" said Harry uncertainly. She shook her head in disbelief. "Oh, come on. You heard them, just behind the veil, didn't you? [8]" "You mean . . ." "In that room with the archway. They were just lurking out of sight, that's all. You heard them." They looked at each other. Luna was smiling slightly. Harry did not know what to say, or to think. Luna believed so many extraordinary things ... yet he had been sure he had heard voices behind the veil too.... "Are you sure you don't want me to help you look for your stuff? [9]" he said. "Oh no," said Luna. "No, I think I'll just go down and have some pudding and wait for it all to turn up.... It always does in the end. ... Well, have a nice holiday, Harry." "Yeah ... yeah, you too." She walked away from him, and as he watched her go, he found that the terrible weight in his stomach seemed to have lessened slightly [10]. tinglinger [1] Before she greeted him, Harry clearly felt that Luna was the last person he wanted to talk to about his loss, yet was too depressed to avoid her. [2] But will she get her things back in time to leave Hogwarts? Maybe not. There was no evidence that she was on the Hogwarts Express the next day, even though she is hinted at by Ginny's actions. This omission is glaring, and imho is not an accident. And all set up by this simple scene..... [3] Harry offers to help her for the first time, to be followed later by a reiteration of the offer later in the scene. Though Luna refused him this time, the premise that Harry is willing to help her has been established and WILL BE SIGNIFICANT LATER. When? How about after the Death Eaters kill/injure her dad. She will need Harry then, and she has no other friends or relatives that we are aware of. Where else can she go besides to Harry? And who else is a more likely companion to the Veil? Hermione? I don't think so...... [4] Luna knows of Harry's loss and empathises with him. I wonder how and why Ginny told her though..... [5] Luna is the first person besides Neville that Harry knows has experienced death first hand. He knows that Neville has too, but Neville was too uncomfortable with death and the disabling injuries to his parents to share that information. Luna on the other hand is quite open to discuss death and what lies beyond the veil. ONCE AGAIN, THIS WILL BE SIGNIFICANT LATER. [6] Luna's age at her mom's death establishes that it happened when Harry was around 10, the year before he started Hogwarts. There are also several theories why a dateline was hinted at, but that is for another post. (Think Quirrell, werewolf, ... Lots happened in the WW in the year before Harry arrived at Hogwarts.) [7] And what if she DIDN'T have dad anymore? Who could she turn to ? Hmmmmmm [8] Who here thinks that Harry and Luna will NOT end up in the Veil Room again? C'mon! [9] The SECOND offer to help.... JKR usually says things twice if she wants to make sure that we don't miss them! [10] The beginning of a new friendship ...... LUNA WAS THE ONLY ONE who made a difference til that point in Harry's depression. So after a bit {too much?} of microanalyses, I think that JKR has provided one possible plotpath for HBP. Time will tell. ------------------------------------------------------------------ As for HBP, Luna and Hermione have developed a mutual respect for each other .... i would not be suprised at all to see Luna end up as a major player before the end of the series -- maybe even in a Harry/Luna ship ... but that is based only on the above .. and after what happened in the HBP anything is possible... From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 22:05:38 2007 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:05:38 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Final Predictions - 5 - Manxmouse Theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171819 MANXMOUSE THEORY -- Harry Potter was not a living being - he was created by Dumbledore -- the Dark Lord was convinced that Harry was immortal by being fed the Elixir of Life and camt to Godrics Hollow not to kill Harry but to use a switching spell on him to gain that immortality {even briefly} -- when Voldemort used the switching spell it backfired and destroyed his own body and gave Harry life .... thus The Boy Who Lived. I guarantee that, whether you buy into the theory presented in this post or not, your perception of Harry Potter will be inalterably changed after you read what follows....... The logic herein is based on canon and one of the books on JKR's bookshelf. This little book is not one that most people would feel is relevant to the Potterverse, and I was not too convinced by either the title or the cover.........until I started reading it. The book in question has been long out of print, but I managed to find an old well-read hardcover copy in the Main Library in Palm Beach County, Florida. When I first looked at MANXMOUSE (the mouse who knew no fear) by Paul Gallico, I thought it would just be another interesting children's book. The first chapter. however, blew me away.... And it wasn't even the main part of the story! The theory is quite simple to state, but quite difficult to believe, or even take seriously. But here goes..... HARRY!MANX!POTTER Dumbledore is an alchemist and transfiguration expert who has used deep magic to created Harry Potter in the extraordinary image of his father but with his mother's eyes..... James and Lily Potter are husband and wife but James is NOT Harry's TRUE blood father. In other words, Harry was NOT born as a living human being. Harry was a creation, a Golem, a Pinocchio, who was fashioned by Dumbledore as a weapon against Voldemort. When Voldemort was lured by the prophecy to attack Harry, his spell split his essence, giving Harry new [or perhaps "more"} life. Harry was sent to live with muggles not for his protection, but to keep his true nature away from the prying and meddling of wizards until he was ready. But, like Gepetto before him, Dumbledore fell in love with his creation, and that was the flaw in his plan. Referring to the Manxmouse book .... CHAPTER ONE - THE STORY OF THE TIDDLY MOUSE-MAKER "There was once rather an extraordinary old ceramist who lived in the village of Buntingdowndale in the heart of England. Ceramics is the art of making pottery into tiles, or dishes, or small glazed figures. <......> ...this [potter] made nothing but the most lifelike and enchanting littler ceramic mice from morning until night. <......> ... but everytime he set about his work, he was hoping that the next one would result in the absolutely faultless or supermouse. [He had gone to the wedding of the daughter of a friend and then went to the village inn, the Cat and Mouse,where he got thoroughly soused and found it easier to float rather than walk home] He drifted down the path to his workshop, ..., and settled down at his pottery bench.... And thereupon the sensation came over him most intently and the idea smote him like a stroke of lightning: Now! Now this very moment, here tonight, this instant, I shall make my supermouse. At last, at last! Everything that he ever seemed to have known both about mice and the making of glazed ceramic figures cane together. And at that particular instant he felt he was the greatest ceramist the world has ever known, and that the mouse he was about to make would be the most beautiful and perfect that anyone had ever seen. <......> "what is art?" he said to himself, and then answered, "Art is creation and I am a creator." <......> He was pouring all of himself that there was into the little creature that was so smoothly and beautifully taking shape beneath his fingers. [3 - pls read comments after you finish the ENTIRE POST] At last it was done. <......> so I've made a Manx Mouse .... all the love and hopes he had poured into the making of this one mouse had called forth the magic of a true creation. And when that has taken place, anything can happen. <......> And thus, having played his part, the ceramist now vanishes from our story. But for Manxmouse, the adventure had just begun. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171820 Okay, I'll make a fool of myself: Compulsory Questions: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? 'Die' yes, stay dead, no. By 'die', I mean, he'll go to a 'Land of the Dead' type-thing like all good Hero-questers, but it will be in some provisional way. Draught of Living Death? Anyhow.. out on a limb, because Harry's kind of a Christ-figure, he'll be 'resurrected' through the Room of Love. Bonus prediction: because JKR and Joss Whedon share a brain, Harry will be peaceful and happy in the land of the dead, but have to return to this vale of tears to live out his natural life. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Guh... Snape. Aargh. I'm not 100% sure, but pretty sure. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark, why not. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? yes b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? yes f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Dudley 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? a new character, as usual. I'm dying to see what happens when the curse is broken. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore, duh. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Gryffindor's sword (poo on JKR for shooting down my Sorting Hat theory!) b. Riddle's Diary c. The Ring d. The Locket from Grimmauld Place e.Ravenclaw's wand f. Hufflepuff's Cup g. Harry Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: a Phoenix. It has changed at some point-- either when he initially 'turned' back in the day, or after he killed Dumbledore. I love Wynnleaf's guess of an Augurey Phoenix. Boggart: Lily being killed because of him. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love. Didn't Dumbledore tell us that? If it's like a symbolic thing.. uh... my brain's stuck on giant hearts. Didn't she actually use giant man-eating brains to represent thoughts? Okay, a giant, man-eating dove. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Because HP is basically an elaboration of "The Little White Horse": We will revisit the Salazar Slytherin/Goderic Gryffindor split, discover hidden complications, and redress an ancient wrong. Also, we'll find out Goderic wasn't as good, nor Salazar as bad, as history likes to record. Out on a limb: it was Goderic who enslaved the House Elves. cf. also "Daughter of Time"-- a revisionist view of Richard the Third. The chapter title "Cat, Rat, and Dog" in PoA may be a reference to this. 2. The "Life Debt" works like the DADA Curse-- it's 'Coincidence Magic' that does not cause events on its own, but somehow results in artistic tableaux of exquisite irony that highlights everyone's characters. Let's say it's the reverse of the DADA curse: rather than arranging events that 'bring out the worst' in the victim, it arranges events that 'bring out the best' in them. In Snape's case, his love for Lily entangled him in saving James. What the best is in Peter Pettigrew I have no idea. 3. The magical emphasis will be on transportation, signifying freedom of movement, action, and choice. Apparition will be the recurring magic, as love potions were to HBP (I have this developmental-psychology theory about the series). Harry will inherit Sirius' motorcycle and will ride around looking badass and disturbing the neighbourhood. Two for one predictions: Harry will also inherit Sirius' little flat that he mentioned, which is in Notting Hill and now worth 1.2 million pounds. 4. Emmeline Vance is alive!! 5. Because JKR likes her parallel structures-- Harry will be helped by some mysterious personage, and have theories about who it is. When the person is revealed, it will be with words along the lines of, "It wasn't Lupin. It wasn't even Dumbledore. It was Snape." And then the chapter will end. Dun dun duuuuuun! There will be a Shrieking-Shack type funhouse reversal, with Harry as Snape, and Snape as Sirius, where Harry goes CAPSLOCK about how obviously Snape is EVIL!! The part of Crookshanks will be played in tonight's performance by Fawkes the Phoenix. Too vague to count as an actual prediction: 6. Because all these kinds of stories end with this kind of thing, the main climax will be WTF? explosion of symbolism and vagueness about how great Love just kind of dissolves evilness. cf. "A Wrinkle in Time", "The Owl Service", every HP book so far but particularly OoP. The actual whiz-bangery will be completely unpredictable and not make much sense. 7. Because HP is like one of those seemingly idiotic tunes that nevertheless still make you mist up and smile and you can't get out of your head: the credits will roll to "Put a Little Love in Your Heart". Starring John Denver as Ron Weasley, and Olivia Newton John as Lily Potter. And ABBA as themselves: http://tinyurl.com/2mqg4k (that's a youtube link, be warned the song will be in your head for the next three days). 8. Madame Pince is not a Prince. Come on, people, that doesn't even count as an anagram. Sydney-- wrong I'd say on about 80% of these, but not on Snape's loyalties. From random832 at fastmail.us Sun Jul 15 22:31:47 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 18:31:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] OFF LIMITS SPOILER for Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <469AA053.9050305@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 171821 TK Kenyon wrote: > As many have noted, there appears to be a SPOILER in today's > Guardian, as reported on HPANA, Mugglenet, et al. > > Anything relating to this SPOILER is now off-limits for the purposes > of the contest. That means any interpretations, notes on the Chapter > title, guesses about the identity of other character, anything. Whoa, there! Just for a comparison... A T L E A S T T W E N T Y F I V E L I N E S > Current Off-Limits Spoilers: > -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: > because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least > somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a > cover will also be worth 0 points.) Now, predicting "The first chapter title will be 'The Dark Lord Ascending'" would be worth zero points by analogy to this. However, you've banned interpretations and guesses about the identity of the other character, which would be equivalent to banning any guesses as to HOW Kreacher will be involved. If I guess "The character appearing with Snape in the first chapter is Aberforth Dumbledore", that is equivalent to predicting, say (assuming this wasn't part of the spoiler), "Harry will summon Kreacher to help deal with one of the horcruxes other than the locket". which is NOT, to my understanding, off-limits. Why does this spoiler have so much stronger of a ban than the other ones? It goes without saying that it would be completely unreasonable to discard entire entries based on the presence of references to such spoilers, rather than simply assigning zero points to specific predictions as with the other off-limits spoilers, but you haven't made it clear this is what you meant. --Random832 From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sun Jul 15 22:49:59 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:49:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tonks In-Reply-To: <7B068151-9E8C-4FED-9977-271BEB549A6B@yahoo.co.uk> References: <7B068151-9E8C-4FED-9977-271BEB549A6B@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: <2795713f0707151549q321d0437l6b425bc087c6bc39@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171822 Lynda: A general reply to the earlier posts here. After my second reading, I decided, given the regularity with which Tonks runs into Harry, that she's been retained at Hogwarts to watch him. That would be the reason they meet with so often. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sun Jul 15 22:43:30 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:43:30 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: An idea... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707151543s7d313416se573a86881325c3b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171823 Eddie: I don't recall this in canon. In fact I remember that Neville's > family thought he might be a squib until his uncle (grandfather?) > dropped him out of a window and he bounced. Would his family have > known he was already "put down for Hogwarts" and therefore know > Neville was no squib? Lynda: OK, I'll moderate my posting from before. I said squibs don't get put down for Hogwarts. There is a possibility that some people show signs of magical ability at different ages. Therefore, Neville may not have been put down for Hogwarts until he bounced when his uncle dropped him out the window. As for squibs not being put down for Hogwarts, there seem to be no non-magical kids there. It is, after all a school of magic. Another possibility is that Neville's somewhat overbearing grandmother refused to believe that her grandson was simply somehow being blocked from showing his abilities and preferred to think he was non-magical. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bawilson at citynet.net Mon Jul 16 00:00:28 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:00:28 -0400 Subject: Half-blood vs Pure-blood Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171824 Dantzel: "Besides, this line of thinking has happened in RL, ie Nazis requiring their citizens to be registered if their genealogy contained a single Jew." JKR said in an interview once that she worked out the 'rules' in the WW for being considered a half-blood vs. pureblood--that is, how far back the Muggle ancestor had to be before one was accepted in 'polite' Wizardling society to be considered a pureblood--and later happened to see a Holocaust exhibit in London which showed a Nazi chart showing how much Jewish ancestry one had to be considered 'Juden', 'Mischling', or 'Aryansh.' (I may not have the spellings quite right.) She said that her blood ran cold to see that if you laid one on top of another they would be almost the same. 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 Mon Jul 16 00:00:28 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:00:28 -0400 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171825 v32H; "So looking at JKR's known style of clue-dropping, if Irma Pince = Eileen Prince, the logical expectation is that we would have clues like - a character mentioning how long Irma has worked at Hogwarts (i.e. exactly as long as Snape has been spying for the Order), or that Snape often visits (or specifically avoids) the library. Or Eileen's description somehow evoking Irma (in fact, Irma is described as having a hooked nose like Snape, while we learn from Snape's memories is a trait he inherited from some male in his family, and not his mother). Or JKR referencing Snape's family in an interview. " Do we know that the hook-nosed man was Tobias Snape rather than Grandpa Prince? 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 mjanetd at yahoo.com Sun Jul 15 22:17:41 2007 From: mjanetd at yahoo.com (mjanetd) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:17:41 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171826 I think Tonks odd behaviour during HBP is a lead up to her betrayal of the Order in Book 7. Slughorn says that the love potion is the most dangerous out of all the potions he's showing the students. Something about obsessive love being very dangerous. All that moping that Tonks is doing can only be called obsessive. And Merope dies from unrequited obsessive love. I had another example of obessive love but I can't think of it right now. Anyone know of another example of obsessive love is mentioned? mjanetd From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 00:20:44 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:20:44 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Final Predictions - 5 - Manxmouse Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171827 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tinglinger" wrote: > canon (POA pg 427-428) Harry & DD discuss the Patronus > ------------------------------------------------------ > HARRY : "I thought it was my dad who'd conjured my > Patronus. I mean, when I saw myself across the lake... > I thought I was seeing him." > > "An easy mistake to make," said Dumbledore softly. > "I expect you'll tire of hearing it, but you do look > extraordinarily [1] like James [2]. Except for > the eyes...you have your mother's eyes." Sirius says the same thing in OotP. Uses the word "extraordinarily" and everything. >;-) TK-- TigerPatronus! From miamibarb at comcast.net Mon Jul 16 00:22:52 2007 From: miamibarb at comcast.net (ivogun) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:22:52 -0000 Subject: SPOILER - Final Predictions - 5 - Manxmouse Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171828 Tinglinger wrote: MANXMOUSE THEORY -- Harry Potter was not a living being - he was created ... -- the Dark Lord was convinced that Harry was immortal by being fed the Elixir of Life and came to Godrics Hollow not to kill Harry but to use a switching spell on him to gain that immortality {even briefly} -- when Voldemort used the switching spell it backfired and destroyed his own body and gave Harry life ....thus The Boy Who Lived... The logic herein is based on canon and one of the books on JKR's bookshelf. This little book is not one that most people would feel is relevant to the Potterverse, and I was not too convinced by either the title or the cover.........until I started reading it... The book in question has been long out of print, but I managed to find ... in the Main Library in Palm Beach County, Florida. When I first looked at MANXMOUSE (the mouse who knew no fear) by Paul Gallico... Ivogun: I read Manxmouse. It may have been the same copy. (I got it on Interlibrary loan, and I live only an hour's drive south, in Miami.) I think that JKR has given clues that Manx Mouse along with Little White Horse and perhaps Emma influenced her. Anyway, I thought that perhaps it was the ending of Manx Mouse, but your theory is intriguing. Anyway all shall be clear soon. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 00:29:00 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:29:00 -0000 Subject: Biggest frickin' spoiler ever-- should we close bragging rights contest? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171829 I will not type anything about the damn spoiler that I just saw that may or may not be a real one in this post. You can read this post and you will not be spoiled. I was over in a HP Club on MySpace, and someone has posted what looks suspiciously like photos of the Epilogue from DH--as a book, perhaps a galleys or ARC copy, several pages worth--in one of the HP clubs there. I tried to close my eyes but I saw a couple words. Hereby, if you read that spoiler or any other spoiler like that, please do not enter the bragging rights contest. Or talk to me. I only saw a few words before I closed my eyes, but even the title and a couple words have made me very upset. I wanted to be unspoiled. Considering that is out there, should we close the contest early? Poop. TK -- Tiger-frickin'-patronus. From va32h at comcast.net Mon Jul 16 00:29:45 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:29:45 -0000 Subject: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171830 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Alan Wilson" wrote: > Do we know that the hook-nosed man was Tobias Snape rather than Grandpa Prince? va32h: No we don't, which is why I was careful to say "a male relative of Snape's" rather than "Snape's father." va32h From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jul 16 00:32:05 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:32:05 -0000 Subject: Prince/Pince Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171831 > va32h: > > In the case of the unicorn - the only thing similiar in those > descriptions is the use of "angles" to describe the position of the > legs. You say yourself that Rowling *doesn't* describe Dumbledore's > hair as being spread out like the unicorn mane, even though she > possibly could. Again, a clue of omission. No, I don't think JKR > expected her readers to assume that Dumbledore's hair was spread out > like the unicorn's mane was five books ago. She doesn't even expect > us to remember that Sirius' brother is named Regulus, even though we > learned that just one book previously. Pippin: There's a similarity of description that runs from the unicorn, through Cedric, to Sirius and finally to Dumbledore. "It was the unicorn all right, and it was dead. Harry had never seen anything so beautiful and so sad. Its long slender legs were stuck out at odd angles where it had fallen and its mane was pearly-white on the dark leaves." "Cedric was lying spread-eagled on the ground beside him. He was dead. For a second that contained an eternity, Harry stared into Cedric's face, at his open gray eyes, blank and expressionless as the windows of a deserted house, at his half-open mouth, which looked slightly surprised." "And Harry saw the look of mingled fear and surprise on his godfather's wasted, once-handsome face as he fell through the ancient doorway and disappeared behind the veil, which fluttered for a moment as though in a high wind and then fell back into place." "there was still no preparation for seeing him here, spread-eagled, broken: the greatest wizard Harry had ever, or would ever, meet." It's an obvious clue, I think, that these deaths are thematically linked. There *is* a JKR statement pointing to Snape's family: the bizarre "FAQ" quoted on her website that Snape is Luna Lovegood's father, and her answer, "Snape doesn't have a daughter." Speculation has run to whether he has a son, but maybe the right question is what's become of his mum. Madam Pince is last seen standing next to Filch. There's been a closeness between Snape and Filch too. In PS/SS Filch binds Snape's wounded leg, and in GoF they converse in strangely familiar terms, with Snape showing a lot less of his usual formality. Now maybe it's all another Vampire!Snape. But we'll soon know. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 00:41:36 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:41:36 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707151549q321d0437l6b425bc087c6bc39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171832 Lynda wrote: > > A general reply to the earlier posts here. After my second reading, I decided, given the regularity with which Tonks runs into Harry, that she's been retained at Hogwarts to watch him. That would be the reason they meet with so often. Carol responds: I agree. I also think that Tonks is hiding under an Invisibility Cloak since she appears out of nowhere twice (once in front of the RoR, once in Hogsmeade when Harry is about to strangle Mundungus). I'm guessing that either Snape or DD has told her about Harry hanging around outside the RoR, which is how she knows to watch for him there. As for her excuse about wanting to see Dumbledore, I think it's a half-truth (like most cover stories in the HP books). She really does want to see him, and IIRC, the entrance to DD's tower staircase is also on the seventh floor, but in a completely different corridor. I'm pretty sure that her fear that Fenrir's latest victim is Lupin is real. OTOH, if we're looking fo someone who's polyjuiced, why mention Blaise Zabini lolling against a post in the Three Broomsticks unless he's really Draco? (Maybe he bribed Blaise to switch identities and take his detention for him.) Carol, noting that Tonks's clumsiness in OoP resembles Ginny's in CoS and wondering if it's a clue that Tonks has a crush on somebody From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 00:40:29 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:40:29 -0000 Subject: Biggest frickin' spoiler ever-- should we close bragging rights contest? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171833 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TK Kenyon" wrote: > I was over in a HP Club on MySpace, and someone has posted what > looks suspiciously like photos of the Epilogue from DH--as a book, > perhaps a galleys or ARC copy, several pages worth--in one of the HP > clubs there. I tried to close my eyes but I saw a couple words. > > Hereby, if you read that spoiler or any other spoiler like that, > please do not enter the bragging rights contest. Or talk to me. Lisa: TK, I completely understand -- I was innocently reading my E-MAIL when a ... ummm ... "friend" told me she read said Epilogue and gave me her reaction to it. GRRRRRRRRRRRR. Though she would neither confirm nor deny it, I told her that her reaction gave it away to me. AUGH. I'm SO ticked off. Not even on a forum, or a website, or a board, or anything ... but in my E-MAIL. DAMMIT. From ekrdg at verizon.net Mon Jul 16 00:56:33 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:56:33 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Biggest frickin' spoiler ever-- should we close bragging rights contest? References: Message-ID: <007801c7c744$2970cb70$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 171834 (Safe to read, no spoiler in this message) *sigh* How disappointing. Several times today I've gone on a website and found myself afraid to look. I think that closing the contest now would be a good idea. Personally, after this post I think I'm going to go "no mail" and then say goodbye to the internet until next Monday. There are no safe sites.... not MySpace, not news sites, not message boards... I am even afraid to check my mail !!!!! I have to not use my computer for a week, it's helping me to pass the time while waiting ! I see less and less mail coming through and suspect that others are doing the same thing. Kimberly I will not type anything about the damn spoiler that I just saw that may or may not be a real one in this post. You can read this post and you will not be spoiled. Recent Activity a.. 62New Members b.. 1New Files Visit Your Group SPONSORED LINKS a.. Harry potter half-blood prince b.. Half-blood prince c.. Harry potter d.. Harry potter birthday party e.. Harry potter collectible Yahoo! News Fashion News What's the word on fashion and style? Yahoo! TV Staying in tonight? Check Daily Picks & see what to watch. Yahoo! Groups Moderator Central get help and provide feedback on Groups. . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mohalagirl25 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 01:01:33 2007 From: mohalagirl25 at yahoo.com (Amy Klein) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 18:01:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <371770.64311.qm@web43133.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171835 Maeg wrote: I just stumbled across a much larger picture of the cover: http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/gallery.dhusfull.html ------------ I was looking at this enlarged poster and I noticed something I did not see before....Harry is wearing a necklace that we have never heard of before. It almost looks like a leaf. Another thing I noticed from a smaller picture is that neither of them have a wand? If they are supposedly to fight each other how can they do so in the wizarding world without a wand? Curiously yours, Amy From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 01:14:39 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 01:14:39 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: <7B068151-9E8C-4FED-9977-271BEB549A6B@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171836 colebiancardi: Nice idea, but does Draco even know who Tonks is, let alone know what she looks like? I don't think he has hung out with her - she may be his cousin, but that side of the family was zapped off the Black Family Tree. Who in their family kept in touch with Andromeda and the Tonk's family? lizzyben: Well, he may not know much about her, but he probably knows that they're cousins. But for Polyjuice Potion, it doesn't really matter much how much he knows about Tonks - he just needs to know her name, know that she's an Auror guarding Hogwarts, & swipe a few hairs. Draco isn't planning on being seen by people in his "disguise" - he just needs a short, temporary disguise for entering the ROR. He also wanted to be able to lurk near DD's office so that he would know when DD had left Hogwarts; this is why Harry saw "Tonks" near DD's office. Draco was trying to figure out when DD leaves Hogwarts so that he could time the Death Eater entrance to occur during one of DD's excursions. > Jadon: > > And what about Hermione, who Draco knows very well is the cleverest > student in the year? McGonagall? Professor Trelawney, who likes to > hang around with sherry bottles? > I think Draco had Crabbe/Goyle impersonate girls because little first > year girls are cute. They aren't threatening. They don't look as if > they're guarding, say, a magical chamber. Draco's a Slytherin. This > is the sort of calculation and emotional manipulation his house is > good at. > > Besides, if Polyjuice could get you past a 'girls only' barrier, > don't you think that dormitory staircase would be a bit obsolete? > lizzyben: Looking at it from Draco's POV, he's mostly thinking about keeping Harry, Snape & DD from figuring out his plan. He doesn't know (or care) about Trelawney's sherry hiding. Isn't it interesting that Trelawney was able to enter the ROR while Draco was there, yet Harry could not? Seems like females could enter the room. And Tonks would be a good person to impersonate because her presence in Hogwarts isn't suspicious. Yet she's also an outsider w/o an expected routine or schedule, so there's less likelihood of someone seeing both "tonks" at the same time. When Harry mentions seeing "Tonks" outside the ROR, it raises some eyebrows, but no one immediately suspects that it was an impersonator. I just don't see why Draco would make Crabbe & Goyle become little girls - the ultimate humiliation for a teenager! They could've impersonated first-year boys instead w/o much difference. But it makes sense if only girls could enter the room. This is Draco's own idea, different from the stairs or whatever else. He sets the parameters of the room of requirement when he tells it what he "requires" - Draco would just need to say that "I need a room that only females can enter in order to repair the Vanishing Cabinet". And the main point of that limitation was simply to keep Harry, Snape, & Dumbledore from learning what he was doing. Pretty clever, really. Anyway, I'm not really invested in this theory, but it seems like Polyjuice Potion was used by more people than just Crabbe & Goyle. There was a whole vat of Polyjuice Potion in the dungeon - IMO a lot of people weren't who they seemed in HBP. lizzyben From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 01:18:25 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 18:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Biggest frickin' spoiler ever-- should we close bragging rights contest? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <894428.64354.qm@web55707.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171837 TK Kenyon wrote: I will not type anything about the damn spoiler that I just saw that may or may not be a real one in this post. You can read this post and you will not be spoiled. I was over in a HP Club on MySpace, and someone has posted what looks suspiciously like photos of the Epilogue from DH--as a book, perhaps a galleys or ARC copy, several pages worth--in one of the HP clubs there. I tried to close my eyes but I saw a couple words. Hereby, if you read that spoiler or any other spoiler like that, please do not enter the bragging rights contest. Or talk to me. I only saw a few words before I closed my eyes, but even the title and a couple words have made me very upset. I wanted to be unspoiled. Considering that is out there, should we close the contest early? Poop. TK -- Tiger-frickin'-patronus. ****************************************************** Chancie: I'm so sorry for all of you who have been spoiled by reading the Epilogue! I hope that whatever it said, turns out to be a fake so that you all can enjoy reading DH with the rest of us. That being said, I have learned that Librarys have been granted permission to open their copy's of DH already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This has been said to have happend so that they may catolog their copies but they are not to display them until the 21st. But that DOES confirm that quite a few people have open access to DH... Chancie . Have A Great Day! Chancie --------------------------------- Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From va32h at comcast.net Mon Jul 16 01:27:46 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 01:27:46 -0000 Subject: Prince/Pince Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171839 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: There's a similarity of description that runs from the unicorn, through Cedric, to Sirius and finally to Dumbledore. -Snip- It's an obvious clue, I think, that these deaths are thematically linked. va32h: But that's not my point. If Irma is Eileen in disguise, that is not a thematic link or similarity it's a surprise plot twist in the order of Scabbers/Pettigrew, Crouch/Moody, RAB/Regulus, Hermione & the Time Turner, Riddle/Voldemort, Aberforth/barman. JKR does not hint at her plot twists via thematic links and similar imagery, she uses *clues*. Which I've given numerous examples about previously. It's all moot anyway, since there are just a few days before the books comes out - but the point I have been trying to make from the beginning is that we have at least 6 examples of JKR giving clues about characters having secret identities - and none of the methods of clue dropping that she used in those examples match the alleged clues offered in the Pince/Prince theory, except the anagram. va32h From random832 at fastmail.us Mon Jul 16 01:37:04 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:37:04 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] FOR DISCUSSION: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <469ACBC0.9090702@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 171840 I hereby certify that I have not read or even seen the "epilogue spoiler" you recently mentioned I also, for the record, have not read any other entries in this contest. TK Kenyon wrote: > > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > > If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, > write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters > or characteristics of new character for full credit. > > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Rubeus Hagrid. > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? Dark Mark. > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? > b. Draco? > c. Hermione? > d. Luna? > e. Ron? > f. Neville? > g. Ginny? None of the above. > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Fleur Delacour and Bill Weasley. > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Petunia Dursley. > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? > b. Head Girl? > c. DADA Instructor? > d. Potions Master or Mistress? > e. Headmaster or -mistress? My answer is complex, because there are several possible underlying assumptions. If Hogwarts reopens as a school in 1997, Harry will be offered the position of Head Boy, but definitely will not return to Hogwarts as a student in 1997. If the following return as students in 1997: a. Ronald Weasley b. Hermione Granger Otherwise a. Zacharias Smith b. Not-as-yet-described Slytherin (Tracy Davis, Daphne Greengrass, other) If Hogwarts reopened as a school in 1997, and Ginny returned as a student in 1997, then in 1998: a. Harry Potter b. Ginny Weasley If neither Ginny nor Hermione did not return as a student in 1997. Also, if Hogwarts does not reopen as a school until 1998 or later, and Hermione returns as a student: b. Hermione Granger And, if Hogwarts does not reopen as a school until 1998 or later: a. Harry Potter If Hermione did return in 1997 but Ginny did not [meaning, both will only be sixth-years in 1998], then: b. Not-as-yet-named Slytherin or Hufflepuff one year younger (obviously) than Harry. > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Will be left unclear. My opinion is that his loyalties lie with Dumbledore, but it will not be made absolutely certain in the text and there will be just as much grounds for an ESE interpretation then as now. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary, destroyed by Harry Potter b. Ring, destroyed by Albus Dumbledore c. Locket, last seen at Grimmauld place. Currently in Kreacher's possession. d. Nagini. e. Unknown artifact of Ravenclaw. Possibly a wand last seen at Ollivander's. f. Unknown artifact of Hufflepuff. Possibly Hogwarts House Cup. g. Harry's scar. Was intended for an unknown artifact of Gryffindor present at the scene of the GH incident. h. Remaining portion in Voldemort > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. I have provided answers for #8 for a variety of situations. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Spider Boggart: James Potter > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Broom closet. > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. It will be revealed that Harry's strong mood swings in Book #5 were in part incited through his link to Voldemort. 2. Peter Pettigrew will save Harry, fulfilling the life debt, by killing Fenrir Greyback. 3. The spell being experimented with by Luna Lovegood's mother, which appeared to have gone badly wrong, in fact worked exactly as intended, and was a spell for time travel forward in time, and she will arrive at a key moment. The reason this qualified as death for purposes of being able to see Thestrals was that she died while in the future and never made a return trip. This reason may not be stated in the text of the book, but will likely be asked and answered in an interview with JKR. 4. The location pictured on the UK children's cover is a secret vault within Hogwarts. May or may not be an aspect of the Room of Requirement. 5. Umbridge will be killed by a Werewolf. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 01:52:31 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 01:52:31 -0000 Subject: The meaning of the new cover (U.S. version) In-Reply-To: <371770.64311.qm@web43133.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171841 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Amy Klein wrote: > Harry is wearing a necklace that we have > never heard of before. It almost looks like a leaf. > > Another thing I noticed from a smaller picture is that neither > of them have a wand? If they are supposedly to fight each other > how can they do so in the wizarding world without a wand? =============================== Lisa: The necklace looks to me like a locket. ;0) As for wandless fighting ... JKR said that the movies have inadvertently inserted things that figure into later books. In the movies, we see quite a bit of worldless, wandless magic, particularly from Snape, as he walks into his classroom and shuts the blinds (are they blinds? I don't remember. Something on the windows, anyway) on the windows. That's my guess! From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 01:58:39 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 01:58:39 -0000 Subject: Biggest frickin' spoiler ever-- should we close bragging rights contest? In-Reply-To: <894428.64354.qm@web55707.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171842 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Chancie wrote: > > I'm so sorry for all of you who have been spoiled by reading > the Epilogue! I hope that whatever it said, turns out to be a fake > so that you all can enjoy reading DH with the rest of us. ============================= Lisa: Thanks, Chancie! I can say with complete certainty that I'll enjoy reading the book no matter what -- my problem is that, real or fake, this information will color my reading of the book. ::::sigh:::: Oh, well ... From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 02:08:29 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:08:29 -0000 Subject: Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOST In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171843 For people who have NOT YET ENTERED: Entries after this time (10 PM EDT July 15) will be subjected to extra scrutiny. If this "Epilogue" spoiler become widely distributed, this contest may close with little or no notice. RULES: Copy, paste, and "sign" (type your name) after this at the beginning of your entry: "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." (TYPE NAME HERE.) If you have read them, please don't enter, whether you read them on purpose or not. RAYOR SPOILER ALERT: THESE RULES INCLUDE ONE VERY SMALL DH SPOILER GLEANED FROM AN INTERVIEW WITH DAVID YATES, THE OOTP MOVIE DIRECTOR AND REFERENCES TO THE RELEASED COVERS. No "Epilogue" spoilers are in this post. Rules: Copy these questions and email your answers *both* to *tigerpatronus* *at* *yahoo* *dot* *com* and to the newsgroup. You must email your entry to TigerPatronus to be entered in the contest. You will receive an email confirmation of your entry. In the event of a dispute, the entry posted to the group will be your back-up. Deadline: Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 11:59 pm (midnight) EDT. (No Friday entries will be accepted.) Any details released by JKR or subsidiaries are worth no credit *after* they are released. Example: if you predict that "The trio will ride a dragon,'" it will be worth 0 points. However, if you make a prediction *and email your prediction to the list and to TigerPatronus* and *then* the detail is released, you will get full credit. If you are JKR, work at the publishing company, hacked Bloomsbury's computers, or have somehow else have already read the book, don't enter. We will find out, hunt you down, and give you a virtual thermonuclear wedgie. Specificity will be rewarded. Brevity is . . . wit. All decisions of the judges (TigerPatronus and her Minions) are arbitrary, ruthless, and final. (Minion recruitment will begin soon.) Prizes: Grand Prize (1): Bragging rights in perpetuity. All HPfGU members must address you as "Your Brilliance," "Leader of the Intelligentsia," "The HP-est," or another superlative title of your own choosing. A filk will be composed in your honor. A year's worth of free butterbeer. Honorable Mentions (10): Bragging rights in perpetuity. All HPfGU members must address you as "Pretty Smartie," "A Member of the Intelligentsia," "Quite HP-ish," or a subordinate title of your own choosing. A free case of butterbeer. Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? b. Draco? c. Hermione? d. Luna? e. Ron? f. Neville? g. Ginny? 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? b. Head Girl? c. DADA Instructor? d. Potions Master or Mistress? e. Headmaster or -mistress? 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. b. c. d. e. f. g. In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. *STARRED REVIEW* for RABID by TK Kenyon: " debut novelist Kenyon isn't fooling around. What begins as a riff on Peyton Place (salacious small-town intrigue) smoothly metamorphoses into a philosophical battle between science and religion. Kenyon is definitely an author to watch, she juggles all of her story's elements without dropping any of them--and, let's not forget, creates four very subtle and intriguing central characters. [RABID] is a novel quite unlike most standard commercial fare, a genre- bending story--part thriller, part literary slapdown with dialogue as the weapon of choice (think Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf)-- that makes us laugh, wince, and reflect all at the same time. Kenyon is definitely a keeper." -- David Pitt, Booklist, December 1, 2006 Subtle HP reference in *RABID*! See if you can find it! --TK --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TK Kenyon" wrote: > > I will not type anything about the damn spoiler that I just saw that > may or may not be a real one in this post. You can read this post > and you will not be spoiled. > > I was over in a HP Club on MySpace, and someone has posted what > looks suspiciously like photos of the Epilogue from DH--as a book, > perhaps a galleys or ARC copy, several pages worth--in one of the HP > clubs there. I tried to close my eyes but I saw a couple words. > > Hereby, if you read that spoiler or any other spoiler like that, > please do not enter the bragging rights contest. Or talk to me. > > I only saw a few words before I closed my eyes, but even the title > and a couple words have made me very upset. I wanted to be unspoiled. > > Considering that is out there, should we close the contest early? > > Poop. > > TK -- Tiger-frickin'-patronus. > From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 02:11:39 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:11:39 -0000 Subject: Biggest frickin' spoiler ever-- should we close bragging rights contest? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171844 OMG. I'm so sorry. That sucks so much. I managed to close my eyes pretty quickly, but I got the Epilogue's chapter title and a couple words. I'm going to go pretty much on electronic blackout for the next 6 days. TK --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "TK Kenyon" > wrote: > > I was over in a HP Club on MySpace, and someone has posted what > > looks suspiciously like photos of the Epilogue from DH--as a book, > > perhaps a galleys or ARC copy, several pages worth--in one of the HP > > clubs there. I tried to close my eyes but I saw a couple words. > > > > Hereby, if you read that spoiler or any other spoiler like that, > > please do not enter the bragging rights contest. Or talk to me. > > Lisa: > > TK, I completely understand -- I was innocently reading my E-MAIL when > a ... ummm ... "friend" told me she read said Epilogue and gave me her > reaction to it. GRRRRRRRRRRRR. Though she would neither confirm nor > deny it, I told her that her reaction gave it away to me. AUGH. I'm > SO ticked off. Not even on a forum, or a website, or a board, or > anything ... but in my E-MAIL. DAMMIT. > From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Mon Jul 16 02:15:26 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:15:26 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tonks Message-ID: <380-22007711621526531@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171845 lizzyben: Isn't it interesting that Trelawney was able to enter the ROR while Draco was there, yet Harry could not? Seems like females could enter the room. Magpie: No, Trelawney can get into the room when he's in there simply because she's asking for the same room he is--the room for hiding things. That's where the Cabinet was moved after Montague came out of it, so that's what Draco asked for. Not "a room to fix the Cabinet" but "a room for hiding things" because he knew that's where the Cabinet was. -m From bawilson at citynet.net Mon Jul 16 01:47:36 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:47:36 -0400 Subject: Tonks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171846 Lizzyben: "As for the rest of the Tonks weirdness, it might just have been JKR's attempt to show how lovesick Tonks is. Except like most of the other romantic subplots, it pretty much fell flat. For all the talk about the power of love, in HBP love pretty much just made people act vindictive, depressed, petty or jealous. " And this is different from how it makes people act in the real world because. . . . . ? 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 From bawilson at citynet.net Mon Jul 16 01:56:07 2007 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:56:07 -0400 Subject: Dedalus Diggle (was: Emmeline Vance) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171847 Dave: "Dave, who still wonders why Jo gives these significant Mythological names to apparently inconsequential characters -- Andromeda Tonks being another glaring example." Andromeda was a Black by birth, and all--or nearly all--the Blacks have star-names. 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 From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 16 02:27:20 2007 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:27:20 -0000 Subject: Biggest frickin' spoiler ever-- should we close bragging ... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171848 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, BrwNeil at ... wrote: > I've seen the above mentioned spoiler and if it is fake, it's done > extremely well. We see the whole open book including the chapter art > work and it looks quite real. The print on the pages looks exactly > like that on all the American versions. We see the pages as a whole > book held open. If a fake, someone went to a lot of work. My > problem with it, or maybe better put, my hope, is the fact that it.... "K": Maybe I'm nitpicking but the above post had what I consider to be a tiny spoiler. I left out the part I didn't care to see. I understand we all vary in what we consider spoilers but maybe it's time to be extra careful in what we post. This is my last day reading HP forums, including this one. I'm afraid the spoiler time is just beginning and I don't care to have the ending ruined. *Crossing fingers for a Good!Snape* From random832 at fastmail.us Mon Jul 16 02:40:09 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:40:09 -0400 Subject: Ultimate Bragging rights answer (forgot to answer part of a question) In-Reply-To: <469ACBC0.9090702@fastmail.us> References: <469ACBC0.9090702@fastmail.us> Message-ID: <469ADA89.5040906@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 171849 Forgot to answer part of question 8. Random832 wrote: > I hereby certify that I have not read or even seen the "epilogue > spoiler" you recently mentioned Still haven't read them. And, to use your official format and wording since this revision is from after the time that went into effect: I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them. Jordan Abel > I also, for the record, have not read any other entries in this contest. > > TK Kenyon wrote: >> Compulsory Questions (50 points total): >> >> If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, >> write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters >> or characteristics of new character for full credit. >> >> >> 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > > No. > >> 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > > Yes. > >> 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent >> character to die and stay dead? > > Rubeus Hagrid. > >> 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio >> were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that >> scared him? > > Dark Mark. > >> 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a >> student (answer yes or no for each): >> a. Harry? >> b. Draco? >> c. Hermione? >> d. Luna? >> e. Ron? >> f. Neville? >> g. Ginny? > > None of the above. > >> 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? > > Fleur Delacour and Bill Weasley. > >> 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first >> time "very late in life?" > > Petunia Dursley. > >> 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: >> a. Head Boy? >> b. Head Girl? >> c. DADA Instructor? >> d. Potions Master or Mistress? >> e. Headmaster or -mistress? > > My answer is complex, because there are several possible underlying > assumptions. > > If Hogwarts reopens as a school in 1997, Harry will be offered the > position of Head Boy, but definitely will not return to Hogwarts as a > student in 1997. > > If the following return as students in 1997: > a. Ronald Weasley > b. Hermione Granger > > Otherwise > a. Zacharias Smith > b. Not-as-yet-described Slytherin (Tracy Davis, Daphne Greengrass, other) > > If Hogwarts reopened as a school in 1997, and Ginny returned as a > student in 1997, then in 1998: > a. Harry Potter > b. Ginny Weasley > > If neither Ginny nor Hermione did not return as a student in 1997. Also, > if Hogwarts does not reopen as a school until 1998 or later, and > Hermione returns as a student: > b. Hermione Granger > > And, if Hogwarts does not reopen as a school until 1998 or later: > a. Harry Potter > > If Hermione did return in 1997 but Ginny did not [meaning, both will > only be sixth-years in 1998], then: > b. Not-as-yet-named Slytherin or Hufflepuff one year younger (obviously) > than Harry. Crap, I forgot to answer the rest. c. Kingsley Shacklebolt d. Horace Slughorn e. Minerva McGonagall >> 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? > > Will be left unclear. My opinion is that his loyalties lie with > Dumbledore, but it will not be made absolutely certain in the text and > there will be just as much grounds for an ESE interpretation then as now. > >> 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or >> less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. >> Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes >> must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul >> pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the >> bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > > a. Diary, destroyed by Harry Potter > b. Ring, destroyed by Albus Dumbledore > c. Locket, last seen at Grimmauld place. Currently in Kreacher's possession. > d. Nagini. > e. Unknown artifact of Ravenclaw. Possibly a wand last seen at Ollivander's. > f. Unknown artifact of Hufflepuff. Possibly Hogwarts House Cup. > g. Harry's scar. Was intended for an unknown artifact of Gryffindor > present at the scene of the GH incident. > h. Remaining portion in Voldemort > >> In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have >> sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two >> alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 >> and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will >> be used as tiebreakers. > > I have provided answers for #8 for a variety of situations. > >> Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > > Patronus: Spider > > Boggart: James Potter > >> Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of >> Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? > > Broom closet. > >> Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): >> >> Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. > > 1. It will be revealed that Harry's strong mood swings in Book #5 were > in part incited through his link to Voldemort. > 2. Peter Pettigrew will save Harry, fulfilling the life debt, by killing > Fenrir Greyback. > 3. The spell being experimented with by Luna Lovegood's mother, which > appeared to have gone badly wrong, in fact worked exactly as intended, > and was a spell for time travel forward in time, and she will arrive at > a key moment. The reason this qualified as death for purposes of being > able to see Thestrals was that she died while in the future and never > made a return trip. This reason may not be stated in the text of the > book, but will likely be asked and answered in an interview with JKR. > 4. The location pictured on the UK children's cover is a secret vault > within Hogwarts. May or may not be an aspect of the Room of Requirement. > 5. Umbridge will be killed by a Werewolf. -- Random832 From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 02:46:06 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:46:06 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171850 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Alan Wilson" wrote: > > Lizzyben: > "As for the rest of the Tonks weirdness, it might just have been > JKR's attempt to show how lovesick Tonks is. Except like most of > the other romantic subplots, it pretty much fell flat. For all the > talk about the power of love, in HBP love pretty much just made > people act vindictive, depressed, petty or jealous. " > > > > And this is different from how it makes people act in the real world > because. . . . . ? > > Bruce Alan Wilson > lizzyben: LOL. True enough, I guess. But it's a bit more reminiscent of a Jerry Springer episode than the "super-powerful magic of love" theme JKR seems to be going for. Between Tonk's moping, Harry's chest monster, Hermione's bird attacks, etc. I was well sick & tired of any character relationships after HBP. JKR writes great mysteries & fantasy, but she doesn't seem to do romance very well. Just IMO. This is assuming that JKR actually believes this behavior is healthy, which might not be the case. lizzyben, who liked OOTP Tonks, but rolled her eyes at lovesick HBP Tonks. From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 16 02:57:54 2007 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (Emily) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:57:54 -0000 Subject: Repost of message #54533 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171851 In honor of this great week in Pottermania history, I feel the need to repost my favorite ever FILK in it's entirety. Thanks ever so much to the person that wrote this: Eileen, "The Students Who Don't Do Anything" was so much fun! It's inspired me to submit "Draco's Hairbrush Song," which I FILKed for the VeggieTales thread over at the Sugar Quill a month or so back. VeggieTales crack me up- they deserve their own category for FILKs, I think! (I'm thinking of doing "Oh My Hermione" to "Oh Barbara Manatee"). For those unfamiliar with the original song ("The Hairbrush Song" from VeggieTales), I have made an mp3 for those interested (2.9MEG). It's available at my own personal website at: http://www.milclan.com/Slytherincess/thehairbrushsong.mp3 Draco's Hairbrush Song (FILKED from the SONG "The Hairbrush Song" from VeggieTales) Narrator: "Our curtain opens as Draco Malfoy, having just finished his after-Quidditch shower, is looking for his beloved hairbrush. Having no success, Draco cries out ..." Draco: "Oh, where is my hairbrush? My fair hair needs a good brush! Oh, where, oh, where, oh, my, my, hair, is, very, very, fair, oh, where, oh, where... is my hairbrush?" Narrator: "Having heard his cry, Harry Potter enters the scene. Shocked and slightly embarrassed at the sight of Draco in a towel, Harry attempts to retain his composure and reports ..." Harry: "Er.I think I saw your hairbrush back there!" Harry points to a dark corner of the Quidditch changing room, where a pile of mouldering towels lie, then quickly flees the changing area. Draco: "Back there is my hairbrush. In a lair, lies my hairbrush. Back there, back there, a lair, my lair, oh, where, my lair, back there, dark lair, is where ... I'll find my hairbrush!" Narrator: "Having heard Draco's joyous proclamation, Marcus Flint enters the scene. Shocked and slightly embarrassed at the sight of Draco in a towel, Flint regains his composure and comments ..." Flint: "Why do you need a hairbrush? You have glue in your hair!" Narrator: "Draco is taken aback. The thought had never occurred to him. Draco Malfoy? With Lego hair? What would this mean? What will become of him? What will become of his hairbrush? Draco wonders ..." Draco: "Glue hair.won't need hairbrush. Glue hair.won't need hairbrush. Glue hair, glue hair, no fair, glue hair, from where, from where, did I get glue hair. Oh, my hairbrush." Narrator: "Having heard his wonderings, Severus Snape enters the scene. Shocked and slightly embarrassed at the sight of Draco in a towel, Snape regains his composure and confesses ..." Snape: "Malfoy, that old hairbrush of yours ... Well, you never use it, you don't really need it. So, well, I'm sorry ... I didn't know. I gave it to Granger - 'cause she's got hair to spare!" Narrator: "Feeling a deep sense of loss, Draco stumbles back and laments ..." Draco: "Not fair! Oh, my hairbrush. Not fair! My poor hairbrush. Not fair, not fair, glue hair, glue hair, my hairbrush is grooming the Mudblood's hair! My poor hairbrush!" Narrator: "Having heard his lament, Granger enters the scene. Herself in a towel, both Draco and Granger are shocked and slightly embarrassed at the sight of each other. And why is Granger in the Quidditch showers in the first place? Nevermind. Recognizing Draco's generosity, Granger is thankful ..." Granger: "Thanks for the hairbrush, Malfoy." Narrator: "Yes, good has been done here. Granger exits the scene with a toss of her magnificent, bushy coif. Draco smirks and sneers, but, still feeling an emotional attachment for the hairbrush, calls out ..." Draco: "Take care of my hairbrush. Take care, oh my hairbrush. Take care, take care, don't dare not care. Take care. Nice hair. No fair. Take care, take care ... of my hairbrush." Narrator: "The end!" From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Mon Jul 16 03:05:07 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 16 Jul 2007 03:05:07 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184555107.78.89195.w108@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171852 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: Whom do you actually hope WILL die by the end of Deathly Hallows? Not who you think will necessarily, but whom would you actually like to see expire? Choose as many as you like. o Harry o Ron o Hermione o Neville o Luna o Ginny o Snape o Lupin o McGonagall o Hagrid o Pettigrew o Bellatrix Lestrange o Voldemort o Umbridge o Kreacher o Dobby o Arthur and/or Molly o Bill and/or Fleur and/or Charlie o Percy o Fred and/or George o Grawp o Vernon and/or Petunia and/or Dudley o Lucius and/or Narcissa o Draco o Crabbe, Goyle, Nott and/or Parkinson To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540032 Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Mon Jul 16 03:06:46 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 16 Jul 2007 03:06:46 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184555206.46.75981.w113@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171853 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: Will Harry... o Live o Die -- that is, be 'properly dead' o Die but return o Live but lose all his magical powers To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540033 Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Mon Jul 16 03:15:04 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 16 Jul 2007 03:15:04 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184555704.64.47931.w119@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171854 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: Who will be proven to be ESE! by the end of Deathly Hallows? Vote for as many as you like. o Lupin o Snape o McGonagall o Flitwick o Sprout o Slughorn o Peeves o Crookshanks o Hagrid o Fudge o Mad-Eye Moody o Tonks o Another Order member (feel free to mention specifically onlist) o Harry o Ron o Hermione o Neville o Luna o Ginny o Arthur o Percy o Fred and/or George o Seamus and/or Dean (or other student -- feel free to mention onlist) o Ollivander o Another person not named here (feel free to mention onlist) To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540050 Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! From rklarreich at aol.com Mon Jul 16 03:24:32 2007 From: rklarreich at aol.com (rklarreich) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:24:32 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171855 Hurrying to get this in before the contest disappears... > "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages > or any summary of them." Signed by ROBERTA. [A thin tongue of brilliant flame issued from TigerPatronus's wand and wound its way around Roberta's clasped hands like a red-hot wire.] Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Luna Lovegood 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? An edible Dark Mark he had just grabbed from Weasley's Wizard Wheezes. (Well, no, I don't really think so, but "Something none of us will ever think of" won't get me any points either.) 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO, he's a wanted criminal c. Hermione? YES, but only for part of the year, during lulls d. Luna? YES e. Ron? See under Hermione f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron will be appointed and turn it down very reluctantly. Ernie Macmillan will be the replacement. b. Head Girl? Hermione will be appointed and turn it down, and it will be agonizing. Hannah Abbott will be the replacement. c. DADA Instructor? A new character whom Harry will meet early in the book, according to the pattern for the "new teacher" in each book. He or she will turn out to be on Voldemort's side. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. Diary c. Ring d. Locket (from Grimmauld Place) e. Hufflepuff cup f. Ravenclaw tiara, passed down to her descendant Muriel Weasley g. Harry's scar In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: Phoenix Boggart: disappointed Dumbledore Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The distilled force of love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape was always Dumbledore's man and originally infiltrated the DEs as Dumbledore's spy. He leaked part of the Prophecy on Dumbledore's orders. And the plan of Zeus--er, Dumbledore--was accomplished. 2. We will hear the rest of the two prophecies that were smashed in the Hall of Prophecy by Lucius and Bellatrix's spells bouncing off each other. 3. Ron will finally try firewhisky at Bill and Fleur's wedding, and he will behave embarrassingly under its influence. Harry and Hermione will try to restrain him for his own good, and while they're struggling Ron will kiss Hermione in the middle of the dance floor. 4. A Horcrux will turn up in the Riddle house. That's why the families that lived there after the Riddles said there was a "nasty feeling about the place." 5. Ron will finally stand up to Fred and George and tell them where they get off. F&G will be first astonished, then impressed. From hexicon at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 03:33:24 2007 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:33:24 -0000 Subject: Bragging rights contest Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171856 I solemnly swear that I have not read any spoilers! (Must keep the "honorable" in the honorable mention I got for the HBP contest.) 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. (I think that he he will appear to die but won't actually do so on a permanent basis, e.g., he'll go through the Veil or take the Draught of Living Death.) 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Dark Mark--but, I don't think that we necessarily find this out. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Enrolled but doesn't attend regularly. b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes (but may take some side trips with Harry) d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes (but may take some side trips with Harry) f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur. I think Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione will be implied in the epilogue. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life"? Petunia. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley (the new head of Gryffindor) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. The Diary (inactivated) b. The Peverell ring (inactivated) c. The Slytherin Locket--which is also the locket at GP that couldn't be opened d. The Hufflepuff cup e. Ravenclaw's Wand (which was at Ollivanders) f. Nagini (Voldemort hoped to use something of Gryffindor's to make a horcrux with Harry's death, but the events at Godric's Hollow thwarted that plan, so he used a later death like Bertha Jorkins or Frank Bryce to make Nagini) g. Still in Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: Phoenix (I think it's been a phoenix for a while, not a recent development) Boggart: Dead Potters Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Lily and Snape were close (Snape was "that awful boy"). 2. Additional deaths: Hagrid and at least one Weasley (not Ron or Ginny) 3. There is an undiscovered traitor in the Order. 4. Privet Drive is attacked right after Harry's birthday (Petunia accidentally produces a little magic in defense) and the Dursleys have to go into hiding in the wizarding world. 5. Dumbledore gave Aberforth something to share with Harry in the event of DD's death Extras, for fun: Neville will teach at Hogwarts after graduation Snape was at Godric's Hollow, too late to help. He found the Potters' bodies (before Hagrid). Neville will help destroy a Horcrux Lupin is hiding a big, unpleasant secret, and it might have something to do with his use of Legilimency and Occlumency and his knowledge about Regulus' death. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 16 03:35:32 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:35:32 -0000 Subject: Poll News from Shorty, aka The Snape Poll Got Evanescoed! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171857 Shorty Elf is chagrined, oh yes she is! It seems that SOMEONE Who Shall Not Be Named is gone and erased all of the answers to the `My Current Thoughts About Snape' poll! Oh dear, but it's true! Shorty is hearing accusations against Peeves, but she is not knowing if this is true. All she knows is it has driven her to Butterbeer, right along with Winky. And time is running out, it is! We elveses is going to be closing down MANY of the polls which is now open, when the list closes at midnight BST this Friday! Oh, we has lost 600+ votes in the Snape poll, we has, and there are lots of other interesting polls which is closing in a few short days, too. Shorty is hoping to see lots and lots of votes before the deadline comes. There are general polls about age and gender and such, but there are also ones about which characters HPfGU members most identify with; who is the character who Herself says has gotten a reprieve she didn't intend at first; and which classes the HPfGU witches and wizards would like to take at Hogwarts. There are even three brand new polls, because Shorty wants her GrownUps to have fun, yes she does! (1) Harry's fate: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540033 (2) Who do you hope will die? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540032 (3) Who will be proven to be ESE? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540050 So, please, Shorty begs, go play while you has the chance! And please, please, go re-vote in the "My Current Thoughts about Snape" poll. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1916317 Inquiring minds want to know, Shorty is always hearing. Thank you, Misses and Misters. Shorty Elf From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 03:48:33 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:48:33 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups In-Reply-To: <1184555704.64.47931.w119@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com wrote: > > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > HPforGrownups group: > > Who will be proven to be ESE! by the end of Deathly Hallows? Vote for as many as you like. > > o Another person not named here (feel free to mention onlist) > lizzyben: What, no Dumbledore? That's my vote. From Harry's POV, at least, he is. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 03:52:07 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:52:07 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171859 lizzyben wrote: > > Looking at it from Draco's POV, he's mostly thinking about keeping Harry, Snape & DD from figuring out his plan. He doesn't know (or care) about Trelawney's sherry hiding. Isn't it interesting that Trelawney was able to enter the ROR while Draco was there, yet Harry could not? Seems like females could enter the room. Carol responds: But Draco isn't hiding in female form when he works on the cabinet. Trelawney tells Harry that she heard a make voice "whooping." I think that Trelawney can enter but Harry can't because Harry is asking the wrong thing and/or because Draco has an additional unstated requirement that no one who's looking for him can find him there. But he probably specifically asks for the room where the Vanishing Cabinet is stored or hidden. Trelawney probably asks for a place to hide her sherry bottles. Notice that when Harry asks to find out what Malfoy is doing, the room won't open, but when he asks for a place to hide his book after Snape threatens to confiscate it, he gets exactly that version of the room. In fact, JKR gives us a tiny clue as he passes the broken Vanishing Cabinet in his search for a hiding place. I don't know how clear this post is, but I think the fact that both Trelawney and Harry would looking for a place to hide something and both ended up in the room with the Vanishing Cabinet is the answer to the riddle. They're in the version of the room that's used for hiding forbidden objects or storing useless ones. Carol, begging the List Elves to ban spoilers altogether now! From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 16 03:59:47 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:59:47 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171860 HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com wrote: > > > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > > HPforGrownups group: > > > > Who will be proven to be ESE! by the end of Deathly Hallows? > > o Another person not named here (feel free to mention onlist) > > lizzyben: > > What, no Dumbledore? That's my vote. From Harry's POV, at least, he > is. SSSusan: Yay! Someone who actually took the option of writing in here with her different choice. Now I should have thought to include DD as an option in the list, but I failed to think of him. Would you be willing, Lizzyben, to explain more what you meant when you said "From Harry's POV, at least, he is"? This intrigues me. Siriusly Snapey Susan From elfundeb at gmail.com Mon Jul 16 04:18:38 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:18:38 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: An idea... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0707152118n4fc3ad01k28a07d6603dff3d5@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171861 Lisa: I don't know that any family knows their child is "put down for Hogwarts" at birth -- we don't know that James & Lily knew about Harry. We only know that Hagrid knew that Harry was, and likely that is because Dumbledore told him. Debbie: I tend to think that Hagrid's statement in PS/SS is just a bit of hyperbole, based on his knowledge of the magical quill which inscribes the names at birth. If Harry got a Hogwarts letter, Hagrid could accept this as proof that Harry's name had been down since birth. There was no need for Dumbledore to tell him anything (the fact that Voldemort transferred some of his powers to Harry had not been discovered at that point). Neville's story also suggests that parents can't simply contact Hogwarts to see if their son's name is inscribed in the book. I envision each page as being unavailable until it's time to send out the Hogwarts letters for that year. On a side note, Neville's statement that his family thought he "might not be magical enough to come" is curious because it's at odds with JKR's comments that either you're magical or you're not. Having always been a great fan of backstories in which Neville witnessed his parents' torture but had his memories of such torture suppressed, it has occurred to me that Neville might have shown signs of magical ability before his parents' torture but showed no signs afterward. Accordingly, Great Uncle Algie kept throwing him out windows and off piers in an attempt to reawaken that magic out of fears that he might be denied admission to Hogwarts if his magical ability was hidden (1) in response to having witnessed his parents' torture, (2) under a Memory Charm, or (3) in the vain hope that he would never be forced to take Potions with Snape. (I'll vote for (2), with a side order of (1).) Debbie who finally saw the film-that-must-not-be-named today [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From doliesl at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 04:52:58 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:52:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights (REVISED) Message-ID: <627320.33211.qm@web82204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171862 TK: If you want to change any of your predictions at a later date, please resubmit ALL your answers to ALL questions as a new entry, and then put ?REVISED? in the subject line and at the top of the email. I will then delete your old email and the new one will become your entry. D. I'd like to revised only ONE answer from my entry because I think my choice for "prominent character death" isn't really 'prominent' enough... "doliesl at yahoo.com" wrote: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? new choice: Snape (my previous guess: Moody, Luna, Tonks) 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? No d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? No f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Bill/Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Zackery Smith b. Head Girl? Pansy c. DADA Instructor? subject cancel d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Snape 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Wand e. Coin f. Sword g. Crown Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus: stag boggart: dead body of James and Lily (or some other symbols of great failure) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. The ending is Harry and Ginny getting back together. Harry married into Weaseley family, gaining a big family even though the story started with him losing his family, alas, circle of life. 2. Hermione and Ron will end up together after what they've been thru. together. 3. Bellatrix will who shield LV from attack and died for her man, or if LV died first, Bella commit suicide to follow him. A twisted frightening love that LV didn't really comprehend. (really likes Bellatrix after watching the movie :D) 4. The final battle will be held back at Hogwarts. 5. (I'm convinced by puppetmaster DD people here :D). Dumbledore is the one who instruct Snape to tell Voldemort's half of the propehcy (Snape either heard the whole thing or not, doesn't matter), DD wanted to plan LV downfall. That's what the crytic regret and anguish DD was crying about when Harry force him to drink the potion. DD is the real person who felt guilty of really causing the death of James and Lily (ie: the "it's my fault" screaming in cave). Well along with Snape anyway. They're partners in crime, that's why DD trust Snape. D. www.tkkenyon.com Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 04:57:52 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOST Message-ID: <276774.79999.qm@web80506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171863 I swear I have not read any spoilers. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? -NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? -YES 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? -Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? -The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? no b. Draco? no c. Hermione? no d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? no f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? -Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" -Merope 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Blaise b. Head Girl? - A new character c. DADA Instructor? - Snape d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Snape e. Headmaster or -mistress? - Snape 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? -With Dumbledore, Harry and Lily 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. locket b. diary c. wand d. ring e. sword f. crown g. snake In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? -Patronus: Deer -Boggert: Lily's death Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? -Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): 1) Harry and Ginny get married, have kids 2) Hermione and Ron married, have kids. One big happy Weasley family. 3) Dumbledore taught Lily the "old ancient magic" that protected Harry from the AK curse. 4) Snape used the same "old ancient magic" that Lily used to protect Harry, so LV's AK curse bounce back from Harry and kill LV for real this time (since all the horcruxes are destroy), but in doing so Snape die just like Lily did. In other words, it's Snape's "love" that protect Harry AND kill LV this time. Snape die a heroic sacrificial death. A full cycle. 5) Snape is the good slytherin and responsible for breaking the prejudice cycle against slytherin from theother house. (yup I'm huge Snape fans so I make all my predictions in the line of "it's all about snape!") Jo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jul 16 05:06:03 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 05:06:03 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Deleting Posts with Unauthorized Information Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171864 Greetings From Hexquarters! As stated in the spoiler policy posted twice on this list, Do Not Discuss Any Unauthorized Leaks on the HPFGU Lists. They are violations of the Wizarding Statute of Secrecy (not to mention copyright laws). If you violate this rule, the elves reserve the right to confiscate, or even destroy, your wand. All non-official spoilers, whether real or fake, are now being deleted without prior notice. You Might Be Next! The Administration Team Link to full pre-DH spoiler policy for more information: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/167822 Link to JKR's spoiler policy: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/ From angelabrooks at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 05:11:20 2007 From: angelabrooks at yahoo.com (angelabrooks) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 05:11:20 -0000 Subject: Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171866 Delurking to get my guesses in before it's too late. "I solemnly swear I am up to no um, oops. Start over. "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." Angela Predictions Contest Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His new Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur, Tonks & Remus ? both about equally prominent 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Aberforth Dumbledore 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Kingsley Shacklebolt d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Against Voldemort, with Dumbledore and the OoTP 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Cup e. Something of Ravenclaw's ? most likely wand from Olivander's f. Nagini -> Something of Gryffindor's, most likely sword (see predictions) g. Harry h. Rest of soul remains in Voldemort Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Phoenix Boggart: Voldemort victorious, standing over dead Harry, laughing Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Love Room Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1.) Voldemort will move a soul piece out of Nagini and into a relic of Gryffindor's captured during an assault on Hogwarts, either the sword or the Sorting Hat, to complete his Four Founders collection. Snape, because of his position of trust earned by his killing of Dumbledore, will witness and/or assist in this transfer, thus learning how to transfer a soul piece out of a living being without killing it. He will use this knowledge to transfer the soul piece from Harry, either into an object which can be destroyed, or back into Voldemort. 2.) Lily, having learned about Horcruxes from Slughorn, in the moments she bought by pleading with Voldemort for Harry's life, worked a spell whereby when Voldemort's soul split due to her murder, the soul piece entered into Harry and made him a Horcrux. The Avada Kedavra bounced because Voldemort was in essence attacking himself. If Voldemort tries to AK Harry before the soul piece is removed from him, it will bounce again. 3.) Early in the book, we will see signs that seem to indicate Snape is ESE, but late in the book we (and Harry) will discover incontrovertible proof he is DDM. Harry and Snape will come to feel grudging respect for each other. Snape will make a nasty comment to Harry immediately before dying in order to save Harry and/or make it possible for him to defeat Voldemort. 4.) Harry's Quidditch skills (spotting and catching small objects, flying) will prove vital to Voldemort's defeat. 5.) The epilogue will take place at Harry's deathbed, after a very long and fulfilling life, which will include playing professional Quidditch, marrying Ginny and having many children, and serving as Headmaster of Hogwarts. After he dies, he will see the Veil appear, and have the choice to remain on this side and become a ghost, or pass through. The book will end as he chooses to pass though and go on to what lies beyond, including a promised but not shown reunion with all his loved ones who have predeceased him. A few more random thoughts for discussion: Might "by the hand of the other" refer to the place, not the method, of death? If someone else kills Voldemort while he is right next to Harry ? "at his right hand" ? would that fulfill the prophecy? Might "neither can live while the other survives" refer to a specific incident, not a general state of affairs? Would it fulfill the prophecy if there is some event which either Harry or Voldemort can come out of alive, but not both? Re: why a DDM Snape would agree to take the Unbreakable Vow ? What if Voldemort had already ordered Snape to kill Dumbledore if Draco fails, before Snape takes the Unbreakable Vow? In that case, taking the Vow would not change his circumstances much, since Voldemort would surely kill him if he disobeyed a direct order. Snape would have told Dumbledore of the order, and the two of them would have discussed the relative importance of Dumbledore's life verses Snape's position within Voldemort's organization. I see that position less as a spy, and more as a mole. Passing information to the Order is only a side benefit, able to be done only if it doesn't risk his being discovered. The real reason he is there is to become trusted, deep within Voldemort's plans, so that at the crucial moment he can act to sabotage whatever Voldemort is trying to do. He only gets one chance to betray Voldemort, so must save it until the most opportune possible moment. Snape and Dumbledore agree that saving Dumbledore's life isn't it. He will use his one chance to help Harry, and will most likely die for it, but his action will make the crucial difference that helps Harry win. Re: earlier Puppetmaster!Dumbledore discussion. Dumbledore has taught or served as Headmaster at Hogwarts for at least 50 years. He has been in contact for 5-7 years with every adult wizard who has attended Hogwarts in that time. The "nameless, faceless" masses of the wizarding world, at least in Britain, all have names and faces for Dumbledore. I get the feeling he hasn't forgotten a single one of them. The greater good vs. the good of one individual isn't an abstraction to Dumbledore - it's a matter of one individual vs. lots and lots of other individuals. I don't think the extreme form of Puppetmaster!Dumbledore will prove true, but he certainly has manipulated many events. I've written Dumbledore in fanfiction, and find him easy to write. Just take infinite compassion plus infinite ruthlessness, and add a generous dose of whimsy. The ruthlessness and compassion are both equally strong parts of his character, and both together are needed to understand his actions. Angela From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 06:23:04 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 06:23:04 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171867 Mike, agreeing with Roberta: > Hurrying to get this in before the contest disappears... "I hereby certify that I have not read any spoilers" Mike grasps Roberta's hand' > A thin tongue of brilliant flame issued from TigerPatronus's wand and winds its way around Roberta's [and Mike's] hands like a red-hot wire. Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Rubeus Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Something that Voldemort gave him to show that "I'm with the Band" 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? NO f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan b. Head Girl? Hannah Abbott c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall and one you forgot f. Transfiguration Instructor? Fleur Delacour-Weasley 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With the side against Voldemort which doesn't make him truly Dumbledore's Man. But he looks that way for all intents and purposes. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. Diary c. Ring d. Locket (from Grimmauld Place) e. Hufflepuff cup f. Ravenclaw's Wand which used to be in Olivander's window g. In Harry, but not encased as the other Horcruxes, it's in him accidentally and likes it there. :) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: Phoenix, now Boggart: A Voldemort that knows he's not a true DE Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The *Power* of Love in all it's goodness, desperate love, love spurned. In other words, things that make it the most powerful emotion a wizard can draw upon for magical production. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape has his own personal reasons to hate Voldemort. One or both of his parents was/were killed by Voldemort, or more likely the DEs. Because of that, he joined the DEs with the intention of causing Voldemort's downfall, he was never a loyal DE. When the prophesy happened, he had already decided to join forces with Dumbledore. 2. Because of the above, Snape only reported the first two lines of the prophesy to Voldemort by agreement with Dumbledore. He had not really heard any of the prophesy, but Dumbledore implanted the first two sentences from his memory to be sure that if Voldemort cracked through the young Severus' Occlumency, he would only get what was agreed to release to him. BTW, prophesy night was Holloween 1979, the same night Harry was conceived. 3. Dumbledore knowingly allowed the release of the prophesy, with Snape, though he knew Voldemort would likely act upon it and go after *some* wizarding family, which one he didn't know. When he realized it was the Potters he tried to backtrack and protect them to no avail. All Dumbledore's gnashing and agonizing in the cave from the green goo was him reliving his decision and wanting Voldemort to take him instead. 4. Harry will have destroyed 2 of the 4 (he find's SS's locket from Grimmauld Place and somehow HH's cup) remaining Horcruxes when he realizes he has no clue where to find the remaining two. He gets the idea to visit the Mirror of Erised and think about finding the remaining Horcruxes, where to find them. First the Mirror shows him Voldemort and he doesn't understand. He doesn't know that Voldemort has RR's wand. Ron figures this one out for him. Then the Mirror shows Harry himself and he still doesn't get it. He doesn't understand that a piece of Voldemort is inside him. Hermione figures this one out for him. 5. In the final Showdown, Harry uses his stag Patronus to drive the Dementors to Voldemort. They crush in upon Voldemort and attempt to suck out his soul. While Voldie is occupied with the Dementors, concentrating on his Occlumency to keep them from draining him, Kreacher sneaks in and snatches LV's wand and breaks it. The wand was RR's and a Horcrux and the force released from breaking the Horcrux seal kills Kreacher. Harry uses the spell that Dumbledore threw at LV in the MoM fight (the one that made a gong sound when it hit LV's shield) and LV has no wand to deflect it. This spell changes Voldie from evil to good, or tries to. But Voldie's fractured soul can't take the power of this spell and Voldie dies from it. And since I can't resist, 6. Bellatrix will try to capture Harry and bring him to LV. She will have the upper hand when Neville comes to the rescue and disarms her. Then Neville will hit Bella with a Crucio, but since unlike Harry, Neville will *want* to cause pain and this Crucio will be very powerful and cause Bella more discomfort than she has ever experienced in her life. Harry will have to call off Neville to keep him from doing to Bella what she did to his parents. Mike (mcrudele78) From Meliss9900 at aol.com Mon Jul 16 07:55:50 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:55:50 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tonks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171868 In a message dated 7/15/2007 10:57:03 P.M. Central Daylight Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: I think that Trelawney can enter but Harry can't because Harry is asking the wrong thing and/or because Draco has an additional unstated requirement that no one who's looking for him can find him there I think that Trelawney can enter but Harry can't because Harry is asking the wrong thing and/or because Draco has an additional unstated requirement that no one who's looking for him can find him there Actually when Harry was looking for a place to hid his Potions book from Snape, the narration mentions that broken vanishing cabinet as having been in the RoR. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drednort at alphalink.com.au Mon Jul 16 09:18:59 2007 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:18:59 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOST In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E6ED3A4C0C147DE8EFED3E88282FF44@ShaunPC> No: HPFGUIDX 171869 Posting this now, so as to get it in before I am spoiled. I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them. - Shaun Hately > Compulsory Questions (50 points total): > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Severus Snape > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? His dark mark > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): >a. Harry? Yes >b. Draco? No >c. Hermione? Yes >d. Luna? Yes > e. Ron? Yes > f. Neville? Yes > g. Ginny? Yes > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Filch > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Harry Potter > b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger > c. DADA Instructor? Remus Lupin > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? He is Dumbledore's man > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Tom Riddle's Diary b. In Voldemort c. The ring destroyed by Dumbledore d. Nagini e. The Locket of Grimmauld Place f. The Hufflepuff Bowl g. Harry's scar In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus - a lion Boggart - Dumbledore lying dead > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The true essence of love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Minerva McGonagall originally came to Hogwarts as a spy for the Ministry of Magic 2. Fred and George Weasley will be killed mounting a brave but foolhardy attack to rescue their mother 3. Ginny Weasley will attempt to (and will fail in the attempt) seduce Harry 4. Harry will wrongly believe he has been betrayed by Ron 5. Harry will offer to spare Voldemorts life - knowing that the prophecy means that he will die if Voldemort lives, but willing to do that for the sake of love. 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 c.john at imperial.ac.uk Mon Jul 16 10:17:10 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:17:10 -0000 Subject: Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOST In-Reply-To: <276774.79999.qm@web80506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171870 Just returned from holiday - no idea what all the fuss is about!! I would also like to add that it is particularly unfair that I have to pick my copy of book 7 up at midnight and thus will indoubtedly read into the small hours and be cranky for the rest of the weeked. Everyone on the other side of the pond get a good few hours of daylight to start of with!! > > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > -NO > > > > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > > -YES > > > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > > character to die and stay dead? > -Fred & George > > > > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > > scared him? > > -The Dark Mark > > > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > > the classes (answer yes or no for each): > > a. Harry? yes > > b. Draco? no > > c. Hermione? yes > > d. Luna? Yes > > e. Ron? yes > > f. Neville? Yes > > g. Ginny? Yes > > > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? > > - Bill and Fleur > > > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > > time "very late in life?" > > - Mrs. Figg > > > > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > > a. Head Boy? > > - Harry > b. Head Girl? > - Hermione > > c. DADA Instructor? > - Bill Weasley > > d. Potions Master or Mistress? > > - Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? > - McGonagal > > > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? > > - Against Voldemort > > > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) > > a. Slytherin's Locket > > b. Hufflepuff's Cup > > c. Slytherin's Ring > > d. The Diary > > e. The piece in Lord Voldemort > > f. Ravenclaw's Wand > > g. n/a > > > > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > > be used as tiebreakers. > > > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > -Patronus: Phoenix > > -Boggart: Lord Voldemort discovering Snape's treachery > > > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? > > -Love > > > Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): > > 1) The Dursley's will make some negative comment regarding DD (after his visit in HBP). Harry will get angry and reveal that a DD was killed by a teacher (specifically naming Snape). Petunia will eventually reveal that 'that awful boy' that Lily brought home was in fact Snape. > 2) Snape will destroy the bulk of the Horcruxes. This is the reason for DD martyrdom - to allow Snape to gain the whereabouts of the Horcruxes from a trusting Voldemort. > 3) Voldemort is still one Horcrux short. He will return to Hogwarts in an attempt to find one of Gryffindor's relics - probably the sword, but could be the sorting hat. > 4) Lily was the one student who was nice to Snape. Snape specifically asked Voldemort to spare her (hence his constant attempts to get her to stand aside). This is the reasone for Snape's hatred of Voldemort (even stronger than his hatred of James). > 5) Lord Voldemort was hoping to make the prophecy orb into a Horcrux using Harry's death. Now he will try again with Gryffindor's relic. Brothergib (looking forward to very little sleep!!) From wyzdyx at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 10:44:24 2007 From: wyzdyx at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:44:24 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171871 "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." (Wyzdyx.) I was, in fact, unaware that any such material was circulating until I saw Tigerpatronus's post about it. Predictions Contest Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? no 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Peter Pettigrew 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? a dark mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? yes b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? yes f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? define prominent...Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Arabella Doreen Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Aberforth Dumbledore d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? The Order of the Phoenix...Harry is as wrong about him now as he was when he suspected Snape of trying to steal the Sorcerer's Stone. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's Diary b. Marvolo's Ring c. Slytherin's Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaw's wand f. A previously unknown Gryffindor artifact located in Godric's Hollow g. In Voldemort...1/64th of his original soul In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? patronus...owl / boggart...Voldemort victorious Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Harry will return to school because he needs N.E.W.T.s to become an auror, but he will be absent most of the time. 2. Harry will continue to study with Albus Dumbledore via the Pensieve memories. 3. We will find out that 2 Hogwarts staff members were married to each other, but kept it secret for security reasons...I think it was Dumbledore and McGonagall--both Gryffindors, both transfiguration teachers who became headmaster / headmistress of Hogwarts. 4. Snape did not kill Dumbledore; Dumbledore is dead, nevertheless. 5. Wizards from Beaubatons and Durmstrang, the Merpeople, the house elves, the goblins, and the centaurs will rally behind Harry, not the Ministry of Magic, to defeat Voldemort. 6. With Draco missing (and her acne cleared up) Eloise Midgen will elope with Pansy Parkinson. Marci From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Jul 16 11:22:36 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:22:36 -0000 Subject: Emotional connections with the characters WAS: Re: Connections Interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171872 > > Dungrollin: > > I have to admit that I don't engage at such an emotional level with the books; > > > > Alla: > > Hey Dung. Are you sure though that you do not engage on such > emotional level with the books or you are just engaging with the > different character then Jen does and myself does as well? > The only reason why I am asking is because this statement of yours to me stands in contradiction with you saying at the end of the > paragraph that you feel pity for Snape and with your earlier > statement that you really do not want Snape to die. I mean, if you were just saying that Snape is amusing for you on the intellectual level, his gift with words, etc, I would understand that this is not the emotional level connection, you know? > Dungrollin: You're right, I did seem to contradict myself. Sorry for the delay in replying, I read a big chunk of OotP over the weekend, and tried to watch myself closely to see my reactions. A big problem is that having re-read the books so many times I find it difficult to remember what my original reactions were. Over the weekend the only really strong reaction I had was laughing out loud when the twins left Hogwarts. I distinctly remember a sensation of shock in the pit of my stomach when I read Snape AKing DD the first time, but honestly, *as I'm re-reading* I don't react much. The emotional reactions come later when I'm thinking about it and discussing things on-list, and even then, (and this is really difficult to put into words) they're not really real emotions. My reactions as I'm reading for the first time must be there, (the thrill during Spinner's End, the shock at the end of the Tower scene), but I read very non-judgementally, so it's in the analysis that I work out what I think the characters were going through and it's to the analysis that I react, rather than the text as a whole as I'm reading. Perhaps I'm making a false distinction, or perhaps I shouldn't say that *I* pity Snape, more that I think he deserves to be pitied. As for not wanting him to die ... yeah ok, that's an emotional reaction! However, I'm almost certain that if we hadn't had years of waiting between books, if I'd read them all one after the other, I wouldn't think that Snape was DDM, I wouldn't care if he snuffed it or not, and I'd be desperate for Harry to survive. Does that make any sense at all, or am I blithering again? Dungrollin Who will quickly post the bragging rights predictions she has been agonising over before it's too late, and will then disappear until the list re-opens, having had too many near misses with spoilers. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Jul 16 11:30:18 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:30:18 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171873 I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages nor any summary of them. Dungrollin. > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Hagrid > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Nobody. Something will stop Bill and Fleur tying the knot. > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Argus Filch. > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Anthony Goldstein b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley, and the curse *will* hit him d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? He is loyal to Dumbledore, and vehemently anti-Voldemort. Dumbledore *did* know about clause 3 of the unbreakable vow, this is why he made Snape DADA teacher. In fact, Snape had told DD that Voldy expected him to "do it in the end" before he had even taken the vow. > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Voldemort b. The very secret Diary (destroyed) c. The Peverell Ring (destroyed) d. The Slytherin Locket (with Aberforth) e. The Hufflepuff Cup f. Ravenclaw's Wand g. Harry Potter (Voldemort discovered during the possession at the MoM that Harry is a Horcrux which is why he's now using Occlumency against him, and wants him alive (for now). Now that DD is out of the way Voldy intends to transfer the Horcrux from Harry to the sword of Gryffindor, but Harry will get to it before him ? see freestyle prediction #1 below.) > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? His patronus is a snowy owl (the bearer of information between both sides in the war, clever, stealthy and nocturnal). His boggart is a Voldemort who knows that Snape is DDM, (Snape will have to face this, his greatest fear, at some point in DH). > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The force of love. The door is permanently sealed and locked because it causes so much damage when people don't know how to handle it properly. Lily did not work there, nobody works there, it's permanently locked. > Freestyle (10 points each / 50 points total): 1. Voldemort's scheme in this book involves taking over Hogwarts, pinching Gryffindor's sword, getting the horcrux out of Harry and into the sword, and killing Harry. At some point, Voldemort will be in residence at Hogwarts, and Harry will need to use the Marauder's Map and his knowledge of secret passageways to sneak around without being caught by the DEs. Voldemort will be enraged at not being able to get into the headmaster's office since McGonagall is the rightful head, but Harry will be able to because the password is Raspberry Jam, or something he can guess. 2. Harry is a Horcrux. Voldemort told Lily to step aside because he wanted to use Harry's death to make his Horcrux, but she wouldn't, and he ended up making Harry a Horcrux (unintentionally) with the piece of soul ripped off when he killed Lily. Snape can de-horcrux him, but to allow him to do so Harry must fully trust him, perhaps by allowing himself to be possessed by Snape. 3. The Deathly Hallows refers to the four founders of Hogwarts, not their magical objects, their secret rooms in the castle, or the horcruxes. 4. We will find out something surprising about Hagrid before he dies. 5. The important thing we'll learn about Lily is that she forgave Snape for taking the prophecy to Voldemort. From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jul 16 13:47:09 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:47:09 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dedalus Diggle (was: Emmeline Vance) Message-ID: <33087026.1184593629643.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171874 From: Dave Hardenbrook >I know what you mean -- I haven't quite (but almost) given up hope >that Dedalus might yet play a significant role. His name suggests he's >a good flyer. Possible aerial maneuvering coach for Harry? (I have >also almost-but-not-quite given up hope that the final Harry/LV >showdown will be airborne.) Bart: Dedalus (noted philologist, albeit of American English, Prof. John Algeo, pronounces it "Deed'-a-lus", btw) represents a lot of things, but being a GOOD flyer? I guess in comparison to his son, Icarus. Dedalus was the great inventor of Greek Mythology. Diggle? Well, seeing that he is depicted as lacking in commonsense (according to Minnie the Cat, at least), Diggle might be "Giddy" spelled sideways, sort of. Someone who creates ingenious, but impractical things? Bart From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Mon Jul 16 14:00:37 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:00:37 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : Brave Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171875 At the risk of repeating something that I missed while not participating, I have a theory I'd like to advance. In the last days of waiting before DH comes out, I *finally* went back and read HBP again. Several things struck me, but one in particular was Snape's almost incoherent rage when Harry called him a coward on the grounds after DD's death. I think this is a clue to Snape's whole character, as well as his motivations in that entire sequence of events. Before I get to the rage part, let me fill in a bit of background. I still think Snape's primary motivation comes from a love he once had for Lily Evans, and (whether requited or not) his worst memory was when she ultimately rejected him ("Snivelous") and went off with James (his worst enemy.) He has always hated Harry, because Harry has Lily's eyes in James' face. Harry is a constant reminder of love lost. As DD said in HBP, Snape had no idea his passing on to LV the half prophecy he heard would result in LV setting his sights on killing the Potters. His realization of that was what motivated him to turn traitor to LV and work for DD. This also ties in to why LV didn't want to kill Lily, as Snape had made some kind of agreement with him. She wouldn't get out of the way, so too bad for Snape's agreement -- but that's just LV being himself. Snape's motivation is therefore based not in love, but in guilt. HE caused Lily's death, in his own estimation. He is therefore trying to make up for it by saving the life of her son. He cannot help but hate Harry, but he is absolutely bound to save his life, as a way of making up for Lily's death. So he is simultaneously hating and tormenting Harry and working to save his life. Going back to the scene in HBP on the grounds, consider what SS had just done: He had killed DD, which meant that he would go down in WW history as the greatest Judas of all time, and would be hated by all. He was still planning to kill and/or betray LV to help Harry, which meant that the DEs would all see him as the worst kind of traitor as well. Whichever side won, he would be at the top of their most-wanted list. He fully expects to die doing what he believes is right, damned forever with no redemption by everyone on both sides, including Harry. It is probably the bravest act by any character in the entire series, for he cannot even take comfort in being called a hero when he dies. He is doing these things FOR Harry, and yet Harry himself calls him a coward. No wonder he is enraged. JKR said a long time ago that SS was a "deeply horrible" person, or something like that. This fits it, and finally exposes a full set of motivations for him, that fit everything we've seen him do so far. So, what do you all think of "Brave Snape" as a theory? Vivamus From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jul 16 14:13:40 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:13:40 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tonks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6415093E-E550-4162-842D-0C582416910E@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171876 lizzyben04 wrote: > Tonks would be > a good person to impersonate because her presence in Hogwarts isn't > suspicious. Jadon: It is suspicious. Harry thinks it's suspicious, and so would any other student who bumped into Tonks. A teacher might get fetched, and they'd think it was suspicious too, unless they were a member of the OotP, in which case they would soon find it odd that 'Tonks' knew nothing about the plans of the Order. lizzyben04: > When Harry mentions seeing "Tonks" outside the ROR, it > raises some eyebrows, but no one immediately suspects that it was an > impersonator. Jadon: He's talking to Ron and Hermione, and they're used to strange coincidences around Harry. Hermione might not suspect an impersonator, but: "'It's a bit odd,' said Hermione, who for some reason looked very concerned. 'She's supposed to be guarding the school, why's she suddenly abandoning her post to come and see Dumbledore when he's not even here?'" The fact that Professor Trelawney got in gives credence to the theory, but if Draco had wanted to spare Crabbe and Goyle humiliation (does he care?), why not simply use a different spell? Jadon From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jul 16 14:29:57 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:29:57 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The first paragraph of book 7 Message-ID: <15201161.1184596197391.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171877 From: Goddlefrood >If he is to turn out to be good >then I for one would want an extraordinarily brilliant explanation >for it. I've read this and other lists for some time and have yet >to come across an anywhere near adequate reason why Dumbledore >was killed. The old wizard has to be got out of the way is about >as far as JKR has gone so far. > >Before I'm accused of being a Snape hater I would add that I do >think, and have said many times, that Snape will assist Harry. Bart: First of all, you know quite well that just because they're against Voldemort doesn't make someone good. For example, I am one of what I believe to be a host of fans who dislike Dung Fletcher quite a bit, who was willing to expose Harry to mortal danger to make a quick illegal profit, and, after Harry not only forgave him but helped him hide some of his slimy doings, thanks Harry by stealing from him. So, even if Snape is against Voldemort, it does not make him a good person. Now, I'm going to give you a scenario. Please say what Snape SHOULD have done, or why the scneario is invalid: Dumbledore was already dying, from whatever gave him the withered arm, or the potion in the cave, or both. He has already gotten Snape to promise that, if the circumstances are right, to kill him. Note that Snape gets all the DE's away from Hogwarts without further damage to anybody else, and has firmed up his position on the side of the DE's. What SHOULD Snape have done, or what is wrong with the above scenario? Support: In terms of canon support, we have the argument between Snape and DD overheard by Hagrid, where Snape does not want to do something that Dumbledore is insisting upon, we have the spreading death on DD's wand arm, and we have DD's comment implying that the poison in the cave would kill, slowly)? In terms of literary support, the fact that JKR specifically does NOT reveal DD's reasons for COMPLETELY trusting Snape (emphasis mine, note that, just before leaving for the cave, DD at least appears to be on the verge of revealing it to Harry, and then stops) implies that letting the readers know would give away something to the readers. Given that, Bart From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 14:30:48 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:30:48 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171878 Vivamus wrote: He fully expects to die doing what he believes is right, damned forever with no redemption by everyone on both sides, including Harry. It is probably the bravest act by any character in the entire series, for he cannot even take comfort in being called a hero when he dies. He is doing these things FOR Harry, and yet Harry himself calls him a coward. No wonder he is enraged. JKR said a long time ago that SS was a "deeply horrible" person, or something like that. This fits it, and finally exposes a full set of motivations for him, that fit everything we've seen him do so far. So, what do you all think of "Brave Snape" as a theory? vmonte: How does being deeply horrible equate to being brave? I think Snape is a coward. some people don't like being told the truth. Especially when it's something negative. From sherriola at gmail.com Mon Jul 16 14:37:00 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 07:37:00 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <469b8291.1498600a.6fe0.ffffbe3d@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171879 Vivamus wrote: He fully expects to die doing what he believes is right, damned forever with no redemption by everyone on both sides, including Harry. It is probably the bravest act by any character in the entire series, for he cannot even take comfort in being called a hero when he dies. He is doing these things FOR Harry, and yet Harry himself calls him a coward. No wonder he is enraged. JKR said a long time ago that SS was a "deeply horrible" person, or something like that. This fits it, and finally exposes a full set of motivations for him, that fit everything we've seen him do so far. So, what do you all think of "Brave Snape" as a theory? vmonte: How does being deeply horrible equate to being brave? I think Snape is a coward. some people don't like being told the truth. Especially when it's something negative. Sherry now: I can never accept murder being considered an act of bravery. I think Snape reacted with such rage because he knew he acted out of cowardice. He saved his own neck and murdered an old man, the one person who had stood by him for years. not very brave in my opinion. Sherry From jnferr at gmail.com Mon Jul 16 14:44:26 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:44:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dedalus Diggle (was: Emmeline Vance) In-Reply-To: <33087026.1184593629643.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <33087026.1184593629643.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707160744y68a5a068uf77fa470a6bd9222@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171880 > > Bart: > Dedalus (noted philologist, albeit of American English, Prof. John Algeo, > pronounces it "Deed'-a-lus", btw) represents a lot of things, but being a > GOOD flyer? I guess in comparison to his son, Icarus. Dedalus was the great > inventor of Greek Mythology. Diggle? Well, seeing that he is depicted as > lacking in commonsense (according to Minnie the Cat, at least), Diggle might > be "Giddy" spelled sideways, sort of. Someone who creates ingenious, but > impractical things? montims: strange pronunciation - I have only ever known it as Dedd - alus... He was a good flyer though, not just in comparison to his son, because he flew a long way on those wings he invented... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Mon Jul 16 14:49:04 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:49:04 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Deleting Posts with Unauthorized Information In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C995CF97353701-16D4-3149@WEBMAIL-MC16.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171881 Did anything happen to the person who posted the "opening paragraph"?? I'm trying to remain spoiler free until Saturday, and I thought that the list was going ot be safe.? This person didn't even put spoiler in the header!? I read my messages on AOL, so I don't get to read the subject line until they are opened.? I managed not to read the rest of the paragraph, but that was really upsetting.? I know the post is a few days old, but I can't believe someone would have the disrespect to post a HUGE spoiler without spoiler space! Oryomai -----Original Message----- From: Jen Reese To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 1:06 am Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Deleting Posts with Unauthorized Information Greetings From Hexquarters! As stated in the spoiler policy posted twice on this list, Do Not Discuss Any Unauthorized Leaks on the HPFGU Lists. They are violations of the Wizarding Statute of Secrecy (not to mention copyright laws). If you violate this rule, the elves reserve the right to confiscate, or even destroy, your wand. All non-official spoilers, whether real or fake, are now being deleted without prior notice. You Might Be Next! The Administration Team Link to full pre-DH spoiler policy for more information: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/167822 Link to JKR's spoiler policy: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/ ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jul 16 15:05:06 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:05:06 -0000 Subject: Emotional connections with the characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171882 Dung: > Over the weekend the only really strong reaction I had was laughing > out loud when the twins left Hogwarts. I distinctly remember a > sensation of shock in the pit of my stomach when I read Snape AKing > DD the first time, but honestly, *as I'm re-reading* I don't react > much. The emotional reactions come later when I'm thinking about it > and discussing things on-list, and even then, (and this is really > difficult to put into words) they're not really real emotions. Jen: I completely agree with your assessment that the list can be the soure of secondary emotional reactions (for lack of a way to say that). There are several distinct emotional reactions I remember very keenly from the moment of reading certain passages, like when my surprise over the events on the tower was broken by sadness at this line: "...but there was still no preparation for seeing him here, spread-eagled, broken: the greatest wizard Harry had ever, or would ever, meet." The finality of those words moved me. And when I finished reading HBP, I felt perfectly satisfied Snape was loyal and a good guy, that Dumbledore wouldn't have died if he hadn't wanted to and that - HAHA- there was no need for me to discuss HBP like I'd needed to discuss OOTP, a book that left me with a strong negative reaction upon closing it. So much for first reactions, right? I have hundreds of posts since HBP proving there were many crucial matters to dissect after all. ;) And some have caused me to feel emotions about characters different from ones I actually felt when reading the first time around. Dung: > As for not wanting him to die ... yeah ok, that's an emotional > reaction! However, I'm almost certain that if we hadn't had years > of waiting between books, if I'd read them all one after the other > I wouldn't think that Snape was DDM, I wouldn't care if he snuffed > it or not, and I'd be desperate for Harry to survive. Jen: The years and life circumstances both play a role in my own thoughts/feelings about characters. Reading the books with my son causes me see them in a slightly different light than reading in my own head. For instance, having a child who doesn't like school much and wants to be the comedian means I linger over the situation with Fred/George and Molly's reaction to them in a way I didn't a few years ago. JKR's own words on her website about Sirius gave me pause; I couldn't help but wonder if she saw him in a different light some 10+ years later than when he first popped into her head, due the changes in her own life circumstances? Maybe, maybe not. I'll always remember the wonderful pull to read and re-read the books the first time around - wish that could be replicated *sigh*. > Dungrollin > Who will quickly post the bragging rights predictions she has been > agonising over before it's too late, and will then disappear until > the list re-opens, having had too many near misses with spoilers. Jen, wishing she could disappear. From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jul 16 13:49:31 2007 From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (becks3uk) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:49:31 -0000 Subject: TIGERPATRONUS' bragging rights contest? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171883 "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." (BECKY WILLIAMS.) Rules: Copy these questions and email your answers *both* to *tigerpatronus* *at* *yahoo* *dot* *com* and to the newsgroup. You must email your entry to TigerPatronus to be entered in the contest. You will receive an email confirmation of your entry. In the event of a dispute, the entry posted to the group will be your back-up. Deadline: Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 11:59 pm (midnight) EDT. (No Friday entries will be accepted.) Any details released by JKR or subsidiaries are worth no credit *after* they are released. Example: if you predict that "The trio will ride a dragon,'" it will be worth 0 points. However, if you make a prediction *and email your prediction to the list and to TigerPatronus* and *then* the detail is released, you will get full credit. If you are JKR, work at the publishing company, hacked Bloomsbury's computers, or have somehow else have already read the book, don't enter. We will find out, hunt you down, and give you a virtual thermonuclear wedgie. Specificity will be rewarded. Brevity is . . . wit. All decisions of the judges (TigerPatronus and her Minions) are arbitrary, ruthless, and final. (Minion recruitment will begin soon.) Prizes: Grand Prize (1): Bragging rights in perpetuity. All HPfGU members must address you as "Your Brilliance," "Leader of the Intelligentsia," "The HP-est," or another superlative title of your own choosing. A filk will be composed in your honor. A year's worth of free butterbeer. Honorable Mentions (10): Bragging rights in perpetuity. All HPfGU members must address you as "Pretty Smartie," "A Member of the Intelligentsia," "Quite HP-ish," or a subordinate title of your own choosing. A free case of butterbeer. Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO HE WILL DISCOVER THAT DUMBLEDORE WAS RIGHT THERE IS A FATE WORSE THAN DEATH I.E. DEMENTORS REMOVE HIS SOUL OR HE LOSES HIS MAGIC 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? SEVERUS SNAPE BUT I WILL CRY IF I AM RIGHT. HE WILL DIE SAVING HARRY 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? THE DARK MARK OF COURSE 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? YES b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? NO g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? BILL AND FLEUR 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" TEMPTED TO SAY AUNT PETUNIA BUT I WILL GO WITH MRS ARABELLA DOREEN FIGG 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? ERNIE MACMILLAN b. Head Girl? HERMIONE GRANGER c. DADA Instructor? A NEW CHARACTER PREVIOUSLY UNMENTIONED d. Potions Master or Mistress? PROFESSOR SLUGHORN e. Headmaster or -mistress? PROFESSOR MCGONNOGAL 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? HE IS DUMBELDORE'S MAN THROUGH AND THROUGH 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Tom Riddle's diary b. Helga Hufflepuffs cup c. Ravenclaw's tiara (and its at Hogwarts) d. Slytherin's locket (at Grimmauld Place) e. Marvolo's ring f. Voldemort's pet snake g. Inside Voldemort himself In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? HIS PATRONUS IS A PHOENIX AND WILL HAVE CHANGED TO THAT SINCE DUMBLEDORE DIED. HIS BOGGART IS VOLDEMORT OR HIMSELF KILLING DUMBLEDORE Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. SNAPE WILL SEND MESSAGES TO HARRY AND CO THROUGH HIS PATRONUS. THE PATRONUS WILL BE A PHOENIX TO REPESENT DUMBLEDORE AND THEY WILL THINK DD IS ALIVE AND SENDING MESSAGES. NOBODY WILL KNOW THEY ARE FROM SNAPE AS HIS PATRONUS WILL HAVE CHANGED DUE TO THE TRAUMA OF DUMEBLEDORE'S DEATH. (CAN YOU TELL I'M A DIE HARD DDM SUPPORTER??) 2. PETER PETTIGREW WILL DIE REPAYING HIS LIFE DEBT TO HARRY 3. SOMEONE CLOSE TO HARRY WHO HE TRUSTS A LOT WILL BETRAY HIM. NOT SURE WHO BUT SOMEONE SIGNIFICANT LIKE PROF MACGONNOGAL OR LUPIN OR SOMEONE. SOMEONE SEEN AS A TRUSTED FIGURE OF AUTHORITY 4. DUMBLEDORE IS A DIRECT DESCENDENT OF GODRIC GRYFFINDOR 5. ABERFORTH WILL FEATURE MORE PROMINENTLY, HELPING HARRY OUT From robin.kirkby at altanapharma.com Mon Jul 16 12:59:41 2007 From: robin.kirkby at altanapharma.com (robin_kirkby) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:59:41 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: <007d01c7c680$b8258a50$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171884 Kimberly: > > 40. Droobles Gum wrappers from Alice Longbottom! > 41. What was Dumbledore thinking/feeling during the Cave scene ? > 42. How did Merope get Tom Riddle to stay with her for that brief period ? Love potion or Imperius Curse ? > 43. Does Snape love ANYone ? Who ? > 44. Krum !! > 45. Will Pettigrew repay his life debt by turning against LV and helping Harry ? > 46. Just how mad IS LV at Lucius for the foul up at the ministry and now Draco's failure to kill DD himself ? Robin: 47. Who will be using magic late in life: Dudley? Petunia? Mrs Figg? Filch? 48. Why all the cat references? Who was Mrs Norris? 49. Is Snape an animagus spider? 50. What were Harry's parents jobs/professions? 51. Why did Film 5 include Kreacher when he wasn't needed for the plot? 52. Does RAB = Regulus Black 53. Was Kreacher the second creature (but not a wizard) that helped RAB get the locket out of the cave? 54. What happened in the missing 24 hours in Chapter 1 book 1? 55. Why did Harry;s scar hurt when he was so close to Voldy in Books 1-5, but not in Book 6? 56. Is Harry a Horcrux? 57. Why was Harry "in" the snake in Book 5 when Mr. Weasley is attacked? 58. Who else was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters were killed? 59. How are Horcruxes made? Destroyed? 60. What are the 12 uses of Dragon's blood? Robin From kellymolinari at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 15:11:21 2007 From: kellymolinari at yahoo.com (kelly molinari) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 08:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: <949589.35282.qm@web50504.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171885 Specificity will be rewarded. Brevity is . . . wit. I swear I have not read any of the EPILOGUE SPOILER that has been discussed on this list. --- Kelly (Though I wish someone would send me the link) Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No, but he will be powerless to use his magical ability. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Minerva MacGonagall 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes - but will leave often on horcrux hunts b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes, but will leave only once before the end on the school year. d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes, but will leave sometimes with Harry on horcrux hunts f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Bill and Fleur -- but their original wedding date will be post-phoned due to an attack on Mr. and Mrs. Weasley. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg, although I really want it to be Dudley --- just to rub it in his father's face. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? New Character d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? MacGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Tom Riddle's Prefect Badge d. Slytherin's Locket e. Tom Riddle's Award for Special Services f. In Voldemort g. N/A -- was going to be made with the death of Baby Harry, but never happened In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's Patronus is a bat. Snape's boggert is Harry failing. Snape has no feelings for Harry one way or the other, he just needs him to get rid of LV now that LV has made him the chosen one. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Power of Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Dumbledore's big mistake was that there are 7 horcruxes, related to the four founders. Tom Riddle was to smug to put his soul into objects of people he loathed. Instead he used objects of his Slytherin heritage and of his own rise to power (prefect, head boy). Harry will waste valuable time on this, but Hermione will figure it all out. Thankfully they will only have to find 3 not 4 horcruxes. 2. Snape turned on LV when he found out LV was going to act on the Prophecy, a strict no-no in the magical world. Snape told Lily what was about to happen and how to protect Harry. He knew the ancient magic needed to do it. Lily trusted Snape enough to die for her son and hoped to save the Wizarding World by doing so. No one else knew about this, not James, not even Dumbledore. 3. The scar came from Lily's sacrifice, not the AK from Voldemort, and has protected Harry all along. The charm runs out on Harry's 17th birthday, but the scar will remain as a reminder of his mother's love. Harry, of course, will not know this until Snape tells him. Snape will also give him the information he needs to rid the WW of LV. This will be the moment Harry trusts Snape, finally realizing Snape was on the side of the Order and was in fact DDM. 4. Lily invented the disappearing charm "evanesco". 5. MacGonagall will die near the end of the book, opening the door for the new Headmaster -- Severus Snape. Thanks for reading --- Kelly --------------------------------- Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jul 16 14:24:11 2007 From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (becks3uk) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:24:11 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171886 Lizzyben: > > "As for the rest of the Tonks weirdness, it might just have been > > JKR's attempt to show how lovesick Tonks is. Except like most of > > the other romantic subplots, it pretty much fell flat. For all > > the talk about the power of love, in HBP love pretty much just > > made people act vindictive, depressed, petty or jealous. " Becks: I think the sole purpose of lovesick Tonks was to show that trauma and heartbreak can cause a patronus to change. I think this is because it was important for us to know that patronuses can change and that the order use them to communicate. I think Snape's patronus will change (probably to a phoenix in honour of Dumbledore - sniff) and he will use it to communicate with Harry and co to help them along, tell them where to find horcruxes etc. They won't realise it is him, they might think Dumbledore is alive and sending messages but it will actually be Snape. I like this theory so much that I am really really hoping I am right and if not I feel that JKR should change her book to accommodate my wishes (only joking guys don't shout at me or I will have to go back under my rock and hide). I understand that ESE Snape supporters won't be so keen on this idea but I am a DDM Snape girl, always have been, always will be. (Even after reading the final book. If JKR says Snape is ESE I will still be of the opinion that she is mistaken.) Oh my God I am so excited, only a few more days and all will be revealed! Becks From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 15:17:29 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:17:29 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: <6415093E-E550-4162-842D-0C582416910E@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171887 Jadon: > The fact that Professor Trelawney got in gives credence to the > theory, but if Draco had wanted to spare Crabbe and Goyle humiliation > (does he care?), why not simply use a different spell? > > Jadon > lizzyben: I dunno, maybe he doesn't care? This is probably useless speculation, cause I doubt we'll get an explanation of this detail. Draco: "You know when you saw Tonks acting strangely outside the ROR on page 345?" Harry: "Yeah?" *dodges LV curse* Draco: "That was me." *ducks, dies* Harry: "Oh. OK." *shrugs, saves the world.* I mean, who really cares at this point? The same goes for an explanation involving Tonks explaining why she was there. It seems like any explanation will just halt the plot in order to refer back to minor details from HBP. Possibly Tonk's random appearance was just bad writing - plenty of that in HBP too. Or maybe it was really DD? Tonks was near his office... lizzyben, indulging in idle speculation while she still can. From shmantzel at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 15:18:47 2007 From: shmantzel at yahoo.com (Dantzel Withers) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 08:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: An idea... In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0707152118n4fc3ad01k28a07d6603dff3d5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <897252.47533.qm@web56514.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171888 Lisa: I don't know that any family knows their child is "put down for Hogwarts" at birth -- we don't know that James & Lily knew about Harry. We only know that Hagrid knew that Harry was, and likely that is because Dumbledore told him. Dantzel replies: We know that Riddle was down for Hogwarts since birth - Dumbledore told the head of the orphanage so. So that's two sources so far. I would say it is fair to assume that if you are magical, you have been down since birth. Dantzel --------------------------------- Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hitchykoo at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 14:51:07 2007 From: hitchykoo at yahoo.com (hitchykoo) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:51:07 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Harry Potter Ending Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171889 "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." CATHY CHILDS. QUESTIONS (See also predictions below) 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. >From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? A ring given to Lucius from Voldemort, which Draco's father gave to him for safekeeping, anticipating his own imprisonment. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? Yes. d. Luna? Yes. e. Ron? Yes. f. Neville? Yes. g. Ginny? Yes. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Harry and Ginny and Ron and Hermione will announce their engagements, then Neville and Luna will also announce theirs. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Aunt Petunia. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Neville. b. Head Girl? Luna. c. DADA Instructor? Still won't be one. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Draco. e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall will be Headmistress. (But see my predictions below.) 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore and the anti-Death Eater forces. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Tom Riddle's diary. b. Marvolo Gaunt's ring. c. Helga Hufflepuff's cup. d. Unidentified Ravenclaw founder's item. e. Portrait painting of past headmaster from Slytherin. f. Voldemort's own wand. g. Harry's forehead scar. PREDICTIONS: 1. Snape will turn out to have all along been a spy among the Death Eaters, working for Dumbledore. Dumbledore already knew he was going to die soon, and persuaded Snape to "finish him off". Snape did this only after much soul-searching and protesting. The "murder" served to allay the Death Eaters' concerns that Snape may be a double agent for Dumbledore and the good guys (which he actually is) and allowed him to continue to move freely among them. The "murder" also allows Dumbledore to continue to work for the forces of good from behind the mysterious "curtain of death". Snape will sacrifice himself to save Harry and Draco, his favorite students, from Voldemort. 2. Neville's parents, the Longbottoms, will be revealed to also have been spies for Dumbledore during their internment in a Death Eater- run sanatorium. Neville's parents have been putting on a "crazy act" that has allowed them to get a lot of information. When Neville's mother gave him a small piece of paper during his visit, he put it in his pocket without realizing it was a hidden message. In DH Neville will accidentally pull the piece of paper out after having touched a magical plant which will cause the message to show up. The information will be invaluable in helping Harry defeat Voldemort. 3. Lucius ranks very high with Voldemort. He will have been commanded, like Abraham with Isaac, to prove his loyalty to Voldemort by sacrificing his only son. Snape will have found this out. When Snape left with Draco, he was actually kidnapping the boy, to protect him from Lucius. While in hiding, Snape and Draco will argue, and Snape will reveal that Lucius does not have his son's best interests at heart. But Draco will scoff. Draco will have received news that Lucius has escabed from Azkaban, and the boy will rejoin his father somewhere in hiding preparatory to joining the Death Eaters for their final rally, the Deathly Hallows. The gathering is so names because Voldemort anticipates being named a sort of High Priest of Death in a darkly religious ceremony that his followers will witness (and become his apostles). 4. Harry will defeat Voldemort by destroying the final horcrux -- his own famous scar. 5. Harry will get some help from an unexpected ally -- Aunt Petunia, who has honed her own powers in a belated show of love for her sister. NARRATIVE SUMMATION: Hogwarts reopens and Harry is back. He will have received mysterious messages from Sirius, who upon reaching the afterlife learned something important regarding Voldemort's secret vulnerability. But Sirius can only tell Harry that the boy himself holds the answer to defeating the Dark Lord. Harry presses Sirius for more clues, but the communications from Siruis are very cryptic, and Harry is frustrated at his slowness in deciphering them. His friends are baffled as well. When Harry goes to see the new painting of Dumbledore, he is told not to expect the picture to talk to him, because there's a waiting period for departed headmasters to be able to speak. But as soon as Harry is about to leave the room after having been left alone with the painting, he is delighted to hear Dumbledore quietly call him back into the room. To Harry's delight, Dumbledore speaks with him. Harry tells Dumbledore about the mysterious message from Sirius. Dumbledore tells Harry that he himself has learned much in the afterlife. But all he tells Harry is that the boy does indeed hold the key to defeating the dark forces. Harry wants to know more, but Dumbledore apparently falls asleep in his frame. Harry sullenly leaves the office. But he doesn't have much time to contemplate the message before he is called into action. He hears faculty worriedly discussing the planned Death Eaters' rally. Harry meets with Ron and Hermione to fill them in on this and what he has learned from Dumbledore. Ron and Hermione can hardly believe that the painting of Dumbledore talks. As Hermione points out, there is a waiting period that has never been waived in the entire history of the school. Harry impatiently says that isn't the point. Dumbledore's message is basically the same as that from Sirius. But what does Harry have that will defeat Voldemort? The three conclude that it must have to do with the last horcrux. They figure that the only thing that Harry has that seems to fit the bill is his wand. Has Voldemort indeed captured the final piece of his soul in Harry's wand? Harry thinks about this for a while, then hatches a daring plan of his own to defeat Voldemort. He will challenge the Dark Lord to a wand duel. All his friends immediately try to discourage him from this very dangerous undertaking. But Harry is adamant. In the end they all, including Neville, Luna and Ginny, insist on joining Harry in the dangerous venture, overcoming his objections. He doesn't want his friends to be in danger, but there is no dissuading them. The students manage to sneak into the Deathly Hallows unobserved. It's in a huge amphitheater that reminds them of the Colosseum. Harry sees a mysterious woman in disguise at the rally. She hurries away from him. All the students are surprised to see the Longbottoms held prisoner. This is too much for Neville. He cries out, and the group is discovered. It looks like Harry was right to be worried, as he and his friends are all quickly captured by Death Eaters. Draco gloats over this apparent victory, but his delight turns to horror as it is revealed that Voldemort has commanded to prove his loyalty by sacrificing his child. For the first time, Draco sees his father (and Voldemort and his followers) as they really are. He will also see Snape for what he really is, a force on the side of good. Harry offers himself as a substitute sacrifice to Voldemort in order to save his friends and Draco as well. Voldemort pretends to accept the deal but seizes both boys. He is about to finish Harry off when Snape intervenes with a daring plan of his own to save Harry and Draco, who were always his favorite students. But no sooner has Harry realized Snape really is a friend after all, than Voldemort kills Snape. Snape whispers a few last words to Harry, as the two are finally reconciled. No one else has heard what Snape said. The death of Snape throws Harry into a rage. He challenges Voldemort to a wand duel. At first, Harry seems to be winning. But then he is almost killed. Suddenly, a flash of magic saves him. The flash comes from the hidden wand of the mysterious woman. Harry gets a glimpse of her face. It's Aunt Petunia. Harry makes a mental note to thank her, if he lives. But Voldemort gains the upper hand quickly and taunts Harry, telling all that these are to be Harry's final moments of life. Then, to the horror of all Harry's friends, Harry turns his wand directly at his own face and utters a fateful curse. Has Voldemort taken control of Harry at last and forced him to commit suicide? Harry is thrown into excruciating pain as the wand does its work. He falls to the ground, apparently dead. Voldemort laughs. But it turns out that it is Voldemort who is dying. Voldemort realizes what Harry has done. He cries out that he has underestimated the boy. It is too late for Voldemort. This time he really is gone. The Dark Mark appears in the sky and is obliterated. All the Dark Marks on the arms of his followers also are obliterated. Harry's friends hardly notice this, as they rush over to the lifeless Harry. Ginny throws herself tearfully on Harry's chest. Then Hermione makes an important discovery. Harry's scar is gone! > Harry is alive, albeit dazed. He tells everyone what Snape told him. It was the final piece of the puzzle. The final horcrux was Harry's famous scar itself, and Harry destroyed it. That explains all the strange pain and premonitions regarding Voldemort over the years. It also explained why Harry was The Boy who Lived. Voldemort was keeping him alive as a living repository for the last piece of his own soul, and had planned to take back the scar and dispense with Harry. But Harry had other plans. Draco is numb with shock at the loss of his father. Yet he has a new respect for Harry, and it looks like they might even turn out to be friends. The grateful government offers Harry the job he has always wanted, to be an auror. But to his friends' surprise, Harry turns it down. He has had another offer. All the departed headmasters have voted, and they want Harry to become the youngest-ever headmaster at Hogwarts. He'll have good advice in the job from Dumbledore Harry's first act as Hogwarts' new headmaster will be to give Hagrid the promotion long denied him. All ends happily, with wedding plans for Ron and Hermione, Harry and Ginny, and Neville and Luna. The book's final sentence will be (more or less): "You know, Harry," sighed Ginny as she snuggled against his chest, "You really do look a lot handsomer without that scar." hitchykoo From roxy70072 at cox.net Mon Jul 16 15:17:27 2007 From: roxy70072 at cox.net (artiemd123) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:17:27 -0000 Subject: TIGERPATRONUS' bragging rights contest? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171890 I hereby certify that I have not seen or heard any spoilers. RCT 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YEs 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Ron 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Death mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione?Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill/fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Dudley Dursley 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Shacklebolt d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonnagal 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Against Voldy 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Locket b. Diary c. Ring d. Sword e. Wand f. In Voldemort g. Scar In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Panther Boggert: Voldemort discovering his treachery Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The power of love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Neville will capture or disable bellatrix. He will refrain from killing or torturing her, however. 2. Harry will not use violence (e.g. AK or other curse) to vanquish Voldy. It will be Harry's compassion that disables Voldy 3. Harry's blood has created a weakness or vulnerability in Voldemort. 4. Lupin will betray Harry and the Order 5. After Voldy is vanquished, Snape will be a threat to Harry. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 15:32:35 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:32:35 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : Brave Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171891 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vivamus42" wrote: > > So, what do you all think of "Brave Snape" as a theory? ============================== Lisa: I love it, as it is a theory I've espoused since my very first reading of HBP! ;0) I'm not one to think he loved Lily, though. Not necessarily because it's impossible, but because every theory I read about nearly every character has them in love with Lily, and I just find it hard to believe that she was so beautiful and perfect that everyone loved her, LOL! But that's just me -- and I'm the first to admit it could be true, as well! From colwilrin at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 15:39:40 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:39:40 -0000 Subject: On the lighter side! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171892 As we all try to dodge spoiler...and hide from the media, I thought it would be fun to bring a little levity in here. Does anyone besides me find it highly entertaining, and coincidental that just 1 week prior to DH release...a GIANT SQUID washes up on the shores of Australia? Maybe GG's story is long at last over, and he is in need of a vacation on the sunny shores! Colwilrin From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 15:40:33 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:40:33 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171893 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "becks3uk" wrote: > > I like this theory so much that I am really really hoping I am right > and if not I feel that JKR should change her book to accommodate my > wishes (only joking guys don't shout at me or I will have to go back > under my rock and hide). I understand that ESE Snape supporters > won't be so keen on this idea but I am a DDM Snape girl, always have > been, always will be. (Even after reading the final book. If JKR > says Snape is ESE I will still be of the opinion that she is > mistaken.) ============================== I'm right there with you on this one, Becks! My only addition would be to hope that the wispy phoenix Harry thought he saw arising from Dumbledore's tomb was one final patronus to the Order advising them to trust Snape! From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 15:42:51 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:42:51 -0000 Subject: An idea... In-Reply-To: <897252.47533.qm@web56514.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171894 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dantzel Withers wrote: > > Lisa: > I don't know that any family knows their child is "put down for > Hogwarts" at birth -- we don't know that James & Lily knew about > Harry. We only know that Hagrid knew that Harry was, and likely that > is because Dumbledore told him. > > Dantzel replies: > We know that Riddle was down for Hogwarts since birth - Dumbledore told the head of the orphanage so. > > So that's two sources so far. I would say it is fair to assume that if you are magical, you have been down since birth. =================== Now Lisa: That wasn't my point though. I wasn't disputing the fact that magical children "are" on Hogwarts' admission list since birth, I was saying that we do not know if any FAMILY knows whether their child is on said list. From lmkos at earthlink.net Mon Jul 16 15:45:29 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:45:29 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: References: <007d01c7c680$b8258a50$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171895 >Robin wrote: >47. Who will be using magic late in life: Dudley? Petunia? Mrs Figg? >Filch? >48. Why all the cat references? Who was Mrs Norris? >49. Is Snape an animagus spider? >50. What were Harry's parents jobs/professions? >51. Why did Film 5 include Kreacher when he wasn't needed for the >plot? >52. Does RAB = Regulus Black >53. Was Kreacher the second creature (but not a wizard) that helped >RAB get the locket out of the cave? >54. What happened in the missing 24 hours in Chapter 1 book 1? >55. Why did Harry;s scar hurt when he was so close to Voldy in Books >1-5, but not in Book 6? >56. Is Harry a Horcrux? >57. Why was Harry "in" the snake in Book 5 when Mr. Weasley is >attacked? >58. Who else was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters were killed? >59. How are Horcruxes made? Destroyed? >60. What are the 12 uses of Dragon's blood? > >Robin Lenore: At least one of these has been answered in HBP, ch4 Horace Slughorn: >55. Why did Harry;s scar hurt when he was so close to Voldy in Books >1-5, but not in Book 6? Scholastic, page 59: "So tell me, Harry," said Dumbledore. "Your scar... has it been hurting at all?" "No," he said, "and I've been wondering about that. I thought it would be burning all the time now Voldemort's getting so powerful again." He glanced up at Dumbledore and saw that he was wearing a satisfied expression. "I, on the other hand, thought otherwise," said Dumbledore. "Lored Voldemort has finally realized the dangerous access to his thoughts and feelings you have been enjoying. It appears that he is now employing Occlumency against you." Lenore From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 16:45:02 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:45:02 -0000 Subject: Snape on the tower (Was: The first paragraph of book 7) In-Reply-To: <15201161.1184596197391.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171896 Bart wrote: > First of all, you know quite well that just because they're against Voldemort doesn't make someone good. For example, I am one of what I believe to be a host of fans who dislike Dung Fletcher quite a bit, who was willing to expose Harry to mortal danger to make a quick illegal profit, and, after Harry not only forgave him but helped him hide some of his slimy doings, thanks Harry by stealing from him. So, even if Snape is against Voldemort, it does not make him a good person. > > Now, I'm going to give you a scenario. Please say what Snape SHOULD have done, or why the scneario is invalid: > > Dumbledore was already dying, from whatever gave him the withered arm, or the potion in the cave, or both. He has already gotten Snape to promise that, if the circumstances are right, to kill him. Note that Snape gets all the DE's away from Hogwarts without further damage to anybody else, and has firmed up his position on the side of the DE's. What SHOULD Snape have done, or what is wrong with the above scenario? Support: > > In terms of canon support, we have the argument between Snape and DD overheard by Hagrid, where Snape does not want to do something that Dumbledore is insisting upon, we have the spreading death on DD's wand arm, and we have DD's comment implying that the poison in the cave would kill, slowly)? > > In terms of literary support, the fact that JKR specifically does NOT reveal DD's reasons for COMPLETELY trusting Snape (emphasis mine, note that, just before leaving for the cave, DD at least appears to be on the verge of revealing it to Harry, and then stops) implies that letting the readers know would give away something to the readers. Carol responds: I come not to poke holes in your scenario but to support it. :-) In addition to the points you've made, we have Amycus's comment that DD looks like he's dying, Snape's hesitation before lifting his wand, which he does only after DD begs him to do some unspecified thing ("Severus, please!), the oddness of that AK (it sends DD's body over the battlements and DD dies with his eyes closed), Snape's expression anf (self?) hatred and revulsion echoes Harry's feelings when he forcefeeds the horrible potion to DD, Snape snatches Draco off the tower and makes sure that he's not killed by the DEs for failing in his mission (he and DD have been watching over him and protecting him all year), and Snape not only saves Harry from a Crucio but parries all his curses. Since Snape is very observant and knows about Harry's Invisibility Cloak and deduced that Harry was there, so getting the DEs off the tower prevents Harry from rushing out and being killed by them. To get the DEs off the tower (not to mention keep his cover) Snape had to stay alive, which means that he and no one else had to kill Dumbledore. Also, a normal AK would not have sent DD over the battlements. Fenrir Greyback would have rushed forward to have the dead Dumbledore for afters, Harry would have come rushing out to protect DD's body, and Harry would have been killed. (Snape, being dead from the broken vow, could not have saved him.) Okay, that's how *I* read it. I can't explain the body going over the battlements in any other way. That's not normal for an AK though it sometimes happens with and Impediment Curse or an overly strong Expelliarmus. Neither are open eyes. We don't even see a blinding flash or hear the rushing sound of speeding death. It's as different from the AK that kills Cedric (the light of which Harry can see through closed eyelids!) and the one that kills the spider as it can possibly be. Dumbledore could have called Fawkes to him but he didn't. He must have *chosen* not to. DD tells Harry in CoS, "Help will always come at Hogwarts to those who ask for it." DD didn't ask for it. Why not? He, of all people, knew about the powerful magical protections that Snape mentions in the Occlumency lessons. IMO, it can only be because he knew he was about to die and chose the only form of death that could save Harry and Draco, get the DEs out of Hogwarts, and place Snape in deep cover--having Snape kill him. And Snape, it seems, added the body over the battlements as a means of achieving that end. Over and over again, we've seen events in the HP books misinterpreted by Harry and others. Several times we've seen people (Sirius Black, Frank Bryce, even Harry) wrongly suspected of murder or other dark deeds. I think we're seeing the same thing again in some form with Snape. Yes, DD is dead, but it may not have been the AK (insufficiently willed or false?) that killed him, and even if it was, he wanted Snape and no one else to kill him. Nothing else could have saved Harry and Draco from the DEs and gotten the DEs out of Hogwarts. BTW, I think that DD already knew that Snape would be assigned to kill him before Snape took the Unbreakable Vow. Why else would he try to hire Slughorn to teach Potions, depriving Snape of a job, unless he *already intended* to give Snape the DADA position? (He could have gotten the unaltered memory and/or protected Slughorn in some other way.(And why give Snape the DADA job unless he knows (from Snape) that Draco has been assigned to kill him and suspects, even without the Unbreakable Vow, that Snape will be forced to do exactly that to keep his cover? I agree with Bart that Snape took the only possible action. Had he done nothing or tried to fight the DEs, four people would have died instead of one. And I agree with Vivamus that Snape's rage at being called a coward results from his having just performed the bravest action of his life, knowing that it would be misread by all sides. Carol, who thinks that Snape is crucial to the entire series and hopes (parays!) that he'll somehow survive to tell his tale and become a researcher for St. Mungo's, or better yet, an Unspeakable From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 16:54:55 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:54:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OPEN: ULTIMATE AND LAST BRAGGING RIGHTS BY TIGERUS PATRONUS (REVISED) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <555885.50044.qm@web30003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171897 I'm not sure that my original predictions were recieved so I am redoing them here. I put it as revised due to the fact that I might change some of my predictions.. Compulsory Questions: 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No...he will go beyond the viel but return. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid, definitely Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark, what else could it be? 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? yes b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? yes f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes I must be one of the only people who thinks that Harry will return. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch.. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie McMillian b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? I'm going with Tonks. d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore with Dumbledore and the light side. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Ravenclaw's wand b. Riddle's Diary c. The Ring (Slytherin's) d. The Locket from Grimmauld Place e. In Voldemort f. Hufflepuff's Cup g. Harry Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: a pheonix Boggart: Killing Dumbledore Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The room of Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Petunia will do somethingto help Harry before leaving the books. Perhaps give Harry something that belonged to her sister. 2. Dumbledore's portrait is going to be the answer to whether or not Snape is evil 3. Draco will come to aide Harry in defeat of Voldemort 4. Neville will get some sort of revenge on Bellatrix Lestrange.. 5. There will be an attack at the Weasley wedding of Bill and Fluer (at the reception more than likely). It will be partially caused by something that Percy said or did. --------------------------------- Finding fabulous fares is fun. Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 17:20:24 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:20:24 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: <469b8291.1498600a.6fe0.ffffbe3d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171898 vmonte wrote: > How does being deeply horrible equate to being brave? I think Snape is a coward. some people don't like being told the truth. Especially when it's something negative. > Sherry added: > > I can never accept murder being considered an act of bravery. I think Snape reacted with such rage because he knew he acted out of cowardice. He saved his own neck and murdered an old man, the one person who had stood by him for years. not very brave in my opinion. Carol responds: But what options did Snape have? Even if he had a Bezoar in his pocket and a Bezoar could have saved DD from that horrible potion, he couldn't have given it to Dumbledore or aided him in any way without being killed by the DEs or the UV. Nor could he have fought the DEs without the same consequences. And if he had allowed another DE to kill Dumbledore, failing to keep his vow, he might also have died. Moreover, DD's body would not have gone over the battlements and the DEs would have had no reason to get off the tower. Now, granted, Snape's action does save his own life. But notice that he immediately snatches Draco by the scruff of the neck like a mother cat protecting her kitten and orders the DEs off the tower. Surely, he knows that Harry is hiding under the Invisibility Cloak and will come rushing out unless he hurries them away. As it is, the last DE is leaving when Harry is unfrozen (did DD take that long to die?) and Harry is able to hit him in the back with a Stunning Spell rather than taking on four DEs (not counting Snape, who would be dead, and Draco, whom he would also have seen as an enemy but who would really have been in as much danger as Harry). Claerly, Snape does not *want* to kill Dumbledore. He does not rush in with his wand raised and immediately commit murder. He merely looks around and pushes Draco out of the way, essentially relieving him of the task of committing the murder, which he has already failed to commit, triggering the UV. Snape hears DD speak his name and turns to look at him but does not raise his wand. His expression changes as DD looks into his eyes. Surely Snape reads some sort of message there, an image or emotion that he understands but Harry doesn't? His expression changes, but *he does not raise his wand* until DD says "Severus, please." As I read it, the terrible has to be done or worse things will happen. Snape has to kill Dumbledore, who has no chance of surviving (if Snape or the potion or the ring curse doesn't kill him, the DEs will do it themselves or Crucio Draco into doing it. They can't leave with their mission unaccomplished). If anyone or anything but Snape kills DD, the two boys will be in terrible danger and the DEs will have the free run of Hogwarts. Snape will not be alive to protect the boys or order them out. We see from the attempted Crucio, the broken Gryffindor hourglass (symbolizing blood?), Fenrir Greyback's attack on Harry, and Hagrid's burning hut the bare beginnings of what they would do if they were not ordered off the grounds. I know that the simple answer is that Snape should have died defending Dumbledore and the boys, but what good would it have done? DD would have died anyway, Draco whom he had sworn to protect would have been killed, and Harry, the only person who can vanquish Voldemort, would have been killed or captured. (He couldn't outduel Snape, much less four DEs at once, one of them a known child killer who would have loved to eat him.) As for "deeply horrible," what else is JKR supposed to say about him without giving away her plot? She's talking about his teaching methods and his bitterness and his sarcasm, not his loyalties, given the context of the quotation. And note that she also says, more than once, that there's more to Snape than meets the eye. That probably means more than meets Harry's eye, since that's the point of view we see him from in most of the books. Carol, who agrees with vmonte that people don't like unpalateable truths and who expects a roar of outrage from the Snape haters when Snape is revealed as DDM From chaomath at hitthenail.com Mon Jul 16 16:50:36 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:50:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <70559DEA-3105-4962-924F-E5E4F0E656D7@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171899 On Jul 13, 2007, at 7:52 PM, va32h wrote: > va32h: > I think that *is* how Voldemort brought Snape into the fold, > and that at some point Snape realized that he'd been duped, that > Voldemort tells every Death Eater a different story, designed to > appeal to that person's circumstances, desires, and beliefs (which is > why he tells Harry that wearing one's heart on one's sleeve is a huge > mistake. > > Actually, I think that's why Snape turned spy for the Order. Angry at > Voldemort for fooling him (and angry at himself for being fooled) > Snape undertakes the ultimate revenge by tricking the one who tricked > him. Maeg writes: Interesting theory, and the recruiting technique certainly fits with Voldemort's amorality. I've always harbored a suspicion (fantasy?) that Voldemort seduced Snape by offering him revenge for his father's ill-treatment of him and his mother. This supposes that we saw Snape and his mother and father in the pensieve in HPB; recent discussion suggests other possibilities, but I'll stick with the most obvious explanation (Occam's Razor, and all that). Let's suggest that this memory was but one in a long childhood of abuse and neglect by his father. He hates his father for this, but is unable to stand up to him (hence the cowering child) to protect himself or his mother. This pattern continues through adulthood, so even when Snape has the ability to stop his father (Tobias), he can't do the deed. Voldemort uses that against Snape, offering to kill his father for him. Snape eventually agrees, turning to the "dark side". Is it just Voldemort's persuasive powers, or does something happen to make Snape agree? His mother's death, perhaps? I would think that Voldemort doesn't kill Snape's father immediately; he's the kind to hold onto this kind of power for as long as possible. So maybe Snape is a death eater for a while before Voldemort acts. I envision a horrific scene where Voldemort captures, tortures and kills Tobias as Severus watches. This is the point where Severus turns from the "dark side". He gets his fondest wish, revenge for all the pain and suffering inflicted by one who should love him, and he finally sees it for the truly screwed up thing that revenge is. I see Snape as honest and uncompromising in recognizing his own mistake; but in typically Snape fashion, he doesn't immediately lash out at Voldemort. (After all, some part of him is pleased at daddy's demise.) He puts his brain to work & comes up with a plan to make himself look good (playing the hero spy for the Order) and to get him out of the mess (becoming a Death Eater). This also squares with the idea that, until Dumbledore, Snape has never killed anyone. Despite being a venemous old git with questionable morals and abusive tendencies, I don't believe we know that Snape's ever committed that ultimate sin before the Tower at the end of HPB. (And a lot of people seem to think that's open for debate, too.) Of course, this doesn't jibe with what's been said about Snape's motivations; that he only began to spy for the Order after realizing that Voldemort acted upon the prophecy he (Snape) overheard by killing the Potters and attempting to kill baby Harry. But that explanation never worked for me; at least, it doesn't yet. We'll see after book 7. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From chaomath at hitthenail.com Mon Jul 16 17:14:55 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:14:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : Brave Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171900 On Jul 16, 2007, at 10:32 AM, Lisa wrote: > I'm not one to think he loved Lily, though. Not necessarily because > it's impossible, but because every theory I read about nearly every > character has them in love with Lily, and I just find it hard to > believe that she was so beautiful and perfect that everyone loved her, > LOL! But that's just me -- and I'm the first to admit it could be > true, as well! My thoughts exactly. In fact, it's not just every theory that seems to think this of Lily Potter -- JKR's dropped some hints that she was universally liked and could do no wrong. Only the fact that she was't terribly nice to Snape in his "worst memory" saves her from being a complete Mary Sue. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From tbookworm5 at hotmail.co.uk Mon Jul 16 17:37:56 2007 From: tbookworm5 at hotmail.co.uk (moblib564) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:37:56 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171901 "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." (Tracy Tunstall.) 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid most prominent but also Percy, Kreacher, Tonks, Peter, Luna & possibly a few more. We have been promised a "bloodbath" 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? NO b. Draco? NO c. Hermione? YES d. Luna? YES e. Ron? YES f. Neville? YES g. Ginny? YES 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? RON (mirror of erised) b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Kingsley (Voldy will be gone at end, so no curse!) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Against Voldermort 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary (desytroyed) b. Ring (destroyed) c. Locket (Aberforth has this, took it from Mundungus in Hogsmeade) d. Hufflepuff cup e. Ravenclaw wand from shop window f. Gryffindor sword g. In Voldermort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? No patronus, don't think he has enough happiness in him Boggart=Voldermort victorious Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Unselfish love like Harry showed at the age of 11 when he looked in the mirror & only desired Voldermort's defeat, Dumbledore said he was unique and that is a power Voldy can never comprehend. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Snape is working for good and will survive but throughout the book it will appear otherwise. 2. Aberforth is the order member we have met but not in detail. He has the locket. He will help Harry, he also has a conection to Snape. 3. Bill & Hermione (ancient runes anyone?) will help with curse breaking. 4. Harry will go through the veil with Voldermort but only Harry will return & we will get a final goodbye to Sirrius (sob! sob!!!) 5. Ron will appear to be fatally injured in a sacrifice for Harry (as per the chess game) but will survive & enable Harry to go on. Peter will pay his life debt (Fernrir?) and Kreacher will be forced to reveal that he went with Regulus to retrieve the locket, he will go with Harry but may betray him to the baddies as in HBP. I'd love a Kreacher/Dobby final showdown. Finally, because I couldn't resist, I am hoping that the last chapter (not epilogue) will be called "The Boy Who Lived" Thank you, that was fun Tracy, de-lurking for the first & possibly last time in years. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 17:43:25 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:43:25 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171902 I notice that the vast majority of posters don't think that Nagini is a Horcrux, possibly because they're sold on the Harry!Horcrux hypothesis. Without getting back into that argument (I'll just say that I think DD is right about Nagini and that if Harry or his scar were a Horcrux, DD would have said so), I want to ask what people think Nagini *is* (aside from being a "dirty great snake"). Is she Voldemort's familiar? Just his ugly pet, who conveniently provides venom when it's needed as a potion ingredient? How can he possess her without doing lasting harm to her if she's not a Horcrux? Is she, erm, a garbage disposal for the bodies of his victims? (LV offered her Wormtail, retracted the offer, and offered her Harry. Perhaps she ate Bertha Jorkins, whose body was never found?) Is Nagini evil in her own right even though she's a snake, not a human being with free will, or just too dangerous to live? (Surely, she can't be allowed to roam the WW freely after LV is destroyed and I can't see her as an attraction at the London Zoo.) I think that, Horcrux or no Horcrux, Harry will slay her as he slew the Basilisk, with the Sword of Gryffindor. Parseltongue will come in handy as a diversionary tactic, and maybe Ron will be standing by with some rue. (Okay, that last remark is facetious.) Carol, who also wonders whether Quirrell smuggled Voldemort into Britain while LV was possessing Nagini (and, if not, how did Q do it since LV wasn't yet inside his head?) From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 17:49:22 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:49:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171903 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: As it is, the last DE is > leaving when Harry is unfrozen (did DD take that long to die?) =================================== Lisa: I think all those things referenced happened in practically a split second, and only when the last Death Eater is leaving does Harry _realize_ that he can move. Since I'm firmly of the belief that Dumbledore is dead, I think Harry _could_ move the second the AK hit Dumbledore, but he was in shock and didn't realize he could. From lkotur at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 16:37:26 2007 From: lkotur at yahoo.com (Damit Lazarus) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:37:26 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Harry Potter Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171904 Simple prediction based on Pareto's Principle 80% of the readers will love the ending while 20% will hate it or 80% will hate the ending while 20% will love it. Actually I believe Snape will turn out to be a good guy and has a hand in saving Harry. Does anyone else think that Harry's father James was a bit arrogant in his youth? Damit Lazarus From hitchykoo at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 17:43:27 2007 From: hitchykoo at yahoo.com (hitchykoo) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:43:27 -0000 Subject: More details on my HP predictions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171905 One of the horcruxes is an item that belonged to the founder of Ravenclaw, possibly a beat-up-looking silver teapot. It is in the careful keeping of Kreacher. Harry will learn this and be overheard by Dobby. To Harry's dismay, Dobby will take it upon himself to destroy this horcrux. The valiant Dobby will succeed in doing this, but at the ultimate cost, as he and Kreacher will fight to the death (both will perish). In recognition of this sacrifice, a law will be enacted requiring equal treatment for house elves and the official end of the practice of slavery. Another horcrux is a portrait painting of one of the departed headmasters, this one from Slytherin. Dumbledore, speaking from his frame, will give Harry a cryptic clue about watching out for a certain headmaster, but Harry won't understand the meaning, i.e., it's not the person depicted who is not to be trusted, but rather the painting itself. Neville will be the one to learn the truth, of course by accident. His gran will send him a plant previously unknown to wizarding science. After handling this plant, Neville will pull from his pocket the slip of paper his mother gave him when he visited St. Mungo's. He will have forgotten he still has this paper. But the plant's juice on his hand will cause a secret message to be revealed. Neville is astounded, as this not only means that his parents are merely play-acting at being insane, and they have discovered one of the horcruxes. With Neville's help, Harry destroys the painting. The boys can't persuade Hogwarts officials of the dangerous nature of the painting, and they get into huge trouble, of course, for vandalizing school property. The Deathly Hallows is intended to be a public consecration of Lord Voldemort as a godlike high priest of death, invested by the Evil One, the ultimate unseen spirit of evil in the world. It will be revealed that the name "Voldemort" means "Will of Death"; upon his apotheosis of sorts, Tom Riddle will be able to cause the death of anyone to whom he merely wills it. This would be the highest power ever held by a wizard. The penultimate horcrux is Voldmort's wand. When Harry challenges Voldemort to a wand duel, he isn't aware of this. But during the duel, a flash of magic comes from the crowd, and the wand is knocked from Voldemort's hand and a woman's voice cries out to Harry to destroy the wand, as it is a horcrux. Which Harry will do. The mystery woman is Petunia Dursley. She long ago received a cryptic letter from Lily, who told her about Tom Riddle's wand and until recently didn't understand its meaning. She has learned, and now knows that the time has come to use her knowledge ? and bone up on her spells. She has defied Vernon and Dudley's pleas not to attend the Deathly Hallows. Upon knocking the wand out of Volemort's grasp, Petunia will be seized by Death Eaters. Thanks to ensuing events, Petunia will survive, to the vast relief of Vernon and Dudley. She will be welcomed back into the wizarding world and will be offered the position of new instructor of Defense Against the Dark Arts. To the dismay of Vernon and Dudley, when last seen she will be seriously considering accepting the post. She would no doubt be the first successful such instructor. Harry accepts the offer to be the youngest-ever headmaster of Hogwarts. He will offer the humbled Draco, now firmly on the side of good, the position of professor of Potions. Draco will be honored to take over for the now-revered departed Snape. Harry will insist that the blushing Neville become professor of Herbology. It's appropriate, as Neville has scientifically documented the mysterious plant from his gran, and it will be named after him: Revelaticus Longbottomii. hitchykoo From augustinapeach at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 17:52:52 2007 From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:52:52 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171906 Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by Augustina Peach I don't have time to go find support for any of these theories, and it probably makes no difference anyway, ha ha. Just had to join in on the fun of the last great speculation! Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Not really sure ? I can think of a good case for several of the characters to be killed off, but I'll say Hagrid. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? A lovely signed photo of Voldemort 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes ? but he won't go to classes. b. Draco? no c. Hermione? yes d. Luna? yes e. Ron? yes f. Neville? yes g. Ginny? yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? None ? Bill and Fleur will have to postpone their wedding while he recovers 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron (he saw it in the Mirror of Eirsed!) b. Head Girl? Hermoine c. DADA Instructor? Maybe there won't be one d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary - destroyed b. ring -- destroyed c. Locket ? in Kreacher's closet d. Hufflepuff cup - maybe at Malfoys' house? (see below) e. Nagini f. in Voldemort g. I think Voldemort plans to use Harry's murder to complete the seventh Horcrux, which is why he's so keen on killing Harry himself (of course, it could just be that he wants revenge) In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus ? Oh, why not go with everyone else's idea? It's a bat. Boggart ? a crowd of people laughing at him Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Unconditional love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Harry will finally have to read "Hogwarts, a History." 2. Neville knows much more about this situation than anyone realizes. He will be instrumental in Harry's final victory. 3. Draco will change sides. I can't figure out what would motivate him to do so ? but he has to do it so the "Hogwarts unity" can be achieved. 4. One of the Horcruxes will be somewhere in the Malfoy's house. Either Kreacher will retrieve it on Harry's orders (assuming Harry inherits control of Kreacher), or Draco will give it to Harry. 5. Harry will sacrifice himself as a shield to save someone during the final battle, but the very act of selfless sacrifice will render Voldemort utterly impotent, meaning Harry actually doesn't have to die. Voldemort will dissolve like Sauron does in LOTR, ha ha. 6. The final battle between Harry and Voldemort will be at Godric Hollow. 7. I have a feeling something will happen to Ron. I just think Hermione (reason) and Luna (faith) are going to be more important to Harry in the long run than loyal Ron. Even Neville seems to have more usefulness as a plot device than Ron. Sorry. From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jul 16 17:55:19 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions Message-ID: <12508739.1184608519778.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171907 From: Goddlefrood >One that I note that was not on any of the suggestions so far is >the little matter of Grindelwald being defeated by Dumbledore. >This would also lead on to expecting that all the dates in canon >and their significance being explained. I expect an answer to >neither of these two before DH is finished. If, however, >Grindelwald does somehow feature then he has at least been >set up within the so far published books. Bart: A prominent science fiction writer (I THINK it was Ted Sturgeon) found out the hard way that if you want to write a series, you have to contend with increasing expectations. The story was about a bear with a human child-level intelligence and his best friend, the scientist who is working with him, at an experimental laboratory. In the first story in the series, the bear saves the world from being conquered by an evil scientist at the lab. The series only lasted 3 stories (in the last, the bear went from saving the world to saving his friend's job). I suspect that JKR saw the same sort of problem. Here she has a story of a child growing into a young man who saves the world from the greatest threat it has ever seen. How the hell are you going to top THAT? In the Oz series, although Dorothy managed to get rid of no fewer than 2 major powers, they were a continuing problem, and not an immediate threat, so the Oz books could go on with smaller, but more immediate, problems. Consider: HARRY POTTER AND THE GNOME OF STUBBORNNESS. Harry Potter decides to get rid of the lawn gnomes outside his house. A great conflict ensues when he finds one with enough intelligence to keep on coming back, bringing all his friends with him. The song, "Extraordinary" from PIPPIN keeps coming to mind. The bridge, alone, sums it up quite nicely: "If the moat won't stop leaking And the goat won't stop shrieking And the griffin keeps losing its hair If the west wing is rotting And our best wine is clotting Well, I'm terribly sorry but I don't care" Now, if JKR leaves it alone, then she won't fall into the same trap as Marion Zimmer Bradley with the fanfic (MZB allowed fanfic with her Darkover series, until a fanfic author sued her over resemblance between a novel and the fan's story; the result was that the novel never got published, and MZB stopped giving permission for fanfic). Now, there is another possibility: Harry attempts interdimensional transport, and finds himself (and perhaps some cohorts) hopping from one dimension to another where he is needed to stop some disaster. This could lead to a fanfic favorite, intersection with other series: Harry Potter and the Unnamed Doctor: Harry Potter materializes on the Tardis, where the Daleks have almost taken over. Harry Potter and the Witches of Oz: With the offices of Wicked Witch of the East and West still vacant, Hermoine and Ginny are thought to be the perfect candidates. Harry Potter and the Wizard Assassin: Harry Potter ends up in an alternative England, where a pair of assassins with their own mystical powers, one American and one Korean, are charged with killing all the wizards. Harry Potter and the Myth Alignments: Harry finds himself in a bazaar where it appears creatures from all dimensions gather; he joins up with a group where nobody is quite what they seem to be, and everybody calls him a "Potter", even before he's been introduced. Bart From doliesl at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:19:21 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : Brave Snape Message-ID: <869624.86932.qm@web82215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171908 On Jul 16, 2007, at 10:32 AM, Lisa wrote: > I'm not one to think he loved Lily, though. Not necessarily because > it's impossible, but because every theory I read about nearly every > character has them in love with Lily, and I just find it hard to > believe that she was so beautiful and perfect that everyone loved her, > LOL! But that's just me -- and I'm the first to admit it could be > true, as well! Maeg My thoughts exactly. In fact, it's not just every theory that seems to think this of Lily Potter -- JKR's dropped some hints that she was universally liked and could do no wrong. Only the fact that she was't terribly nice to Snape in his "worst memory" saves her from being a complete Mary Sue. Me: After the incredibly awesome & beautiful & mega popular Ginny-sue in HBP, why wouldn't Lily be pretty much the same? Everyone's in love with her, didn't JKR said this herself "she's a popular girl." Of course Snape, like all the other male speices (including mauraders probably), loves/admire/worship her but can't have her. But yeah I'm totally convinced on the "don't called me a coward --> reveal to be really brave' and "I'll never forgive him --> I totally forgive him" setup and paid off in Book 7, JKR is just that obvious to me. D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:23:12 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:23:12 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171909 Carol wrote: I know that the simple answer is that Snape should have died defending Dumbledore and the boys, but what good would it have done? DD would have died anyway, Draco whom he had sworn to protect would have been killed, and Harry, the only person who can vanquish Voldemort, would have been killed or captured. (He couldn't outduel Snape, much less four DEs at once, one of them a known child killer who would have loved to eat him.) vmonte responds: I'm glad Lily didn't decide to just step aside and let Voldemort kill Harry. I mean, why would she step in front of Harry unless she thought he could die? And surely she knew that stepping in front of him would sentence her to death as well. But she did it anyway. From chaomath at hitthenail.com Mon Jul 16 18:24:40 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:24:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Worst memory/ MWPP vs. Snivellus WAS:Re: Reason Dumbledore trusted Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171910 On Jul 15, 2007, at 2:01 AM, Charles Walker Jr wrote: > Why was that Snape's *worst* memory? I have several reasons that I > think could be valid: 1.(assuming DDM) He realized that he insulted > someone who tried to defend him in the worst way available to him. > 2.(works for any Snape) That was one of the few times that he did > *not* actually deserve what was being done to him. (excluding the > prank) 3. (again assuming DDM) The use of sectumsempra on James > showing a descent into the dark arts. 4. As has been stated before, > his powerlessness in that situation, which once again works for any > Snape. How about the option that we didn't see the whole memory? In rereading it I can't tell if that was the end of the memory or if present-day Snape interrupted Harry -- before his memory-self was stripped naked by James. If we didn't see the whole memory, then that complicates things. Adult!Snape is desperate that Harry tell no one about what he saw, which seems to rule out number 2 above. This memory is something that he's deeply ashamed of -- or perhaps deeply frightened of. I don't think insulting Lily is enough to qualify; at least, not uless we speculate a lot about their relationship and subsequent events. Time will tell on that one. Either 3 or 4 works, and possibly both are correct. Margaret martin at hitthenail.com Design for a Better World www.hitthenail.com From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:28:57 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:28:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] DH cover. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <90092.96663.qm@web30012.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171911 Alan: I have just seen the "front cover" of the 7th book - http://www.beyondho gwarts.com/ harry-potter/ gallery.dhusfull .html and I noticed there appears to be several hooded figures surrounding LV and HP. Could they be death eaters? Will some of them #cough#snape& wormtail# cough# have to help Harry escape? I have to say, I don't fancy Harry's chances very much if they are death eaters. Melanie: I think that they are death eaters. This may be movie visuals playing a part into this but that is what they looked like in the movies. I suppose it could be Voldemort. However, I do not think that at least the red-eyed one is a death eater. I would think for the most part they would have thier normal eye colors. It is only Voldemort with his non-human eyes. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:32:37 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:32:37 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171912 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > I'm glad Lily didn't decide to just step aside and let Voldemort kill > Harry. I mean, why would she step in front of Harry unless she thought > he could die? And surely she knew that stepping in front of him would > sentence her to death as well. But she did it anyway. > =================================== I've never really understood why she didn't grab Baby Harry and disapparate. I'd rather live life on the run than hand my baby over to what could mean certain death. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:30:53 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:30:53 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : Brave Snape In-Reply-To: <869624.86932.qm@web82215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171913 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doliesl at ..." wrote: > After the incredibly awesome & beautiful & mega popular Ginny-sue in HBP, why wouldn't Lily be pretty much the same? Everyone's in love with her, didn't JKR said this herself "she's a popular girl." Of course Snape, like all the other male speices (including mauraders probably), loves/admire/worship her but can't have her. ========================= Lisa: I think the generalization is simply unbelieveable. All the rest of the characters have their flaws to which we can relate, but not these girls. I was "a popular girl" in high school, too, but that sure didn't translate to "everyone" being in love with me ... in fact, far from it. I think JKR's categorization with no real follow-up about their characters in the books creates very flat characters -- shocking, compared to how well she's fleshed out the rest of the characters. From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jul 16 18:14:30 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:14:30 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : Brave Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5C645FFA-B1FD-4A23-B26C-63EF25E78EF2@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171914 Vivamus: > He fully expects to die doing what he believes is right, damned > forever with no redemption by everyone on both sides, including Harry. > It is probably the bravest act by any character in the entire > series, for he cannot even take comfort in being called a hero when he > dies. Jadon: Is that bravery or self-sacrifice for a noble cause? It _involves_ bravery - I don't think Snape can be called a coward for an instant; whatever side he's on, he's in the thick of it. Plenty of enemies, and he's just killed the wizard who believed in him. The coward stays out of the war, the Gryffindor scrapes through to victory at great personal risk, the Slytherin operates by preference from a safe distance, but he'll walk in and sacrifice everything to the cause if he considers it necessary. Consideration, planning is the key. Slytherin doesn't require glory; it requires results. It might involve what a Gryffindor would call cowardice (and all Harry's doing in this scene is trying to get a rise out of Snape; Snape thinks he has better options), or it might involve outright daring, but it's unlikely to be showy, and I this is one thing Snape is very touchy about: he does believe, to whatever extent, that Harry is arrogant and likes to show off. Perhaps he really does want the recognition Harry gets, feeling he deserves the glory. He doesn't appreciate that luck is a quality of Harry's as putting effort in and working for results is a quality of his own. If Snape does have a plan to save the world, where does that leave Harry, our designated hero? If there's a possibility that Snape is _competing_ with Harry to save the world first, he has to fail; it's unthinkable that anyone other than Harry should defeat LV, and that would be too tragic an ending: sacrifice everything, all for nothing, because Harry's just defeated the Dark Lord on sheer unworked-for brilliance. Carol: > I know that the simple answer is that Snape should have died defending > Dumbledore and the boys, but what good would it have done? Jadon: Exactly. That's the big difference between the way Snape thinks and the way Harry thinks. No-one doubts that Harry means well, but if anyone other than Harry used Harry's methods, LV would already be directing the WW, over the bodies of all his opponents. From lmkos at earthlink.net Mon Jul 16 18:36:06 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:36:06 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOST In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171915 >For people who have NOT YET ENTERED: I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." LMKOS (I also haven't read very many of the Bragging Contest entries-- there have been so many.) >Compulsory Questions (50 points total): >If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, >write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters >or characteristics of new character for full credit. > >1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? NO > >2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? YES > >3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent >character to die and stay dead? HAGRID > >4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio >were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that >scared him? The Dark Mark on his arm > >5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a >student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend >the classes (answer yes or no for each): >a. Harry? NO >b. Draco? NO >c. Hermione? YES >d. Luna? YES >e. Ron? YES >f. Neville? YES >g. Ginny? YES > >6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during >the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill & Fleur > >7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first >time "very late in life?" Arabella Figg > >8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: >a. Head Boy? Ernie >b. Head Girl? Hermione >c. DADA Instructor? Tonks >d. Potions Master or Mistress? Prof. Slughorn >e. Headmaster or -mistress? Prof. McGonagall > >9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? >Dumbledore/Harry/the Order > >10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or >less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. >Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes >must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul >pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the >bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) >a. in Voldemort >b. Nagini >c. the Ring of Gaunt >d. Slytherin Locket >e. Hufflepuff Cup >f. something found at Godric's Hollow >g. Diary of Tom Riddle > >In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have >sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two >alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 >and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will >be used as tiebreakers. > >Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? >Patronus: Raven Boggart: himself shamed, humiliated, embarrassed >Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of >Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The Room of Love > >Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): >Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. >-- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your >score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Hermione's Runes-reading skills will play an important part at some critical juncture. It will occur either during one of the horcrux searches or to obtain entry to a locked door (more likely). 2. Lucius will be killed by LV, and this will be a major factor in Draco's decision to fight for the good side. 3. Neville will accomplish some deed which will be critical to the successful outcome, and he will be a hero in his own right. Neville and Luna will marry and have some very strange but talented children. 4. The Room of Love will work in a similar way to the Room of Requirement, i.e., when Harry is ready, when he is prepared, he will be able to enter. It will require a pure focus or something like a Knock spell ("Knock, and the door shall be opened" kind of thing). But the spell will work only for one whose will is aligned with higher order Love. 5. Mundungus will be revealed to be in possession of the Slytherin locket which had been at Grimmauld Place. (He either took it while filching other items or he was told by DD to get it. After all, that is one of his great skills.) Additional Predictions for fun (or anguish if they are direct hits): 6. We will find out that LV was planning to make another horcrux from the Ravenclaw Wand. Anticipating that likelihood, DD has placed Ollivander and the wand in hiding to protect both. One less horcrux for Harry to have to deal with! 7. We will learn specific information which will clarify the wizard lines of Godric Gryffindor and R. Ravenclaw. Dumbledore and Harry are both heirs of Gryffindor. 8. Goblins, giants, house elves, and some dragons which Charlie has successfully trained will be active in the "great war". Most of the giants will be fighting on the DE side, but Grawp will fight at Hagrid's side. 9. We will see a resolution to Snape's tangled life and he will not die, because (1) he has too much to offer for the future of the WW; and (2) he is a character perfectly set up for redemption (along with Draco). I see Snape as representing the unhealed, unloved, rejected shadow self which lies in every human psyche. Whether or not JKR decides to have him die, the relationship between him and Harry MUST be healed in order for Harry to accomplish his life mission. (OK, sorry, not very brief.) 10. Hagrid will lose his life while saving someone else's life... Grawp, or Ron. We will see Ron in St. Mungo's undergoing a desperate effort by others to heal him. 11. Draco and Harry will develop a new understanding and respect between them, but will never become real friends despite their searing war experiences. --------- From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Mon Jul 16 18:38:00 2007 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:38:00 -0400 Subject: In the end... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C995EF91EE0767-1EE8-16A8@FWM-D21.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171916 I've been thinking about this for some time while reading the list.? At the end of the day, I'll still believe what I always have about the characters.? Even with the Epilogue telling us the rest of their lives, I think I'll still believe what I believe.? What if ESE!Lupin doesn't happen?? Does that mean he *really* wasn't ESE or that we just didn't find out he was ESE?? If Severus lives but stays with LV, is he really evil or is he trapped now?? I think JKR can tell me flat out: "And Severus Snape was an evil, evil, evil man and stayed with the Dark Lord forever," and I'll still have some doubt about it. Why? Because the characters aren't just hers anymore.? Since we've had years between the books, the characters have grown in our minds.? We give them backstories and lives -- sometimes even when the book doesn't match up (I still think Remus and Sirius are a couple).? Just look at all the people who don't believe Dumbledore is dead even though JKR has said it numerous times. Just because it's her ending doesn't mean it's ours. Oryomai ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Mon Jul 16 18:42:17 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:42:17 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171917 > Carol wrote: > I know that the simple answer is that Snape should have died defending > Dumbledore and the boys, but what good would it have done? DD would > have died anyway, Draco whom he had sworn to protect would have been > killed, and Harry, the only person who can vanquish Voldemort, would > have been killed or captured. (He couldn't outduel Snape, much less > four DEs at once, one of them a known child killer who would have > loved to eat him.) > > vmonte responds: > I'm glad Lily didn't decide to just step aside and let Voldemort kill > Harry. I mean, why would she step in front of Harry unless she thought > he could die? And surely she knew that stepping in front of him would > sentence her to death as well. But she did it anyway. > colebiancardi: at that time, however, Harry wasn't marked by LV. So, to Lily, he was just her little boy, not the savior of the WW. Dumbledore has always told Harry that he, Harry, will defeat LV. Dumbledore states that his own life is not that important and he is not afraid of death. DD lived a long life - not saying that makes it *right* or as an *excuse*, but one can see a person trying to protect someone who is younger than they are(in the case of Lily & Harry and Snape & Draco - not to mention all of the Hogwarts students and Harry himself). We don't know what DD and Snape discussed in the woods or at any time. But the fact that DD gave Snape the DADA job after DD *knew* it was cursed for the instructor, tells me that DD already *knew* his days were numbered. The Horocrux Ring and the blacked hand are great clues to that, as well as DD always seeming tired. Whether DD & Snape discussed this right after the Ring incident and before the UV was taken, or after the UV, I don't know if we will ever find out - I hope we do. Is Snape brave? I've always thought so, as I believe him to be DDM!Snape. Snape has never married (as far as we know) and does not seem to have a current love. He wraps himself in a persona that is nasty and sarcastic - I do think this is *part* of his persona, but many nasty & sarcastic people do manage a way to find love with others. I think the reason why this is that Snape's role as spy prevents him from having a *life* - He really doesn't have one. We see him living in the past, with his hatred and biases. I think he does that because to open himself up, to be *nice* like Lupin, to allow people to get close to him, only endangers those people. LV would take them out in an instant if he ever found out about Snape's betrayal to him. I DO hope in DH we get a scene where LV *gets* it - he is in the same room as Snape and the revelation that Snape is Dumbledore's Man, through and through, is made clear to him. That will be a rockin' scene, IMHO. Even more rockin' is that if Harry is in that room as well, and Harry finally understands Snape is loyal to Dumbledore and is on the same side as Harry. colebiancardi (of course, this all hinges on DDM!Snape) From jenni.merrifield at jamm.com Mon Jul 16 18:42:47 2007 From: jenni.merrifield at jamm.com (Jenni A. M. Merrifield) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:42:47 -0000 Subject: "the other" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171918 I had a thought about the wording in part of Trelawney's original prophecy this morning and wanted to find out if it had been discussed here before. If it has, could someone direct me to the best threads on the subject. If not, I'd appreciate your thoughts, in these last 4-1/2 days before DH-day. In the past Jo has said that she worded the prophecy "very carefully", suggesting that a key to understanding it is in how we interpret the words. One theory along these lines is that Snape might be "the one" identified by "The one with the power to vanquish the dark lord approaches" because Snape was "approaching the door" at that moment (personally, I don't hold this to be so, based on the last line of the prophecy, "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies" as Snape was born in the past and his birthday is in January anyway) My "theory" (if you can call it that) concerns the interpretation of the words in the fourth line of the prophecy: "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...", specifically, the identity of "the other". My first assumption is that the "either" and the "neither" in this line refer to "the Dark Lord" and "he" from the previous line ("And the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not..."), and that "he" refers to "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord" from the first line ("The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches"). Not an unreasonable conclusion with which most other interpretations appear to agree. The second assumption that is generally made is that the phrase "the other," where it appears in this line, refers to one or the other of the two individuals who are refered to by the noun either or neither. Accepting this assumption, the general meaning of the fourth line would appear to be as follows: Either one or the other of the two individuals identified by "either"/"neither" must die at the hand of the other one of those two individuals because, ultimately, both of these two individuals will be unable to continue living as long as the other one of those two individuals also continues to survive. My thought, however, is that, perhaps, this assumption is false. Perhaps, "the other" refers to a third individual, that is, someone who is not "the Dark Lord" or "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord". If this assumption is accepted instead, the general meaning of the fourth line would appear to be as follows: Either one or the other of the two individuals identified by "either"/"neither" must die at the hand of a third individual identified by "the other" and neither of these two individuals will be able to continue living as long as this third individual survives. It isn't quite as neat as the former - for one thing, if "neither" one of the first two can live if the third one survives, why is it that only "either" of the first two must be killed by the third? I submit that it's possible that "either" could be read as an inclusive OR ("this OR that OR both") rather than an exclusive OR ("this OR that") but I readily admit that it is a bit of a stretch to read it that way nor do I like the thought that Harry AND Voldemort will be killed by a third party! Alternatively, it is possible that there are some aspects of the situation that will occur that the prophecy leaves unvoiced - for example, perhaps the prophecy itself is assuming that the third individual will die after killing either of the first two, thereby allowing the other one of the first two individuals to live on. In any case, while not a pat answer it doesn't seem like a completely improbable interpretation, so I thought I'd throw it out there. Of course, if it is correct that raises one new question: WHO is "the other" if it is a third person? A couple of possibilities immediately spring to mind: * Neville (as the other who was "born as the seventh month dies") * Snape (given the complexity of his character and the ambiguous status of his loyalty) Well, that's it. Have at it. :-D :-j(enni) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:43:36 2007 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:43:36 -0000 Subject: DH predictions contest: REVISED Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171919 Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie McMillan b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? Viktor Krum d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horace Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore's Man through and through 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's Diary b. Riddle's Head Boy Badge c. Slytherin's Locket d. Slytherin's Ring e. Hufflepuff's Cup f. Harry's Scar g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's patronus is probably a bat and his boggart is probably a Voldemort who has become aware of Snape's treachery against him. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Current Off-Limit Spoilers: -- Predictions that describe any the covers are worth 0 points unless they include specific information not obvious in the cover. -- SPOILER: Kreacher will be in DH. (David Yates, interview.) (Note: because we are pretty sure that Kreacher will figure at least somewhat prominently in DH, any predictions about his presence on a cover will also be worth 0 points.) -- The probable identity of "R.A.B." as stumbled around by JKR during Leaky / Mugglenet interview will earn 0 points. -- Predictions based on "Gabriel the Hacker" are allowed but we will laugh at you when they're wrong. -- Anything stupidly obvious (e.g., Harry will turn 17, Ron and Hermione will date, Voldemort is evil, someone will perform magic,) will be worth 0 points, at most. Negative points are possible. -- "Negative" predictions, i.e., "The Centaurs will *not* come skipping into Hogwarts offering free pony rides," will receive no credit. -- Only your first 5 predictions will be evaluated and included in your score. Extra predictions may be marveled at but will not be scored. 1. Someone who we have thought to be dead, (Regulus Black or Amelia Bones), will be revealed to be alive. 2. Neville will somehow defeat/kill Bellatrix. 3. Time Travel will be important: not used again within the time frame of DH, but revealed to have been used in the past 4. Ravenclaw and Slytherin will unite, Hufflepuff and Gryffindor will unite, as a result of a decreased student population 5. Fred and George Weasley will join the Order and be killed in the course of their duties. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:50:34 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:50:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171920 Carol earlier: > I know that the simple answer is that Snape should have died defending Dumbledore and the boys, but what good would it have done? DD would have died anyway, Draco whom he had sworn to protect would have been killed, and Harry, the only person who can vanquish Voldemort, would have been killed or captured. (He couldn't outduel Snape, much less four DEs at once, one of them a known child killer who would have loved to eat him.) > >vmonte replied: > I'm glad Lily didn't decide to just step aside and let Voldemort kill Harry. I mean, why would she step in front of Harry unless she thought he could die? And surely she knew that stepping in front of him would sentence her to death as well. But she did it anyway. > Carol responds: Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds as if you think that Snape should have just stepped in front of Dumbledore and said, "Don't kill Dumbledore. Kill me instead." Somehow, I don't think his sacrifice would have given the dying Dumbledore the blood protection that Harry's mother's death gave Harry, who shares her blood. Lily's sacrifice is depicted as being unique. It could not be recreated by Snape stepping in front of Dumbledore (or Harry stepping in front of Ron, for that matter). In any case, DD was already dying, and, as I interpret his words, he wanted Snape to kill him. How was DD, wandless and too weak even to stand, supposed to protect Harry and Draco from the DEs and get the DEs out of Hogwarts? I doubt that they would have obeyed him. Snape was the only one who could save the boys. Nothing could have saved the dying DD, not with the DEs present, ready to kill DD if Draco or Snape didn't, and no time for Snape to figure out what the green poison was and brew the appropriate antidote. Carol, noting that if blocking an AK aimed at someone else were all it took to create blood protection and transfer the powers of the caster to the would-be killer, Lily's sacrifice would not be unique to the Potterverse From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 18:59:25 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:59:25 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171921 Carol wrote: Somehow, I don't think his sacrifice would have given the dying Dumbledore the blood protection that Harry's mother's death gave Harry, who shares her blood. Lily's sacrifice is depicted as being unique. It could not be recreated by Snape stepping in front of Dumbledore (or Harry stepping in front of Ron, for that matter). vmonte responds: True. I still think she would have stepped in front of him even if he did not have the blood protection spell. But that's just my opinion. From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 16 18:53:44 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:53:44 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: <12508739.1184608519778.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171922 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > From: Goddlefrood > >One that I note that was not on any of the suggestions so far is > >the little matter of Grindelwald being defeated by Dumbledore. > >This would also lead on to expecting that all the dates in canon > >and their significance being explained. I expect an answer to > >neither of these two before DH is finished. If, however, > >Grindelwald does somehow feature then he has at least been > >set up within the so far published books. > > Bart: > A prominent science fiction writer (I THINK it was Ted Sturgeon) found out the hard way that if you want to write a series, you have to contend with increasing expectations. The story was about a bear with a human child-level intelligence and his best friend, the scientist who is working with him, at an experimental laboratory. In the first story in the series, the bear saves the world from being conquered by an evil scientist at the lab. The series only lasted 3 stories (in the last, the bear went from saving the world to saving his friend's job). > > I suspect that JKR saw the same sort of problem. Here she has a story of a child growing into a young man who saves the world from the greatest threat it has ever seen. How the hell are you going to top THAT? > Every so often Rowling has introduced a new magical concept or technique. By itself that process leads to severe problems for an author. In fact I would argue that Rowling passed that point long ago but seems unaware of it. Be that as it may, Larry Niven's "Known Space" universe had this problem. Over the course of many books and stories he had introduced so many powerful technologies that it was getting to be impossible to write a new story with an essential conflict that a 12 year old reader couldn't find a trivial solution to using a technology found in a previous story. He stopped writing in that "universe" when too many 12 year olds started pointing this out to him with every new story. Then he hit the idea of backpedaling. He wrote a nice series of stories about the Ringworld which was in an almost unknown backwater of the galaxy that had diverged technologically from the rest of his known space universe long before the civilizations that comprised the bulk of it existed. In some ways it had a more advanced technology but mostly it was just a different technology. So it was a fertile field in which to write new stories using a few of the same old characters without the "been there, done that, know how to solve it" problem. If Rowling wanted to do something similar she could write further stories in the Potterverse without the risk of inflaming her (or her reader's) "Harry fatigue". I am sure there are a lot of stories that could be set in earlier eras of the Potterverse, quite aside from the possibility of prequels which apparently don't interest her. I do hope that she kept Doug Adams' advice (not example!) in mind: "Don't destroy the Earth in chapter 1 because you are going to need it later". In other words, she might find use for Harry in the future after all, I hope she hasn't killed him off. Ken From orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk Mon Jul 16 19:18:23 2007 From: orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk (or.phan_ann) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:18:23 -0000 Subject: [TBAY] My DH predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171923 'Let's crank her up, Fred!' orders Ann, and leaps to the main winch of the S.I.E.G.E. C.A.T.A.P.U.L.T., causing the N.O.S.T.A.L.G.I.A. to list alarmingly. Faith and George move to the other side to balance her, and make a swift escape if the worse happens. 'So, do you like her?' Ann calls to them. Faith coughs. 'She's very, er, unique,' she begins, but Ann's attention is on the winch. 'Avery, get over here and help us with this! It's stuck... what were you saying?' 'We think it's very brave to set out right now, so soon before Hurricane Jo hits,' says George. 'But we're afraid that your ship's a little, well, unusual. It doesn't seem to have much holding it together, for one thing...' 'Oh, that's the catapult's job,' says Ann breezily. 'The supports go straight down into the keels; there aren't any proper connections, just securing lines.' She points at one nearby. 'For instance, that one's All the Books Start With the Dursleys. And there's Harry Always Ignores the Plot, joining the catapult and this hull.' She reaches out to point to it. 'Look!' cries Faith, 'There's someone on the shore! It's Mooseming, we haven't seen *her* in a while!' Everyone turns round to see a listie standing on the harbourside, apparently checking something on she ship against a thick handbook. 'Why's she pointing at me?' asks Ann, who leans on the Harry Always Ignores the Plot hawser to get a better look. 'Woah!' She falls face down into the bottom of the hull, slack rope in her hand. Faith, well versed in the sinkings of ships, leaps ashore with the agility of a smug gazelle. But she is disappointed, for the humble N.O.S.T.A.L.G.I.A. does absolutely nothing. Ann climbs to her feet. 'That's odd,' she says, sounding disappointed not to find herself on the bottom of the Bay. She climbs up to check the part of the catapult the rope was attached to. 'Aren't you going to sink?' asks George. 'I don't think so,' she says, scratching her head. 'I've no idea where I went wrong.' 'You've attached a useless rope,' says the woman on the pier. 'Look, it attaches there to there - look, it's pulling against the rest of the ship.' 'So it is!' Ann cries delightedly, and unties the two. 'You're lucky I noticed,' says Mooseming. 'If you had put any tension on it, it would have snapped that support...' 'Well, it's not important,' says Ann. 'Plenty more where that came from.' She unties the other end and begins to coil it up. 'You can have this back if you like,' she offers to Faith. 'Should make up for me not sinking. Thanks for the heads up, Mooseming. I appreciate it... been a while since I checked my canon. Want to go for a drink in the George?' 'The bits you haven't destroyed,' mutters its landlord. Ann, who's been away from the computer lately and hopes Mooseming doesn't mind such a late reply From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 19:26:53 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:26:53 -0000 Subject: Phineas Nigellus in DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171924 While we're on the topic of Chekhov's guns, I think we haven't seen the last of Phineas Nigellus, who conveniently has portraits in both Dumbledore's office (now McGonagall's, assuming that she remains headmistress and I'm sure she will for simplicity's sake) and 12 GP, which is now Harry's house. Conveniently, that portrait hangs in Harry's and Ron's room, which I hope they'll continue to sleep in at 12 GP. Although Phineas could not have witnessed the argument in the forest, he must have overheard most of the conversations between DD and Snape (Snape reports to DD; we've never seen DD in Snape's office). He also criticizes Harry twice in HBP for making derogatory remarks about Snape. Does anyone else think that he'll act as a kind of reverse Cassandra, not providing predictions that aren't believed but providing evidence of Snape's loyalty to DD that Harry won't want to hear? (I suspect that his portrait is attached to the wall with a permanent Sticking Charm; the only way Harry can escape him will be to Silencio the portrait or sleep in a different room. With luck, the Order won't allow Harry to do that because of Phineas's essential role as a messenger or go-between and he'll have to hear the revelations whether he wants to or not. Sidenote: This is utterly trivial, but the Giant Squid is also a Chekhov's gun and will probably play some role in a Battle of Hogwarts near the end of the book as one of the good guys. (The battle will probably cause the deaths of several key characters, but not HRH, Neville, or the absent Snape). Carol, signing off for the day and trusting any list member who knows anything about DH to "Keep it secret; keep it safe!" From scb1066 at adelphia.net Mon Jul 16 19:27:32 2007 From: scb1066 at adelphia.net (littlegreenpartyhats) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:27:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171925 Carol wrote > Somehow, I don't think his sacrifice would have given the dying > Dumbledore the blood protection that Harry's mother's death gave > Harry, who shares her blood. Lily's sacrifice is depicted as being > unique. It could not be recreated by Snape stepping in front of > Dumbledore (or Harry stepping in front of Ron, for that matter). I always assumed that the protection that Lily's sacrifice gave Harry was related to the mother-child (or parent-child maybe) relationship. I remember JKR saying in an interview that what was significant about it was that Lily had a choice, and James did not. This is "the power that the Dark Lord knows not", because he did not have a mother to have made this sacrifice/choice for him. It is also why he underestimates the power. He does not realize that nearly every mother given the choice to save herself or her baby would choose the baby. It's a simple and ancient truth that Voldemort simply overlooks becuase it's just not part of his nature. And somehow, the fact that the protection was in the blood used to regenerate him will play a part in Voldemort's downfall (i.e., the gleam in Dumbledore's eye) littlegreenpartyhats From jrkathryn at netscape.net Mon Jul 16 19:35:54 2007 From: jrkathryn at netscape.net (Kathryn) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:35:54 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171926 de-lurking for the first & possibly last time ever! HP&DH predictions by jrkathryn "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." (Kathryn Johnson) 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Peter Pettigrew, who will be killed by the Dark Lord, while saving Harry 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His (fresh) Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes but not attend much b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleaur Hagrid and Olympia in epilogue Hermione and Ron in epilogue and Harry and Ginny in epilogue. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Dudley Dursley or maybe Petunia if Dudley is attacked 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Zachariah Smith b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger c. DADA Instructor? Victor Krum d. Potions Master or Mistress? Horus Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Minerva McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself but he is on Dumbledore's side. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaw's mirror f. Snake g. In Voldemort Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape's patronus is a phoenix the reason for this is Albus gave him a second chance, and his boggart is (a strong) Voldemort. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love is in the locked room, the strongest of all powers. 5 predictions 1. Harry, Ron and Hermione will go on a futile horcrux hunt following Mundungus Flecher. This will lead to a confrontation with him. 2. Kreature will tell Harry about retrieving the locket with RAB and we will understand what happened to Dumbledore. Kreature will also be instrumental in getting the locket horcrux. 3. JKR put a horcrux into each of the seven books. 4. The wizarding community will be forced to confront its discriminatory practices toward other magical creatures. Hermione will dedicate her life toward the unification of the wizarding world and magical creatures. 5. To defeat Voldemort Harry will have to use people he does not like, such as Zachariah Smith and possible Draco Malfoy or Snape. Extra Harry will visit the Dursley's one last time, to wrap things up where we will find out about what Dudley saw when he was attacked by the Dementor and where one of the Dursley's will show magical ability From meltowne at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 19:32:38 2007 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:32:38 -0000 Subject: Snape on the tower (Was: The first paragraph of book 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171927 I think you're dead on - Snape is very important, and has been all along. JKR has spent 6 book making Snape out to be evil in Harry's eyes, but she has also spent the time to show that there are many shades of Grey. We see Bary Crouch Sr, who fights so hard against the death eaters, he is blinded to the fact his own son is one of them - and then because its his son, and he still loves him, rescues him from Azkaban. We see Cornelius Fudge who is an inept Minister - we don't know if he was ever a death eater, though I suspect not; he's an opportunist. He was one of the first on the scene when Sirius was captured, and send to Azkaban without a trial. He also authorized the Dementor's Kiss to two people - both Sirius, and Barty Jr. The public never got to hear Sirius's side of the story, and never would if Fudge was given a choice - I wonder what he did that day that he wants to hide? Did he help Wormtail for some reason, not knowing the whole story? Does he have wormtail's wand? I also wonder why he was in such a rush to kill Barty Jr? Something else to hide? I doubt he was protecting Crouch Sr's reputation. Incidentally, Barty Jr was a very talented wizard - during Crouch Srs mumblings, we see he earned 12 OWLS! Impressive! Did Fuge perhaps know about his DE involvement, even if his father didn't? No, I think Snape is firmly on our side. I think he didn't cast a normal Avada Kedavra spell. We know he is another very powerful wizard - perhaps he said the words for Avada Kedavra, but cast a different spell. I don't think it would be unheard of, for a powerful wizard. I still think he killed Dumbledore in the end, but not in the way it looks, and I don't know the significance. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Okay, that's how *I* read it. I can't explain the body going over the > battlements in any other way. That's not normal for an AK though it > sometimes happens with and Impediment Curse or an overly strong > Expelliarmus. Neither are open eyes. We don't even see a blinding > flash or hear the rushing sound of speeding death. It's as different > from the AK that kills Cedric (the light of which Harry can see > through closed eyelids!) and the one that kills the spider as it can > possibly be. > > Dumbledore could have called Fawkes to him but he didn't. He must have > *chosen* not to. DD tells Harry in CoS, "Help will always come at > Hogwarts to those who ask for it." DD didn't ask for it. Why not? He, > of all people, knew about the powerful magical protections that Snape > mentions in the Occlumency lessons. IMO, it can only be because he > knew he was about to die and chose the only form of death that could > save Harry and Draco, get the DEs out of Hogwarts, and place Snape in > deep cover--having Snape kill him. And Snape, it seems, added the body > over the battlements as a means of achieving that end. > > Over and over again, we've seen events in the HP books misinterpreted > by Harry and others. Several times we've seen people (Sirius Black, > Frank Bryce, even Harry) wrongly suspected of murder or other dark > deeds. I think we're seeing the same thing again in some form with > Snape. Yes, DD is dead, but it may not have been the AK > (insufficiently willed or false?) that killed him, and even if it was, > he wanted Snape and no one else to kill him. Nothing else could have > saved Harry and Draco from the DEs and gotten the DEs out of Hogwarts. > > BTW, I think that DD already knew that Snape would be assigned to kill > him before Snape took the Unbreakable Vow. Why else would he try to > hire Slughorn to teach Potions, depriving Snape of a job, unless he > *already intended* to give Snape the DADA position? (He could have > gotten the unaltered memory and/or protected Slughorn in some other > way.(And why give Snape the DADA job unless he knows (from Snape) that > Draco has been assigned to kill him and suspects, even without the > Unbreakable Vow, that Snape will be forced to do exactly that to keep > his cover? > > I agree with Bart that Snape took the only possible action. Had he > done nothing or tried to fight the DEs, four people would have died > instead of one. And I agree with Vivamus that Snape's rage at being > called a coward results from his having just performed the bravest > action of his life, knowing that it would be misread by all sides. > > Carol, who thinks that Snape is crucial to the entire series and hopes > (parays!) that he'll somehow survive to tell his tale and become a > researcher for St. Mungo's, or better yet, an Unspeakable > From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 20:01:57 2007 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:01:57 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171930 Carol wrote: "and I can't see her as an attraction at the London Zoo." Nick says: I have no canon in front of me, but has everyone already rejected the idea that Nagini is the snake that Harry freed in SS? Do their descriptions conflict with ne another? It could turn out to be another example of Harry's mercy (freeing the snake) helping him in the end (snake turns on Voldy in critical moment because he owes Harry a favor, or something...) Either way, I have issues with Nagini as a horcrux. What happens when she dies of old age? Or does LV give Nagini a horcrux as well (creating a horcrux within a horcrux, or something equally perverse)? If Nagini is a horcrux, I will be disappointed in JKR. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Mon Jul 16 20:04:41 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:04:41 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171932 > Carol wrote: > Somehow, I don't think his sacrifice would have given the dying > Dumbledore the blood protection that Harry's mother's death gave > Harry, who shares her blood. Lily's sacrifice is depicted as being > unique. It could not be recreated by Snape stepping in front of > Dumbledore (or Harry stepping in front of Ron, for that matter). > > vmonte responds: > True. I still think she would have stepped in front of him even if he > did not have the blood protection spell. But that's just my opinion. Magpie: I don't think Snape necessarily killed Dumbledore because he had no choice in the matter, but I do think that there's still differences in the situation with Lily, based on what Carol said. Lily was just a mother with her child and standing in front of him was natural. Snape, as Carol described, does not have the same choices in front of him. Lily throwing herself in front of Harry (which I agree she would have done regardless of any ancient magic she thought it would invoke, since there's no reason to think she knew what the result woudl be) is a noble sacrifice. Snape throwing himself in front of Dumbledore might be noble, but unhelpful and irresponsible given everything else going on. The two situations are set up very differently -m From pswann at kc.rr.com Mon Jul 16 19:15:57 2007 From: pswann at kc.rr.com (pswannkcrrcom) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:15:57 -0000 Subject: is Dumbledore really dead? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171933 > drax_orion: > Personally I think if he has been reborn in that matter, he would > have retained his memories. If that is true, it may be possible that > he is actually Godric Gryffindor (yeah, that is a super sized > stretch) or he is just as old as his old friend Nicholas Flamel. > Makes you wonder if maybe Dumbledore's so called brother is maybe > actually his son, grandson, or even more distant decendant. pswann Fawkes has saved lives by intervention before, so it was unusual that he didn't shield Dumbledore when this was most needed. That alone makes me think it was a planned event between Dumbledore and Snape. We did not see Dumbledore die--only go over the rampart. I know that the dead stay dead (most of the time) but perhaps he and Fawkes somehow merged. That would explain Fawkes' sad lament before leaving the grounds and also his not being around when people gathered around Dumbledore's body on the grounds. He was suspiciously absent through the entire event. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 16 20:28:02 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:28:02 -0000 Subject: Arithmancy {was:List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171934 First of all I want to apologize for 2 posts that had precisely ZERO content; apparently my computer had a nervous breakdown and decided to post stuff LONG before I thought it was a good idea to do so. "joan of anarchy" joanofanarchy at ... Wrote: > 7. Hermione & Ancient Runes I don't think Ancient Runes are particularly mysterious, but Arithmancy is another matter entirely! I like to think that Arithmancy is a discipline so abstruse that a Muggle mind like the one I happen to possess cannot even understand what the subject of Arithmancy is even about much less master it (as Hermione has), it would be like trying to teach calculus to a dog; even JKR, one of the greatest Muggles who ever lived says she doesn't understand Arithmancy. In the same way I don't think a Muggle could make even the simplest potion even if they were lucky enough to have the Half Blood Prince's annotations to help him; a Muggle would be hopelessly confused by the instructions, their brains just don't work the right way to understand what is going on. One last thing, I love the name "Joan of Anarchy", I may disagree with you but it cannot be deigned you have style. Eggplant From lmkos at earthlink.net Mon Jul 16 20:33:46 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:33:46 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : Brave Snape In-Reply-To: <5C645FFA-B1FD-4A23-B26C-63EF25E78EF2@yahoo.co.uk> References: <5C645FFA-B1FD-4A23-B26C-63EF25E78EF2@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171935 >Vivamus: > > He fully expects to die doing what he believes is right, damned > > forever with no redemption by everyone on both sides, including Harry. > > It is probably the bravest act by any character in the entire series, > > for he cannot even take comfort in being called a hero when he dies. Lenore: Outstanding interpretation! >Jadon: >Is that bravery or self-sacrifice for a noble cause? It _involves_ >bravery - I don't think Snape can be called a coward for an instant; >whatever side he's on, he's in the thick of it. Plenty of enemies, >and he's just killed the wizard who believed in him. The coward stays >out of the war, the Gryffindor scrapes through to victory at great >personal risk, the Slytherin operates by preference from a safe >distance, but he'll walk in and sacrifice everything to the cause if >he considers it necessary. Consideration, planning is the key. >Slytherin doesn't require glory; it requires results. It might >involve what a Gryffindor would call cowardice (and all Harry's doing >in this scene is trying to get a rise out of Snape; Snape thinks he >has better options), or it might involve outright daring, but it's >unlikely to be showy, and I this is one thing Snape is very touchy >about: he does believe, to whatever extent, that Harry is arrogant >and likes to show off. Perhaps he really does want the recognition >Harry gets, feeling he deserves the glory. He doesn't appreciate that >luck is a quality of Harry's as putting effort in and working for >results is a quality of his own. > >If Snape does have a plan to save the world, where does that leave >Harry, our designated hero? If there's a possibility that Snape is >_competing_ with Harry to save the world first, he has to fail; it's >unthinkable that anyone other than Harry should defeat LV, and that >would be too tragic an ending: sacrifice everything, all for nothing, >because Harry's just defeated the Dark Lord on sheer unworked-for >brilliance. Lenore: IMO, you have written one of the most sensitive and perceptive delineations of Snape's character that I have ever read. It has helped me to see why there is so much in the "good, brave" Snape that I can identify with in myself, e.g. "Slytherin doesn't require glory; it requires results"; "might involve what a Gryffindor would call cowardice"; "it's unlikely to be showy"; and he is touchy about arrogance and glory seekers. He is not afraid to die but neither would he take needless or stupid risks. He has foresight; he would always be able to think twelve steps ahead and be prepared for it... and he wouldn't miss much. I had a flash that Gryffindor is the exact shadow side to Slytherin, and vice versa. That's one reason they detest each other so much. They just cannot understand or feel respect for each other's modus. Indeed, it seems to me that Gryffindors would have difficulty surviving at all if it were not for their vaunted innate luck factor (evil grin). And yes, this would surely add to Snape's bitter feeling toward them. However, if my strong intuitive reaction to your post is accurate, I do not believe Snape would be competing with Harry or even that he wants recognition in the same sense that a Gryffindor would want it. Snape wants respect. He is willing to do what others would not do, but he would like the others to realize, just a little bit, what it is like for him and what the cost really is. (Granted, there is some subjectivity in my view in this paragraph...) Lenore (who identifies with Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff, and Slytherin, but not much with Gryffindor) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 20:45:24 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:45:24 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171936 > Carol wrote: > > I notice that the vast majority of posters don't think that Nagini is > a Horcrux, possibly because they're sold on the Harry!Horcrux > hypothesis. Without getting back into that argument (I'll just say > that I think DD is right about Nagini and that if Harry or his scar > were a Horcrux, DD would have said so), I want to ask what people > think Nagini *is* (aside from being a "dirty great snake"). Neri: Well, I think she's also a dirty great red herring . Dumbledore is probably right about most of his guesses, but he can't be right about *all* of them, or it'll get too predictable. Besides, Dumbledore never actually says that Nagini *is* a Horcrux. The scenario of Nagini as a Horcrux doesn't seem to make for a very good story. When did Voldy make her a Horcrux? If before GH, then what was she doing all that time? And who was the murder that made her a Horcrux? I don't see an interesting story here. Nagini seems much more useful to the plot as a red herring. Besides, she has already fulfilled another important function: through her we've learned that living Horcruxes are canonical. Now that we know about this charming possibility, using it on for a mere overgrown snake seems like big waste of plot potential. > Carol: > Is she > Voldemort's familiar? Just his ugly pet, who conveniently provides > venom when it's needed as a potion ingredient? How can he possess her > without doing lasting harm to her if she's not a Horcrux? Neri: I don't see the difficulty. Voldy did explain to us that snakes where his first preference to inhabit. IIRC he also explained that inhabiting them for long periods makes them die. This implies that possessing them only for short periods (as in a quick excursion into the MoM) is just fine. And anyway, even if every minute Voldy possesses Nagini shortens her life span by, say, one hour, do you really expect him to care much about it? Not unless she really is his Horcrux. Indeed, the canon we're lacking here is that possessing your living Horcrux does *not* shorten its life. > Carol: > Is she, erm, > a garbage disposal for the bodies of his victims? Neri: Well of course. Every evil overlord must have one of those. I believe it's in the manual, although I haven't checked. > Carol: > Is Nagini evil in her own > right even though she's a snake, not a human being with free will, or > just too dangerous to live? Neri: Was the Basilisk evil in its own right, or just too dangerous to live? And who cares, as long as the hero sticks him in the kisser with the magical sword? > Carol: > I think that, Horcrux or no Horcrux, Harry will slay her as he slew > the Basilisk, with the Sword of Gryffindor. Neri: Personally I doubt that. You don't make the hero stick the giant snake with the magical sword in the second episode, only to have him stick the much smaller snake in the seventh and last episode, with that same sword. As an Author you're supposed to build *up*, not down, towards the climax. Nagini seems to me just the right size for Ron, or maybe even Peter. Which would be fitting if she *isn't* a Horcrux, and so isn't Harry's job. Neri From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 21:04:00 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:04:00 -0000 Subject: In the end... In-Reply-To: <8C995EF91EE0767-1EE8-16A8@FWM-D21.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171937 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, SnapesSlytherin at ... wrote: > > > I've been thinking about this for some time while reading the list.? At the end of the day, I'll still believe what I always have about the characters.? Even with the Epilogue telling us the rest of their lives, I think I'll still believe what I believe.? What if ESE! Lupin doesn't happen?? Does that mean he *really* wasn't ESE or that we just didn't find out he was ESE?? If Severus lives but stays with LV, is he really evil or is he trapped now?? I think JKR can tell me flat out: "And Severus Snape was an evil, evil, evil man and stayed with the Dark Lord forever," and I'll still have some doubt about it. > > Why? > > Because the characters aren't just hers anymore.? Since we've had years between the books, the characters have grown in our minds.? We give them backstories and lives -- sometimes even when the book doesn't match up (I still think Remus and Sirius are a couple).? Just look at all the people who don't believe Dumbledore is dead even though JKR has said it numerous times. > > Just because it's her ending doesn't mean it's ours. > Alla: I sorta hear you partially Oryomai. Not discounting your reactions, just trying to explain mine. If that makes sense, whether she leaves something blank, I can imagine something that she may have not intended, but if she does put definite information in, then I cannot imagine the opposite. Take for example Snape and imagine the scenario that was brought up as possibly JKR's ultimate joke :) So, say Snape shows up at the moment of Harry/Voldemort ultimate showdown and saves Harry, I don't know, steps up in front of him and dies, **without saying a word**, I want to stress this part. So IMO in this scenario it is left open whether Snape was always DD!M OR was evil, had a revelation (I don't know, Lily came to him in his dream) AND decided to commit one redeeming act of evil man. If this happens, then of course I would continue to imagine that Snape was evil and had revelation :) Just as good Snape fans would imagine that he was always DD!M. BUT if Snape, before he dies, tells Harry his story, that he, I don't know participated in DD plan to kill him and was DD!M always, always, I am not capable of imagining that he is evil anymore, canon in my mind will always takes precedent. Same with Remus and Sirius being a couple. I LOVED it, I still do, but if Remus accepts Tonks' love in book 7, I am afraid I cannot imagine it anymore. Now, Snape and Sirius on the other hand.... And **of course** if Evil Lupin does not happen and Lupin, say dies like a hero or lives like a hero, um, no way I say he is evil, I mean how could he be, if he is not in the books. For me of course. JMO, Alla From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 21:17:45 2007 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:17:45 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171938 Kimberly: 40. Droobles Gum wrappers from Alice Longbottom! 41. What was Dumbledore thinking/feeling during the Cave scene ? 42. How did Merope get Tom Riddle to stay with her for that brief period ? Love potion or Imperius Curse ? 43. Does Snape love ANYone ? Who ? 44. Krum !! 45. Will Pettigrew repay his life debt by turning against LV and helping Harry ? 46. Just how mad IS LV at Lucius for the foul up at the ministry and now Draco's failure to kill DD himself ? Robin: 47. Who will be using magic late in life: Dudley? Petunia? Mrs Figg? Filch? 48. Why all the cat references? Who was Mrs Norris? 49. Is Snape an animagus spider? 50. What were Harry's parents jobs/professions? 51. Why did Film 5 include Kreacher when he wasn't needed for the plot? 52. Does RAB = Regulus Black 53. Was Kreacher the second creature (but not a wizard) that helped RAB get the locket out of the cave? 54. What happened in the missing 24 hours in Chapter 1 book 1? 55. Why did Harry;s scar hurt when he was so close to Voldy in Books 1-5, but not in Book 6? 56. Is Harry a Horcrux? 57. Why was Harry "in" the snake in Book 5 when Mr. Weasley is attacked? 58. Who else was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters were illed? 59. How are Horcruxes made? Destroyed? 60. What are the 12 uses of Dragon's blood? Janelle: 61. What are Switching Spells? 62. Will the Hogwarts houses unite? 63. SHIPS From va32h at comcast.net Mon Jul 16 21:34:38 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:34:38 -0000 Subject: In the end... In-Reply-To: <8C995EF91EE0767-1EE8-16A8@FWM-D21.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171939 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, SnapesSlytherin at ... wrote: I've been thinking about this for some time while reading the list.? At the end of the day, I'll still believe what I always have about the characters.? va32h: Well, yes and no. In the absence of outright contradiction I'll believe whatever I already concluded, sure. But I won't try to come up with an elaborate explanation as to why what JKR wrote didn't really happen. (like, you know, certain shippers do). Anyway! However, I won't need or expect JKR's definitive answer for absolutely everything. If she never gives a name to the "missing Gryffindor girls" I won't be losing any sleep. If we never hear from Krum again, I can imagine my own conclusion to his story. That sort of thing. Just looking at the lists on the "Chekov's gun" posts - if people really expect all that stuff to be resolved...there are going to be some very disappointed people some Saturday afternoon. va32h From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 21:58:29 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:58:29 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups TBAY: Dumbledore is Ever So Evil! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171940 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com wrote: > > > > > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > > > HPforGrownups group: > > > > > > Who will be proven to be ESE! by the end of Deathly Hallows? > > > o Another person not named here (feel free to mention onlist) > > > > > lizzyben: > > > > What, no Dumbledore? That's my vote. From Harry's POV, at least, he > > is. > > > SSSusan: > Yay! Someone who actually took the option of writing in here with her > different choice. > > Now I should have thought to include DD as an option in the list, but > I failed to think of him. Would you be willing, Lizzyben, to explain > more what you meant when you said "From Harry's POV, at least, he > is"? This intrigues me. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > lizzyben: LOL, are you sure you want to hear the whole thing? Basically, I think that DD has been using Harry as part of an intricate & complex plan that is *not* in Harry's best interests. I've ranted about DD's sketchy actions before, but it's time to just come out with the accusation... lizzyben blinks. Suddenly she is standing at a bay, surrounded by the wreckage of old ships. Far in the distance, she sees that a few ships have almost reached the opposite harbor. Knowing it is too late to start the journey now, lizzyben begins to construct a small boat. It needs to be sturdy, but it doesn't need to be large, because she knows that this boat won't get many passengers. She sets sail, and climbs up to the top mast to loudly proclaim: "Dumbledore is Ever So Evil!" Silence echoes. Suddenly, out of the corner of her eye, lizzyben spots a flotilla of "epitome of goodness" quotes approaching her at high speed. She veers sharply, narrowly avoiding the barrage of quotes, & resolutely aims the small boat towards the opposite harbor. ESE!Dumbledore codified: First, I think DD arranged the events at Godric's Hollow in order to defeat LV & get a Chosen One w/special powers - he did this by first leaking the prophecy, helping Lily w/ancient blood magic as a Plan B if they are discovered, then alerting LV of the Potter's secret location. He kept the invisibility cloak so that the Potters wouldn't be able to hide Harry beneath it (JKR's important unasked question). When LV attacks Harry, Lily's ancient magic protects Harry, causing the AK to rebound on LV & leave Harry w/special powers - just as DD intended. Details in message #171278. - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/171278 DD needed this "chosen one" to be loyal to him & ready to fight. So he placed Harry w/the Dursleys, knowing that they wouldn't care about what happened to Harry, or interfere w/DD's Plan. DD let Sirius stay in Azkaban, knowing he was innocent, to get Harry's legal guardian out of the way. Because the Dursleys were so abusive, DD knew that Harry would be grateful & thankful that DD "rescued" him from this abusive home, & see Hogwarts as his real home. This ensured that he would be loyal & willing to fight for DD's cause from then on out. The blood protection thing was mostly just an excuse. He's also arranged things so that LV would use Harry's blood for his resurrection. Right before Harry's due back at Hogwarts, DD fetches Vapor Voldie back from Albania via Quirrel. DD also moves the Stone of immortality to Hogwarts as LV-bait. When LV tries to get it, DD ensures that Harry is there, too. LV realizes he can't touch or harm Harry & flees; now terrified of Harry's powers. DD lets Vapor Voldie go on purpose. DD destroys the Stone - knowing that LV will now have to resort to a specific magical ritual to ressurrect. In GOF, DD knows LV is back, because DD had previously purchased the Riddle House. He knows the ritual that LV will use to resurrect & has manipulated LV into choosing Harry for the "blood of the enemy." LV thinks that using Harry's blood will remove the special "Can't touch" blood protection that Harry had in SS - just as DD intended. So when Harry tells DD about LV's reason for choosing Harry for the ritual, DD gets a *Gleam of triumph*. All is going according to his Plan. Details in message #170937 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/170937. This means that DD knew Fake!Moody was a Death Eater, & knew what would happen when Harry entered the TWT. When Crouch Sr. tried to warn DD, DD called Fake!Moody, alone, to search the Hogwarts grounds for him, knowing Fake!Moody would kill Crouch when he found him. DD *wanted* the Death Eaters to be able to capture Harry. It seems like using Harry's blood created some special effects on LV - eg. he can't create more horcruxes, & possibly other side benefits. In OOTP, DD lures both Harry & LV to the MOM so that LV can possess him. This also increases Harry's strengths against LV - LV can no longer posess him or share visions. Sirius is killed, probably by DD or on DD's orders; Sirius was getting restless & too protective of Harry. In HBP, DD tries to inflame Harry's hatred & need for revenge in order to get the weapon ready, & this is partially why he makes Harry witness his death. And etc. DD is sacrificing Harry's happiness & welfare for some distant greater good that *only* DD is allowed to see. He is *using* Harry as a pawn, & the traumas Harry endures are all part of increasing Harry's fitness for DD's larger purpose. The worst part is, DD actually seems to love Harry (against his will), yet he is still willing to do this. It's all for THE PLAN, the noble, brilliant plan that DD never sees fit to share w/Harry, even though his life may depend upon it. Is that Plan worth it? I don't know, but I suspect not. No goal is worth this much evil. Is defeating LV even the actual plan? I'm not sure any more. DD could have taken out LV many times himself, but he does not. By my count, DD is responsible for at least four murders, probably more - the Potters, Sirius, Crouch Sr., Cedric, & (indirectly) all of LV's new victims. He's caused Harry to have a miserable childhood, allowed him to be abused, tortured & traumatized, and killed the adults who actually loved Harry. DD exploits, manipulates, & sacrifices people for his goals, and all indications are that he expected to sacrifice Harry, as well. So yeah, however noble DD's ultimate goal might be, he is surely Ever So Evil from Harry's point of view. And mine, too. lizzyben From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jul 16 22:07:22 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 23:07:22 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5C84DFE0-97F2-4D40-9CFE-791BB10C55ED@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 171941 Neri wrote: > Nagini seems to me just the right size for Ron, or maybe > even Peter. Which would be fitting if she *isn't* a Horcrux, and so > isn't Harry's job. Jadon: Poor Ron! You can see why he gets fed up sometimes with living in Harry's shadow, can't you? Put on the same level as his one-time pet rat. *grumble* From colwilrin at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 23:04:36 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 23:04:36 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups TBAY: Dumbledore is Ever So Evil! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171942 > lizzyben: So yeah, however > noble DD's ultimate goal might be, he is surely Ever So Evil from > Harry's point of view. And mine, too. > > > lizzyben > Colwilrin: I agree, but also disagree with your theory. I think that there is little that has happened in the past 6 books that was beyond DD's manipulation. IMO he is MM!DD (Master Manipulator DD). However, I don't see this as evil. He has an agenda, for the greater good. Though his actions may have caused pain to some, his underlying intent is for the good of all. There is no element of "evil" to his personality. If it does turn out that he is "evil" I will literally fall of the couch! He reminds me more of what Spock from Star Trek says- the good of the many outweigh the good of the one. He is very logical and calculating...I find it very hard to believe that all of Harry's adventures could have occurred without his knowledge and allowance. For example, I do believe that DD orchestrated the entire PS/SS challenge to get to the mirror/stone with full intent to test Harry and his abilities. It is just too convenient that he is "away" from Hogwarts every time Harry is on the verge of acting and his presence would stop Harry. In thoughts of absurd wondering, I have even wondered if DD hadn't arranged every challenge Harry has gone through during all 6 books as an intricate training program. However, I think that is going a little to far...but not much! DD has surrounded Harry with the appropriate teachers, role models and friends to foster his development and give him clues and unique skills. I think little was left to chance. I don't think he went as far as to assign R and Her to him as friends...but I also don't think that it is meer coincidence that Harry ended up exposed to them early on. If he is not that manipulative...I will tip my hat to JKR for making a dottering, imperfect old wizard appear so much greater than he was. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon Jul 16 23:31:06 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 23:31:06 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171943 vmonte: > I'm glad Lily didn't decide to just step aside and let Voldemort kill > Harry. I mean, why would she step in front of Harry unless she thought > he could die? And surely she knew that stepping in front of him would > sentence her to death as well. But she did it anyway. Ceridwen: Actually, I've thought about this sort of scenario a lot. If you were a parent, would you jump in front of a car to save your child? If you were a parent, would you throw yourself between that child and a hail of bullets? Will you hold your child's head above the water, even though it means you're going to drown? This is the sort of thing people I have known seem to enjoy taunting parents about, so yeah, I've thought about it. A lot. Thinking about something like this when not in the situation, when you wuold react instinctively instead of thinking, makes you consider all sides. A truly selfless parent would throw themselves between their child and death without a thought. Without a thought of what would happen to the child once the parent is dead. That car isn't going to stop a dime's breadth away from the child just because the parent is lying dead. Those bullets won't stop just because they have a victim. The ocean won't get shallower just because the parent is dead. In most of those cases, the child will die anyway. In the Potter's case, James is dead. Lily can be fairly certain of this. Voldemort is in the room, and ordering her to step aside. If she does, Voldemort kills Harry. If she doesn't, Voldemort, to her knowledge at that time, kills her, and then kills Harry because there's no one to protect him. Toddler Harry doesn't know magic. Toddler Harry can't wield a wand: he doesn't even have one. Accidental magic might serve to protect him for a time, but not for long. At that point, no one knew what Lily's sacrifice would accomplish. It had never been done before. Lily made the same sacrifice parents have been making for millenia, knee-jerk and without thought. In her case, it turned out differently. Snape isn't Lily. Snape is human. Why should he trust that his death would provide magical protection to Draco, Harry and Dumbledore? Did Lily do something to prepare for such an eventuality, given that someone knew about the prophecy, which was why they were in hiding? Or did it just happen, randomly, the handmaiden to the prophecy? How would Snape know whether his sacrifice would protect those he leaves behind? I wouldn't trust to luck. As I said, I've thought about this a lot. People I have known love stories about parental sacrifice, and make a big deal out of how selfless the parents all were. But, really, what happens to the child, as far as we know in the real world, when it's left in a situation like that all alone? A parent will react on instinct. Unless the fanfics are true, Snape is neither Harry's nor Draco's father, and he's too young to be Dumbledore's dad. My own feelings on this subject, of course. Ceridwen. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 23:34:13 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 23:34:13 -0000 Subject: CONTEST: Clarification on spoiler-related guesses. (only little spoilers) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171944 This post contains info from the David Yates interview and the Guardian newspaper first chapter spoiler. No Epilogue spoilers. *** S O M E *** S P O I L E R *** S P A C E *** E V E N *** T H O *** The *** Spoilers *** are *** only *** little *** ones. ************************************** Random said: >However, you've banned interpretations and guesses about the identity of the other character, which would be equivalent to banning any guesses as to HOW Kreacher will be involved. If I guess "The character appearing with Snape in the first chapter is Aberforth Dumbledore", that is equivalent to predicting, say (assuming this wasn't part of the spoiler), "Harry will summon Kreacher to help deal with one of the horcruxes other than the locket". which is NOT, to my understanding, off-limits. Why does this spoiler have so much stronger of a ban than the other ones? It goes without saying that it would be completely unreasonable to discard entire entries based on the presence of references to such spoilers, rather than simply assigning zero points to specific predictions as with the other off-limits spoilers, but you haven't made it clear this is what you meant. --Random832 Here's why. The Kreacher thing from David Yates was a piece of information. No actual text. The opening of chapter one and chapter title was text from DH and therefore (at least a rough draft of) canon. Many things can be read into the specific wording of canon that cannot be read into a comment about the presence of Kreacher. Therefore, it is a much huger spoiler than Kreacher. TK-- TigerPatronus -- Ruthless, Arbitrary, and Final From clio44a at yahoo.com Mon Jul 16 23:42:31 2007 From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 23:42:31 -0000 Subject: Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171945 Phew, feels like I have to submit my predictions as quick as possible. I haven't seen any spoilers yet, but after sending this, I want to go and get spoiled senseless, because I can hardly wait till Saturday. Thanks TK TigerPatronus for doing the contest. Right here I go: "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." Clio Parker Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Severus Snape 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? A Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes, Of Course! d. Luna? No e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur and Tonks and Lupin, whoever you'd like to call more prominent. 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Argus Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillan of Hufflepuff b. Head Girl? Padma Patil of Ravenclaw c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? NOT Minerva MacGonagall. It will be someone Ministry approved and appointed. Possibly Dolores Umbridge, but very likely Cornelius Fudge. 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Lily Evans. Period. And in consequence with her son, meaning: Snape is fighting on the side of the good guys AGAINST Voldemort, at least since Lily's death. (I am a fierce Snape/Lily love/friendship supporter) 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. The diary (CoS, disabled) b. The Gaunt's family ring (HBP, disabled) c. Slyterin's locket d. Huffelpuff's cup e. Ravenclaws wand (Not among the original ones. Made a Horcrux after Voldys rebirth in GOF, possibly during HBP or DH) f. In Voldemort g. Gryffindor's shield or gauntlet Horcrux c. d. or g. was already disabled/used during Voldemorts `death' at Godric's Hallow or is rebirth in GOF, respectively and is now inactive. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: Bumblebee Boggart: Himself as a Deatheater Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? The room where the Ministry researches the power and the nature of human emotions, among them love. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Harry Potter will for the first time in his life leave Great Britain. He will visit Central and/or Eastern Europe. * 2. Harry will defeat and overcome Voldemort, but Snape will kill Tom Riddle's/Voldemort's body in the end. 3. Harry will lose his magical powers. 4. We will see the insides of the Chamber of Secrets and of Gringott's again 5. Snape will break the curse of at least one Horcrux or has done so in the past. * For the American listies: This includes everything east of Central France all the way to the Ural mountains in Russia. Romania, Albania anyone? Clio, who hasn't posted for more than 2 years From neumannm9 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 00:02:21 2007 From: neumannm9 at yahoo.com (mary neumann) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:02:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: <469b8291.1498600a.6fe0.ffffbe3d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <342543.23442.qm@web53308.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171946 Vivamus wrote: He fully expects to die doing what he believes is right, damned forever with no redemption by everyone on both sides, including Harry. It is probably the bravest act by any character in the entire series, for he cannot even take comfort in being called a hero when he dies. He is doing these things FOR Harry, and yet Harry himself calls him a coward. No wonder he is enraged. JKR said a long time ago that SS was a "deeply horrible" person, or something like that. This fits it, and finally exposes a full set of motivations for him, that fit everything we've seen him do so far. So, what do you all think of "Brave Snape" as a theory? vmonte: How does being deeply horrible equate to being brave? I think Snape is a coward. Some people don't like being told the truth. Especially when it's something negative. Sherry now: I can never accept murder being considered an act of bravery. I think Snape reacted with such rage because he knew he acted out of cowardice. He saved his own neck and murdered an old man, the one person who had stood by him for years. not very brave in my opinion. Mary: I think that all along DD knew that he would have to die and it was his plan for SS to kill him. I think that when Hargrid overheard them arguing that DD was telling SS that he would have to kill him (because of the unbreakable vow that he did w/ Malfoy's mom*) and that Snape was arguing because he didn't want to do it. Then, at the end of HBP, right before SS killed DD, DD said something along the lines of "Severus please" and I think he was pleading for SS to hurry up and put him out of his misery. Just my opinion. Mary Rayner From sherriola at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 00:51:53 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:51:53 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <469c12b7.12da600a.0dea.6de9@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171948 Carol: In any case, DD was already dying, and, as I interpret his words, he wanted Snape to kill him. How was DD, wandless and too weak even to stand, supposed to protect Harry and Draco from the DEs and get the DEs out of Hogwarts? I doubt that they would have obeyed him. Snape was the only one who could save the boys. Nothing could have saved the dying DD, not with the DEs present, ready to kill DD if Draco or Snape didn't, and no time for Snape to figure out what the green poison was and brew the appropriate antidote. Sherry; Unless I missed something in canon, there is no proof that DD was dying. We assume he was dying, but canon does not explicitly state that. There is no canon that the green stuff would have been terminal. I will not believe until I must, that Harry will have to live with the burden of thinking the stuff he gave DD at his demand was the thing that killed him. In any case, Snape didn't know any of that had happened. He just pulled out his wand and uttered the words. Saved his own neck and was a coward to the end. In my own opinion, of course. Wasn't there a place in that scene where Harry thinks DD is sounding stronger? We don't know that he would have died with or without Snape's treachery, so I refuse to believe it was hopeless. And even if that's how JKR makes it turn out, I'll be cruelly disappointed that Harry will be sacrificed to Snape. It's all about Harry for me, as ever, and I can't bear to imagine that a 17-year-old boy should have to live with that! Sherry From aholm006 at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 01:23:42 2007 From: aholm006 at gmail.com (rummage8) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:23:42 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171950 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lizzyben04" wrote: > lizzyben: The real Tonks is listless & depressed, but is never on > the brink of tears the way ROR "Tonks" is. Draco's the one who's about > to burst out crying. The real Tonks is stationed outside the school, > not outside DD's office. That wasn't Tonks. > > As for the rest of the Tonks weirdness, it might just have been JKR's > attempt to show how lovesick Tonks is. Except like most of the other > romantic subplots, it pretty much fell flat. For all the talk about > the power of love, in HBP love pretty much just made people act > vindictive, depressed, petty or jealous. Rummage8 writes: I must admit that I do get excited when i see that lizzyben has posted a message some where. Being new to HP4GU, i am slowly finding favorites among the posters. Anyways. I am really surprised this message hasn't just taken off. But i do have a few questions. I am slowly becoming tied to this theory, not strong ties..but it is possessing my thoughts for most of the day. 1. When would Draco have begun impersonating Tonks? I am assuming it would have to be after Tonks sends her patronus up to the castle. It is fishy how Draco was the only one who knew Harry was there, (her looking out especially for him adds to the body guard theory) 2. Why didnt Draco disclose all of this while talking to Dumbledore at the end of the book? Surely it would have add more evidence to his ability to carry out the AK. Rummage8, who wishes the book would just hurry up and get here already From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Tue Jul 17 02:04:50 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:04:50 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171951 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rummage8" wrote: 1. When would Draco have begun impersonating Tonks? I am assuming it would have to be after Tonks sends her patronus up to the castle. -- Inge: Wasn't it "Tonks" who found Harry on the Hogwarts Express after everyone else had gotten off? Might this actually have been Draco, sort of regretting what he did to Harry? (though in my oppionion Harry deserved what he got there!! ) From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 17 01:41:55 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:41:55 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171952 "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." JOAN OF ANARCHY 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Dark mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? Yes. d. Luna? Yes. e. Ron? Yes. f. Neville? Yes. g. Ginny? Yes. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Filch 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ernie MacMillan (runner up to Draco, who does not return to school) b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Against Voldemort 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. diary b. ring c. Slytherin locket d. Hufflepuff cup e. Ravenclaw wand f. Pettigrew's silver hand g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: bat Boggart: himself Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? unconditional love Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): 1. Harry will leave the Dursleys to attend Bill and Fleur's wedding -- which will be much fun, until Death Eaters (and/or Voldemort) show up at the end (most likely during the reception) and wreak havoc. (I picture it happening like Tzeitel and Motel's wedding in "Fiddler on the Roof".) 2. Snape used James' invisibility cloak (during the VWI backstory). 3. Neville will be instrumental in defeating Voldemort. 4. Dumbledore trusted Snape due to an Unbreakable Vow. 5. Harry will forgive Snape. (Note: Harry will not necessarily *like* Snape.) 6. Snape is a vampire. j/k From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 02:33:23 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:33:23 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171953 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mandorino222" I have no canon in front of me, but has everyone already rejected the > idea that Nagini is the snake that Harry freed in SS? Do their > descriptions conflict with ne another? ============================ Lisa: Nagini is a python; the snake Harry freed was a boa constrictor. From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 17 02:33:47 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:33:47 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171954 > Lisa: > I've never really understood why she didn't grab Baby Harry and > disapparate. I'd rather live life on the run than hand my baby over to > what could mean certain death. Eddie: Haven't you read "Godric's Hollow, A History?" :-) Seriously, maybe she couldn't apparate or dis-apparate from the house because of all the magical protections around it. On the other hand, Fred and George successfully apparated all over 12 Grimmauld Place even though it was full of magical protections. Eddie From random832 at fastmail.us Tue Jul 17 02:42:24 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:42:24 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] "the other" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <469C2C90.2000704@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 171955 Jenni A. M. Merrifield wrote: > A couple of possibilities immediately spring to mind: > > * Neville (as the other who was "born as the seventh month dies") * > Snape (given the complexity of his character and the ambiguous status of > his loyalty) Peter Pettigrew has come up in connection with this idea in the past, IIRC. --Random832 From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 02:46:10 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:46:10 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171956 > > Lisa: > > I've never really understood why she didn't grab Baby Harry and > > disapparate. I'd rather live life on the run than hand my baby over to > > what could mean certain death. > > Eddie: > Haven't you read "Godric's Hollow, A History?" :-) Seriously, maybe > she couldn't apparate or dis-apparate from the house because of all > the magical protections around it. On the other hand, Fred and George > successfully apparated all over 12 Grimmauld Place even though it was > full of magical protections. ====================================== Lisa: ::::snort::::: Oh, how I wish there WAS a "Godric's Hollow, A History!" LOL! I, too, thought that the only reason she wouldn't disapparate with Baby Harry would be that she physically couldn't because of the magical protections on the house. Then, once we saw Fred & George apparating in Grimmauld Place, it made me question even that; and further, when Harry and Dumbledore went to see Slughorn to offer him the Potions job, Harry asked why they couldn't just apparate into the house. Dumbledore told him that magical persons have protections that keep others from doing so (much like Muggles have locks), but didn't say that they themselves couldn't do so. Very curious. From aholm006 at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 02:13:56 2007 From: aholm006 at gmail.com (rummage8) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:13:56 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171957 > Inge: > Wasn't it "Tonks" who found Harry on the Hogwarts Express after > everyone else had gotten off? > Might this actually have been Draco, sort of regretting what he did to > Harry? (though in my oppionion Harry deserved what he got there!! ) > Rummage8 writes: Yea, but how would he have gotten back in to the Great Hall fast enough to retell the story to all his friends. As we know by now, there arent many ways to get into the castle Rummage8 From sedyn2000 at yahoo.de Tue Jul 17 02:48:25 2007 From: sedyn2000 at yahoo.de (Sedyn) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:48:25 -0000 Subject: Tiger's Bragging Rights Contest Rules Revision-- READ PLEASE and RULES REPOS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171958 Delurking now before they post the whole book online o_0 here I go: "I hereby certify that I have not read the scanned "Epilogue" pages or any summary of them." Verena Schwarting Compulsory Questions (50 points total): 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Hagrid 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? A Dark Mark (unoriginal, but I can't think of anything else) 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs. Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Bill Weasley d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Anti-Voldemort and Pro-Harry. He joined Dumbledore's to defeat Voldemort and became DDM after a while, but now he's on his own and will do whatever he deems necessary. He will however also try to protect Harry and Draco because he promised their mums. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Riddle's Diary (inactivated) b. ring (inactivated) c. the real Slytherin's Locket (already inactivated by someone else) d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Gryffindors shield f. Harry's Scar g. In Voldemort Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Patronus: Phoenix Boggart: dead Dumbledore Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? pure Love in all shapes Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1. Snape will help/protect Harry during the Horcrux hunt, but Harry will not know it's him. When he finds out he will still distrust Snape and endanger Snape's life because of it. 2. Harry will use Dumbledores pensieve several times. He will get additional information on finding the missing Horcruxes and he will get the proof to convince him that Snape is on his side. 3. Harry will go to the place behind the veil, but not necessary by literally going through the veil. He will have some sort of near-death experience and the Draught of Living Death will play a part. During that adventure he will see Sirius again. 4. Lucius will be killed by Voldemort or on Voldemort's orders which will convince Draco to help Harry in some way, probably near the end of the book. It will take some courage on Draco's part. 5. Lupin will harm or has harmed Harry or somebody Harry cares about by withholding information. Lupin is of course very sorry (again). Harry will be disappointed but forgive him eventually (before the epilogue). 6. Snape will live snarkily ever after or I will cry myself to sleep that night ;) I will search out the scanned pages now so don't accept any corrections from me :) Sedyn From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 04:06:46 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:06:46 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171959 > Lisa: > > has everyone already rejected the > > idea that Nagini is the snake that Harry freed in SS? Do their > > descriptions conflict? > > Nagini is a python; the snake Harry freed was a boa constrictor. JW: I know nothing about snakes, but a few minutes of googling divulges that boas and pythons are both contrictors. Pythons are old world while boas (which used to be considered new world) are found in both old and new world. Both groups can live to 30-40 years, so Nagini could easily date back to VWI. Is there canonical indication that this was the case? If so, where was she for the intervening years? They are both primitive snakes, with some lizard-like structures, and are cousins often placed in the same taxonomic family (boidae, IIRC). You can find some non-scientific references that do NOT carefully distinguish between boas and pythons, and I found some non- technical references that seem to use the terms as practically synonymous. This might be interesting: NEITHER PYTHONS NOR BOAS ARE POISONOUS!! Nor do they chew or otherwise crush prey with their teeth - they constrict to smother, not to crush bones, and they swallow prey whole. Nagini therefore can not be a RW python or boa - she is poisonous, crushes, and crunches. Perhaps JKR's knowledge of biology is as precise as her use of math. Harry's zoo friend came from Brazilian stock (IIRC), and would NOT be a python. However, in layperson's usage, there does not seem to be a sharp differentiation between the two types of snakes. Those who wish to consider the issue further may wish to research the detailed descriptions in SS/PS, GOF and OotP. From talisman22457 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 04:14:48 2007 From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:14:48 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: <3202590701160139u194c83e8m946b4a499b47637e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171960 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Scarah wrote: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: What *Do* You know? >Talisman then: >For instance, I am sure that DD is the author of the Prophecy, and >that the dynamics in play, and the inevitability of the final show- >down, are his very creations. >Sarah: >What do you suggest are the mechanics of the seemingly legitimate >Pensieve recreation of Trelawney giving the prophecy >snip< The short answer is I think she was possessed--outright or some ventriloquistic variant yet to be named/revealed. Since it has taken me so long to get back to you, let me give you the long answer, too. ; ) We know Trelawny has given two *real* prophecies. Real in the sense that they come true, and that she delivers them with peculiar...shall we say, flare? DD has played both sides of the game, sometimes granting Trelawney authenticity, but Rowling has said enough to tell us that Trelawney is not a *true seer,* i.e. an oracle channeling the numina. JKR: "...at one point there was a blind character who went by the name of Mopsus, and I will let you look him up because there is a mythological connection there, but he sort of -- that was a very early character and he had the power of second sight, in other words he was a bit like Professor Trelawney...the reason I cut him was he was too good. As the story evolved, if there was somebody who really could do divination at the time that Harry was alive, it greatly diminished the drama of the story because someone out there knew what was going to happen. So that is why Mopsus went and I have never really replaced him ." Edinburgh "cub reporter" press conference, ITV, 16 July 2005 http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-edinburgh- ITVcubreporters.htm Rowling has insured that, during Harry's lifetime, no one will be able to do *true* divination. Trelawney *is,* indeed, a totally bogus seer. (Ironically, the future is spelled out in the teacup lesson in PoA, and in the cards she pulls in HBP--but Trelawney just can't get the message). However, I'm sure the overwhelming number of readers will agree that she has *authentic* experiences of some nature when she delivers the prophecies. The prophecies may be *fake,* but Trelawney is not the one faking. The events come upon her unbidden; she doesn't perform them of her own volition, and she has no memory of them afterwards. If she is not serving as the mouthpiece of the Divine, she is certainly an authentic *instrument* of powers, closer to home. Necessarily, then, a magical person with some interest in planting these expectations. Indeed, that old fibber DD, while deceiving Harry, is also having a little joke with himself. For Trelawney's prophecies *are* true, that is to say they certainly predict the future. DD, himself, makes sure of that. As to the *possessory* mode of transference, notice how each event involves Trelawney feeling ill: " Professor Trelawney didn't seem to hear him. Her eyes started to roll...she looked as though she was about to have some sort of seizure...(PoA 324). For the second prophesy, she blames this on "the heat of the day" (324). Speaking of the first prophecy in HBP, she says "...I remember I was starting to feel a little odd, I had not eaten much that day..."(544). Compare Trelawney's complaints to Harry's experience in the O.W.L. exams in OoP, from page 725 to the end of the chapter; he wasn't exactly feeling well, later, in the Atrium, either. While Harry's connection, even during possession, is unique, especially in that he remembers everything, I think his experiences still offer clues transferable to Trelawney's case. Trelawney loss of memory during the prophecies comports, instead, with Ginny's experience, as related in OoP. As Ginny explains to Harry: "Are there big blank periods where you don`t know what you`ve been up to?" "...No..." "Then [LV] hasn't ever possessed you...[w]hen he did it to me, I couldn't remember what I'd been doing for hours at a time" (OoP 500). In PoA, we see that Trelawney has no memory of delivering the second prophecy, and regarding the first prophecy, DD tells Harry: "She does not know--and I think it would be unwise to enlighten her--that she made the prophecy about you and Voldemort" (HBP 427). Our bogus seer evinces the trance-like signs of someone who has lost the ability to control their own functions: "Professor Trelawney had gone rigid...her eyes were unfocused and her mouth sagging...[she] didn't seem to hear him "(PoA 324). Then she begins to broadcast what is clearly someone else's message, in a "harsh voice, quite unlike her own" (PoA 324). Now, we haven't heard anyone else describe a voice emanating from a possessed person but, we've seen it: "...when the creature spoke, it used Harry's mouth, so that in his agony he felt his jaw move..." (OoP 816). I feel fairly confident that Harry sounded *quite unlike himself,* at that moment, too. And again, "He was feeling sick again, just as he had the night he had the vision of the snake...the words came, just as they had back in the Gryffindor changing room, as though a stranger was speaking them through Harry's mouth..." (OoP 541, 542). So we've got: 1) magical (human) / non-numinal control 2) feeling ill 3) loss of bodily function/faculties 4) loss of memory 5) speaking in a strange voice Nothing fits these symptoms like possession. Who could be behind this? For evidence, let's just take a look at the prophecies, themselves. As Harry did, let's start with Number Two. Again, it was an authentic event for Trelawney. Here, however, no handy BS about self-fulfillment attains (not that it really makes sense for Number One, either). No one heard the second prophesy, except Harry. He tried to tell Trelawney the gist of it, but she dismissed him as deluded. She then had no additional involvement, whatsoever, in events as they unfolded. Harry intended to tell Ron and Hermione, but, as soon as he found them, Hermione told him of Buckbeak's imminent demise, and Harry forgot *all* about the prophecy...he neither mentions it or even thinks of it again...until the following day, *after* everything fulfilling the utterance is completely over. Harry could not anticipate how the prophecy would be accomplished, none of his actions were motivated or informed by it, indeed he didn't even recall it during the adventure that set it's fulfillment in action. No self-fulfillment *at all.* And yet, Harry certainly watched it come true. Readers who understand that Order operatives, Lupin and Snape, were indeed working in concert to effectuate DD's plan to send Wormtail back to fetch Vapormort, don't have to inquire further. It's clearly DD's plan, and it's DD's prophecy. (Readers who don't understand this, by now, require more remediation than will be provided in this post.) Now, inasmuch as the second prophesy played absolutely no role in *effectuating* Wormtail's return to Voldemort, why would DD bother to put on the performance? Purely for Harry's indoctrina er I mean information. Heh. And ours. Just as Prophecy One was used to *inform,* and motivate, Lord Voldemort. As for whether it's in DD's character, well, I've seen him do worse. But then, unlike some supposedly *rational* people, I don't force the evidence to conform to my preconceived notion of DD's character. I just go where the evidence takes me. >Talisman then: >I'm not so sure DD's plan is all about bringing Voldemort down. >There is too much evidence of DD facilitating Voldemort, in the first >place, for me to say that. >Scarah: >I think there is evidence of facilitating Voldemort, but isn't the >purpose of it to get Voldemort "right where we want him?" I'd like to >hear more on this. Talisman: Well, everything DD does to everyone is meant to put them *right where he wants them.* The question is does DD simply want to axe Lord Voldemort? I think he clearly could have done it before now, as I said in my old post: Going for the Vold: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79769 , circa Sept. 2003. >Scarah: >If Dumbledore facilitated Pettigrew's escape, and the subsequent >events at the graveyard, that has more obvious benefits toward the >goal of bringing down Voldemort. It's hard to get an invisible target >roaming the floor of the Albanian forest. Talisman: I think it is substantially easier to dispose of Hxes, without the Dark Lord and his re-empowered minions breathing down one's neck. And no, I don't think it would be difficult at all for DD to find the rat du jour in order to whack the final bit of evil soul tethered to this mortal plane. He seems to have a pretty good method of monitoring LV's disembodied presence, as we've all seen in CoS (328). Moreover, I'm sure DD could whack every rat in Albania, in one toss, if it came to that. I'd say DD could tell what LV was, way back at Mrs. Cole's orphanage-- before then even--as he arived there knowing what he wanted to say-- and show--Riddle. I imagine it's why DD, himself, undertook the task of informing Riddle of his wizardhood. And I'll bet anything that DD knew Riddle was Slytherin's only remaining heir. He wasn't shopping for just any psychopath. But, having found the one he wanted, he *has* been very carefully grooming him--since before LV made his first Hx. Amid a growing body count. DD certainly knew what Tom Riddle was up to the first time The Chamber was opened. This is DD at nearly 100 years of age, shortly before his defeat of Grindewald. Rowling, via Harry, clearly shows us that DD used Legilimency on adolescent Tommy. "`Well hurry off to bed,' said Dumbledore, *giving Riddle exactly the kind of penetrating stare Harry knew so well*" (CoS 245, my emphasis). Now DD is an awesome Legilimens who can find memories folks don't even know they have (see e.g. Morfin and Winky). And there is Tom Riddle, with his use of the Basilisk and the murder of Myrtle topmost on his mind...do you think DD doesn't know? Do you think he couldn't do something about it? I've had someone try to deny that this is a significant scene-- because it's so *small.* All I can say is: "Buddy, you don't know how to read a mystery." Cheers, Talisman PS It all feed back in to the old split with Slytherin. Having some venue--including Harry's soul--for accepting/reincorporating the Slytherin side is the point. Rowling has compared the 4 Hogwarts Houses to the personal psyche. The Alchemy involved is heavily Jungian. It involves acknowledging the Slytherin in yourself--not pretending that it's *over there* in those other *awful people.* This is the purpose of Harry Hx, too. You can easily see how Harry projects his Shadow onto Snape--which is why he is going to have to 1) accept Snape; 2)own up to his own short comings, his own dark side. See Dark Mirror Part I: Hairy as Lupin: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163728 . From toonmili at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 03:31:50 2007 From: toonmili at yahoo.com (toonmili) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 03:31:50 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171961 Becks: > I like this theory so much that I am really really hoping I am right > and if not I feel that JKR should change her book to accommodate my > wishes (only joking guys don't shout at me or I will have to go back > under my rock and hide). I understand that ESE Snape supporters > won't be so keen on this idea but I am a DDM Snape girl, always have > been, always will be. (Even after reading the final book. If JKR > says Snape is ESE I will still be of the opinion that she is > mistaken.) > Toonmili: I feel the same way about an evil Snape.I have already said that I will pitch the book across the room if Snape is evil myslef.That being said... I don't think her sole purpose was to show that patronuses can change. I think she was by the room of requirement for a reason. Again this goes back to my Tonks being Snape's assistant theory. He maybe told her to be there to see if she could find out what Draco was up to or to guard to see if anyone was coming through the room so she could alert the Order but she kept leaving her post and wondering around and that the reason why he was angry with her at the begining. She must have been acting off for a while. Snape was sitting in his office in the middle of night as if waiting for news. Who knows if he was waiting for News from her or Dumbledore From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 04:20:41 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:20:41 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171962 > Lisa: > Nagini is a python; the snake Harry freed was a boa constrictor. Deepthi: Where in canon is it stated that Nagini is a python? I always assumed that it was a cobra or some other venomous snake. Nagini is an Indian name for a female cobra, and Nagini is always referred to as "she" or "her" in the books, never "him". - Deepthi From angellima at xtra.co.nz Tue Jul 17 03:43:01 2007 From: angellima at xtra.co.nz (Angel Lima) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:43:01 +1200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] predictions In-Reply-To: <1184612397.4037.95940.m46@yahoogroups.com> References: <1184612397.4037.95940.m46@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <235CAD93D4794D72BB4F21EAAA2D6790@GclanPC> No: HPFGUIDX 171963 HP (Harry Potter) for Grownups I have been reading the flurry of posts through the last couple of days and though I have not read the spoilers touted biggest fricking spoilers ever by TK I really want to put out my predictions seeing as it is the first and last time I will be able to do so. Long time member but have never managed to post successfully - yes am a twat... unfortunately this is really rushed as I am at work but caught a snippet warning the predictions will close early due to the above mentioned spoiler. Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH I wish, but no, he lives. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No his punishment is to live also - death is easy...besides children's book here and to have Harry be a murderer ...well only du Maurier had a hero be a murderer somewhat successfully. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? It will break me to read of Snape's death, sniff! Luckily Hagrid snuffs it too 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Dark Mark 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? Yes c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes They are all enrolled but do not attend. Their enrollment is important to be able to get back into Hogwarts to recover the horcrux hidden there. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, *excluding any epilogue*? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" At first I thought Argie Filch but then Dumbledore's brother must surely be older than Argus, so Dumbly's bro instead. 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Harry b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Doge or Shacklebolt if the ministry can spare him d. Potions Master or Mistress? Prof. Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? Professor McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Dumbledore's man through and through! 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Tom Riddle's diary (destroyed) b. Gaunt's ring (destroyed) c. Merope's locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup (with RAB) e. Quidditch Cup f. Nagini (GoF and HBP) g. Inside Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Snape's Patronus : Acromantula Snape's Boggart : Mimbulus mimbletonia Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love; as much as time, death, knowledge etc were in their rooms though I think here, it would take pure love to open the door and call forth its powers - perhaps representations of loved ones without physical form - hallows? After all, one's loved ones never die when they are kept true to. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. All my logical predictions have been dispersed for the grandeur of farfetchedness and the unexpected . If any of these even hint of realisation then hailing me would not be adequate reward 1. There is a thing about "hand" that is mightily discombobulating, one's right hand in particular. Dumbledore, Peter and Harry lost theirs, Peter 's replaced, Harry's regrown. Even Voldemort was "regrouped" by Peter's and Harry's right hands. From lack of any other thoughts on this subject I'd say Peter slays Fenrir to save Ron. 2. Snape did not AK Dumbledore. In a volume about non-verbal spells and from a character championing such a prowess as well as the ability to "put a stopperer on death" I dare say Dumbledore was already dead from the ring except Snape put a stopperer on it - a clamp - hence the very dead "blackened" hand. Snape merely removed his "magic" and thus could not have murdered Dumbledore as he was already "dead", could not rip his soul by committing such a heinous act as murder and at the same time save Malfoy and himself from Voldemort's order and the UV. It would also explain why he was a willing participant of the UV in the first place. 3. Petunia and Lily are descendents of Ravenclaw - hence Petunia's secret (her family is from a lost line of magick. Their parents response to Lily's magic implied they were much more than happy to discover a witch in their midst. Perhaps thier euphoria "pride" according to Petals was in rediscovering a witch in the family) and being named after flowers will coincide with the roots of Rowena from the rowan tree as will Lily's red hair, coincidentally I wonder if Harry mistook a rowan for a beech in Snape's worst memory and where the trio once studied. Rowena Ravenclaw might be buried under there. 4. I have always thought Minerva was Voldemort's most loyal servant- so unlike Minerva's character to be subservient and evil yet I could never sway the nagging feeling of why Dumbledore did not trust her completely whereas he trusted Snape implicitly. It would also explain why she was extra-eager to recover the Quidditch Cup as I believe it might be another horcrux, perhaps fashioned by Rowena. 5. Amelia Bones plays a significant part in DH. I very very much doubt she is dead as her skills were renowned. 6. R.A.B Regulus Arctrus Black? I'm hesitant as Sirius spoke of him almost as an idiot with a lot less talent than the Marauders, yet Peter proved too quick for Paddy when he slaughtered 12 muggles as did Uglytrix when she snuck in a jab whilst Sirius was too busy laughing and mocking her. So beloved as he is , Sirius is undoubtedly not a very good judge of character. Still, Dumbledore told Harry recovering that locked required two, I wonder then if it was Regulus and Kreacher on that trip. It is only because of Kreacher that I am willing to count Regulus as RAB otherwise was at first inclined to lean towards Amelia Bones but seeing as she is ASB I would have thought Borgins was a better choice but alas will stick with Regulus and Kreacher. 7. Harry's friends are vital to the final battle. Whereas the deatheaters do Voldy's bidding out of fear, Harry's friends would stand infront of an AK for Harry out of loyalty and love, though they don't do that in DH, it is Ron who slays Nagini and depending on how far the epilogue takes us to, he becomes the future Minister of Magic. 8. The dead play a major role in Deathly Hallows. The upside is we get to see Harry's family as he saw in the Mirror of Erised but in no way does Harry go through the veil, dies and comes back to life ... that is preposterous even for my handy dandy Trelawny crystal ball. 9. I made this my final prediction as these are children's books and thus highly unlikely, still I think Draco might be Snape's son as I cannot fathom otherwise, why Narcissa sought his help. Snape's worst memory verified he was a loner and did follow the Marauders - Harry describes him as wondering without aim, yet stopping when the Marauders had stopped etc. That tree and all those people are linked, but Lucius was not there. Lily was at the lake with other girls that Harry did not recognise, one of them might have been Narcissa. Her saying Lucius always trusted Snape rings false as their only shared bond was that of death eater. Also it is Narcissa that is blond not Lucius as the movies have made him, besides the way Severus stitched up Draco after the sectumsempra curse when he found him spoke of caress not just efficiency. Cannot wait for Harry to fall at Snivvy's feet and plead forgiveness Angel Lima From stanner91 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 04:43:19 2007 From: stanner91 at yahoo.com (stanner91) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:43:19 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Harry Potter Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171965 > Damit Lazarus: > Does anyone else think that Harry's father James was a bit > arrogant in his youth? As far as JK Rowling has shown him, James Potter was an arrogant show-off due his natural magical talent. Frankly, he sounds like a jerk. I also agree Prof. Snape will be shown to be working for the Order and specifically with Prof. Dumbledore. stanner91 From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 05:01:38 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 05:01:38 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171966 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sdeepthi" wrote: > Where in canon is it stated that Nagini is a python? ========================== Lisa: Good question -- I thought I remembered it, and just googled it. According to Wikipedia: "Nagini is a fictional animal from the Harry Potter series created by JK Rowling. She is a large serpent, specifically a Brazilian Python who is the loyal pet of the main antagonist of the series named Lord Voldemort. Lord Voldemort is able to communicate with her due to an unusual genetic trait that he recieved from his ancestor named Salazar Slytherin. Both Lord Voldemort and Harry Potter are able to speak Parselmouth, the language of snakes." Wikipedia, of course, is far from canon. Perhaps the movie portrayed Nagini as a python, and that's why it's sticking in my mind? From juli17 at aol.com Tue Jul 17 05:41:41 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 05:41:41 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171967 "sdeepthi" wrote: > > Where in canon is it stated that Nagini is a python? > ========================== > > Lisa: > > Good question -- I thought I remembered it, and just googled it. > According to Wikipedia: > "Nagini is a fictional animal from the Harry Potter series created by > JK Rowling. She is a large serpent, specifically a Brazilian Python who > is the loyal pet of the main antagonist of the series named Lord > Voldemort. Lord Voldemort is able to communicate with her due to an > unusual genetic trait that he recieved from his ancestor named Salazar > Slytherin. Both Lord Voldemort and Harry Potter are able to speak > Parselmouth, the language of snakes." > Wikipedia, of course, is far from canon. Perhaps the movie portrayed > Nagini as a python, and that's why it's sticking in my mind? > Julie: I believe JKR also mentioned that when she wrote the first book she thought pythons were poisonous. It was only later that she realized they are not poisonous (they constrict their prey). So Nagini is something that doesn't exist in nature, a poisonous python. I don't really have a problem with this myself, given that the WW is full of creatures, both real (owls) and mythological or invented (Hippogriffs), who have certain magical abilities. So there's no reason Nagini couldn't have some sort of magically produced poison (either as part of her own nature magical, or as something Voldemort's magic gave her). Julie From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 17 05:53:37 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 05:53:37 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171968 Some random thought on questions Joan of Anarchy (love that name) would like answered: > 13. Gryffindor's Sword I wonder if anybody had seen Gryffindor's Sword before Harry pulled it out of the hat; I suspect they had not, I think that's the first time anyone had seen that sword in a thousand years; if so I'll bet Dumbledore gives Harry the sword in his will and I would not be surprised if that is the very instrument Harry uses to finish off the last part of Voldemort's soul, the part still remaining in his body. >14. Neville -- memory, toad, Herbology Neville was older than Harry was when his parents were attacked, so normally you'd expect him to remember it, however it was so horrible he may be suppressing it, and as a result be uneasy of memory in general. I expect he will improve over time. And I don't think there is any great mystery about the Herbology, he just enjoys the subject and is good at it. > 17. Veil of death As good a writer as JKR is I don't think even she can clear up that little mystery. > 24. Hermione's E in DADA Hermione is very very good at DADA, but not as good as Harry, Hermione admits that herself. I have the feeling that an O in that subject is extremely rare; or perhaps Harry just blew the curve that year. And there is something not on your list that I'd like to be cleared up, it comes from book 2: "While Harry was sure he had never heard the name T.M. Riddle before, it still seemed to mean something to him, almost as though Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very small, and had half-forgotten. But this was absurd. He'd never had friends before Hogwarts, Dudley had made sure of that." (Chamber of Secrets, 233-34) What on Earth was that about? > Joan of Anarchy, who's been waiting for Book 7 > for ten years and now realizes she's not ready for it I know the feeling, I'm both looking forward to the book and dreading it. What if all my pet theories turn out to be nonsense? Oh well, like it or not here it comes, so put on your hard hat and flack jacket and brace for the explosion! Eggplant From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 17 06:13:19 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 06:13:19 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171969 > > "sdeepthi" wrote: > > > Where in canon is it stated that Nagini is a python? > > ========================== > > > > Lisa: > > > > Good question -- I thought I remembered it, and just googled it. > > According to Wikipedia: > > "Nagini is a fictional animal from the Harry Potter series created > by > > JK Rowling. She is a large serpent, specifically a Brazilian Python > who > > is the loyal pet of the main antagonist of the series named Lord > > Voldemort. Lord Voldemort is able to communicate with her due to an > > unusual genetic trait that he recieved from his ancestor named > Salazar > > Slytherin. Both Lord Voldemort and Harry Potter are able to speak > > Parselmouth, the language of snakes." > > Wikipedia, of course, is far from canon. Perhaps the movie > portrayed > > Nagini as a python, and that's why it's sticking in my mind? > Anne Squires: I reiterate sdeepthi's question---Where is the canon that Nagini is a python? I don't think Wikipedia is a reliable source, as Lisa acknowledges. IMO, The HP Lexicon is a *much* better source. They describe Nagini as, "the gigantic snake kept at Voldemort's side." The HP Lexicon does not mention a place of origin nor a species. I don't think any of the books give this information; thus, the Lexicon doesn't have this information either. Anne Squires > Julie: > I believe JKR also mentioned that when she wrote the first > book she thought pythons were poisonous. It was only later > that she realized they are not poisonous (they constrict > their prey). So Nagini is something that doesn't exist in > nature, a poisonous python. I don't really have a problem > with this myself, given that the WW is full of creatures, > both real (owls) and mythological or invented (Hippogriffs), > who have certain magical abilities. So there's no reason > Nagini couldn't have some sort of magically produced poison > (either as part of her own nature magical, or as something > Voldemort's magic gave her). > Julie Anne Squires Now: I went to Accio Quotes and searched for anything about "pythons." JKR mentions the word "python" twice. Both times are in reference to Monty Python. http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp_a=sp100168f8&sp_q=pythons&submit=Search&sp_p=any&sp_f=iso-8859-1 I also searched for anything about "Nagini." I found that she has discussed her, but always refers to her as a snake. Not a specific kind of snake. http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp_a=sp100168f8&sp_f=iso-8859-1&sp_q=nagini&submit=Search Now, I acknowledge that JKR may have said something about pythons (the snakes, not the comedy team) and I just can't find it. Julie, I would be interested in the source of your information. Anne Squires From talisman22457 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 07:23:27 2007 From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 07:23:27 -0000 Subject: It's Guilty!DD all over again (was: New poll for HPforGrownups TBAY: ESE!DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171970 Before we start, let me explain that AutoCorrect is dead set on rendering lizzyben as lazybones. I keep changing it back, and it keeps *correcting* me, so if lazybones shows up anywhere, blame Bill Gates, pas moi. Heck, go ahead and blame him for any errors. ;o) --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lizzyben04" wrote: > > lizzyben: >snip< > Basically, I think that DD has been using Harry as part of an intricate & complex > plan that is *not* in Harry's best interests. >snip< Talisman: You might be interested in my vintage version: Guilty!DD. Some of the more scandalous entries date from July 3, 2003, see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/66983 , et seq. I could also say, see my posts generally. Often each post deals with some specific phase of The Plan, however, one of the posts that aggregates various parts is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159930 , from October 2006. It starts out all HBP, but goes back to other topics. As to Harry's best interest. I've stated in various post, likely the easiest to access is this short one from January http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163065 that DD is a god substitute---displaced --because our genre is not mythology proper (the particular plot thread at issue is quest Romance)--but serving in the role, from a literary perspective. Recently NPR made available a previously unreleased section of an old, 1998 interview, in which Rowling seems to agree. Go to this page: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11935611 then select the last link ,*Her Favorite Characters etc.,* from the 1998 interview link inset to hear Rowling say it, herself. JKR: * he's almost godlike, isn't he?* I expect that, rather than pretending that bad things don't happen to *innocent* people, Rowling is going to offer us the hope that everything, no matter how awful, works to some good end. That's the only way to resolve the *epitome of goodness* business with *almost godlike DD's* outrageous behavior. Personally, I enjoy Guilty!DD. I just love the old scoundrel. He's far more exciting than the twinkly old fool. Plus, he's justified by the text, whereas the twinkly crowd has to keep complaining of plot holes and/or constructing Rube Goldberg's to explain how DD *wasn't* involved. > lizzyben > First, I think DD arranged the events at Godric's Hollow in order to > defeat LV & get a Chosen One w/special powers - Talisman: Close enough, though we have to watch that word: defeat. Also, I believe DD actually *chose* Harry. Offering Neville as an option was merely DD's way of verifying what he already anticipated, i.e. that LV would prefer Harry. See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/82031 for discussion of how GH worked into some future aspects of the plan, and mention that the plan is far older than Harry. Lizzyben: >he did this by first leaking the prophecy, Talisman: Well, go back a bit further; DD is the very *author* of both prophesies: Again, see e.g. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159930 . In the process of this reply, I was reminded that I owed Scarah a post, dating from her February post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163826 . My reply deals with Prophecies and Purposes, and has now been posted at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/171960 Lizzyben: >helping Lily w/ancient blood magic as a Plan B if they are discovered, Talisman: I don't think this was Plan B. DD created LV's interest in Harry, knew Wormtail was the spy, and happily allowed Sirius to go to the pokey. Moreover, the effects of GH continue to support so many other phases of The Plan, that it's clear it all happened as Guilty!DD intended. Still, there is no doubt, Lily had been instructed in what she had to do: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163793 >Lizzyben: then alerting LV of the Potter's secret > location. Talisman: You mean allowing Wormtail to take care of this detail, don't you? Not that Wormtail actually knew he was part of DD's plan, they never do . lizzyben: >He kept the invisibility cloak so that the Potters wouldn't be able to hide Harry beneath it. (JKR's important unasked question). Talisman: Indeed, DD probably had it lent to someone else, someone who can't be invisible at will. And, while we see in OoP that lending rare ICs to other Order members is an established custom, you can be sure DD knew it would be out of Potter hands the night LV came knocking. lizzyben: >When LV attacks Harry, Lily's ancient magic protects > Harry, causing the AK to rebound on LV & leave Harry w/special > powers - just as DD intended. Talisman: I think the burning skin came directly from the *sacrifice.* Whatever blood protection (heretofore unused) comes with living at the Dursley's (which must now come into play before July 31, or never) was prepared by DD post -GH, using Lily's sacrificed blood as one of the ingredients. The bouncing AK and the squirt of Dark Wizard juice that effect Harry are more likely explained by DD making a HX of Harry--using the bit of LV's soul that was severed with Lily`s murder. Or as I've said elsewhere: Voldemort did the murder, DD did the spell . Of course, LV had no idea .but he will. Just in time for it to save Harry's butt. My original Hx post appeared on another site in October of 2005, but, I mentioned part of this in January 2007 in Dark Mirror Part I: Hairy as Lupin, which can be found at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163728 . lizzyben: > DD needed this "chosen one" to be loyal to him & ready to fight. So > he placed Harry w/the Dursleys, knowing that they wouldn't care > about what happened to Harry, or interfere w/DD's Plan. DD let > Sirius stay in Azkaban, knowing he was innocent, to get Harry's > legal guardian out of the way. Because the Dursleys were so > abusive, DD knew that Harry would be grateful & thankful that > DD "rescued" him from this abusive home, & see Hogwarts as his real > home. This ensured that he would be loyal & willing to fight for > DD's cause from then on out. The blood protection thing was mostly > just an excuse. Talisman: Yep. Harry is DD's product. Lots of people have discussed this since the beginning of this group. As for the blood protection, which hasn't been invoked at all in books 1-6, I've never found it a compelling basis for keeping Harry at the Dursley's all those years. Since he started at Hogwarts--when Lv came back for a visit--the maximum time it might be used is the two summer months of vacation: July and August. We know that Harry spends part of that time other places: the Burrow, Diagon Alley, The QWC, Grimauld Place: so even less than that. Year 6 he was only at Number 4 for two weeks. Add to that, that when he IS home, he stays outside--which also means outside the protection--as much as possible. You're really down to very little time--and that never used to date. Even if it proves useful in Harry's 17th year, DD could have reestablished Harry there at a later date and provided more oversight (as Snape did when he sent the Order members at the end of OoP-- thanks to what he saw in Harry's memories) except that DD *wanted* Harry to have the Dursley experience. Can't have another *pampered little prince* (OoP 837) read here: James Potter. Sirius's manipulation had other purposes, as well. Timing is everything, and DD brought Sirius out, let him establish a limited relationship with Harry, and then bumped him off for specific reasons. Happily, Rowling says she'll shed more light on this in DH. See, e.g. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67142 although I no longer expect, or want, much in the way of Harry's free agency. By the way, my pal, annemehr, has been asking what will happen when Harry finds out what DD has been up to, since the early days of Guilty!DD, back in 2003. lizzyben: > He's also arranged things so that LV would use Harry's blood for his > resurrection. Right before Harry's due back at Hogwarts, DD fetches > Vapor Voldie back from Albania via Quirrel. DD also moves the Stone > of immortality to Hogwarts as LV-bait. When LV tries to get it, DD > ensures that Harry is there, too. LV realizes he can't touch or harm > Harry & flees; now terrified of Harry's powers. DD lets Vapor > Voldie go on purpose. DD destroys the Stone - knowing that LV will > now have to resort to a specific magical ritual to ressurrect. Talisman: And ensures that LV will insist on Harry's blood for the recipe. All covered in the distant past. See, e.g.: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81961 , Sept 2003 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159930 , October 2006 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159935 , October 2006 lizzyben: > In GOF, DD knows LV is back, because DD had previously purchased the > Riddle House. He knows the ritual that LV will use to resurrect & > has manipulated LV into choosing Harry for the "blood of the > enemy." LV thinks that using Harry's blood will remove the > special "Can't touch" blood protection that Harry had in SS - just > as DD intended. So when Harry tells DD about LV's reason for > choosing Harry for the ritual, DD gets > a *Gleam of triumph*. All is going according to his Plan. Talisman: Natch. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/131961 July 2005. Lizzyben: >This means that DD knew Fake!Moody was a Death Eater, & knew what would > happen when Harry entered the TWT. When Crouch Sr. tried to warn DD, > DD called Fake!Moody, alone, to search the Hogwarts grounds for him, > knowing Fake!Moody would kill Crouch when he found him. DD *wanted* > the Death Eaters to be able to capture Harry. Talisman: In Message http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83543 , October 2003, Talisman wrote: > You also have to join the Graveyard Scene to the rest of the book. > If you take all the evidence in GoF that DD planned for the > Graveyard Scene and was totally on to Fake!Moody, it negates the > possibility that he didn't have protections in place. >snip< >DD was on to Fake!Moody before he showed up at Hogwarts. Don't forget that DD instigated the TWT, knowing full well that LV was en route and looking for a way to get Harry's blood. DD also knew LV would believe his *jinx* would require a new DADA (though DD had long since disposed of LV's version of any jinx), so LV would plan to *get in* via the year 4 DADA professor--ergo DD called in the old warrior Moody to take the hit. When the dustbins went off, DD knew LV had taken the DADA bait. Game on. Also, you can bet DD dropped a little bug in Bertha's nosy ear-- knowing she'd high-tail it for Albania--all primed with TWT info. Add her to DD's body count. lizzyben: > It seems like using Harry's blood created some special effects on > LV - eg. he can't create more horcruxes, & possibly other side > benefits. Talisman: I don't think Harry's blood is what precludes additional Hx manufacture. As we see when Riddle is questioning Slughorn in HBP, there are limitations--Riddle's concern was with just how many one wizard could make. I'm betting the 7 part soul LV has now is pushing the envelope. But you can keep this part of ESE!DD, as original to you. ; ) Certainly there are other benefits, to be seen in DH. lizzyben: >In OOTP, DD lures both Harry & LV to the MOM so that LV > can possess him. This also increases Harry's strengths against LV - > LV can no longer posess him or share visions. Sirius is killed, > probably by DD or on DD's orders; Sirius was getting restless & too > protective of Harry. Talisman: See Guilty!DD--in spades (except that Sirius was always for the chop-- he was trouble before Book 5)-- starting with http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/66983 , July 2003,et seq. Please note, I explained the benefit before Rowling did. For additional exploration of the prophecy orb as bait, see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80164 , September 2003. lizzyben: >In HBP, DD tries to inflame Harry's hatred & > need for revenge in order to get the weapon ready, & this is > partially why he makes Harry witness his death. And etc. Talisman: A mighty big part of why he makes Harry witness his death---as I explained in Dark Mirror Part I: Hairy as Lupin , http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163728 January 2007. Lizzyben: > DD is sacrificing Harry's happiness & welfare for some distant > greater good that *only* DD is allowed to see. He is *using* Harry > as a pawn, & the traumas Harry endures are all part of increasing > Harry's fitness for DD's larger purpose. The worst part is, DD > actually seems to love Harry (against his will), yet he is still > willing to do this. It's all for THE PLAN, the noble, brilliant plan > that DD never sees fit to share w/Harry, even though his life may > depend upon it. Is that Plan worth it? I don't know, but I suspect > not. No goal is worth this much evil. Is defeating LV even the > actual plan? I'm not sure any more. DD could have taken out LV many > times himself, but he does not. Talisman: Well, we'll just have to allow JKR to wrap it up. As I've mentioned in various posts, from a literary perspective, DD is a displaced god. The Plan may well be Rowling's optimistic metaphysical assertion that all of the evil things that happen in the world, happen for good reason, rather than as random, useless, occurrences. She seems to posit a God, and usually people who do so believe that God is in charge. There's no denying that a lot of awful things happen to people, God being in charge, notwithstanding. I'm sure some of the local proselytizers will want to jump in here and talk about unauthorized apple snacks--and then we'll have to review the felix culpa, and so on. But, as the evidence points to Rowling envisioning an entity that is both the epitome of goodness and the choreographer of so much that ends in death and suffering, I'm guessing that her iteration of God doesn't get off the hook because of anything Lily and James had for lunch. No one has to agree with her metaphysics, but unless she does something to radically alter the situation in DH, that's where the subtext takes us. lizzyben: > By my count, DD is responsible for at least four murders, probably > more - the Potters, Sirius, Crouch Sr., Cedric, & (indirectly) all > of LV's new victims. Talisman: Don't be so conservative. DD's Plan goes back at least to Voldemort's childhood. You can add in all of Riddle/Voldemort's old victims too. As for named casualties, don't forget Quirrell (maybe even Nicholas and Perenelle Flamel--who might have kept their stone out of the limelight); Myrtle, since DD knew what he was bringing to Hogwarts; Bertha, Broderick Bode, and all the other people we've heard about: MadameBones, Emmeline Vance, etc. In addition to death, and grief, he's played a role in petrifications, Imperiouses, Crucios, other imprisonments (e.g. Hagrid, Sturgis Podmore, Stan Shunpike), and various other maimings (Arthur's snake attack, Greyback's werewolf bite victims, etc.) There really are too many to count. And, oh yeah, and his own demise, as well. Lizzyben: >He's caused Harry to have a miserable > childhood, allowed him to be abused, tortured & traumatized, and > killed the adults who actually loved Harry. DD exploits, > manipulates, & sacrifices people for his goals, and all indications > are that he expected to sacrifice Harry, as well. So yeah, however > noble DD's ultimate goal might be, he is surely Ever So Evil from > Harry's point of view. And mine, too. Ah, now you're into deep metaphysics. ; ) As long as I'm above page, I think DD's a perfect hoot. Wouldn't change him for all the gold in Gringotts. Relax and enjoy. Talisman, long on record with Guilty!DD, signing off for the Fellowship of the D.U.S.T. (Dumbledore Undercover Surveillance Team), posthumous division. PS I never post to TBay, because it describes itself as a forum for subversive readings--and I maintain that my readings conform to what the author wrote. From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 07:18:55 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:18:55 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? References: Message-ID: <01c301c7c842$bc8b7000$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 171971 >> "sdeepthi" wrote: >> > > Where in canon is it stated that Nagini is a python? >> > ========================== >> > >> > Lisa: >> > Good question -- I thought I remembered it, and just googled it. >> > According to Wikipedia: >> > "Nagini is a fictional animal from the Harry Potter series created by >> > JK Rowling. She is a large serpent, specifically a Brazilian Python who >> > is the loyal pet of the main antagonist of the series named Lord >> > Voldemort. Shelley says: I have never heard of Nagini's breed from any source either, although I fully agree that it must be a special breed of magical snake, because of Mr. Weasley's wound. Remember, they couldn't get it to stop bleeding? So, it must have a venom or magical poison that makes the victim hemorrhage to death, and isn't necessarily death from the primary poison from the fangs, but the secondary effect of the anticoagulant in the blood. I think Wikipedia is wrong in this case; it seems to me that the Brazilian Python was the snake at the zoo- the one Harry set on Dudley. I think Nagini is nothing more than a specially breed magical snake; one illegally breed, of course, or enhanced by spells to make her live longer, be tougher or otherwise more enduring. It was said that when Lord Voldemort possessed small animals, they didn't live long. He would have to do something special to Nagini to make her tough enough to withstand possession by him at the time that Nagini bit Arthur. Of course, whether she's a Horcrux or not (I don't think she is) is yet another discussion entirely. You wouldn't risk a Horcrux just to gain a prophesy, would you? Shelley From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 09:20:51 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:20:51 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups TBAY: Dumbledore is Ever So Evil! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171972 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "colwilrin" wrote: > > > lizzyben: > > So yeah, however > > noble DD's ultimate goal might be, he is surely Ever So Evil from > > Harry's point of view. And mine, too. > > > > > > lizzyben > > > > Colwilrin: > > I agree, but also disagree with your theory. I think that there is > little that has happened in the past 6 books that was beyond DD's > manipulation. IMO he is MM!DD (Master Manipulator DD). However, I > don't see this as evil. He has an agenda, for the greater good. > Though his actions may have caused pain to some, his underlying > intent is for the good of all. lizzyben: Yes, I agree w/what you are saying about Manipulative!DD, but for me, he shades into evil DD for a number of reasons. First, DD's absolute conviction that his vision of the "greatest good for the greatest number" justifies any means he might use to obtain that good, and any people he might sacrifice, use or exploit to reach that goal. That is a frightening philosophy, to me. Because once you identify your own goals w/"good", and believe that good gives you the right to hurt other people, there's really no limit to what you can do. After all, Al-Queda thinks that they are working for the greater good of the Muslim World, & that they can cause pain & suffering for this goal. The IRA thought that their noble goals justified blowing up schools & churches. The Nazis thought that they were working for the good of the Fatherland. Even the Death Eaters think that they are inflicting harm to further the "noble goal" of a Muggle-less world. Visions of a greater good are NOT ENOUGH, and do not justify using evil tactics to achieve that end. (I'm a moral absolutist. :)) But DD seems to constantly justify the harm he causes because of his Plan, and that is almost monstrous to me. He doesn't seem to have any check on his actions, any internal moral compass that stops him from inflicting harm if it serves his agenda. That is a recipe for tyranny & atrocity. Colwilrin: There is no element of "evil" to his > personality. If it does turn out that he is "evil" I will literally > fall of the couch! He reminds me more of what Spock from Star Trek > says- the good of the many outweigh the good of the one. He is very > logical and calculating...I find it very hard to believe that all of > Harry's adventures could have occurred without his knowledge and > allowance. lizzyben: IMO there are indications of evil in DD's personality, as well. I could have a grudging respect for a Manipulative!DD that is a sort of demi-god, forced to move the mere mortals around the chessboard to save the wizarding world at large - a tragic figure, kind of a "Heavy hangs the head that wears the crown" image. Except that DD seems to so often *enjoy* having more information than everyone else, enjoy feeling superior to everyone else ("brilliance, genius", "superior brain power" etc), and most of all, how he seems to enjoy using his great power against the powerless. It's the little things DD does, more than the grand plans, which really nag at me. It's how he oblivates Marietta, publically humiliates Snape with the vulture hat, knocks the Dursleys in the head w/wine glasses. Because He Can. The common theme in all of these is that DD is using his magical or social power against a person w/o power. In all these cases, the target of his actions is totally powerless to stop it. I think he's a bully, someone who has always been a member of an powerful elite & is almost unable to empathize w/the "common people" at the bottom of the heap. In contrast, we never see Snape using his magical power against powerless people. IMO, he would consider that to be unfair. Snape, unlike DD, knows what it's like to feel powerless or inferior, & is much more restrained in his use of magic against others. This is one of the reasons I like Snape more than DD. And it's one of the reasons I can't really see Snape as DD's Man. He's too different, & seems to operate under a different code. Colwilrin: > DD has surrounded Harry with the appropriate teachers, role models > and friends to foster his development and give him clues and unique > skills. I think little was left to chance. I don't think he went as > far as to assign R and Her to him as friends...but I also don't think > that it is meer coincidence that Harry ended up exposed to them early > on. lizzyben: Yeah, I agree that DD has orchestrated many events in order to train Harry. But I do not believe that he has done this in order to help Harry become a great wizard or a good man. All indications are that DD intends for Harry to die for DD's cause. Harry is supposed to be another sacrifice, like his parents before him. That's his appointed role in The Plan. This is why DD seemed to pity Harry in OOTP, & why he considers his love for Harry to be a fatal flaw in the plan. His plan is evil for Harry, whatever good it's supposed to do otherwise. Again, MM!DD might be thinking about the larger good & planning to sacrifice Harry in order to save the wizarding world at large. But IMO he becomes ESE!DD when he wants Harry to love him in spite of it. lizzyben, sending up a last, desperate hope for a good Snape. From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 17 11:19:32 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:19:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171973 > colebiancardi: > I DO hope in DH we get a scene where LV *gets* it - he is in the same > room as Snape and the revelation that Snape is Dumbledore's Man, > through and through, is made clear to him. That will be a rockin' > scene, IMHO. Even more rockin' is that if Harry is in that room as > well, and Harry finally understands Snape is loyal to Dumbledore and > is on the same side as Harry. Eddie: And perhaps this time Harry can help in the fight against Voldemort, unlike in OotP where Dumbledore put Harry was behind the fountain pieces. Can Harry and Snape achieve together what Dumbledore could not do alone (in the OotP battle)? Is this a uniting of the Gryffindor and Slytherin houses? And a reconciliation between the houses Snape and Potter? Eddie 3 days, 17 hours, 41 minutes, 37 seconds to go From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 12:14:18 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:14:18 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: <01c301c7c842$bc8b7000$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171974 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma" it seems to me that the Brazilian > Python was the snake at the zoo- the one Harry set on Dudley. =========================== Lisa: No, I do have canon for that. In SS, it specifically references that snake as a boa constrictor. And Harry didn't set the snake on Dudley. He unintentionally set the snake free; the snake didn't go after anyone. From ethveg at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 12:22:16 2007 From: ethveg at comcast.net (ethveg) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:22:16 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171975 The question of why Riddle's name was familiar to Harry is one of the BIG but seldom-seen-in-forums questions I've been wondering about. 'Almost as though he had been a friend in Harry's childhood.' I suspect Harry must have HEARD the name at some point when he was too young to encode it (store it in his memory) in a way which he could recall when he became verbal (~ 2.5 years - he'd have been with Petunia by then; he came to her at age 15 months. But I don't think it's likely she'd know the Riddle name, so he must have heard it very early.) Perhaps Lily (and James?) was an auror and already working on the Voldemort/Riddle history, and so discussed it at home? Even so, at age 14 months or younger I'm not sure Harry could encode the name in ANY way that would allow it to be recognized (and so 'seem familiar') when he heard it again in adulthood. ethveg From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 12:41:24 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:41:24 -0000 Subject: R.A.B. Theory/Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171977 So, I have really been thinking hard about R.A.B. lately, and I am quite convinced that it is Regulus Black. I know, I know, duh, where's the new theory? Well, maybe someone has mentioned this before, but what if Regulus isn't dead? What if, like many other people we know, he simply went into hiding? What if he's actually on our side? I have this wonderful thought bubbling up in me, that maybe, if Sirius doesn't come back, Harry will get to be with Regulus, and get to know Sirius through his brother. I don't know why I think that...I just have a feeling that Sirius isn't coming back, but that Harry will have another shot at having a family. Anyway, just wanted to toss that out there before all of our theories are either disproved or proved this weekend! Harry on, Katie From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 17 12:49:12 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:49:12 -0000 Subject: Where is Dumbledore's wand? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171978 Whatever became of Dumbledore's wand? The last we saw of it, it was flying over the battlement when Draco's "Expelliarmus" propelled it out of Dumbledore's hand. Eddie From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 13:01:40 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 06:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <133067.44822.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171979 ethveg wrote: Unrelated to my previous post, but on the lighter side, I have NEVER seen anyone post about what I consider to be one of JKR's BEST jokes: In SS/PS 1, when Vernon's concern about overhearing the Potters' name being discussed finally becomes greater than his fear of discussing the Potters with Petunia, he asks her what Harry's name is, offering several incorrect possibilities, such as "Harold" (and "Harvey"?) And I find Petunia's reply hilarious (remember they're in England!) - it's one of the first things to let me know that there was more to the HP series than a story for children. Anyone else find it as funny as I did/do? ethveg KATIE RESPONDS: I don't get it. I want to get the joke...I just don't. The exact conversation is: V: "Their son -- he'd be about Dudley's age now, wouldn't he?" P: "I suppose so." V: "What's his name again? Howard, isn't it?" P: "Harry. Nasty, common name, if you ask me." V: "Oh, yes, yes, I quite agree." This is from page 7 of the US Collector's Edition. I just don't get it. Please explain? : ) Katie . --------------------------------- Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mercuryblue144 at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 13:18:41 2007 From: mercuryblue144 at gmail.com (Beth Hartung) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:18:41 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: <133067.44822.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <133067.44822.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1be73e550707170618w2b9cd34bjd0d5894dc9bba80d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171980 My suspicion is ethveg's talking about Prince Harry. MercuryBlue On 7/17/07, Kathryn Lambert wrote: > KATIE RESPONDS: > I don't get it. I want to get the joke...I just don't. > The exact conversation is: > V: "Their son -- he'd be about Dudley's age now, wouldn't he?" > P: "I suppose so." > V: "What's his name again? Howard, isn't it?" > P: "Harry. Nasty, common name, if you ask me." > V: "Oh, yes, yes, I quite agree." > > This is from page 7 of the US Collector's Edition. I just don't get it. > Please explain? : ) Katie > -- "The truth shall set you free." --Aletha Freeman to Sirius Black, Where We Belong [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 13:30:02 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:30:02 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ethveg" wrote: Even so, at age > 14 months or younger I'm not sure Harry could encode the name in ANY > way that would allow it to be recognized (and so 'seem familiar') when > he heard it again in adulthood. =========================== Lisa: I agree that 14 months is too young to retain memories into adolescence, but Harry does have a "dream" about a flying motorcycle in SS. I guess he's got a lot buried in his subconscious! From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 17 13:47:56 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:47:56 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171982 Eggplant: > >14. Neville -- memory, toad, Herbology > > Neville was older than Harry was when his parents were attacked, so > normally you'd expect him to remember it, however it was so horrible > he may be suppressing it, and as a result be uneasy of memory in > general. I expect he will improve over time. And I don't think there > is any great mystery about the Herbology, he just enjoys the subject > and is good at it. Magpie: This has never seemed like a gun to me--except as a fanon theory. Many people don't remember things that happened to them at that age-- technically it's impossible that Harry could remember any of the things that he remembers when he's near a Dementor. He was pre- verbal at the time. So we know "real" memory has nothing to do with it one way or the other, but we don't know that Neville was even present when his parents were tortured. He could have been with someone else at the time or in a different room. Personally, that makes more sense to me- -if Neville was there I'd think both Barty and Bellatrix would realize it would be far more sadistic to zap him with Cruciatus than his parents. We see him upset by the whole idea of what happened to them in GoF, and he's seen them presumably every year since then; I don't know what there would be left to repress. I mean, it seems like by this point he'd probably have imagined exactly what happened to them many times over. He could just have a poor memory. -m From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Tue Jul 17 13:51:19 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:51:19 -0000 Subject: Snape opinions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171983 After the evanescoing of the Snape loyalty poll, I rooted around and found a file I'd saved with the results from February '06. At that time 499 votes had been cast, though by the time the poll disappeared it was somewhere around 650, so 150 votes cast over the last year and a half have been lost. :( But still, here's a summary of the way listies voted about Snape's loyalty before February `06. Upthread you can find my summary of the way voting went in August '05; not much had changed by Feb '06: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/137879 - A whopping 65% of people thought/hoped/expected Snape to be good before they read HBP. - After reading HBP this fell to 29%. (I did not include those who *want* to believe he's good, but aren't sure.) - However, 61% still either believe or *want* to believe that he is good. - Only 4.6% thought Snape was ESE before HBP, now it's 8.2%. - Only 11% of voters had their minds changed about Snape by reading HBP. - 25.7% remained completely unchanged in their opinions by HBP - 19% used to have firm opinions/hopes, but are now unsure. - 44% remain uncommitted to assigning Snape to DD/Voldy's side or good/ESE. - The 'don't knows' increased from 14% to 47% due to reading HBP. - Those who thought that Snape was amoral, and not loyal to either side before HBP made up 16.2%, and none of them changed their minds after reading HBP (though none of the options allowed for a change in opinion from amoral ->good/ese, so we can't be sure). Top 5 individual responses made up 69.8% of the vote and are: 1. I have always believed Snape was on the side of Good, and after reading HBP, I am SURE of it ? 23.4% 2. I am hoping and expecting Snape to come down on the side of Good, but I am reserving judgment until I have Book 7 in my hands ? 19.8% 3. I have always *wanted* to believe Snape was on the side of Good and still want to believe it, but after reading HBP I am not sure ? 12.6% 4. Ultimately Snape is on no one's side but his own ? 7.2% 5. Snape is between such moral absolute categories as good and evil; he partakes of both and is a frayed individual ? 6.8% - Apparently only three people (0.6%) had always thought Snape was ESE but are now certain that he's good. - Only 3.6% changed their minds from Snape is definitely good, to Snape is definitely ESE. The new poll shows something completely different, but only 43 votes have been cast thus far: 58% thought Snape was good before reading HBP, which dropped by only 4.5% to 53.5% after reading HBP. 51% didn't have their minds changed by reading HBP, and apparently nobody now thinks that he's ESE. I don't think that's representative. Get voting!!! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1916317 Dungrollin Breaking her vow to keep away from the list... From aholm006 at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 14:00:21 2007 From: aholm006 at gmail.com (rummage8) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:00:21 -0000 Subject: R.A.B. Theory/Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171984 "Katie" wrote: > > So, I have really been thinking hard about R.A.B. lately, and I am > quite convinced that it is Regulus Black. I know, I know, duh, where's > the new theory? > > Well, maybe someone has mentioned this before, but what if Regulus > isn't dead? What if, like many other people we know, he simply went > into hiding? Rummage 8 writes: I for a while thought that Regulus Black was alive. But after thinking about it. Wouldnt the magic that protects the Grimwald Place have recognized this, and not given itself to Harry? Rummage8 From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 14:44:05 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 07:44:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: R.A.B. Theory/Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <369939.31346.qm@web52712.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171985 rummage8 wrote: "Katie" wrote: > <<<>>> > > Well, maybe someone has mentioned this before, but what if Regulus > isn't dead? What if, like many other people we know, he simply went > into hiding? Rummage 8 writes: I for a while thought that Regulus Black was alive. But after thinking about it. Wouldnt the magic that protects the Grimwald Place have recognized this, and not given itself to Harry? Rummage8 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>KATIE REPLIES: Well, I am banking on the idea that Sirius thought Regulus was dead. So, Sirius' magic that bypassed any Black to let Grimmauld Place and Kreacher come directly to Harry, would have bypassed Regulus as well. Actually, that works even if Sirius knew Regulus was alive. Grimmauld Place was unable to bypass Sirius' wishes, as was Kreacher, to avoid being Harry's property. I am certain both would have preferred to have remained in the Black family line. But as Dumbledore says (paraphrasing)to Harry in HBP, "Looks like Sirius knew what he was doing." Sirius' magic was powerful enough to bypass Belletrix, so that would encompass any other living Black, as well, I assume. That was sort of rambling...but the main point is that Grimmauld Place and Kreacher could not make their own choices. Sirius gave them to Harry, and that was that. So, I don't think that disproves that Regulus could be alive. Counting the minutes and seconds until Friday night, and then wishing Friday would never come because then it will all be over and we'll never have another new Potter book, but then again wishing Friday would come quicker, Katie . --------------------------------- Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and always stay connected to friends. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 17 14:49:04 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:49:04 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171986 As entertainment for the final days before DH, and for the lonely cold days that will follow, here's a new thread: What theories have you held -- and you were SURE you were right -- but have since been proved wrong? Eddie, who used to believe for certain that Dumbledore was Ron gone back in time, but JKR says it ain't so (although I can't find the exact quote right now) From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 15:05:21 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:05:21 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171987 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: <<<>>> > > What theories have you held -- and you were SURE you were right -- but > have since been proved wrong? > > Eddie, who used to believe for certain that Dumbledore was Ron gone > back in time, but JKR says it ain't so (although I can't find the > exact quote right now) >>>>KATIE REPLIES: I was certain that Dumbledore would pull a Gandalf on us and return for the final showdown...or at least an Obi-Wan and come back to Harry as a guiding spirit. But JK says no way, he's dead and he's staying that way. That breaks my heart. I was sure we had not seen the last of him after reading HBP, but I guess we have. That was a bummer, for sure. I'll have to ruminate on it, and see if there are any other things I was majorly wrong about...Katie From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 17 15:13:40 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:13:40 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Predictions for Harry Potter Ending Message-ID: <1420765.1184685220608.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 171988 From: stanner91 >As far as JK Rowling has shown him, James Potter was an >arrogant show-off due his natural magical talent. Frankly, >he sounds like a jerk. Bart: (Showing where I'm going in advance: I'm going to point out factors in the real world, and then relate it to James' canon behavior). When he was 15. Now, in RW society, 15 is kind of a weird age. Evolutionarily speaking, the 15 year old is ready to leave his or her parents, and strike out on his or her own. However, the increasing complexity of society prohibits this. This has created the relatively modern phenomenon called the "teenager" (a word that didn't really come into use before the mid-20th century). We have evolution pushing in one direction, society pushing in another, and the 14-18 year old stuck in the middle. Also, note that new studies have shown something we knew all along; teenagers are lousy multitaskers. They tend to be highly focused on one thing at a time, and tend not to look at the long-term consequences of their actions. Now, developmentally, here's what's goes on. At about age 2, the human realizes that they are a person apart from the rest of the world (in particular, his or her mother). That is the idea of the so-called "terrible two's"; the two year old starts to assert him or herself as an individual. The ages 10-14 are the time from when a child first generally realizes that it's possible to break the rules that have been set for him or her, but has yet to realize that the rules may be there for a reason. During this time, they start breaking rules for the sake of breaking rules. A common question answer between parents and children during this period: Q: "What were you thinking?" A:"I dunno..." For example the kids who went past people waiting to buy OOP yelling, "Snape kills Dumbledore!"; they gain NOTHING from that, but it proves to them that they have power, even if it's just the power to destroy (OT: to avoid that, I'm getting my copy mail order; unfortunately, I'm photographing a celebrity birthday party on Saturday night, so I still don't have high hopes). Generally, by the time the kid is 15, they begin to have a handle on cost/benefit, although sometimes the cost looks a lot smaller until they have to pay it. Now, Snape and Sirius seem to be at least partially stuck in their adolescence, especially when you put them in the same room together. But Lupin has clearly grown out of it (although that does not mean that he has not turned ESE), and, as James and Lily got married, had a kid, and were very highly thought of (and based on what we have heard from Hagrid, Lupin, Sirius, etc., not to mention meeting the guy briefly at the end of GOF), he grew out of it. Bart From goodasitgets at insightbb.com Tue Jul 17 16:25:12 2007 From: goodasitgets at insightbb.com (Goodasitgets) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:25:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Predictions for Harry Potter Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003c01c7c88f$0f352c50$da088a4a@DF1BV731> No: HPFGUIDX 171989 Damit Lazarus: > Does anyone else think that Harry's father James was a bit > arrogant in his youth? stanner91: As far as JK Rowling has shown him, James Potter was an arrogant show-off due his natural magical talent. Frankly, he sounds like a jerk. I also agree Prof. Snape will be shown to be working for the Order and specifically with Prof. Dumbledore. Goodasitgets: MANY if not MOST High School age (relatively the comparison to the school age James) boys of this day (or mine 20 years ago) show similar "arrogant" behavior in addition to trying to impress friends and girls usually in the worst or counterproductive ways. James being a Seeker, along with his other abilities and we assume good looks, was sure to have enough "going for him" to have it go to his head. I think what we see of James in Snape's worst memory wasn't due to those abilities of James though. I certainly knew a number of James-like boys in my school. Also James didn't have (that we are aware of) the circumstances of suffering and humility such as Harry did at the hands of the Dursleys, which made him sensitive to the feelings of others. So I never really thought James was a jerk AND felt that because we saw these memories form Snape's perspective the incident could have been easily out of context; ...what had Snape already done? Or how did James perceive Snape's actions? I now believe Harry has always misjudged Snape's actions, as well, despite the fact that Dumbledore repeatedly reinforces his trust in Snape. Harry continues to believe that he knows better than Dumbledore on that issue. Harry only believes what he sees/perceives to be true. I want to ultimately believe that because we see Lily and James happily together in the photos Harry has of them, there is much more GOOD to James Potter than we have been allowed to see though the glimpses of these memories. Maybe I am a "Disney" reader but I have to believe that Harry was loved by TWO wonderful people in his parents NOT perfect Lily and "just accepted for the jerk he is, James". The Lily factor aside, James may have been aware that Snape disliked Lupin attending Hogwarts and wanted to be sure to have a go at Snape for giving one of his mates a hard time. However, that doesn't conflict in my opinion with Snape also being on the good side. I believe in the theory of Snape either using a non-verbal spell at the time when he said the killing curse or not having the intention of killing so that Dumbledore ultimately survived OR that Snape did this on Dumbledore's orders and was the only one EVER perhaps even more loyal or equally loyal to Dumbledore as Harry. I love the similarity of Harry being loyal to Dumbledore forcing him to drink the liquid from the basin in the cave despite the obvious suffering of Dumbledore...because he promised Dumbledore he would follow through. Just pages later, Harry is forced by Dumbledore to remain a silent, unseen witness to such similar loyalty to Dumbledore by Snape. ~Goodasitgets From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Tue Jul 17 15:37:13 2007 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:37:13 -0000 Subject: Revised Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171990 Revised (PS: not coming back onlimne until I have read #7 ... have fun all 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Ginny (JKR won't have to kill Harry then. He will refuse to be seen in public again without Ginny there) I also wonder if Salazar Slytherin has a surviving Horcrux which will be destroyed during this book. (After all, no-one knows what happened to that Hogwarts founder once he left the school 1000 years ago) 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? The Death Eater's Death Head on his forearm (I don't think we will see more evidence of this in Deathly Hallows) 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes (if only to follow up clues based around Hogwarts) b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes But even though Hogwarts reopens, we will see no more Quidditch games. Luna's commentating was the last game for JKR to write 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Mrs Figg 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Ron b. Head Girl? - Hermione c. DADA Instructor? - New character (either a recruit from the Dragon Sanctuary, a friend of Charlie Weasley's or the wizard/witch that helped Sirius after escaping Hogwarts, the one with the tropical bird doing owl deliveries) d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Snape (or actually, Eileen Prince ? his mother) He plays both sides for his own goals. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaw's wand f. Snitch g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus : Snake Boggart: the Bloody Baron Mirror of Erised: Eileen Prince Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Known present and past Horcruxes Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. - RAB (Regulus) was given the task to kill his own brother, Sirius Black. That is why he left the Death Eaters. - Some very important characters will have clues that will help Harry find the remaining Horcruxes: Kreatcher; the Bloody Baron; Eileen Prince; Ollivander; and one of the female students who went to school at the same time as Tom Riddle (McGonagall, Neville's Gran or even Moaning Myrtle) - Norbert, Hagrid's dragon, will return - Non-humans will assist the Trio in the quest for the Horcruxes (house elves, centaurs, maybe Goblins) - Either Draco or Bellatrix will betray the Dark Lord. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 16:00:59 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:00:59 -0000 Subject: R.A.B. Theory/Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171991 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: > I have this wonderful > thought bubbling up in me, that maybe, if Sirius doesn't come back, > Harry will get to be with Regulus, and get to know Sirius through his > brother. > > I don't know why I think that...I just have a feeling that Sirius isn't > coming back, but that Harry will have another shot at having a family. ============================ But Regulus isn't family. Nor does he even have the bond with Harry's actual family that Sirius did. Much like, I met my biological father when I was 25 ... he was related to me, but he wasn't my "family," he was just a stranger who was interested in my life. There was no bond. From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 16:00:24 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <255393.88406.qm@web30008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 171992 Eddie: Now Me: Honestly, I never put much stock in the big, shocking theories. However, one theory come to mind that I wish would have come true: 1) That Draco Malfoy would inherit Grimmauld Place. I just thought it would be interesting to see how Harry would have reacted to that. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From peckham at cyberramp.net Tue Jul 17 16:04:00 2007 From: peckham at cyberramp.net (luna_loco) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:04:00 -0000 Subject: R.A.B. Theory/Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171993 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: ... > > Well, maybe someone has mentioned this before, but what if Regulus > isn't dead? What if, like many other people we know, he simply went > into hiding? What if he's actually on our side? I have this wonderful > thought bubbling up in me, that maybe, if Sirius doesn't come back, > Harry will get to be with Regulus, and get to know Sirius through his > brother. ... A question that must be answered for a Regulus is still alive theory to be viable is "If Regulus is still alive, why did he not come out of hiding?". Once the Aurors started rounding up Death Eaters following Voldedort's disappearance there would be no need for Regulus to remain in hiding just because he knew about the locket horcrux. Possession of the horcrux, with knowledge of its true nature, would have even been a useful bargaining chip when trying to avoid a trip to Azkaban. Without some explanation as to why he has remained in hiding all these years there is no reason to believe Sirius was wrong about Regulus being dead. Allen From meltowne at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 16:15:02 2007 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:15:02 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171994 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ethveg" wrote: > Even so, at age > > 14 months or younger I'm not sure Harry could encode the name in ANY > > way that would allow it to be recognized (and so 'seem familiar') when > > he heard it again in adulthood. > =========================== > > Lisa: > I agree that 14 months is too young to retain memories into > adolescence, but Harry does have a "dream" about a flying motorcycle in > SS. I guess he's got a lot buried in his subconscious! I think it simply refers to the connection between the two - part of T.M. Riddle's powers were transferred to him, and who knows what else. I think it is just a clue that there is a connection between them. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 16:30:58 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:30:58 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171996 Lisa wrote: > > Good question -- I thought I remembered it, and just googled it. > According to Wikipedia: "Nagini is a fictional animal from the Harry Potter series created by JK Rowling. She is a large serpent, specifically a Brazilian Python who is the loyal pet of the main antagonist of the series named Lord Voldemort. Lord Voldemort is able to communicate with her due to an unusual genetic trait that he recieved from his ancestor named Salazar Slytherin. Both Lord Voldemort and Harry Potter are able to speak Parselmouth, the language of snakes." > Wikipedia, of course, is far from canon. Perhaps the movie portrayed Nagini as a python, and that's why it's sticking in my mind? > Carol responds: As you say, Wikipedia is not canon, and Nagini's species is not identified in canon. The person who wrote this entry may be assuming that the Brazilian snake in SS/PS is the same snake as Nagini, but that snake is specifically identified as a boa constrictor. At the risk of sounding snide toward the author of this entry, he or she is clearly no HP expert: The language of snakes is not Parselmouth but Parseltongue. (A Parselmouth is a person who speaks Parseltongue.) So I'd give this entry about as much credence as I'd give an opinion expressed by a ten-year-old reader. We do not know that the snake at the zoo is poisonous, whereas Nagini's venom is both deadly and magical. We do know that the boa constrictor is large and brown and capable of winking (evidence that JKR is no snake expert). The snake seems friendly to Harry and says "Brazil, here I come. Thankssss, amigo" he leaves. Somehow, I can't imagine Nagini being that friendly and grateful to any human, even her master. Nor can I imagine Nagini loose in the streets of London with nothing about a murderous snake in the Muggle news. Nagini, in contrast, is definitely poisonous, definitely female (the snake in SS/PS strikes me as being male though the sex is unspecified), and definitely evil, not only reporting loyally to her master but circling the graveyard waiting to eat Harry after Voldemort kills him. (I believe that LV feeds her his victims, e.g., Bertha Jorkins, to dispose of the evidence. She's also clearly magical and shares her master's anti-Muggle prejudices (she tells LV that "an old Muggle" is standing on the stairs, eavesdropping on LV and Wormtail, GoF Am. ed. 13). She is described only as "a gigantic snake, at least twelve feet long" (12). I can't find any other descriptions except "great snake" and "gigantic snake." (In OoP, Harry is inside the snake's mind and can't see her.) I don't think we're given a color or a pattern unless I've overlooked a reference to her, which is quite posssible. (The snake in the film does look like a python, or a very oversized rattlesnake, but the filmmakers didn't have much to go on except their own imaginations.) It seems unlikely that she's Brazilian as Voldemort seems to have met her, or rejoined her, in Albania. Her name, of course, suggests that she's from India. Possibly, LV met her on his earlier travels and brought her to a hideout in Albania. (She can't be a native species unless magical snakes are hidden by the same protections as dragons. Plot hole? Improbability that we're supposed to gloss over?) She could have been brought to England by Quirrell; I don't think that Wormtail could have done it since he's not supposed to be seen in human form. There's a better article on Nagini at answers.com http://www.answers.com/topic/nagini which suggests (as I've done independently, with virtually no response) that Nagini is Voldemort's spirit familiar (which would certainly explain how he could summon her, as DD summons Fawkes, without having to deal with the difficulties of transporting a real snake, even magically). Maybe, like house-elves, she can transport herself magically, unaffected by Anti-Apparition spells. That would also explain how she could get into the MoM unnoticed when LV was possessing her. The answers.com article isn't perfect, stating that she's "believed to be venomous" and in the next breath mentioning that her venom makes it difficult for wounds to heal, and although it mentions Wormtail "milking" her, it doesn't mention that he used her venom as an ingredient in the potion that created Fetal!mort (GoF 656). It does, however, make the excellent point that she's the "opposite" of Fawkes, whose tears heal wounds. The article states that Nagini has a hood like a cobra's, but I can't find any such reference in canon. Anyway, I doubt very much that the friendly (male?) boa constrictor from SS/PS is the same as Nagini, whose personality (so to speak) is as venomous as her bite. Carol, hoping that the boa constrictor somehow made it to Brazil but assuming that he was captured by his keeper (once he recovered from his shock) and returned to his cage and still expecting Harry to kill Horcrux!Nagini with the Sword of Gryffindor From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 16:27:41 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:27:41 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Favorite theories proved wrong References: Message-ID: <003201c7c88f$66299c30$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 171997 "Eddie" wrote: >>> What theories have you held -- and you were SURE you were right -- > but have since been proved wrong? >> >> Eddie, who used to believe for certain that Dumbledore was Ron gone >> back in time, but JKR says it ain't so (although I can't find the >> exact quote right now) > > >>>>>KATIE REPLIES: > > I was certain that Dumbledore would pull a Gandalf on us and return > for the final showdown...or at least an Obi-Wan and come back to Harry > as a guiding spirit. But JK says no way, he's dead and he's staying > that way. That breaks my heart. I was sure we had not seen the last of > him after reading HBP, but I guess we have. That was a bummer, for > sure. I'll have to ruminate on it, and see if there are any other > things I was majorly wrong about...Katie > Shelley now: I am with Katie- I was sure that something was funny with Dumbledore's death, that it had been faked so that he could work against the Dark Lord without being constantly tailed by Aurors from the Ministry, without every move and action scrutinized by both sides. It just made so much sense- I was sure that the Phoenix rising from those ashes of the fire was symbolic of Dumbledore returning to a new life- one that we would actively get to share. I reluctantly grieved all over again when Rowling said in that summer interview that he truly was gone, or maybe I started grieving for real. Really, the other smaller theories I have are still open for fulfillment or rebuttal, or even to be left unanswered, so that's the only one I had so far that is just plain shot down. One that had come to pass was the relationship between Harry and Ginny- glad to see that one fulfilled. Shelley From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 16:47:22 2007 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:47:22 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171998 Carol said: Anyway, I doubt very much that the friendly (male?) boa constrictor from SS/PS is the same as Nagini, whose personality (so to speak) is as venomous as her bite. Nick then: I certainly agree that the personality traits exhibited by the two snakes are different enough to cast doubt on the "same snake" theory, but LV could have affected those changes himself. For all we know, Nagini could be under the snake verson of the Imperius curse, and the highly poisonous fangs could be a LV physiological amdendment (akin to Wormtail's hand). Nick (who will continue to cling to his theory until conclusive canon is produced) From christopherauk at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 17 16:19:08 2007 From: christopherauk at yahoo.co.uk (Christopher) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:19:08 -0000 Subject: Will Harry be using Felix Felicis to find the Horcruxes? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 171999 I was just re-reading HBP and it occured to me that Harry might use Felix Felicis to find, get past the protections, the Horcruxes. I don't know if the 'liquid luck' would stretch that far though. Christopher From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 17:00:53 2007 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (TK Kenyon) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:00:53 -0000 Subject: CONTEST CLOSED: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights Contest closed Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172000 Dear GUs, This is the end, my friends. Due to the Big Frickin' Spoiler being published elsewhere on the 'net by some SOB-ES (Son of a Blast-Ended Skrewt,) and the dissemination of memes into the collective unconsciousness, I'm announcing the end of the contest. If your entry is in my inbox right now, you've entered. Do nothing. No more revisions or entries will be accepted. I'm sorry, guys. Yes, occasionally an SOB-ES ruins it for the rest of us, even those of us trying to play fair. I'd like to thank Chancie, Number One Minion of the Spoilers, for her Constant Vigilance. I will take Minion applications now and after DH is released for grading duty. Just send me an email stating interest. Personally, I am not entering my own contest because I saw 5 words of the supposed Epilogue, including the chapter title which is not so spoily, but I saw a name (it wasn't "Harry," either in the sense of a living character or a glaring absence, so at least I don't know whether Harry bites it or not,) and while it didn't change my answers, it reinforced at least one of them, and I don't think that's fair. I should have entered earlier. Let that be a lesson to me. I'll see you guys after DH is released. I am now going into blackout mode. The atmosphere is too spoily for me. TK Kenyon -- TigerPatronus! Author of RABID: A Novel "Kenyon is an author to watch." -- Starred Review, Booklist From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 16:36:25 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (Andrew Snee) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: It's Guilty!DD all over again (was: New poll for HPforGrownups TBAY: ESE!DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <789663.12945.qm@web45315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172001 I'd just like to offer a different point of view about the theory that everything is all part of of Dumbledore's master plan. The reason it looks like a plot is because it is a plot -- but it's not DD's plot, or any other character's. It's JKR's plot. Things fall so precisely into place because that's what happens in stories. If you try to attribute it all to a character, DD's the only choice: he's the most powerful character in the book, and he's the only character involved in nearly every aspect of the storyline so far. But in actuality, he's powerful and universally involved because the author needs him to be. Otherwise she wouldn't have a device for telling readers what they need to know. He often functions as a sort of stand-in for the author. In short, I think some readers are trying to attribute the machinations of the author to a character. It's actually an interesting question about the "morality" of writing. The author is "evil" in the sense that she puts the characters through a lot of suffering -- and even kills some of them -- all for our enjoyment. Probably every author has felt a bit of a moral pang about a character's suffering, if the character is real enough to him or her. Sneeboy2 --------------------------------- Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From roxy70072 at cox.net Tue Jul 17 16:42:46 2007 From: roxy70072 at cox.net (artiemd123) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:42:46 -0000 Subject: ***revised***predictions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172002 Only made 1 small change. I hereby certify that I have not seen or heard any > spoilers. > > RCT > > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > No > > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of > HPDH? YEs > > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the > most > prominent character to die and stay dead? Ron > > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop > while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, > what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Death > mark > > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will > return as a student, which means enrolled in classes > whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes > or > no for each): > a. Harry? Yes > b. Draco? No > c. Hermione?Yes > d. Luna? Yes > e. Ron? Yes > f. Neville? Yes > g. Ginny? Yes > > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, > if any, during the time period covered in DH, > excluding any epilogue? Bill/fleur > > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic > for the first time "very late in life?" > Dudley Dursley > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will > be > the: > a. Head Boy? Harry > b. Head Girl? Hermione > c. DADA Instructor? Shacklebolt > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonnagal > > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Against > Voldy > > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think > there > are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add > extra > letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books > and > previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified > for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces > is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes > plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" > for one of the answers.) > a. Locket > b. Diary > c. Ring > d. Hufflepuff cup > e. Wand > f. In Voldemort > g. Scar > > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? > Patronus: Panther Boggert: Voldemort discovering > his treachery > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the > Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? > The > power of love > > > 1. Neville will capture or disable bellatrix. He > will > refrain from killing or torturing her, however. > > 2. Harry will not use violence (e.g. AK or other > curse) to vanquish Voldy. It will be Harry's > compassion that disables Voldy > 3. Harry's blood has created a weakness or > vulnerability in Voldemort. > 4. Lupin will betray Harry and the Order > 5. After Voldy is vanquished, Snape will be a threat > to Harry. > From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 17:01:11 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:01:11 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] R.A.B. Theory/Question References: Message-ID: <006801c7c894$1443a140$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172003 From: "Katie" So, I have really been thinking hard about R.A.B. lately, and I am > quite convinced that it is Regulus Black. I know, I know, duh, where's > the new theory? > > Well, maybe someone has mentioned this before, but what if Regulus > isn't dead? What if, like many other people we know, he simply went > into hiding? What if he's actually on our side? I have this wonderful > thought bubbling up in me, that maybe, if Sirius doesn't come back, > Harry will get to be with Regulus, and get to know Sirius through his > brother. > > I don't know why I think that...I just have a feeling that Sirius isn't > coming back, but that Harry will have another shot at having a family. > Anyway, just wanted to toss that out there before all of our theories > are either disproved or proved this weekend! Harry on, Katie I have several problems with the Regulus theory- he died at just 18, according to some of the family trees floating around.... and that's just too young to do the complicated stunt that DD did just to enter that cave, which makes me wonder if he was the UNDERAGE wizard involved when the real locket was stolen.....you know, a few months beneath the age of 17, just like Harry was? So, if that piece of the puzzle holds, who would have be the "fully qualified" wizard who went with him? The other angles of this theory all have Regulus as the "of age" wizard, with some accomplice like Kreacher who would have been his second, but that supposes way too much information on the part of Regulus to know all those spells and advanced magic- no, I think it makes much more sense that Regulus was a brash, daring Harry type who was trying to make a difference long before he was even of age. He steals the locket, joins Voldemort to gain yet more information as a spy, and then gets offed when LV reads his mind and discovers his treachery. Maybe LV didn't see the stolen locket incident, but another thought that spoke of a lack of loyalty, and for that other act or thought of betrayal, he was killed. Shelley From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 17:15:06 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:15:06 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172004 --- "sistermagpie" wrote: > > Eggplant: > > >14. Neville -- memory, toad, Herbology > > > > Neville was older than Harry was when his parents > > were attacked, so normally you'd expect him to > > remember it, however it was so horrible he may be > > suppressing it, ... > > Magpie: > This has never seemed like a gun to me--except as a > fanon theory. Many people don't remember things that > happened to them at that age-- > ... > > ... we don't know that Neville was even present when > his parents were tortured. ... Personally, that makes > more sense to me-... -if Neville was there I'd think > ... Bellatrix would ... zap him with Cruciatus .... He > could just have a poor memory. > > -m > bboyminn: While I don't dispute the basic points that you've made, at the same time, I don't see how you can dispute that Neville is a gun introduced in Act 1, that has yet to go off? Neville is not an insignificant background character. He is unique and there are many mysteries about him. He is the alternate prophecy boy. His situation is very similar to Harry's. He has been developing and growing in importance with each book. There are many mysteries regarding Neville that have been introduced in the story. Neville is important, and his role grows larger and larger, his presences become more significant. This is the Hammer pulling back on the gun, as a character Neville is certain to go 'bang' at some point. Without question, Neville is an unresolved mystery, and that, in my mind, makes him very much a "Chekhov's Gun". But then, that's just my opinion. Steve/bboyminn From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 17:19:03 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:19:03 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172005 Eggplant: > Neville was older than Harry was when his parents were attacked, so > normally you'd expect him to remember it, however it was so horrible > he may be suppressing it, and as a result be uneasy of memory in > general. I expect he will improve over time. Juli now: As I see it, the Longbottoms were tortured a little after Voldemort was gone, so if HArry was a baby, Neville was also a toddler, he is only a day (or two) older than Harry Juli From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 16:48:10 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:48:10 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? References: Message-ID: <005b01c7c892$4293a060$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172006 "k12listmomma" > it seems to me that the Brazilian >> Python was the snake at the zoo- the one Harry set on Dudley. > =========================== > > Lisa: > > No, I do have canon for that. In SS, it specifically references that > snake as a boa constrictor. > > And Harry didn't set the snake on Dudley. He unintentionally set the > snake free; the snake didn't go after anyone. Shelley again: Ok, you are right and wrong- it was a boa constrictor, but when Hagrid is asking Harry if he had ever made things happen when he was scared or angry, he remembers the boa incident as "setting a boa constrictor on Dudley". SS, Chapter 4 "... and the very last time Dudley had hit him, hadn't he got his revenge, without even realizing that he was doing it? He had set a boa constrictor on him." Word for word, it was Harry's thoughts, not my interpretation of it. Even though the snake didn't go after anyone, it's Harry's recollection of the event later that I am going by. Shelley From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 17:27:05 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:27:05 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore is Ever So Evil! (Was: New Poll for HPfGu) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172007 lizzyben wrote: Except > that DD seems to so often *enjoy* having more information than everyone else, enjoy feeling superior to everyone else ("brilliance, genius", "superior brain power" etc), and most of all, how he seems to enjoy using his great power against the powerless. It's the little things DD does, more than the grand plans, which really nag at me. It's how he oblivates Marietta, > Carol responds: I'm not going to respond to your post in general since we differ so profoundly in both our moral philosophies (I am not an absolutist, and I think part of the tragedy for many of the characters is determining which is the greater of two evils when perhaps there is no right choice) and our interpretations of Dumbledore that there's no point in even making the attempt. Neither will persuade the other. However, I do want to nitpick this one example. Dumbledore does *not* Obliviate Marietta. Kingsley Shacklebolt does. And, FWIW, DD reprimands Umbridge for, erm, manhandling Marietta. Even though she's betrayed the DA (with at least understandable if hardly noble motives), he protects her as his student. Also, "ESE!" as used in this group generally means "secret supporter of Voldemort," so perhaps Talisman's "Guilty!Dumbledore" is a better label for the extreme version of Manipulative!DD or Puppetmaster!DD that you're advocating. Carol, who somehow doubts that the revelations in DH will include an evil Dumbledore (which rather saps the significance of DDM!Snape to indicate a good Snape loyal to the side of Light--and robs him of a good guy to be loyal to!) From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 17:47:17 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:47:17 -0000 Subject: Will Harry be using Felix Felicis to find the Horcruxes? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172008 Christopher: I was just re-reading HBP and it occured to me that Harry might use Felix Felicis to find, get past the protections, the Horcruxes. I don't know if the 'liquid luck' would stretch that far though. Juli: I think it would be a terrific idea, but with past books, once we see an element of magic being used we don't see it again playing a mayor role. Like the Time Turners, we all loved them and we wanted to see them again, but they played their part in PoA and now they are just a memory. Also Hipogriffs, they were also very important in PoA, now they are just passing by characters, even Buckbeak, we hear about him, but he doesn't have a mayor role, he's just a background character. Before I started writting this reply I had a lot more examples, but they have all gone to the land of oblition. I believe that if Harry managed to make some Felix Felicis potion, which would be very difficult considering it takes 6 months to brew, it could certainly help him find an Horcrux or two. It requires a bit more than sheer luck to find an Horcrux, but some luck couldn't hurt. Juli From colwilrin at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 17:54:26 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:54:26 -0000 Subject: R.A.B. Theory/Question - combining ESE!DD In-Reply-To: <006801c7c894$1443a140$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172009 > From: "Katie" I have several problems with the Regulus theory- he died at just 18, > according to some of the family trees floating around.... and that's just > too young to do the complicated stunt that DD did just to enter that cave, > which makes me wonder if he was the UNDERAGE wizard involved when the real > locket was stolen.....you know, a few months beneath the age of 17, just > like Harry was? > > So, if that piece of the puzzle holds, who would have be the "fully > qualified" wizard who went with him? The other angles of this theory all > > Shelley > Colwilrin: Oh, the ESE!DD's out there are going to love this one. The last part of HBP has always bothered me...the more I read it, the more staged it appears. DD warns Harry he must keep on doing whatever DD says...no matter what. As IF DD already knew what lie ahead. He seems to know where all the perils are and how to get about them quickly. So, here is the theory. RAB was the "underage" wizard. He brought along the locket...and wrote the note tucked inside of it before the locket was switched. DD was the older wizard. He got through all the obstacles, when it came to drinking from the goblet...he had Regulus do it. He was there to watch its effects...and to see exactly how long it was from the time of drinking until the time of death (RAB's death that is). This would explain his warning to Harry. DD fully intends on drinking from the goblet...and knows how it will look to Harry. He also knows that he will die in a specified time after drinking it. So, why would DD bring Harry out on a hunt for a Horcrux he knows if fake? Harry's last "training mission"...he wants to see if Harry is ready for the real battles. Also, it gets Harry out of the castle to set up the final scene. DD knows what Draco is planning. Harry's info about Draco plus Snape's information was enough for DD to figure out the whole scheme. DD knows that Voldy is gaining too much power, and the only way to defeat him is to set Harry on his final path. To have all his "ducks in a row"...DD must get Snape firmly entrenced in Voldy's good graces...where he can help Harry most. DD knows he must die. He goes on the adventure...drinks the poison (I also believe at this point DD is already dying from the black arm injury...or from lack of "Nicholas Flammel immortality potion" ) This would also explain DD's horror while drinking the potion...he is remembering RAB drinking it while he forced it down RAB's throat...and is saying, take me instead The potion just allows him to die under his own terms...when it will do the most good )...DD times it just right so he arrives at the tower to put on his little "play" in front of Harry and the death eaters. The DE believe Snape has finally shown undeniable allegiance to Voldy...and Harry had to see it too...until that moment...if Voldy got a hold of Harry...he would know that some part of Harry was told to trust Snape. This way, his distrust of Snape is complete...so there is no danger to Snapes "deep cover" in the DE. Snape never AK's DD...the potion took its course...and either Snape or DD himself...flung DD off the tower to come to crash on the ground below...dead from the potion. I know...really far fetched...but hey...only 4 days left. Colwilrin...hoping..really hoping DD isn't half as manipulative as I fear. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 18:03:33 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:03:33 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: <005b01c7c892$4293a060$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172010 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma" wrote: > SS, Chapter 4 > "... and the very last time Dudley had hit him, hadn't he got his revenge, > without even realizing that he was doing it? He had set a boa constrictor on > him." > > Word for word, it was Harry's thoughts, not my interpretation of it. Even > though the snake didn't go after anyone, it's Harry's recollection of the > event later that I am going by. ========================== Lisa: However, we were witness to the actual incident, and that's not how he saw it happen: SS, p. 28-29: ... What came next happened so fast o one saw how it happened -- one second, Piers and Dudley were leaning right up close to the glass, the next, they had leapt back with howls of horror. Harry sat up and gasped; the glass front of the boa constrictor's tank had vanished. The great snake was uncoiling itself rapidly, slithering out onto the floor. People throughout the reptile house screamed and started running for the exits. As the snake slid swiftly past thim, Harry could have sworn a low, hissing voice said, "Brazil, here I come .... Thanksss, amigo." The keeper of the reptile house was in shock. "But the glass," he kept saying, "where did the glass go?" The zoo director himself made Aunt Petuia a cup of strong, sweet tea while he apologized over and over again. Piers and Dudley could only gibber. As far as Harry had seen, the snake hadn't done anything except snap playfully at their heels as it passed ... " So there was no malicious intent on Harry's part ... no "intent" at all, truth be told, no matter how Harry categorized it later. He didn't "set" the boa constictor on him anymore than he "made" his hair grow back after haircuts. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 18:12:15 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:15 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172011 --- "justcarol67" wrote: > > ... I want to ask what people think Nagini *is* (aside > from being a "dirty great snake"). ... bboyminn: I'm not addressing Carol's central question, but as so often happens in discussions of Nagini, the subject has drifted off into exactly what kind of snake is Nagini? Dungrollin, has done an excellent analysis back in October 2004. "Now, I'm not a herpetologist, *but*..." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115333 See also - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159063 Dungrollin's conclusion, she is a South American Bushmaster. A non-constricting, poisonous snake with a diamond pattern and heat sensing ability that grows to 12 feet long and has the physical power to break bones. Either that, or a magical mythical snake, but in the real world, no snake comes closer to matching Nagini than the BushMaster. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 17 18:18:24 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:18:24 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172012 > > Magpie: > > This has never seemed like a gun to me--except as a > > fanon theory. Many people don't remember things that > > happened to them at that age-- > > ... > > > > ... we don't know that Neville was even present when > > his parents were tortured. ... Personally, that makes > > more sense to me-... -if Neville was there I'd think > > ... Bellatrix would ... zap him with Cruciatus .... He > > could just have a poor memory. > bboyminn: > > While I don't dispute the basic points that you've made, > at the same time, I don't see how you can dispute that > Neville is a gun introduced in Act 1, that has yet to go > off? > > Neville is not an insignificant background character. > He is unique and there are many mysteries about him. He > is the alternate prophecy boy. His situation is very > similar to Harry's. He has been developing and growing in > importance with each book. There are many mysteries > regarding Neville that have been introduced in the story. > Neville is important, and his role grows larger and larger, > his presences become more significant. > > This is the Hammer pulling back on the gun, as a character > Neville is certain to go 'bang' at some point. Without > question, Neville is an unresolved mystery, and that, > in my mind, makes him very much a "Chekhov's Gun". Magpie: I'm not sure what you mean by calling him a gun, I guess. He's a supporting character who was introduced in Act I and has continued to play a role. He has certainly grown with the other characters and I think his arc will probably come to a specific conclusion. But I don't see anything hanging over his head, exactly, besides presuming that his is own of the student stories that will have closure in the sense of us seeing what kind of man the 11-year-old grows into, and his will be tied to what happened to his parents and how that's avenged or addressed. JKR herself has said that Neville's being the alternate prophecy boy has no bearing on Neville at all, one way or the other. (Mike Smith is actually really hilarious in his reaction to people explaining to him that Neville is important because of what might have happened to him but didn't.) I don't see where the mystery is with him--I think we all already know that behind the timid exterior lurks a brave heart who cares deeply about his parents and wants to avenge them. The questions raised about him in fandom actually don't seem to come from canon--upon reading I took the Drooble's gum wrappers to be just what JKR said they were later--a tragic symbol of Alice's wanting to love her son. I expect Neville to continue to be Neville and will not be surprised if he plays an important part, but I don't see any mysteries about him beyond the ones that we've been given--that it turns out his parents were tortured. Now, one place where I do see a potential Neville-related-mystery is in the story of who sent the LeStrange's to the Longbottoms. It's quite possible that there will be more revelations there and that they'll be important to Neville, absolutely. I think Neville has grown to the point where JKR will give him his own moment to end his family story. But that seems more just like a plot thread that will have closure that possibly contains surprising revelations, it doesn't make Neville a Chekovian gun. Just a recurring supporting character. -m From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 18:22:33 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:22:33 -0000 Subject: It's Guilty!DD all over again (was: New poll for HPforGrownups TBAY: ESE!DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172013 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" wrote: > > Before we start, let me explain that AutoCorrect is dead set on > rendering lizzyben as lazybones. I keep changing it back, and it > keeps *correcting* me, so if lazybones shows up anywhere, blame Bill > Gates, pas moi. Heck, go ahead and blame him for any errors. ;o) > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lizzyben04" > wrote: > > > > > lizzyben: > >snip< > > Basically, I think that DD has been using Harry as part of an > intricate & complex > > plan that is *not* in Harry's best interests. >snip< > > Talisman: > You might be interested in my vintage version: Guilty!DD. Some of > the more scandalous entries date from July 3, 2003, see > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/66983 , et seq. lizzyben: Look, I'm sure that most or all of this stuff has been tossed around in the past, and I'm sure that other people have dared to call Dumbledore Ever So Evil. My ideas probably aren't very original or worthwhile, but they are my own, borne out of my attempt to understand why DD drives me straight up a wall. I've gotten a surface understanding of how puppetmaster DD operates, but no where NEAR the level of detail & complexity you've outlined here. Those posts are brilliant, even though your vision of DD is far darker than even I'd have suspected. I've only fallen a few feet down the rabbit hole, but you've gone all the way to the bottom. Talisman: > from the > 1998 interview link inset to hear Rowling say it, herself. > > JKR: * he's almost godlike, isn't he?* > > I expect that, rather than pretending that bad things don't happen > to *innocent* people, Rowling is going to offer us the hope that > everything, no matter how awful, works to some good end. That's the > only way to resolve the *epitome of goodness* business with *almost > godlike DD's* outrageous behavior. > lizzyben: And here I thought JKR just said that "epitome of goodness" stuff to stop debate on the subject! That's an interesting interpretation of DD - he'd be like one of the Greek gods, capricious & all-powerful. Maybe we'll even find out he is god-like or supernatural, which would certainly explain a lot. My problem is that right now, DD is not a god, but a human being, and a human being that exercises that personal level of power & judgment over others' life & death can only be called a tyrant. DD acts like a god when it suits him, yet he also seems to want Harry's love like a grandfather. It's that inconsistency w/Harry that truly creeps me out. So, as a character, he's horrible, but as a metaphysical symbol of God's willingness to allow evil on earth, he's promising. I hope that JKR does have some similar message in mind. Talisman: > Personally, I enjoy Guilty!DD. I just love the old scoundrel. > > He's far more exciting than the twinkly old fool. Plus, he's > justified by the text, whereas the twinkly crowd has to keep > complaining of plot holes and/or constructing Rube Goldberg's to > explain how DD *wasn't* involved. lizzyben: Personally, I hate puppetmaster/evil/guilty DD, but I do hope that that's his real character. Because, as you point out, the character otherwise dissolves into a series of plot holes & deus ex machinas. And it seems odd that DD's character, alone, would be so inconsistent when the other characters are so carefully drawn. DD simply can't be the kindly, twinkly mentor that JKR is attempting to sell us. > > lizzyben > > First, I think DD arranged the events at Godric's Hollow in order > to > > defeat LV & get a Chosen One w/special powers - > > Talisman: > Close enough, though we have to watch that word: defeat. Also, I > believe DD actually *chose* Harry. Offering Neville as an option was > merely DD's way of verifying what he already anticipated, i.e. that > LV would prefer Harry. > > See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/82031 for > discussion of how GH worked into some future aspects of the plan, and > mention that the plan is far older than Harry. > > Lizzyben: > >he did this by first leaking the prophecy, > > Talisman: > Well, go back a bit further; DD is the very *author* of both > prophesies: > Again, see e.g. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159930 . > lizzyben: How do you know this? I considered this, but assuming Snape, Trelawney & the 2 DDs were actually present, it seems difficult to fake something like this. What would DD use? Imperio? Is Trelawney just pretending to enter a trance (unlikely, IMO, DD wouldn't let her in on the prophecy if he could help it). > Lizzyben: > >helping Lily w/ancient blood magic as a Plan B if they are > discovered, > > Talisman: > I don't think this was Plan B. DD created LV's interest in Harry, > knew Wormtail was the spy, and happily allowed Sirius to go to the > pokey. Moreover, the effects of GH continue to support so many other > phases of The Plan, that it's clear it all happened as Guilty!DD > intended. > > Still, there is no doubt, Lily had been instructed in what she had to > do: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163793 Lizzyben: I meant a Plan B as pitched to the Potters - DD would always know that this plan B would be the actual result once the SK is leaked. And based on the delicate thought/knew dance that JKR uses in her interview above, maybe Lily knew as well. BTW, that kind of linguistic hair-splitting is one of the reasons DD drives me straight up a wall. He totally misleads Harry about the meaning of the prophecy, yet can backtrack & later claim that Harry simply *misunderstood*. Maybe you can enlighten me here - what exactly *is* The Plan? What is Harry's role here? All I can tell is that it involves the prophecy, Godric's Hollow, & Harry's probable sacrifice to some higher goal. And it seems likely that Harry's role is as bait, patsy or pawn, as per most of DD's schemes. But I'm not even sure that defeating LV is the actual goal of DD's plan. It seems much larger than that, because DD could have taken out LV himself in SS. One excuse is if DD knew that only Harry could defeat LV - but if you believe that he wrote the prophecy, that wouldn't be a valid reason. So what is DD really up to? I can't think of many goals that would justify the amount of suffering that his plan has inflicted thus far. (Beyond the meta-textual goal, the actual character DD's goal) > >Lizzyben: then alerting LV of the Potter's secret > > location. > > Talisman: You mean allowing Wormtail to take care of this detail, > don't you? Not that Wormtail actually knew he was part of DD's plan, > they never do . lizzyben: Yep. DD's complicity would be too obvious if DD were the Secret Keeper - but IMO he manipulated the Potters into choosing Wormtail as SK instead, knowing he would run straight to LV w/the information. Sort of laundering the betrayal through a third party. At first, I wondered if the Potters had begun to suspect DD's real motives, which was why they selected a friend to be SK instead. But now I think it's even more likely that DD actually *planted* those doubts in their minds so that they would choose a known LV spy instead. Sneaky. > lizzyben: > >He kept the invisibility cloak so that the Potters wouldn't be able > to hide Harry beneath it. (JKR's important unasked question). > > Talisman: > Indeed, DD probably had it lent to someone else, someone who can't be > invisible at will. And, while we see in OoP that lending rare > ICs to other Order members is an established custom, you can be sure > DD knew it would be out of Potter hands the night LV came knocking. lizzyben: And who is that someone else? Are you suggesting that someone else was at Godric's Hollow under the IC? Basically, I think JKR's question is a huge red flag that DD was involved in the events at Godric's Hollow. The Order members have other IC cloaks to use - there would be *no* good reason to take the IC from a family in imminent danger from a psychotic wizard. The Potters needed that cloak to shield Harry if LV ever discovered their location, & DD wanted to make sure that they didn't have that extra protection. If he's going to go through the trouble of orchestrating the attack, he wants to make sure that a Chosen One is created in the deal. This also suggests that the Potters themselves weren't aware of the Plan, or that they might have to sacrifice themselves to accomplish it. You seem to think that the Potters voluntarily sacrificed their lives for the cause, but IMO DD's actions seem to show that this was actually a planned murder. The Potters might have known about a possible sacrificial Plan B, but DD was going to ensure that they had to use it. > lizzyben: > >When LV attacks Harry, Lily's ancient magic protects > > Harry, causing the AK to rebound on LV & leave Harry w/special > > powers - just as DD intended. > > Talisman: > The bouncing AK and the squirt of Dark Wizard juice that effect Harry > are more likely explained by DD making a HX of Harry--using the bit > of LV's soul that was severed with Lily`s murder. Or as I've said > elsewhere: Voldemort did the murder, DD did the spell. Of course, > LV had no idea .but he will. Just in time for it to save Harry's butt. lizzyben: I wish we knew more about what was actually involved in creating a Horcrux. Could it be accidental? Because I tend to think that Harry did get a Hx, by accident, after the curse rebounded. Would the spell have to be done at the time or later? Could a third party do the incantation (it seems like it'd need to be the Horcrux-er.) Are you saying that an invisible DD was actually there inside GH, waiting to do the spell? Assuming that this is true, why do it? The Hx doesn't offer blood protection, only (maybe) protection against an AK. And if DD just wanted someone who could AK LV, he could've done that ages ago. What special power does the Hx offer? I wonder if it would actually evaporate all of the other Hxes as well. Horcrux Harry would also explain why DD seems so certain that Harry will die for the cause, so I'm inclined to believe it. > lizzyben: > > DD needed this "chosen one" to be loyal to him & ready to fight. So > > he placed Harry w/the Dursleys, knowing that they wouldn't care > > about what happened to Harry, or interfere w/DD's Plan. DD let > > Sirius stay in Azkaban, knowing he was innocent, to get Harry's > > legal guardian out of the way. Because the Dursleys were so > > abusive, DD knew that Harry would be grateful & thankful that > > DD "rescued" him from this abusive home, & see Hogwarts as his real > > home. This ensured that he would be loyal & willing to fight for > > DD's cause from then on out. The blood protection thing was mostly > > just an excuse. > > Talisman: > Yep. Harry is DD's product. Lots of people have discussed this > since the beginning of this group. > > As for the blood protection, which hasn't been invoked at all in > books 1-6, I've never found it a compelling basis for keeping Harry > at the Dursley's all those years. > Can't have another *pampered little prince* (OoP 837) read here: > James Potter. lizzyben: Or maybe the real benefit of the blood protection was simply that LV was too terrified to try to attack Harry there after the events of SS. But yeah, I think the Durseleys' were mainly just to ensure that Harry remain a loyal minion to DD. Talisman: > Sirius's manipulation had other purposes, as well. Timing is > everything, and DD brought Sirius out, let him establish a limited > relationship with Harry, and then bumped him off for specific > reasons. > > Happily, Rowling says she'll shed more light on this in DH. > > See, e.g. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67142 lizzyben: I don't really buy this. If DD really just wanted to spring Sirius in order to use him as bait to lure Harry to the MOM, it again seems like a lot of work for little reason. Harry has a "saving people thing," and would presumably try to help any of the Order members or friends who he saw in danger. Even if DD brought Sirius & Harry together, there's no guarantee that they'd even get along, much less that Sirius would become the one person Harry would save. It seems risky when DD could always use one of Harry's friends as bait instead. (Can't believe I'm saying this stuff). Plus, if DD really wanted Sirius & Harry to bond, he'd have let Sirius stay at Hogwarts instead of keeping the two apart throughout most of GOF & OOTP. Talisman: > although I no longer expect, or want, much in the way of Harry's > free agency. lizzyben: I do have faith in Harry's ability to cut the puppetstrings. Because if he does not, he will die. And it's one thing to die as an independent noble act, & quite another to die as a pawn in one wizard's Machievellian game. I don't think JKR will do that to Harry. If puppetmaster DD is real, I expect Harry to learn at least part of the truth before the end of the novel. And my best hope is that Snape & Harry can collaborate to find a way to avoid the fate that DD has planned for him. lizzyben: > In GOF, DD knows LV is back, because DD had previously purchased the > Riddle House. He knows the ritual that LV will use to resurrect & > has manipulated LV into choosing Harry for the "blood of the > enemy." LV thinks that using Harry's blood will remove the > special "Can't touch" blood protection that Harry had in SS - just > as DD intended. So when Harry tells DD about LV's reason for > choosing Harry for the ritual, DD gets > a *Gleam of triumph*. All is going according to his Plan.. Talisman: > Don't forget that DD instigated the TWT, knowing full well that LV > was en route and looking for a way to get Harry's blood. DD also > knew LV would believe his *jinx* would require a new DADA (though DD > had long since disposed of LV's version of any jinx), so LV would > plan to *get in* via the year 4 DADA professor--ergo DD called in > the old warrior Moody to take the hit. When the dustbins went off, > DD knew LV had taken the DADA bait. Game on. lizzyben: Seems like a lot of trouble to go through, for both sides. If DD knew that the DE's would infiltrate through a DADA professor, why bother w/the TWT at all? The DE could easily transport Harry via any kind of Portkey. Why didn't Moody just give Harry a pencil Portkey or something instead? Seems like a plot hole. Talisman: > Also, you can bet DD dropped a little bug in Bertha's nosy ear-- > knowing she'd high-tail it for Albania--all primed with TWT info. > > Add her to DD's body count. lizzyben: No problem. The only thing is, I'm not sure how DD would know that Bertha Jorkins knew about Crouch Jr.'s rescue. Crouch Sr. placed a powerful memory charm on her, so he couldn't use Legimency to find out the truth from her (although he might have used Crouch Sr. instead). And DD doesn't have the ability to dispatch Jorkins the way he could control Quirrel's movements - so how could he make her go to Albania? > lizzyben: > > It seems like using Harry's blood created some special effects on > > LV - eg. he can't create more horcruxes, & possibly other side > > benefits. > > Talisman: > I don't think Harry's blood is what precludes additional Hx > manufacture. As we see when Riddle is questioning Slughorn in HBP, > there are limitations--Riddle's concern was with just how many one > wizard could make. I'm betting the 7 part soul LV has now is pushing > the envelope. lizzyben: Maybe. But I think that DD had to have a surefire reason for entrusting that Hx knowledge w/Harry. Harry can't use Occlumency & shares a direct pipeline to LV. It seems like it would be too risky to allow Harry to know about this unless DD was *sure* that no more Hx could be created. Seven mught be "pushing it", but that alone doesn't guarantee that LV won't create more. So, maybe using Hx Harry's blood at the ressurection prevented LV from making more. It's obvious that DD wants LV to use Harry's blood, but we still haven't seen the benefit of it - why was it so important? > lizzyben: > >In OOTP, DD lures both Harry & LV to the MOM so that LV > > can possess him. This also increases Harry's strengths against LV - > > LV can no longer posess him or share visions. Sirius is killed, > > probably by DD or on DD's orders; Sirius was getting restless & too > > protective of Harry. > > Talisman: > See Guilty!DD--in spades (except that Sirius was always for the chop-- > he was trouble before Book 5)-- starting with > , July > 2003,et seq. > lizzyben: Then why spring him? Sirius is a loose cannon - from DD's view better off safe in AZ than causing trouble in the Order. It seems like any benefit of a Sirius/Harry relationship is outweighed by the danger that Sirius will try to take guardianship of Harry away from DD, or raise hell about DD's plan for Harry. Or cause further turmoil w/the whole Snape/Sirius thing. I agree w/most of this, but the Sirius prison break just seems a step too far in terms of what DD would do (or want) compared to the benefit it gives him. Just in general, I disagree w/your contention that Snape is in on DD's schemes as a First Lieutenent. I'm fairly convinced that he is not, excepting the HBP AK, & even there DD probably just gave him the miminal information necessary. DD doesn't share information about the Plan with *anyone*. JKR said once that DD doesn't have any peers, any equals that he can interact with, & I agree. DD parsels out bits of info to Snape, Harry, Lupin, but no one gets the whole. Veteran Order members like Arthur Weaseley are left in the dark about what they are guarding, Harry isn't told about his prophecy, etc. I don't think that Snape is an equal partner who is putting on an act, but that he is often used (and manipulated) by DD as much as Harry & the other Order members are. IMO Snape undertook the Occlumency lessons in good faith; DD knew it would fail & ultimately open Harry's mind more. I don't think DD ever told Snape about his real plans for the SS - which is why Snape kept investigating on his own. I don't think that Snape knew that Crouch was impersonating Moody. IMO Snaoe really did have emotional meltdowns in POA & OOTP; anything Lily- related does that to him. But I do agree that Snape often seems to be the only one who really looks out for Harry's interests; certainly DD does not. > Lizzyben: > > DD is sacrificing Harry's happiness & welfare for some distant > > greater good that *only* DD is allowed to see. He is *using* Harry > > as a pawn, & the traumas Harry endures are all part of increasing > > Harry's fitness for DD's larger purpose. The worst part is, DD > > actually seems to love Harry (against his will), yet he is still > > willing to do this. It's all for THE PLAN, the noble, brilliant > plan > > that DD never sees fit to share w/Harry, even though his life may > > depend upon it. Is that Plan worth it? I don't know, but I suspect > > not. No goal is worth this much evil. Is defeating LV even the > > actual plan? I'm not sure any more. DD could have taken out LV many > > times himself, but he does not. > > Talisman: > Well, we'll just have to allow JKR to wrap it up. As I've mentioned > in various posts, from a literary perspective, DD is a displaced > god. The Plan may well be Rowling's optimistic metaphysical > assertion that all of the evil things that happen in the world, > happen for good reason, rather than as random, useless, > occurrences. > No one has to agree with her metaphysics, but unless she does > something to radically alter the situation in DH, that's where the > subtext takes us. lizzyben: I can accept that on a symbolic level, but IMO the actual person DD still needs to have a reason for his actions. Beyond teaching that "bad things happen to good people." > lizzyben: > > By my count, DD is responsible for at least four murders, probably > > more - the Potters, Sirius, Crouch Sr., Cedric, & (indirectly) all > > of LV's new victims. > > Talisman: > Don't be so conservative. DD's Plan goes back at least to > Voldemort's childhood. You can add in all of Riddle/Voldemort's old > victims too. > Lizzyben: *sigh* OK, my mind is a bit blown, but you think that DD actually intended for Riddle to become a psychotic Dark Lord? Or just that he is responsible through negligence? It's interesting that he later follows the same process for Harry. Talisman: > As for named casualties, don't forget Quirrell (maybe even Nicholas > and Perenelle Flamel--who might have kept their stone out of the > limelight); Myrtle, since DD knew what he was bringing to Hogwarts; > Bertha, Broderick Bode, and all the other people we've heard about: > MadameBones, Emmeline Vance, etc. > lizzyben: *ticking off on her fingers* - Frank Bryce, Karkaroff, Regulus, most of the original Order of the Phoenix... Talisman: > There really are too many to count. lizzyben: Far too many. If DD intentionally set LV loose for the first war, he's responsible for a genocide. I do think that DD brought back LV for the second war, but still don't accept that DD intended to unleash LV & the Death Eaters in the first place. What good could it possibly serve? Maybe DD actually supported LV's agenda back in the day, or maybe he was also a Dark Wizard who turned "good" later on? (this explains his later acceptance of Snape). More possible evilness from DD. > Lizzyben: > >He's caused Harry to have a miserable > > childhood, allowed him to be abused, tortured & traumatized, and > > killed the adults who actually loved Harry. DD exploits, > > manipulates, & sacrifices people for his goals, and all indications > > are that he expected to sacrifice Harry, as well. So yeah, however > > noble DD's ultimate goal might be, he is surely Ever So Evil from > > Harry's point of view. And mine, too. > Talisman: > Ah, now you're into deep metaphysics. ; ) > > As long as I'm above page, I think DD's a perfect hoot. Wouldn't > change him for all the gold in Gringotts. > Relax and enjoy. > lizzyben: Yeah, but would you want to join the Order of the Phonenix? I'm probably too emotionally invested in the other characters to really be amused about DD's schemes. It just makes me sad to see so many lives being broken & destroyed as DD's plan steamrolls on. (Yes, I know it's just fiction, usually). > Talisman, long on record with Guilty!DD, signing off for the > Fellowship of the D.U.S.T. (Dumbledore Undercover Surveillance Team), > posthumous division. lizzyhen, saluting a master at the DD game. From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 18:29:18 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: R.A.B. Theory/Question - combining ESE!DD (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <514489.68846.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172014 colwilrin wrote: Colwilrin: <<>> The last part of HBP has always bothered me...the more I read it, the more staged it appears. DD warns Harry he must keep on doing whatever DD says...no matter what. As IF DD already knew what lie ahead. He seems to know where all the perils are and how to get about them quickly. So, here is the theory. RAB was the "underage" wizard. He brought along the locket...and wrote the note tucked inside of it before the locket was switched. DD was the older wizard. He got through all the obstacles, when it came to drinking from the goblet...he had Regulus do it. He was there to watch its effects...and to see exactly how long it was from the time of drinking until the time of death (RAB's death that is). This would explain his warning to Harry. DD fully intends on drinking from the goblet...and knows how it will look to Harry. He also knows that he will die in a specified time after drinking it. <<>> "...DD must get Snape firmly entrenced in Voldy's good graces...where he can help Harry most. DD knows he must die. He goes on the adventure...drinks the poison (I also believe at this point DD is already dying from the black arm injury...or from lack of "Nicholas Flammel immortality potion" ) This would also explain DD's horror while drinking the potion...he is remembering RAB drinking it while he forced it down RAB's throat...and is saying, take me instead <<>> Snape never AK's DD...the potion took its course...and either Snape or DD himself...flung DD off the tower to come to crash on the ground below...dead from the potion. I know...really far fetched...but hey...only 4 days left. Colwilrin...hoping..really hoping DD isn't half as manipulative as I fear. *****KATIE REPLIES: All I can say about that theory is that, as much as I wouldn't want it to be true, it would certainly be a shocking ending and it would certainly alienate a lot of fans, as JKR predicted the last book would. Also - it's brilliant. While I truly believe DD is exactly what he seems to be - the most gifted and intelligent wizard of his time, a nice old man with a loving heart, and also slightly arrogant - It would be brilliant to have him turn out to be the master of everything that's happened so far... My only problem is...he's still dead. If he's this amster manipulator, wouldn't he want to be around to see everything he's planned come to fruition? Also, if he had been to the cave before with RAB, couldn't he have replaced the poison with something else, so that he wouldn't actually die? Wouldn't he want a plan that left him alive to reap the rewards? However, I do really like the idea of DD's hallucinations being watching RAB die...although I've already posted that I think RAB might be alive... ACK. Too many theories. Can't wait to actually find it all out! Alas, I believe I have reached my 5 post limit today, so I bid you all adieu until tomorrow! Katie, hoping that Dumbledore IS what he appears, that Snape is NOT what he appears, that Ron and Hermione both survive, and that Harry lives a long happy life with Ginny and finally gets to have some peace. . --------------------------------- Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 18:43:14 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:43:14 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore is Ever So Evil! (Was: New Poll for HPfGu) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172015 > Carol responds: > > However, I do want to nitpick this one example. Dumbledore does *not* > Obliviate Marietta. Kingsley Shacklebolt does. And, FWIW, DD > reprimands Umbridge for, erm, manhandling Marietta. Even though she's > betrayed the DA (with at least understandable if hardly noble > motives), he protects her as his student. lizzyben: Yes, you're right. Shaklebolt does the oblivating, presumably on DD's orders. It's not even that that bothered me - cause DD could justify doing that in order to keep the DA secret. But Umbridge learns who the DA members are anyway, & the oblivation doesn't accomplish much at all (beyond further traumatizing Marietta). But DD still congratulates Shaklebolt on his great shot. And his anger at the "manhandling" seems a bit hypocritical considering that he'd just approved a mind-wipe of the same student. It just seemed unfair, somehow. It seemed to show an abuse of power, but I can definitely see how others might disagree. Carol: > Also, "ESE!" as used in this group generally means "secret supporter > of Voldemort," so perhaps Talisman's "Guilty!Dumbledore" is a better > label for the extreme version of Manipulative!DD or Puppetmaster!DD > that you're advocating. lizzyben: Sorry, sorry. I should've stuck w/puppetmaster, but the drama was just too tempting. > Carol, who somehow doubts that the revelations in DH will include an > evil Dumbledore (which rather saps the significance of DDM!Snape to > indicate a good Snape loyal to the side of Light--and robs him of a > good guy to be loyal to!) > lizzyben: Unless Snape is Lily's Man. :) *cue groans* This is sort of how I see Snape - Deontological!Snape, who has a duty to Lily, Harry & Hogwarts. DD is a nasty piece of work he works w/in order to fulfill this duty. lizzyben, who can speculate about ESE DD, but will be truly devastated if Snape turns out to be evil. From christopherauk at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 17 18:24:09 2007 From: christopherauk at yahoo.co.uk (Christopher) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:24:09 -0000 Subject: Will Harry be using Felix Felicis to find the Horcruxes? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172016 > Juli Wrote: > > I believe that if Harry managed to make some Felix Felicis potion, > which would be very difficult considering it takes 6 months to brew, > it could certainly help him find an Horcrux or two. It requires a bit > more than sheer luck to find an Horcrux, but some luck couldn't hurt. Perhaps Slughorn will brew the Felix, or have some stocks of it? To me at the minute it seems he is going to need quite a bit of luck to find the Horcruxes, I mean they could be anywhere and as far as I can see he has no clues as to where they are. christopher From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 19:05:20 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:05:20 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Harry Potter Ending In-Reply-To: <003c01c7c88f$0f352c50$da088a4a@DF1BV731> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172017 Damit Lazarus wrote: > > Does anyone else think that Harry's father James was a bit arrogant in his youth? > stanner91 responded: > As far as JK Rowling has shown him, James Potter was an arrogant show-off due his natural magical talent. Frankly, he sounds like a jerk. > Carol adds: Even Sirius Black admits that he and James were "arrogant little berks." Snape has been calling James "arrogant" since PoA and SWM surprises the reader by proving him right. And it's not just the two-on-one unprovoked attack on Severus Snape, it's hexing people in the hallways when they annoy him, showing off his reflexes with the Snitch to get the girls to admire him and Wormtail to hero-worship him. His whole attitude in the scene, from his and Sirius's relating to Remus not as a friend or a Prefect but as the werewolf they run with on full-moon nights to his failure to understand that he's doing anything wrong by humiliating a seemingly unpopular schoolmate "because he exists," shows that he is indeed an arrogant bully--or, as you say, a jerk. Sadly, popular Lily, who at least has the courage to stand up to him, actually likes him, and the whole exchange (in which she unwittingly adds to Severus's humiliation by "protecting" him) is a flirtation between a pretty, popular girl and the resident Hogwarts jock. As for "natural magical talent, I'll get to that in a moment. Clearly, something happens to make this (IMO) undeservedly popular boy (who may have been "popular" because to oppose or annoy him was to be hexed by him) grow up. The boy in the memory (who must have had a summer birthday as Harry does to be fifteen at the end of his fifth year; 3/4 of the students would have turned sixteen by June) and the heroic young man who fights Voldemort in a futile effort to give his wife and child a chance to escape are light-years apart. Quite possibly, early marriage and the birth of a child changed his priorities. No more moonlight runs with a werewolf for him. The serious business of risking his life to fight Voldemort as an Order member may have helped, too (but that alone didn't bring his Friend Sirius out of adolescence). I reserve judgment on James's role in the so-called Prank. It didn't end his rivalry with Severus Snape (who clearly hated him more than ever after James saved his life), and it's unclear whether James got "cold feet" as Snape thinks or found out at the last minute and saved Severus not for his own sake but to keep Sirius and Remus out of serious trouble. Anyway, as I see it, adolescent James was most definitely a jerk. I see nothing to like about any of the Marauders in SWM (though I feel a touch of pity for Remus, who must feel that they only like him because he's a werewolf or he wouldn't be afraid that standing up to them would cause them to lose their affection for him. Too bad Neville wasn't around to give him a few lessons in moral courage.) Goodasitgets wrote: > MANY if not MOST High School age (relatively the comparison to the school age James) boys of this day (or mine 20 years ago) show similar "arrogant" behavior in addition to trying to impress friends and girls usually in the worst or counterproductive ways. James being a Seeker, along with his other abilities and we assume good looks, was sure to have enough "going for him" to have it go to his head. I think what we see of James in Snape's worst memory wasn't due to those abilities of James though. I certainly knew a number of James-like boys in my school. > > Also James didn't have (that we are aware of) the circumstances of > suffering and humility such as Harry did at the hands of the Dursleys, which made him sensitive to the feelings of others. So I never really thought James was a jerk AND felt that because we saw these memories form Snape's perspective the incident could have been easily out of context; ...what had Snape already done? Or how did James perceive Snape's actions? I now believe Harry has always misjudged Snape's > actions, as well, despite the fact that Dumbledore repeatedly reinforces his trust in Snape. Harry continues to believe that he knows better than Dumbledore on that issue. Harry only believes what he sees/perceives to be true. I want to ultimately believe that because we see Lily and James happily together in the photos Harry has of them, there is much more GOOD to James Potter than we have been allowed to see though the glimpses of these memories. Maybe I am a "Disney" reader but I have to believe that Harry was loved by TWO wonderful people in his parents NOT perfect Lily and "just accepted for the jerk he is, James". The Lily factor aside, James may have been aware that Snape disliked Lupin attending Hogwarts and wanted to be sure to have a go at Snape for giving one of his mates a hard time. Carol responds: Yes and no. There's no question that all five boys (MWPP and Severus) are suffering the pangs of adolescence in their various ways. James the Jock shows off for the girls and Lily in particular (he's a Chaser, BTW, not a Seeker); handsome Sirius (a Black and therefore part of "Nature's aristocracy) doesn't even deign to look at the girls who eye him adoringly and thinks he's too good to help Remus with Transfiguration. Peter basks in the reflected glory of the biggest bully on the playground, slobberingly admiring him. Severus wants to fight back and resorts to swearing and insults to mask his humiliation. Teenage boys one and all. Luckily for the parents of those who had them, they were at boarding school and (theoretically) couldn't get in too much trouble. (Yeah, right.) I disagree that the Pensieve memory is from Severus's perspective. JKR has said that Pensieve memories are accurate records, so the memory itself is objective. However, it, like almost everything in the books, is told from Harry's perspective. "Snape was clearly unpopular," for example, is Harry's interpretation. ("The students were clearly afraid to stand up to James" is just as likely given his penchant for hexing people in the hallways. Lily can do it because she knows he likes her.) As for why James is the way he is, I agree that, unlike Harry, he hasn't had the opportunity to learn humility. He's a much-loved only child born to elderly parents ("a treasure", JKR says) and it's extremely likely that he's been indulged given his parents' wealth and their passing on an Invisibility Cloak to a school kid. We know, based on all those detentions, not to mention the midnight excursions with a werewolf, that he's a rule-breaker. (And the genuinely arrogant, rule-breaking James is what the adult Snape sees when he looks at Harry.) As for James's talent, where do we see it (besides his skill as a Quidditch player)? In the Marauder's Map, a joint product with his friends, in his hexes (at least one of them stolen from Severus Snape), and in his ability as an Animagus. None of the other students except MWP knows about the map or his Animagus form. All they know about is his hexes and his skill as a Chaser. (His wand foreshadows his skill at Transfiguration; Lily's foreshadows a skill we have not yet seen in Charms.) McGonagall, James's Head of House and Transfiguration teacher, gushes about his abilities. Lupin, too, states that James and Sirius were the best students in the school. However, Slughorn (who wouldn't have minded "collecting" Sirius, a handsome pureblood from an ancient family) says nothing about James's (or Sirius's) abilities in Potions. Clearly, the geniuses in that class were Severus and Lily (assuming that Slughorn isn't overestimating her abilities out of affection and guilt). Neither James nor Sirius demonstrates the detailed knowledge of DADA that the DADA-obsessed Severus does. I think that James's friends have idealized him, glossing over his flaws and making him seem better and more brilliant than he was, or perhaps extending his obvious brilliance in Transfiguration (and prowess at hexing) to other areas. There's no evidence from Flitwick, who also remembers him fondly, that he excelled at Charms, for example. I imagine he did well enough, considering that he and Sirius and Peter were devoting most of their spare time to becoming Animagi and all four to making the Marauder's Map, not to mention their midnight excursions, to spend much time studying, but I don't think his "popularity" (mostly among the Gryffindors, I'll bet) had much to do with being (supposedly) the best student in the school. Nerdy little Severus had him beat there, I'll bet, just as he had invented his own charms and hexes. (there's no evidence that James had done the same.) As for looks, it's Sirius who was handsome. James looked like Harry, minus the striking green eyes (and scar) with glasses and hair that wouldn't behave. Presumably, he was skinny and somewhat short, since Harry estimates James's height as being within an inch of his own. For all we know, he had knobbly knees as well. So, James' arrogance seems to stem from doting, indulgent parents, adulation as a Quidditch star, and his brilliance in Transfiguration, not to mention a flair for breaking the rules and getting away with it. (Despite all those detentions, no one ever caught them becoming illegal Animagi or running with a werewolf, endangering anyone in the streets of Hogsmeade or on the Hogwarts grounds.) It's understandable that such a boy (rather like the similarly talented Weasley Twins) would start to abuse his powers. And, sadly, it's likely that the other kids, simultaneously admiring and fearing him, would let him get away with it. And it's equally understandable that DDM!Snape would do everything in his power to prevent James's son, the only one who can save the WW from Voldemort, from turning into a second James, puncturing his status as "our new celebrity" from Day One. Carol, who does not deny that James became a hero but is happy for the WW's sake that he was not the Chosen One From Adam.Chase at charter.net Tue Jul 17 18:53:07 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:53:07 -0000 Subject: unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172018 > Will Draco be redeemed? > Who will be best man at Bill and Fleur's wedding? > Why is it that we never see spouses/partners of Hogwarts' professors? > > Susan McGee Drax: I believe Draco will do something redeemable, I'm not suggesting it will successfully redeem him, but it will be an act of redemption I'm betting on Charlie or a Gringott's Goblin as the best man. Have you seen the lifestyles of the professors? They don't have time for meaningful relationships. From Adam.Chase at charter.net Tue Jul 17 18:59:25 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:59:25 -0000 Subject: Horcrux Locations (WAS: Will Harry be using Felix Felicis to find the Horcruxes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172019 christopher: > Perhaps Slughorn will brew the Felix, or have some stocks of it? To > me at the minute it seems he is going to need quite a bit of luck to > find the Horcruxes, I mean they could be anywhere and as far as I can > see he has no clues as to where they are. Drax: I think Harry's gonna find the first one in Godric's Hollow(just a hunch, I have no real evidence to support the idea). Maybe one will be at his old orphanage (or maybe at Hepzibah's house). And I get this sneaking suspicion that even though Dumbledore tossed Voldie out when he came looking for a "job" he still had an opportunity to plant one in the Chamber of Secrets. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 19:10:21 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:10:21 -0000 Subject: What's Missing? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172020 Something just occurred to me. In the release of the other HP books, haven't we usually gotten a few paragraphs as a teaser by this time? Maybe a couple of paragraphs of first or a selected chapter? For OotP, we knew about a boy laying among the flower beds. In HBP, didn't we get a glimpse of the Prime Minister? Or a hint of Scrimgeour's appearance? A brief mention of Felix Felicius? Maybe they feel the demand is so high for the books that there really is no need for a teaser. And, with only a very few days to go, I guess it doesn't matter. Just curious. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 19:16:47 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:16:47 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: <255393.88406.qm@web30008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172021 Eddie: > > What theories have you held -- and you were SURE you were right -- but have since been proved wrong?> Carol responds: 1) Mark Evans is a Muggle-born wizard distantly related to Harry through a Squib ancestor and will be sorted into Gryffindor. (At least I wasn't alone in being *sure* that the last name he shared with Lily and Petunia was an important clue.) 2) Lily's proficiency at Charms, suggested by Ollivander's description of her first wand as "a nice wand for Charm work," led her to cast a sort of super-Protego Charm on baby Harry that would be activated by her self-sacrifice. As part of the charm, which may also have involved a potion, she marked Harry's forehead with an eihwaz rune (symbolizing protection) which reveals itself in the shape of Harry's scar. (Unfortunately for my theory, JKR says that Lily didn't know the effect her sacrifice would have). Carol, who forgot to mention Hermione's missed exam question involving an eihwaz rune as one of the Chekhov's guns she expects to go off in DH From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 19:20:51 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:20:51 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172022 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: > > As entertainment for the final days before DH, and for the lonely cold > days that will follow, here's a new thread: > > What theories have you held -- and you were SURE you were right -- but > have since been proved wrong? > > Eddie, who used to believe for certain that Dumbledore was Ron gone > back in time, but JKR says it ain't so (although I can't find the > exact quote right now) > Alla: Heee, well, there is a really big one that could be proven wrong for sure - that Snape is not DD!M, but see the funny thing for me is that I was never much of the theoriser. Oh do not get me wrong, I adore speculation and love reading about the wildest theories and speculations and do it so myself, but I always felt that my theories lacked imagination and. Hmmm, trying to remember, what was something significant I really thought in advance was turned out to be true and did not. More often than not I just wait for the author to tell me. Although I fee so sad that lacking imagination or not in four days speculation will end. Oh, Oh, I used to believe that Snape was in Gryffindor with Marauders and that is how their hatred began. But this is more of events, not theory. I also used to believe that the name Death Eaters would be connected in some spectacularly awesome way with ultimate mystery of the ending. I also used to believe that Sirius will survive the ending. Ooops. > Carol, who agrees with vmonte that people don't like unpalateable > truths and who expects a roar of outrage from the Snape haters when > Snape is revealed as DDM > Alla: Trying to imagine myself roaring in outrage if Snape is DD!M and bursting into giggles instead. Can we expect something if he is not? Believe me, this Snape hater will laugh a lot if Snape is revealed as DD!M, but this is **all** you can expect from me. Unless this would be accompanied by Harry's dying. If he is dead and Snape is alive, then YES I will be annoyed enough, but hopefully that will not happen. Alla. From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 18:53:29 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:53:29 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: R.A.B. Theory/Question - combining ESE!DD References: Message-ID: <00e201c7c8a3$c3f6e2f0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172023 By the way, this initial "from" line is wrong... I had answered Katie- this quote is from Shelley, k12listmomma. >> From: "Katie" > I have several problems with the Regulus theory- he died at just 18, >> according to some of the family trees floating around.... and that's just >> too young to do the complicated stunt that DD did just to enter that >> cave, >> which makes me wonder if he was the UNDERAGE wizard involved when >> the real locket was stolen.....you know, a few months beneath the age of >> 17, >> just like Harry was? >> >> So, if that piece of the puzzle holds, who would have be the "fully >> qualified" wizard who went with him? >> >> Shelley >> > > Colwilrin: > > Oh, the ESE!DD's out there are going to love this one. > > The last part of HBP has always bothered me...the more I read it, the > more staged it appears. DD warns Harry he must keep on doing > whatever DD says...no matter what. As IF DD already knew what lie > ahead. He seems to know where all the perils are and how to get > about them quickly. > > So, here is the theory. RAB was the "underage" wizard. He brought > along the locket...and wrote the note tucked inside of it before the > locket was switched. DD was the older wizard. He got through all > the obstacles, when it came to drinking from the goblet...he had > Regulus do it. He was there to watch its effects...and to see > exactly how long it was from the time of drinking until the time of > death (RAB's death that is). > > This would explain his warning to Harry. DD fully intends on > drinking from the goblet...and knows how it will look to Harry. He > also knows that he will die in a specified time after drinking it. > > So, why would DD bring Harry out on a hunt for a Horcrux he knows if > fake? Harry's last "training mission"...he wants to see if Harry is > ready for the real battles. > > Also, it gets Harry out of the castle to set up the final scene. DD > knows what Draco is planning. Harry's info about Draco plus Snape's > information was enough for DD to figure out the whole scheme. DD > knows that Voldy is gaining too much power, and the only way to > defeat him is to set Harry on his final path. To have all his "ducks > in a row"...DD must get Snape firmly entrenced in Voldy's good > graces...where he can help Harry most. DD knows he must die. He > goes on the adventure...drinks the poison (I also believe at this > point DD is already dying from the black arm injury...or from lack > of "Nicholas Flammel immortality potion" ) > > This would also explain DD's horror while drinking the potion...he is > remembering RAB drinking it while he forced it down RAB's > throat...and is saying, take me instead > > The potion just allows him to die under his own terms...when it will > do the most good )...DD times it just right so he arrives at the > tower to put on his little "play" in front of Harry and the death > eaters. The DE believe Snape has finally shown undeniable allegiance > to Voldy...and Harry had to see it too...until that moment...if Voldy > got a hold of Harry...he would know that some part of Harry was told > to trust Snape. This way, his distrust of Snape is complete...so > there is no danger to Snapes "deep cover" in the DE. > > Snape never AK's DD...the potion took its course...and either Snape > or DD himself...flung DD off the tower to come to crash on the ground > below...dead from the potion. > > I know...really far fetched...but hey...only 4 days left. > > Colwilrin...hoping..really hoping DD isn't half as manipulative as I > fear. > Shelley again: No, it doesn't sound far fetched- I've heard worse, and you just completed my thought for me. I had thought, maybe DD, but I couldn't work out a possible explanation for why he would want to repeat what he had done before.... ... so, you think LV's potion refilled itself with the same material? Or did DD replace it with the same poison? Could he have even a different one, maybe one even deadlier, hoping to off LV himself should he ever come back to get the locket? That way, he would have known exactly what it would have done to him- and how fast it would kill him, and he could have told Severus the antidote if there was time and the circumstances were right. I think you are right- DD seems to know far too much of what was to happen that night, and wasn't surprised in the least by any of it. Shelley From Adam.Chase at charter.net Tue Jul 17 19:19:25 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:19:25 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172024 > Ronnie: > you forgot: > 31. reason for Longbottoms being tormented. > 32. Snape/Narciss/Unbreakable Vow Drax: These 2 have been answered. The Longbottoms were tortured in an attempt to gain information about Voldie's whereabouts. To suggest there is more than that is tantamount to paranoia of conspiracies. The Unbreakable Vow was completed when Snape AK'ed (supposedly) Dumbledore. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 19:48:23 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:48:23 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore is Ever So Evil! (Was: New Poll for HPfGu) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172025 > lizzyben: > > Yes, you're right. Shaklebolt does the oblivating, presumably on > DD's orders. It's not even that that bothered me - cause DD could > justify doing that in order to keep the DA secret. But Umbridge > learns who the DA members are anyway, & the oblivation doesn't > accomplish much at all (beyond further traumatizing Marietta). Neri: This isn't very accurate either. If Marietta was able to testify that the DA meetings were going on for months, Umbridge would have expelled Harry and all the rest of the DA members, as she had meant to do. Only because Marietta couldn't testify, Dumbledore was able to claim that today was only to be the first meeting, therefore saving the DA members and taking all the blame himself. Neri From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 19:34:12 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:34:12 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? References: Message-ID: <00e701c7c8a9$7475bd90$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172026 > wrote: >> SS, Chapter 4 >> "... and the very last time Dudley had hit him, hadn't he got his >> revenge, >> without even realizing that he was doing it? He had set a boa constrictor >> on >> him." >> >> Word for word, it was Harry's thoughts, not my interpretation of it. >> Even >> though the snake didn't go after anyone, it's Harry's recollection of the >> event later that I am going by. > ========================== > > Lisa: > > However, we were witness to the actual incident, and that's not how > he saw it happen: > > SS, p. 28-29: > > ... What came next happened so fast o one saw how it happened -- one > second, Piers and Dudley were leaning right up close to the glass, > the next, they had leapt back with howls of horror. > Harry sat up and gasped; the glass front of the boa > constrictor's tank had vanished. The great snake was uncoiling > itself rapidly, slithering out onto the floor. People throughout the > reptile house screamed and started running for the exits. > As the snake slid swiftly past thim, Harry could have sworn a > low, hissing voice said, "Brazil, here I come .... Thanksss, amigo." > The keeper of the reptile house was in shock. > "But the glass," he kept saying, "where did the glass go?" > The zoo director himself made Aunt Petuia a cup of strong, sweet > tea while he apologized over and over again. Piers and Dudley could > only gibber. As far as Harry had seen, the snake hadn't done > anything except snap playfully at their heels as it passed ... " > > So there was no malicious intent on Harry's part ... no "intent" at > all, truth be told, no matter how Harry categorized it later. He > didn't "set" the boa constictor on him anymore than he "made" his > hair grow back after haircuts. Shelley: You are saying "that's not how it happened" only because you are distorting what it is that Harry says he did- he says he "set the snake on Dudley", and so he did! He made that glass disappear, knowing the snake would come out to go seek his freedom, and knowing that stupid Dudley would just assume it was after him. Look, you are defining "set" to mean malicious intent, but frankly, I don't think at all that is how it is used in the book. That's a grave distortion you can't pull from cannon- Harry doesn't show any malicious intent to harm anyone at this stage. I think it simply means to "manipulate the circumstances to appear as if the snake is "approaching" Dudley", so that Dudley would be scared out of his pants. Harry pulls a prank on Dudley- a perfectly harmless one at that. Dudley would have no way of knowing, as Harry fully did from talking to it, that this snake was a perfectly gentle creature who had no harm at all intended for any person, and that this large snake merely desired to go off and have his freedom. Thus, Harry could "set" the snake on Dudley with no malicious intent because he knew ahead of time there is no harm coming whatsoever, much like I used to love to "set" harmless grasshoppers on my sister who was a real treat to watch whenever she got an insect near her. I knew she would "spaz", and so could Harry predict Dudley's reaction. Both were terribly funny to watch, and the victim never was in any harm at all, no matter how energetic their reactions were. Still, I am not quibbling Harry's memory at all- as apparently you are- he remembers "setting the snake on Dudley", and as I have ever read it in my multiple readings of that first book, that's fully accurate. No harm was ever intended- it was a benign prank- merely fright at the unknown on Dudley's part, much like watching a person jump after having a spring jump out of a trick canister in a prank. Harry's merely acknowledges his part in "making" it happen- thinking back, he had indeed used magic to make that glass disappear to allow this snake his freedom at a time when he wanted to get back at Dudley for the punch. Shelley From colwilrin at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 19:59:45 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:59:45 -0000 Subject: R.A.B. Theory/Question - combining ESE!DD (long) In-Reply-To: <514489.68846.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172027 > > *****KATIE REPLIES: > While I truly believe DD is exactly what he seems to be - the most gifted and intelligent wizard of his time, a nice old man with a loving heart, and also slightly arrogant - It would be brilliant to have him turn out to be the master of everything that's happened so far... Katie, hoping that Dumbledore IS what he appears, that Snape is NOT what he appears, that Ron and Hermione both survive, and that Harry lives a long happy life with Ginny and finally gets to have some peace. Colwilrin: That is my biggest problem with DD...I just can't figure him out. I too, would love to believe that he is this lovable old well meaning grandfather figure. However, then I have to believe that the "greatest wizard of our time"...can't figure out the simplest of clues. That he can be outwitted by a very dim Draco and his bumbling side kicks...despite the warnings that Harry has given him. I will also have to believe that is off grounds at crucial times "by coincidence". This is contrary to canon that shows him as almost omniscient at times. For example...seeing Harry and Ron under the invisibility cloak in Hagrid's cabin, knowing that the MOM had moved Harry's hearing up and changed the room, etc... There are just so many inconsistencies between how talented we know he is...and the things we must chuck up to "mistakes" to believe he is not manipulative. In the end...I think that he will lie somewhere in between. Manipulative enough to harden, and train Harry correctly to do the job that must be done...perhaps more manipulative than many of us find tasteful. On the other hand, well meaning enough to try and keep the largest of people living safe and normal lives for as long as he could. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 20:09:38 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:09:38 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: <00e701c7c8a9$7475bd90$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172028 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma" I think it simply means to "manipulate the > circumstances to appear as if the snake is "approaching" Dudley", so that > Dudley would be scared out of his pants. ======================= Lisa: That's just it -- "manipulating the circumstances" implies intent, and there was none on Harry's part, as I said, malicious or otherwise. It just happened -- much like the regrowth of the hair. Harry didn't control the snake at all -- he simply watched the events. And yes, that is canon, because we saw the actual event unfold. How Harry views it in hindsight is irrelevant -- I'm sure we've all done things in the past that we could look back on and describe differently. From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 17 20:14:47 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:14:47 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups TBAY: Dumbledore is Ever So Evil! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172029 > lizzyben: > I > think that DD has been using Harry as part of an intricate & complex > plan that is *not* in Harry's best interests. > [...] > She sets > sail, and climbs up to the top mast to loudly proclaim: "Dumbledore > is Ever So Evil!" Eddie: I think you're half right. It is an intricate and complex plan, but that's JKRowling's hand on the tiller, not Dumbledore's. Eddie, who likes the theory anyway. From Adam.Chase at charter.net Tue Jul 17 20:00:22 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:00:22 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172030 > Lisa: > So there was no malicious intent on Harry's part ... no "intent" at > all, truth be told, no matter how Harry categorized it later. He > didn't "set" the boa constictor on him anymore than he "made" his > hair grow back after haircuts. Drax: Ah, but there was intent, it just wasn't conciously done. Harry's subconcious was what controlled his magic and in hindsight Harry was able to identify that he actually did set the boa on Dudley. Remember, the books are written from Harry's POV, so at the time of the incident we knew as much about it as Harry did, which was next to nothing. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 20:35:48 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:35:48 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172031 "k12listmomma" wrote: > > > I think it simply means to "manipulate the circumstances to appear as if the snake is "approaching" Dudley", so that Dudley would be scared out of his pants. Lisa replied: > > That's just it -- "manipulating the circumstances" implies intent, and there was none on Harry's part, as I said, malicious or otherwise. It just happened -- much like the regrowth of the hair. Harry didn't control the snake at all -- he simply watched the events. And yes, that is canon, because we saw the actual event unfold. How Harry views it in hindsight is irrelevant -- I'm sure we've all done things in the past that we could look back on and describe differently. Carol responds: Can we compromise here? Harry certainly didn't *intend* to "set a boa constrictor on Dudley" any more than he *intended* to "blow up" Aunt Marge. But neither of them "just happened" any more than his hair growing back "just happened." In all cases, the accidental magic fulfilled a half-conscious or subconscious desire--to save himself from humiliation in the case of the hair, to scare or punish Dudley, to punish and hurt Aunt Marge. In no case did he act deliberately, but he "set" the snake on Dudley (subconsciously and accidentally and without realizing he had any such power) in much the same way that he subconsciously and accidentally (but with less naivete regarding his own powers) "blew up" his obnoxious aunt. Note that when the brandy glass explodes in Marge's hand, she blames her "very firm grip," but Harry realizes that his anger has manifested itself as accidental magic. I think, in retrospect, he recognizes a similar if milder subconcious desire for retribution with regard to Dudley. Carol, who sees no contradiction between (accidentally) "setting a snake on Dudley" (to terrify rather than attack him) and (accidentally) melting the glass that set the snake free From chaomath at hitthenail.com Tue Jul 17 15:28:47 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:28:47 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7EB860A8-B4D9-4ED7-9A22-B59D4C5A8792@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172032 On Jul 16, 2007, at 11:14 PM, Talisman wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Scarah wrote: > Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: What *Do* You know? >> Talisman then: >> For instance, I am sure that DD is the author of the Prophecy, and >> that the dynamics in play, and the inevitability of the final show- >> down, are his very creations. > >> Sarah: >> What do you suggest are the mechanics of the seemingly legitimate >> Pensieve recreation of Trelawney giving the prophecy >> snip< > > The short answer is I think she was possessed--outright or some > ventriloquistic variant yet to be named/revealed. Talisman goes on to describe the similarities between possession and Trelawny's "authentic divinations". It's all very logical, but seems very contrived to me. Too complex to fit with how these books are written. It also supposes that JKR's decision to exclude a character with "second sight" means that a character who divines is either right all the time or wrong all the time -- there's no middle ground. That's now how I interpret JKR's words, and I don't think canon supports or rejects it the "all or nothing" theory, either. Talisman again, after explaining why Dumbledore has to manipulate everyone this way: > As for whether it's in DD's character, well, I've seen him do worse. > But then, unlike some supposedly *rational* people, I don't force the > evidence to conform to my preconceived notion of DD's character. I > just go where the evidence takes me. Setting aside the rude ad hominem remarks, I think that it takes a big leap of faith to call Dumbledore a red herring like this. You have to ignore absolutely everything we've been shown about Dumbledore's character -- and more importantly, you have to negate his whole "confession" to Harry in OotP (where he takes the blame for Sirius's death and explains that his desire to protect Harry and to believe in the goodness of the world has led him to make various decisions in Harry's life). Can this be done? Sure. Will it destroy the main theme, narrative arc, and symbolism of the whole series? Yes. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From elfundeb at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 20:43:09 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:43:09 -0400 Subject: TBAY: Waiting for the Last Can(n)on Message-ID: <80f25c3a0707171343q2bc43934w34599b37b31c2a98@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172033 The sun shone brightly on Theory Bay. Debbie sat on the pier while a light breeze was playing with the waves, which sparkled brilliantly in the sun. However, all was not well. Many of the ships that once plied the waters of the Bay were long gone. Some had been sunk, while others sailed off long ago for the world of fanfic. The captains of the few remaining ships were attempting to anchor them to the shifting sands on the floor of the Bay as best they could with very long ropes. Onshore, many residents had piled all their favorite theories into their cars, and a traffic jam was beginning to form as they filed down the sole road out of town, where a sign read "Deathly Hallows: __ Days." Other, more hardy -- or perhaps foolhardy, residents were busy nailing plywood over their windows. Even Faith could be seen closing the hurricane shutters on her sturdy cottage. Debbie heard a rumbling on the horizon. Hurricane Jo was rapidly nearing, and the thunder of the approaching Last Can(n)on was getting louder. Thinking maybe a fortifying drink was called for, Speedy headed for the Royal George Tavern, where a small cadre of List Elves, having been deemed essential employees and forbidden to leave town, were still trading drinks and last-minute theories, each one wilder than the last. Through the open window, Debbie could hear a voice she recognized as Colebiancardi pontificating, "You know, theorizing could be simplified if we all remembered just a few simple rules: "1. all children of eligible age were probably fathered by Severus Snape. 2. all beautiful witches (alive or deceased) had an affair with Severus Snape. 3. Siblings whose eye color isn't the same are not really related. 4. Dumbledore had no idea that Snape has been so busy. 5. Dumbledore had no idea that eye color was a determining factor in relations. 6. Merope, with her "heavy" face MUST be directly related to Eileen, with her "heavy" brows. throw out the DNA tests!! Color of Eyes and anything Heavy is enough to be related." "Hear, hear," shouted the others. Then Debbie heard Sherry call out, "What about the Lily corollary? Lily Evans was desired by and had a fling with every male character in the story who was around up to the time of her death!" Colebiancardi snorted, "I am coming to the conclusion that Lily didn't EVEN give birth - it was all a ruse. Dumbledore, like Zeus with Athena, birthed Harry from his head." Amid the laughter, Debbie heard Betsy HP reply, "Nah, it was MPreg. Dumbledore the father, Snape the mother. Hence the complete trust. How can you not completely trust the mother of your child?" More laughter. "How about this?" Debbie recognized Goddlefrood's voice. "Every male character and female character, including the dead ones, met so far are no further removed than 3rd cousins. It's surprising they don't all look MORE alike. And every object, person and being met so far is a Horcrux for someone else!" Debbie pushed the door open and surveyed the scene. "Why aren't you all preparing for Hurricane Jo?" inquired Debbie. "Shouldn't we be arranging for body bags or something? Or do you think the Bay will survive the Last Can(n)on?" Betsy HP waved her finger at a barstool, "Sit down, order a drink and relax. Not all the theories are leaving town. Some will certainly survive. Especially the Snapetheories." She gave Debbie an arch look. Debbie surveyed the fortress-like walls of George's trusty tavern. "Did you know George started life as a Snapetheory? I bet we'll be safe here. And there's the good ship L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S ." Debbie peered out the window at a large ship anchored in the center of the Bay. A very large crew was busy scrubbing the decks. "It's as ready for the Last Can(n)on as any craft. In fact, I'm willing to bet quite a few galleons that the L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S. will survive." "But it won't be the same," lamented Ceridwen. "Visiting Theory Bay will be like going sightseeing -- just monuments to the victors and all the rest in ruins." "I hope not. I bet there will be many unresolved questions. People will be building new vessels -- and maybe refurbishing some old ones. Look at these!" Debbie fished into her pocket and pulled out a bracelet containing at least a dozen rusty charms. "Memory charms," said Debbie proudly. "I got them cheap from Kirstini's Souvenir Stand after OOP. Someone declared them sunk, but I knew better." Debbie noticed more than a few patronizing glances from the patrons, who very kindly kept silent instead "And then there's Stoned!Harry. Nobody talks about him anymore, but he never left." Speedy pointed to a lone figure doing a lazy backstroke across the bow of the L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S. "I've never heard of Stoned!Harry," snorted Ceridwen. "Why, Stoned!Harry was the embodiment of the Philosopher's Stone!" replied Debbie. "He used to swim around the Bay, where he was co-opted by posters with all kinds of immortality, loss-of-powers and sacrifice theories. Stoned!Harry disappeared after OOP. No one knew where he was. We found out later that he was in rehab, where he tweaked himself a bit and then after HBP emerged with a new name. He likes to be called Harrycrux nowadays, but he's also a big player of Behind the Veil games. I've become rather fond of him." Debbie gazed wistfully at Stoned!Harrycrux, wondering if he was destined to drown, and was shaken out of her reverie only when Alla shook her arm. "I was asking you if you had any last-minute theories. Really good ones." "I already posted my theory about how ESE!Gred and Forge are going to go back to the good side and cause Voldemort's defeat by making his wand turn into a rubber chicken. You want me to top that?" "Yes! Theories! Theories," shouted the now-tipsy patrons of the George. "Well, all right, I'll think of something." After procuring a margarita from the bar, Debbie took a sip and glanced out the window again, where she spied the rusting hulk of the Fourth Man Hovercraft lying upside down at the far end of the beach. "Poor Avery. Elkins once covered him in glory by claiming that this functionless character was the Fourth Man in the Pensieve. But ever since OOP sunk all the Fourth Man Avery theories, he has been wandering the Bay like a ghost. No one has seen fit to him a new narrative function. I guess it's up to me. "What do we know about Avery? Not much, except that he's a favorite punching bag, er, Crucio victim, of the Dark Lord's. Why does he put up with this?" Debbie paused to heighten the effect. "Why, Avery is not a Death Eater at all. He is Dumbledore's man, through and through. Another one of Dumbledore's useful spies. One who knows how to act, I might add, playing the role of the foolish sycophant while expertly planting disinformation. Look how much time the Dark Lord wasted trying to get the likes of Sturgis Podmore and Unspeakable Bode to remove the prophecy from the DoM, all because *Avery* told him that Bode would be able to remove it. If not for the miraculous escape of Rookwood and the other DEs from Azkaban, Voldy might still be Imperiusing various victims to try it. "And in the Graveyard, remember how Avery cleverly deflected nosy questions from Resurrected!Voldy by stepping forward and, in an Oscar- worthy performance, accepted blame for failing to seek out Vapormort all those years? "You know, I bet Dumbledore helped Avery weasel his way out of trouble by claiming he was Imperius'd. Because Avery was a more important spy than that silly potions master, and his cover had to be protected at all costs! And, unlike that other supposed spy, Snapeypoo, Avery lays his body on the line and takes the consequences. Can you imagine Snivellus allowing himself to be Crucio'ed for the cause? Nah, he signs on for the C.H.O.P. assignment." "C.H.O.P.?" asked Alla. "Cranium of Headmaster On Platter. Great theory, enshrined forever in the Canon Museum. And speaking of that greasy-haired slimeball, people may think he's a fabulous double agent, but, Alla, mark my words, you will be proven right. He is the world's best Occlumens. And Ever. So. Evil." "I'll drink to that," cried Alla, raising her glass. The rumblings in the distance were growing noticeably louder. "Only a few hours left," observed Debbie. "Who's going to serve up the next theory?" Debbie who doesn't really believe Snape is ESE! (or Lupin, for that matter) and who didn't make up the theories ascribed to other posters; they did Most of the theories alluded to in this post are described in Hypothetic Alley: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Schlobin at aol.com Tue Jul 17 20:23:24 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (Schlobin at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:23:24 EDT Subject: my latest theory about Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172034 Hi, everyone, I don't want to believe this about Snape. I am very emotionally invested in Dumbledore's judgment about Snape being true (after all, as far as I can tell we have never heard the explanation of why Dumbledore REALLY trusts Snape...) and I have an emotional investment in the idea of redemption..... Despite what I WANT to believe (and I have been very influenced by this wonderful arguments at _http://www.geocities.com/snapeisgood/evidence1.html_ , PARTICULARLY about the 'if DD didn't want to die, where was Fawkes), I have been trying to be more objective. I started out with the realization that Snape might be the type of double agent (most common in real life) who really has no side -- who is planning on going with the winner. Another option (if this has been imagined before, my apologies, and send me to the message or messages where it was talked about) is that Snape wants to take over. We know he has grandiloquent tendences (the Half-Blood PRINCE), and like Voldemort rejected his muggle father's name. Perhaps he plans to supplant Dumbledore AND Voldemort and become the most powerful wizard in the world. Still wanting to know what were the inappropriate charms about Aberforth and the goat, Susan McGee (want to join a low volume list - Harry Potter for Grownups Over 40? Send me an email at _SusanGSMcGee at aol.com_ ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 17 21:14:59 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:14:59 -0000 Subject: Reference for JKR saying no new characters? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172035 I've repeatedly heard that JKR assures us that no new characters will be introduced in Deathly Hallows - but I can't find that on Accio Quote anywhere. Does anyone have a source for this statement? va32h From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 21:29:39 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:29:39 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172036 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "drax_orion" wrote: > Remember, the books are written from Harry's POV, so at the time of > the incident we knew as much about it as Harry did, which was next to > nothing. > ========================= Lisa: Yes, that's my point: Harry's hindsight colored his version of what happened. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 21:32:20 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:32:20 -0000 Subject: Nagini: If she's not a Horcrux, what the heck is she? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172037 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Can we compromise here? Harry certainly didn't *intend* to "set a boa > constrictor on Dudley" any more than he *intended* to "blow up" Aunt > Marge. But neither of them "just happened" any more than his hair > growing back "just happened." In all cases, the accidental magic > fulfilled a half-conscious or subconscious desire--to save himself > from humiliation in the case of the hair, to scare or punish Dudley, > to punish and hurt Aunt Marge. In no case did he act deliberately, but > he "set" the snake on Dudley (subconsciously and accidentally and > without realizing he had any such power) in much the same way that he > subconsciously and accidentally (but with less naivete regarding his > own powers) "blew up" his obnoxious aunt. Note that when the brandy > glass explodes in Marge's hand, she blames her "very firm grip," but > Harry realizes that his anger has manifested itself as accidental > magic. I think, in retrospect, he recognizes a similar if milder > subconcious desire for retribution with regard to Dudley. > > Carol, who sees no contradiction between (accidentally) "setting a > snake on Dudley" (to terrify rather than attack him) and > (accidentally) melting the glass that set the snake free ================================== Lisa: LOL, well, it sounds as though the "compromise" is actually just me conceding the point, but okey-dokey, I'll drop it! From iam.kemper at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 21:43:09 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:43:09 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Reference for JKR saying no new characters? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40707171443m1d4aecf5td0dc1bf1794f7d80@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172038 > va32h: > I've repeatedly heard that JKR assures us that no new characters will > be introduced in Deathly Hallows - but I can't find that on Accio Quote > anywhere. > > Does anyone have a source for this statement? Kemper now: >From Accio Quote: "There will be some characters [in Book 7] who you don't know particularly well, and there may be a couple of new characters, but nobody really major. You know pretty much the cast list by now." [ITV, 2005] To relate to the books... So... will the next DADA teacher be someone we've met, or someone insignificant? Hmm... Kemper, AKing time tonight by watching Transformers then sneaking in to the Die Hard film From peckham at cyberramp.net Tue Jul 17 22:12:37 2007 From: peckham at cyberramp.net (luna_loco) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:12:37 -0000 Subject: Horcrux Locations (WAS: Will Harry be using Felix Felicis to find the Horcr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172040 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "drax_orion" wrote: > I think Harry's gonna find the first one in Godric's Hollow(just a > hunch, I have no real evidence to support the idea). Maybe one will be at his old orphanage (or maybe at Hepzibah's house). And I get this sneaking suspicion that even though Dumbledore tossed Voldie out when he came looking for a "job" he still had an opportunity to plant one in the Chamber of Secrets. > While Voldemort might have planned to use Godric's Hollow as a hiding place, it is unclear that he ever had the opportunity to plant a horcrux there. There is a popular theory that Wormtail accompanied Voldemort on the night of the attack on the Potters, and it seems unlikely that Voldemort would have been willing to place a horcrux at that location with a witness along side him. More likely the horcrux that Voldemort intended to create from Harry's murder would have been hidden at Godric's Hollow if everything had gone by plan. Locations such as the orphanage and Hepzibah's house are certainly possible. Hogwarts is also fertile ground for possible hiding places. Areas such as the Great Hall and Room of Requirements (a location that Tonks passed while walking to the Headmaster's office) would have been accessible during Voldemort's job interview and thus must be considered as possible hiding locations. As for the Chamber of Secrets, I believe that this was the intended permanent hiding location for the diary. This is based on the diary being a record of how Voldemort found and opened the Chamber along with the fact that the diary had itself brought down into the Chamber when the horcrux tried to kill Ginny. Allen From iam.kemper at gmail.com Tue Jul 17 22:19:49 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:19:49 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Reference for JKR saying no new characters? In-Reply-To: <700201d40707171443m1d4aecf5td0dc1bf1794f7d80@mail.gmail.com> References: <700201d40707171443m1d4aecf5td0dc1bf1794f7d80@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <700201d40707171519k41486421k33dc05a355b3fe38@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172041 > me earlier: > From Accio Quote: > "There will be some characters [in Book 7] who you don't know > particularly well, and there may be a couple of new characters, but > nobody really major. You know pretty much the cast list by now." [ITV, > 2005] > > To relate to the books... > So... will the next DADA teacher be someone we've met, or someone insignificant? Kemper: Well, me, in every book the DADA professor is extremely important, pushing the story to its climax. So it would seem odd that JKR would have the position of DADA prof be fulfilled by a character who would stand still within the story. Kemper rules From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 17 22:50:59 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:50:59 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172042 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "drax_orion" wrote: > >> Drax wrote: > These 2 have been answered. > The Longbottoms were tortured in an attempt to gain information about > Voldie's whereabouts. To suggest there is more than that is > tantamount to paranoia of conspiracies. > The Unbreakable Vow was completed when Snape AK'ed (supposedly) > Dumbledore. > At risk of sounding paranoid (and recieving either olanzipine or the DH ASAP. What I ment was: 1. What made the DE suspect the Longbottoms knew the whereabouts of LV? 2. Why did Snape agree to do the unbreakable vow? did he know what he was agreeing to do? On who's orders or wishes (including his own) did he make the vow? etc. I'm sorry that my abbreviated message was not understood. Ronnie, who is also suffering from anxiety and insomnia for the last few days (guess why). From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 17 22:57:32 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:57:32 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172043 > Robin: > > > 48. Why all the cat references? Who was Mrs Norris? > Mrs. Norris is a kneazle, not a cat. From random832 at fastmail.us Tue Jul 17 23:13:51 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:13:51 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: <1be73e550707170618w2b9cd34bjd0d5894dc9bba80d@mail.gmail.com> References: <133067.44822.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <1be73e550707170618w2b9cd34bjd0d5894dc9bba80d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <469D4D2F.6060906@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 172044 Beth Hartung wrote: > My suspicion is ethveg's talking about Prince Harry. Of course, Prince Harry wasn't born until 1984, and this scene takes place in (most commonly accepted to be) 1981. -- Random832 From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 17 23:16:26 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:16:26 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172045 and while I'm insomnic: I'm having real trouble finding discussions about the title "Deathly Hallows". English is not my native language, what makes the 'hallows' thing more difficult for me. Sometime in April someone had the idea the a deathly hallow is a horcrux. I rather doubt JK will repeat herself in that way. But perhaps a deathly hallow is a horcrux cursed to be deathly... (I'm also having serious trouble deciding how many lockets and neckless are there in HBP. I have a feeling some of them might be the same one - as in the famous 'morning star' and 'evening star'. e.g. I think Burkes might be RAB, and the necklace Hermione sees in B&B is the known locket of Slytherin. Is locket and necklace used in a totally different manner in english? or can someone indicate the same object with both names?) R. who is going to try and get some sleep, having to go to work in about 4.5 hours... From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 23:46:43 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:46:43 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172046 Ronnie: Is locket and necklace used in a totally different manner in english? or can someone indicate the same object with both names? Juli now: What is your mother language? perhaps I could translate both words for you... Anyway, a necklace is a piece of jewelry you hang aroung your neck. A locket is something you hang from a necklace, it's like a small box, usually containing pictures. Juli From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Jul 18 00:08:07 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:08:07 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172047 32. Snape/Narciss/32. Snape/Narci Drax: . The Unbreakable Vow was completed when Snape AK'ed (supposedly) Dumbledore. Reply. After re reading the chapters involved in this I am of the opinion that Snape had no idea what Draco's mission really was when he made the vow. He was between a rock and a hard place but in order to keep up his charade (and to quiet any mutterings/suspicions among the other doubting Deatheaters) Melissa. ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 17 23:56:46 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:56:46 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172048 "ronnie" wrote: > Is locket and necklace used in a totally different manner > in english? or can someone indicate the same object with > both names?) ============================== Lisa: A necklace is a piece of jewelry that goes around your neck. A locket is a piece of jewelry with a hinge that opens and commonly holds something (most commonly, a picture) inside. A locket can be attached to a necklace to be worn. However, I would be entirely appropriate to call a locket on a necklace simply a "necklace." Sorry -- clear as mud now?! ;0) NOTE from your friendly neighborhood list elf: Lisa, please email the list elves at hpforgrownups-owner AT yahoogroups.com from a live email acct. at your earliest convenience. Thanks! From chaomath at hitthenail.com Tue Jul 17 15:39:22 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:39:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172049 On Jul 17, 2007, at 9:49 AM, Eddie wrote: > As entertainment for the final days before DH, and for the lonely cold > days that will follow, here's a new thread: > > What theories have you held -- and you were SURE you were right -- but > have since been proved wrong? I was sure Sirius was going to come back in HBP. I still don't buy the need for him to die in OotP (literarily, I mean). Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From missvassy at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 00:05:10 2007 From: missvassy at yahoo.com (missvassy) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:05:10 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172050 I re-read the cave scene in HBP and was paying really close attention to what DD was saying when he had to drink that potion. It sounded like Dumbledore was being forced to tell someone something that was going to lead or had lead to hurting someone. I got to thinking that the liquid might make the drinker think of his/her worst memory. Here goes with the theory: What if Dumbledore was the one who told Voldemort about the prophecy? Maybe Snape, after being caught listening in on the prophecy, ran to Voldemort and told him the prophecy, but mentioned that he only heard part of it, but that Dumbledore and Trelawney knew the whole thing. Then, they kidnapped Dumbledore to find out the rest. I am not sure how Voldemort would have extracted the prophecy, but perhaps a strong potion was used, something Snape could have brewed up and administered. Maybe half- way through, Snape had a change of heart -- maybe he found out is was about Lily and he didn't want her killed for various reasons or maybe he didn't want James killed because he still owed him a life debt -- but maybe Snape stopped the interrogation and escaped taking Dumbledore with him. This would explain so many things: why Dumbledore said what he said when drinking the fluid, why he trusts Sanpe implicity, why Trelawney had to be kept at Hogwarts even though she is an apalling teacher (to keep her safe from Voldemort), why Snape came to teach at Hogwarts (to keep him safe from Voldemort), how James and Lily knew they had to go into hiding. I hope that, come Saturday at 12:01am, I am proven wrong. I just thought I would throw this around and see if anyone on this board had any thoughts. Miss Vassy From purplequeen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 00:14:41 2007 From: purplequeen at yahoo.com (JC) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:14:41 -0000 Subject: Some more theories, kind of silly... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172051 Okay so one theory I have heard is that Harry will kill Voldy and then become a baby. Which I find funny. However, I don't think that will happen since that would give JK a chance to write Harry Potter at Hogwarts the second time around. This is what I would like and it would or could be very entertaining, after Harry kills Voldy, Harry goes insane. Thinking that Voldy is still alive. Harry is sent to St Mangos to recover and befriends Lockhart, but never stops believing that Voldy is still alive and keeps trying to break out. Sad, but could be funny. I know that won't happen, but just a thought. Then, have you seen Gryffindor pic on JKR's site. THOSE GREEN EYES. I know you guys have seen that. It makes me wonder if Gryffindor is somehow related to Lily, but she was a muggle born witch, right? So it is just a coincidence? And the Ravenclaw artifact. I like the wand theory. Since if you know about Tarot cards, include wands(staves), cups, swords, and Pinnacles. But for some reason I hope it isn't a wand, something more normal... JC From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 18 02:16:14 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:16:14 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions Message-ID: <380-22007731821614718@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172052 > Robin: > > > 48. Why all the cat references? Who was Mrs Norris? > Mrs. Norris is a kneazle, not a cat. Magpie: I think she's a cat, isn't she? It's Crookshanks who is part kneazle. -m From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 02:15:36 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:15:36 -0000 Subject: my latest theory about Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172053 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Schlobin at ... wrote: > > Perhaps he plans to supplant Dumbledore AND Voldemort and become the most powerful wizard in the world. > JW: Susan, welcome to the land of the clear-thinking and sure-sighted. There are many reasons to believe Snape is evil. There are many equally valid reasons to believe he is on DD's team. IMO, both sides in the debate are correct, in a sense. Snape is indeed evil, but he is temporarily allied with DD. His pragmatic strategy has been "any enemy of my enemy is my friend." His worthy adversary is LV; DD was an ally of convenience, to be disposed of when no longer useful. For the reasons Susan cited, and more, I concluded while reading OotP that SS was playing each side against the other. Further, I conjectured that the reason he was so concerned about saving the hated HP's life (SS/PS, PoA) was that SS needs a way to defeat LV. I believe he selected the Chosen One as his prime weapon. His pragmatic strategy is to keep HP alive and ultimately assist HP in defeating LV. I thank the History Channel for providing me with an interesting historic metaphor. Around the year 200 C.E., Roman general/politician Septimus Severus became Emperor by (among other things) playing two rivals against each other. Their names were Albinus (Albus?) and Niger (Dark Lord?). I see this as an opportunity for art to imitate history. At this point I leave the comfort of canon and enter the realm of that temptress, Wild Speculation... If this approach to the Snape debate is correct, we will first see Snape consolidate his position with LV, then assist HP and his allies to defeat LV. At some point Snape must play his hand irrevocably one way or the other: either proceed with his plan to eliminate and replace LV, or to redeem himself in an unexpected (from my perspective, for what it's worth) flash of courageous morality. IMO, the stimulus that could turn him to moral correctness must occur in DH; it will have nothing to do with Lily, or DD, or a life debt... it may have something to do with his son, Draco. OR not - my point is in order to maximize dramatic impact, Snape must reverse himself in response to unanticipated circumstances that he will face in DH, not because he was DD's man all along. There will be lots of Wagnerian donner und blitzen, and a torrent of tears. At least, that's the way I would write it... From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 02:23:04 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:23:04 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Waiting for the Last Can(n)on In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0707171343q2bc43934w34599b37b31c2a98@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172054 The rumblings of the Last Canon were growing louder every day, shuddering across the expanse of Theory Bay. Alla and Ceridwen entered the George and ordered some butterbeer, needing something to help them sleep. "Oh," Alla groaned as the canon made another lunge against the heavy gates. Butterbeer sloshed onto the tables. "It is good to know the Last Canon will be released soon, but I need sleep now!" Ceridwen frowned out the window, up to the lone torch by the massive gates. "Maybe the Last Canon should stay put. Maybe bad things will happen that we won't want to know." "Oh! Not Voldemort killing Harry Potter!" Alla downed her butterbeer in one swallow. "No, no, Alla! Voldemort must die. I mean really horrible things." Ceridwen leaned forward and whispered, "Things like Ever So Evil Weasleys!" "No." Alla shook her head. "No! The Weasleys are good to Harry! They're like the familiy he never had! They would never hurt him! They'd rather die!" Alla leaned back in her chair as if trying to escape the shadows of the Ever So Evil Weasleys cast against the back wall of the George. "Who was first people helping Harry Potter, when he couldn't find the train for school?" Ceridwen asked. "Molly Weasley and the kids." "Why did Molly Weasley need to ask about the gate? She has seven children, with only one not in Hogwarts. Molly Weasley could find Gate 9 3/4 sleepwalking." "But..." "And, who sits in the compartment with Harry?" "Ron Weasley, heroic best friend." Alla crossed her arms, reminding Ceridwen of Ron's many dangerous adventures with Harry. "Ron Weasley, the boy who shares all of Harry Potter's secrets! Sleeps in same room with Harry Potter, so he can hear nightmares or talking in Harry's sleep! Brings Harry to his home in the summer, to hear more secrets." "No. No!" Alla shook her head. "And, who was Harry Potter's ideal girlfriend? The one who changed so very much? Who had the diary, and shared confidences with the evil shade of young Tom Riddle? Who released the murderous Basilisk?" "But, Ginny Weasley almost died! The evil shade of young Tom Riddle nearly killed her! Only Harry Potter saved her!" "Ginny Weasley is like Bellatrix. She would willingly give her life for her dark master. All of the Weasleys would, except for brave Percy Weasley, who left home because of his family's evilness." "Percy Weasley is a prat. He hates his mother. He sends her gifts back to break her heart." "All for show, planned by Molly Weasley herself. The jumper was soaked through with spells to listen in to Ministry business, for the Dark Lord. Even loyal Percy doesn't know this, Alla - who sold Peruvian Darkness Powder to Death Eaters? Whose shop is still open, even with those nasty signs in the windows about the Dark Lord? Who pushed Montague into the Vanishing Cabinet so Draco Malfoy could learn about its connection to Borgin and Burkes's shop? Who is so smart they makes advanced sweets and devices, but only got three O.W.L.s between them?" "Not Gred and Forge!" "Yes!" Ceridwen leaned across the table, her eyes almost glowing in the lantern-light. "Gred and Forge Weasley! Following in the muddy footprints of the evilest Weasley of all, Arthur Weasley, who's been passing information from the Ministry of Magic to the Death Eaters since first war! He put his own son Percy under the Imperius curse so he would never speak ill of his family to Dumbledore or the Minister. This is why Fake Moody said the son of Arthur Weasley should know about Imperius - Arthur Weasley is the master of Imperius!" Someone was talking outside the George. The door opened and more elves entered, unable to sleep for the noise of the Last Canon... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 02:30:39 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:30:39 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Waiting for the Last Can(n)on In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172055 Alla went to bed after having a butterbeer and nice long chat with Ceridwen about things that could happen when Last Canon is released, but one thing was on her mind. Why was Jo crying when she wrote that chapter? Why? Alla had fallen asleep but she woke up from nightmarish realisation. Ceridwen was standing near her bed. She was wondering if Alla saw Harry dying in her dreams. "No," was Alla's response - "let's go back to George and have some more butterbeers. I saw something much worse than that." Back at George two sleepy women ordered more beers and some nice dark chocolate as well. Alla was shivering. "Just imagine Ceridwen. Harry already tried to use the Unforgivables, yes? What if all Jo's insistence that Harry's soul is ever so pure and that he would never be tempted by dark side a la Star Wars is nothing but red herring? What if what she is really planning to do is to make Harry the next Dark Lord after he defeats him?" Ceridwen is offering to check Alla's temperature. "No, no my friend I am feeling quite well," Alla responds. "Just think about it - if Harry or his scar are horcruxes or have soul pieces, who is to say that such soul piece cannot conquer Harry's soul? Who is to say that whatever part of his mind that ould have done well in Slytherin would not respond to Voldie soul piece?" Ceridwen was growing impatient. "Alla, dear, please stay focused, would you? What was Jo crying about?" "Oh, but you said it Ceridwen, remember? I was saying that Ron and Hermione would become Harry's closest minions - so called new Bella and Lucius, maybe and you suggested that since these two can remember old life of Harry Potter, his noble, heroic self, Harry `Dark Lord' Potter will kill them off in order to shut them forever. "Here is your answer, my friend. Jo was crying over deaths of Ron and Hermione from the hand of their former friend." Sobbing, Alla tosted to Ron and Hermione with another butterbeer and suddenly realised that she had not drink so much in her entire life. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Alla and Ceridwen. From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 02:46:55 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:46:55 -0000 Subject: List of Chekhov's Guns, unanswered questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ronnie" wrote: > > > Robin: > > > > > > 48. Why all the cat references? Who was Mrs Norris? > > > Mrs. Norris is a kneazle, not a cat. > JW: Somebody better tell JKR, quick. On her website, in response to the rumour that Mrs. N is an animagus, JKR mistakenly says Mrs. Norris is an "intelligent but unpleasant cat." From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 02:55:43 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:55:43 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172057 Miss Vassy wrote: I re-read the cave scene in HBP and was paying really close attention to what DD was saying when he had to drink that potion. It sounded like Dumbledore was being forced to tell someone something that was going to lead or had lead to hurting someone. I got to thinking that the liquid might make the drinker think of his/her worst memory. Here goes with the theory: What if Dumbledore was the one who told Voldemort about the prophecy? vmonte responds: This from a post I made in 2005 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/137548 I was just thinking that Dumbledore's words could be JKR's way of giving DD his last confession. Dumbledore has been set-up by JKR to be almost Saint-like from the first book. But is he? In every book there is always someone who is revealed to be someone or something else. The good guys are the bad guys and vise versa; and people are always using polyjuice to change from one person to another. Moody is Crouch Jr., Harry and Ron are Crab and Goyle, Grab and Goyle are girls. Tom Riddle is the perfect student and Hagrid let the monster out. (And forget about Snape, he annoys me just as much as Trelawny's prophecies.) We are so busy considering everyone else's motives that we never even look into Dumbledore's role in all this. Where did he come from, and what is his stake in all this? Was he given another chance by someone? Is that why he gives everyone else second chances? Was his soul saved? Is part of his penance that he has to convert others? Does Dumbledore represent St. Paul? "Snape is now no more a Death Eater than I am." _____________________________________ God, I just figured out something. I think I may have been wrong about something. Vivian From Adam.Chase at charter.net Wed Jul 18 02:11:23 2007 From: Adam.Chase at charter.net (drax_orion) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:11:23 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172058 Miss Vassy wrote: > > What if Dumbledore was the one who told Voldemort about the > prophecy? Maybe Snape, after being caught listening in on > the prophecy, ran to Voldemort and told him the prophecy, but > mentioned that he only heard part of it, but that Dumbledore > and Trelawney knew the whole thing. Drax: DD was LV's nemesis so they wouldn't have just captured him to get the prophecy. LV would have wasted no time in killing DD then proceeding to Trelawney and extract it from her. In the case of Snape and James not even a life debt would be sufficient to dissuade him from Voldemort's service; it would take something personal to do that. We know Trelawney is kept safe in Hogwarts because Snape undoubtedly told LV who made the prophecy when he originally reported it. As for snape being protected in Hogwarts you have to remember that his job for the Order is to be a spy among the DE's. He certainly wouldn't even be close to being welcomed if he had done something like that. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 03:09:13 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:09:13 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Waiting for the Last Can(n)on In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172059 During the course of the discussion downstairs Goddlefrood Elf had been seated on a rough wooden stool in a salon on the 1st floor of The George. Beside him sat Dobby. Across from them Lord Voldemort's red eyes glowered at the two elves. Shortly before this scene Lord Voldemort had gone to the local furniture manufacturer by the name of Recliners 'R Us to peruse their range of armchairs. Having selected a reclining one to his liking he had had the same placed in his private salon at The George. His author had long promised him the extra legroom he had been craving and now it was his at last. The footrest extended a full three feet! Lord Voldemort turned to reiterate the plan to Dobby: "Now then elf," he hissed, "the plan set in motion when you left the Malfoys with the full consent of Lucius can be realised ... finally my scheme that has been in production these seventeen long years will bear fruit". "When I'm finished with Harry Potter", he went on, "there will be no one who dares to speak his name again whether in this world or the next". The cold, high laugh that followed made the two elves quiver with excitement, too long it had been since they had seen their masters' master mirthful. "I is ready to complete my task", squeaked Dobby delightedly, "all this time those silly witches and wizards helping Master Potter have believed that I was on their side and wanted to help them". "Yes", said Goddlefrood, "Dobby has been the most skilled Occlumens of them all, even the great Albus Dumbledore was fooled into believing your ridiculous tale of wanting to be free". "Enough!" cried Lord Voldemort, "here's where I repeat the plan, just before it finally succeeds in the great tradition of my evil overlord forebears"". The elves knew the story well, but were as enthralled as ever, knowing as they did that Lord Voldemort was right and it would never do for the villain not to set out his glorious plan. "I fooled Albus Dumbledore using Horace Slughorn's second doctored memory into thinking that I only had 6 Horcruxes, being 7 pieces of soul in total. Little did he know as he died that I had made 48. Why stop at 6 I asked myself, especially with all the loose pieces of split soul rattling around inside me? The most powerfully magic number is 49, the square of 7. However, even with that huge number I could not be totally confident of survival, your master Lucius was careless with my diary, even though he knew full well what it contained. Next time I see him I must be reminded to give him a box of chocolates". Lord Voldemort sank into a momentary reverie contemplating as he was what was coming. He stretched out the recliner to its full extent before continuing: "We convene at Godric's Hollow on All Hallow's Eve having first brought the feather dusters. When we arrive we all tickle Harry, Ron and Hermione into submission. They will be laughing so hard that they'll beg us to stop so that they can join our crusade to distribute a daisy to each and every wizard and witch in this hidden world. With daisies in hand the wizarding world can unite and come out of our long imposed seclusion". "So," said Goddlefrood, "what you're basically saying is 'All you need is love". "You got it in one, Goddlefrood", beamed Lord Voldemort at him, "and we even managed to make some of the people in our world believe that I was evil when all I ever wanted was to love and be loved in return". "After that I may decree that all wizards and witches everywhere should have a comfortable chair, and we'll have to make sure that cupboard over there is never opened again in case the Dementors ever get out". The commotion downstairs could not dampen this glorious moment in the history of the wizarding world. Goddlefrood From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 18 03:10:33 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:10:33 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172060 >Talisman: > I just go where the evidence takes me. Eddie: T'man, I'm sure you are a very nice fellow. And I find your theory quite engaging. But I find myself annoyed whenever anybody uses the phrase "I just go where the evidence takes me." To me, it sounds smug and it attempts to hide that what is being purported is one's interpretation of the evidence. Evidence, by itself, has no meaning at all and takes nobody anywhere at all. Having said that, here's the fundamental problem I have with your theory: what is Dumbledore's motivation? That he's Ever So Evil and that he, and not Voldemort is the real villain of the story? I'm unconvinced. Entertained by the notion, but unconvinced. Eddie From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 02:48:10 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:48:10 -0000 Subject: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: <469D4D2F.6060906@fastmail.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172061 > > Beth Hartung wrote: > > My suspicion is ethveg's talking about Prince Harry. > Random 832 wrote: > Of course, Prince Harry wasn't born until 1984, and this scene > takes place in (most commonly accepted to be) 1981. Sneeboy2: But the joke, I think, is that she thinks the name is common when we know it belongs to a prince. We know something she doesn't, and couldn't. From annemehr at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 03:19:08 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:19:08 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: <7EB860A8-B4D9-4ED7-9A22-B59D4C5A8792@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172062 Sarah asked Talisman: > >> What do you suggest are the mechanics of the seemingly legitimate > >> Pensieve recreation of Trelawney giving the prophecy > >> snip< > > Talisman replied, back then: > > The short answer is I think she was possessed--outright or some > > ventriloquistic variant yet to be named/revealed. > Maeg: > Talisman goes on to describe the similarities between possession and > Trelawny's "authentic divinations". It's all very logical, but seems > very contrived to me. Too complex to fit with how these books are > written. Annemehr: Hmmm. I seem to recall that these books were written with years of research, boxes and boxes of notes, complicated charts for each chapter detailing what has to happen, clues, misdirection, and red herrings. I'd say they *are* complex. *And* logical. Even if she's writing "for children" she's apparently doing them the favor of assuming they can think. Maeg: > It also supposes that JKR's decision to exclude a character > with "second sight" means that a character who divines is either > right all the time or wrong all the time -- there's no middle ground. > That's now how I interpret JKR's words, and I don't think canon > supports or rejects it the "all or nothing" theory, either. > Annemehr: It's not so much that JKR couldn't have written a character with imperfect second sight; she *could* have just modified Mopsus a bit. But she didn't. What Talisman further points out is that Trelawney's utterances come in two extremely different varieties. When she's aware of herself, she's no better than a RL "psychic" charlatan and can't properly read the tea leaves in a beginning student's cup -- and then on the other hand she goes into some kind of trance and lets loose with these two prophecies. (And you know, we can't even call her a seer of any sort on the strength of those two prophecies, because she didn't ever *see* them - - she's completely oblivious to them.) The contrast between the two doesn't allow you to call Trelawney an imperfect seer, a la Mopsus Lite. The so-called "prophecies" aren't instances of her doing what she does more successfully than usual, they're something else entirely. And the something else they look to be is nothing so much as possession as we know it. Talisman said: > > As for whether it's in DD's character, well, I've seen him do worse. > > But then, unlike some supposedly *rational* people, I don't force the > > evidence to conform to my preconceived notion of DD's character. I > > just go where the evidence takes me. > Maeg: > Setting aside the rude ad hominem remarks, I think that it takes a > big leap of faith to call Dumbledore a red herring like this. You > have to ignore absolutely everything we've been shown about > Dumbledore's character -- and more importantly, you have to negate > his whole "confession" to Harry in OotP (where he takes the blame for > Sirius's death and explains that his desire to protect Harry and to > believe in the goodness of the world has led him to make various > decisions in Harry's life). > Annemehr: Rude? You think people don't try to alter the facts to fit their preconceptions?! No one is calling DD a "red herring." I assure you, Talisman is not ignoring anything about what we've been shown about Dumbledore. I should know -- I've argued plenty of the details with her in the past. It all comes straight from the text (see her published works - all rife with canon references). As for his character... Well, he lies -- on the tower, he told Draco they were "quite alone" while all along Harry was there under the invisibility cloak (HBP 589- 590 US). That's the most obvious and self-contained example of many; and yet there are plenty of people who insist that while DD may withhold information, he doesn't, of course, lie. He used Imperius -- on Mrs. Cole, to make her believe a blank piece of paper was an official document regarding Tom Riddle's registration with Hogwarts (HBP 265 US). Her eyes "slid out of focus and back again" -- that was no Obliviate; there was nothing to *forget*; that was mind control. Those are a couple of the simplest examples I can give. There are plenty more **in canon** where those came from, and Talisman has used them to show the self-consistent character of Dumbledore -- the one who guides events all through the series. Now, as for that *Confession* of DD's in OoP... True, he takes the blame for Sirius's death, because he is responsible for it. Let's focus on this bit now: Maeg: [DD] explains that his desire to protect Harry and to > believe in the goodness of the world has led him to make various > decisions in Harry's life Annemehr: What he said was that his desire to protect Harry jeopardized The Plan. What he said, was: 'I cared about you too much,' said Dumbledore simply. 'I cared more for your happiness than your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan, more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the plan failed.' [OoP 838 US] In other words, what he *said* was that considerations of Harry's life and happiness sometimes run counter to The Plan. And, you just have to look at Harry's life with the Dursleys to see that The Plan is what guides DD's decisions for Harry's life. Bear in mind, also, that this little speech where DD says he withheld the prophecy from Harry *for too long* is the same speech where he said he was going to tell Harry *everything.* And yet, he reverses himself a few months later - and even Harry thinks to call him on it: "You said, at the end of last term, you were going to tell me everything," said Harry. It was hard to keep a note of accusation from his voice. "Sir," he added. [HBP 197 US] Harry's miffed. Why, he sounds just like he's talking to Snape! And though DD's excuse is that he'd told Harry everything that he *knew* -- that they are now going to journey "through the murky marshes of memory into thickets of wildest guesswork." This, even though JKR said in the Leaky/Mugglenet interview that pensieve memories are objective, i.e. DD is going on to tell Harry more things that he *knows.* http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli- 3.htm Make no mistake. Despite what DD said in OoP, The Plan is still on. It's always been on -- including the handling of the prophecy regarding Harry. And don't forget that Harry's life and happiness are not necessarily a part of it (DD "hopes" his lessons will help Harry to survive -- isn't that nice?). I'm not sure what to make of your statement that DD has a desire to "believe in the goodness of the world [...]" I'm sure he desires to see good where there is good, and evil where there's evil. Otherwise he'd make himself purposefully blind (like Fudge all during OoP). Maeg: > Can this [i.e., ignoring everything we've been shown about DD's character] be done? Sure. Will it destroy the main theme, narrative > arc, and symbolism of the whole series? Yes. > Annemehr: Absolutely. But, trust me, Talisman's not the one ignoring what we've been shown. > Maeg > > My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. > Oooo, snacktime! Annemehr who quite likes the gutter, too From missvassy at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 03:11:16 2007 From: missvassy at yahoo.com (missvassy) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:11:16 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172063 Miss Vassy, earlier: > Here goes with the theory: What if Dumbledore was the one who told > Voldemort about the prophecy? vmonte wrote: > > This from a post I made in 2005 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/137548 > > Dumbledore has been set-up by JKR to be almost Saint-like from the > first book. But is he? > > In every book there is always someone who is revealed to be someone > or something else. The good guys are the bad guys and vise versa; > and people are always using polyjuice to change from one person to > another. > > Moody is Crouch Jr., Harry and Ron are Crab and Goyle, Grab and > Goyle are girls. Tom Riddle is the perfect student and Hagrid let > the monster out. (And forget about Snape, he annoys me just as much > as Trelawny's prophecies.) > > We are so busy considering everyone else's motives that we never > even look into Dumbledore's role in all this. Where did he come > from, and what is his stake in all this? > > Was he given another chance by someone? Is that why he gives > everyone else second chances? Was his soul saved? Is part of his > penance that he has to convert others? Does Dumbledore represent St. > Paul? > > "Snape is now no more a Death Eater than I am." Vivian, Thank you for pointing me to your post with a similar theory. I searched high and low on here and wasn't able to find any other ostings with this type of theory, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it. Just as a clarification, I do not think that Dumbledore gave this information about the Potters and the Prophecy voluntarily. I think he was tortured into doing it and is not evil, just weaker than Voldemort. But I have a question, in all but one of the cases that you mentioned of people not being what they seemed, they were using polyjuice potion. Do you think that the Dumbledore who swallowed the potion was someone else using a polyjuice potion and pretending to be Dumbledore? Or did you mean he was like Tom Riddle, pretending to be a good guy when he was really evil and someone else (Snape maybe?) was the goody guy that got the bad wrap from everyone? Miss Vassy - Who hopes that she can keep throwing around supposition for the next two and a half days to keep her head out of spoilers. :) From rdsilverstein at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 04:05:16 2007 From: rdsilverstein at yahoo.com (hpfan_mom) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:05:16 -0000 Subject: A Clue in Howards End? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172064 Joined the library reading club this summer to kill time while waiting for July 21. Came across this passage from Chapter 2 of Howards End, by E.M. Forster: _____ "Like many others who have lived long in a great capital, she had strong feelings about the various railway termini. They are our gates to the glorious and the unknown. . . . To Margaret--I hope that it will not set the reader against her--the station of King's Cross had always suggested Infinity. Its very situation--withdrawn a little behind the facile splendours of St. Pancras--implied a comment on the materialism of life. Those two great arches, colourless, indifferent, shouldering between them an unlovely clock, were fit portals for some eternal adventure, whose issue might be prosperous, but would certainly not be expressed in the ordinary language of prosperity." _____ When Harry stepped through those arches for the first time, was that a foreshadowing of his journey into Infinity through a different archway, one with a veil? Boy, I hope not. I just cannot see him dying at the end. My guess - Harry's adventure will be prosperous, he will succeed. But the results of his "eternal adventure" will "not be expressed in the ordinary language of prosperity," which I take to mean a life full of material wealth. Instead, his prosperity will be expressed in love, which was missing from his life before he stepped through those arches. hpfan_mom, really really hoping that the last chapter is not titled "The Man Who Died." P.S. Many thanks to the poster who, several months ago, admitted reading the chapter titles to HBP before reading the text and upon seeing "The White Tomb" figured out that DD died. I will not even glance at the chapter titles until I turn the page to start that chapter! From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 04:10:36 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:10:36 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Waiting for the Last Can(n)on In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172065 Phlytie Elf was sitting on the beach looking out into Theory Bay. The myriad of vessels were making their way around the bay with varying degree of success. It was actually a wonder that some of those were still afloat. "What are you looking at, Master Elf?" Phlytie turned around to see a kindly looking Goblin wearing a nautical uniform. Phlytie was relieved to see this Goblin was smiling. "Oh, pardon me sir. I is just wondering at all the pretty ships. Umm, if you please, sir, who is you?" The Goblin drew himself up to his full four foot height (which towered over little Phlytie) and said, "I am the Harbormaster of Theory Bay. My name is Sincher Phlote." The Goblin gave a little bow. "Very pleased to meet you, Master of the Harbor," squeeked Phlytie. "I is Phlytie Elf of the List Elves." "And what brings a List Elf down to Theory Bay?" "Begging your pardon, Master sir, but we List Elvses is going to be launching our own vessel." At these words, Phlytie beamed. "Ahh, I see," said Sincher, looking skeptical. "Perhaps you would show me your vessel?" Phlytie jumped up excitedly. "It is being my pleasure, Master." And Phlytie headed off towards the shipbuilding yard, Sincher in tow. "Are the List Elves aware that a call to berth has gone out to all the ships in Theory Bay? They must all line up to see if they can pass a sea-worthiness test." "Oh, what is this being about?" asked Phlytie. "They must withstand fire from the last can(n)on. Look out there," said Sincher, pointing out into the bay. "Do you see those buoys out in the bay? Those are the markers for sunken theories. They didn't survive previous can(n)on fire. Some of them have been out there for years." "You make boys swim over ship wrecks? For years? How does they stay out there?" "BUOYS, BUOYS. Those things with the red flags." "Oh my, you make the boys carry flags, too? Phlytie didn't know rules was so strict in Theory Bay." Sincher shook his head, giving up that explanation. They walked on coming presently to an enormous 360-foot, 7-deck yatch that was readying for launch. "Magnificent, isn't it my little friend? Do you know what that is?" Phlytie was awestruck, and couldn't speak. "That is the Harry Potter. They've just completed the final can(n)on. See it there on the uppermost deck where they've written 'Deathly Hallows'? All those theory ships are hoping to get picked up by this ship. That's nautical talk for being proven seaworthy. When the Harry Potter sets sail, the last can(n)on will sink all the vessels in Theory Bay it determines are unworthy of itself. Do you think your Elf vessel can pass the test?" Phlytie Elf takes several breaths and tries to comprehend what he's just been told. "Well, we is going to try" "You haven't added your plank to this vessel yet, I take it? Well, let's hear it then. Phlytie screws up his courage and decides it's time to add his Theory. "Puppetmaster!Winky is Phlytie's plank." Sincher looks bemused, but decides to withhold judgement. "Care to explain that one, Master Elf?" "Most assuredly sir! You see, Miss Winky has been controlling things all along. It started with Dogstar Black getting thrown into prison so Harry has no adult wizard friends around for growing up." "Dogstar? Do you mean Sirius?" "Same difference. How do you think he comes upon his animagus form, hmmm? Winky is making sure that Master Squat, Sr doesn't give Dogstar a chance for freedom. Winky has being controlling Squat, Sr forever. She is also getting Senior to sneak Squat, Jr out of Azkaban. She is knowing she will need him later." "Squat? Oh, that would be Crouch, wouldn't it?" "Please keep up, Harbor Master. In the second year, Winky is sending Dobby to meet up and warn the Potter boy. Dobby would never know where to go without Miss Winky. Miss Winky is using reverse Psychobabble here, tell Potter boy not to return to Hogwarts and he's sure to want to go back into the trap. Unfortunately, stupid BadFeast screws up and gives diary to wrong person." "Ah yes, Mal-Foy for Bad-Feast. Are all you Elves as bad with names?" Phlytie sounding slightly exasperated, "Us elves understand wizards better than they know themselves, we knows who they really are. Now, third year, Miss Winky moves clouds to help the rat Fading WorthlessnessArose to escape. She is telling stupid rat where to go also." Sincher thinks on this one for a minute... "Got it, Peter Petty-grew. Can we just use their real... oh wait, that one fits. Do go on." "Now we comes to Miss Winky's crowning glory achievement. She stuns Squat, Sr so's the rat and her Master can Imperiuse Squat, Sr and free up Squat, Jr to make her plan work. Then she goes to Hogwarts to oversee whole operation. And plan works, her Master regains his body." "Wait a minute, didn't she spend that entire year drunk?" "Tut, tut. You fell for that act as much as the rest did. The only one who came close to uncovering the plot was that Professor CutOurselves S-backneck. He almost catches Squat, Jr stealing ingredients." "Cut-Ourselves is Sever-Us, okay got that. But S-backneck, S-nape? What does that tell you?" "Master Harbormaster, if you cut an "S" in back of neck you becomes spineless - you has no legs to stand on. Get it?" Sincher chuckles to himself. This elf has screwy ideas, but at least they're humorous. "Okay, Your Miss Winky has accomplished a lot. Did she do anything in years 5 and 6?" "Oh yes. You remember when Prof Cutourselves tells Container-maker boy that time and space matter in magic? He is being right. Winky has to plant those visions in the boy's mind as she is only one close enough and can hide well enough to not be seen." "Young Montague apperates out of cabinet hisself, please! Wizards are not allowed to apperate in Hogwarts. Winky is doing side-along to get the boy out, and to make sure Doctor Hardware learns about cabinets" Seeing the quizzical look on Sincher's face, Phlytie realizes he has used a regional reference that the Harbormaster couldn't know. "Phlytie is sorry, you see ACO is being a hardware store where Phlytie lives. You see now, DR-ACO, the cabinet repair doctor, is needing hardware to repair cabinets. Told you elvses see wizards for who they really are." "And, no way does Doctor Hardware fix cabinets himself. Remember, elves knew about Come-and-Go room long before wizards kids. Elves moved the cabinet in there in the first place. Miss Winky fixes it while BadFeast boy tries dumb tricks to kill StupidRingPortal." Phlytie sees that Sincher is not getting this last one. So he explains, "Stupid = Dumb, Ring = Bell, Portal = Door. Dumb-Bell- Door. And he never should have made portal in the stupid ring. Got hisself a black hand, didn't he?" Sincher giggles and says, "You certainly have thought this through, haven't you? So, what does your Miss Winky have planned for her final act?" "Isn't this obvious by now? Good wizards fight bad wizards all over the place. Lots and lots of killing. And Elves take over when all the wizards are being dead." Sincher fights back his laughter to ask, "What about us Goblins?" Phlytie looks dumbfounded. "Umm, you join us?" Sincher just smiles. "Sure master elf, if you guys take over, we'll join you." ******** Presently the Elf and Goblin come to the shipyard building that the elves used to build their Theories in. When they open the door they see a number of elves milling about inside. Curiously, these elves are all wearing clothes instead of the normal Tea Towel elf attire. Phlytie walks up to one and says, "Excuse me, who is you elvses and where are my fellow List Elves?" The elf sets down her C.R.A.B.C.U.S.T.A.R.D and smiles. "Well, hello there Phlytie. I'm Elkins and we are all the freed List Elves. We were here long before you even knew what a Harry Potter was." Phlytie bows deeply to Elkins. "Oh my goodness, you is a legend in these parts, you is. Phlytie is most pleased to meet you." Sincher sidles up to Elkins and asks, "Did you all come back to help your former comrades with their last theories?" Elkins, wipes some custard from her chin and nods her head towards the center of the warehouse, as she leads the two off. "Heavens, no. We gave up our tea towels long ago. Quite frankly, it appears our decision to distance ourselves was most fortuitous. The rest of the present List Elves are up at the George, getting drunk, no doubt. And after this latest creation I wouldn't wonder if they began to partake before they began building. Let's have a look at what they have wrought, shall we?" There in the middle of the warehouse, sitting on a boat launching trailer was the oddest looking vessel Sincher had ever seen. In point of fact, he wasn't sure he should even call it a vessel. As Elkins sniggered under her breath, Sincher turned to Phlytie, barely able to contain himself. "Master elf, I believe you and the List Elves have set a new theory record. You are the first theorists to have your vessel sink before it was launched. But I'm sure it will make a fine anchor for some buoys." Phlytie looks aghast. "Oh no, please don't tie down any boys, or girls, to these theories!" ELkins, Sincher and all the freed elves fall around in laughter as Phlytie slinks off to join his fellow elves at the George for a much needed Firewhiskey and Butterbeer chaser. ******************************************************************* Mike, who takes full blame... ahh credit, for this theory. Except, of course for CRABCUSTARD, which was indeed an Elkins original and is timeless. For anyone who hasn't read the incomparable Elkins (search for author = ssk7882) Here is part 1 of CRABCUSTARD: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/47927 From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Wed Jul 18 04:05:51 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:05:51 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hidden via Fidelius Charm ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172066 Do ya think Voldemort could've used the Fidelius Charm to hide the location of a horcrux? Here's the text I've got about the Fidelius Charm: "An immensely complex spell involving the magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul. The information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret-Keeper, and is henceforth impossible to find -- unless, of course, the Secret-Keeper chooses to divulge it" (PoA, Chapter 10) The major snag I see is that the Fidelius Charm is like a buddy system, and Voldemort isn't a team player. However: "When a Secret-Keeper dies, their secret dies with them, or, to put it another way, the status of their secret will remain as it was at the moment of their death. Everybody in whom they confided will continue to know the hidden information, but nobody else." -- JKR website (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_poll.cfm) So... Voldemort and Secret-Keeper X do the Fidelius Charm to hide the location of a horcrux. (X wouldn't even have to know that it's a horcrux. Knowing it's a locket/wand/cup/dragon/door knob would be enough, right?) Voldemort immediately kills X, before X even has the chance to divulge the secret to anyone. The secret (and the horcrux) remain hidden for eternity. Oh my. Oh no... (I did a crude search on this subject and found nothing. If it's been discussed before, I'd love to know where to find the thread. Thanks!) Joan of Anarchy From Schlobin at aol.com Wed Jul 18 03:14:27 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:14:27 -0000 Subject: my latest theory about Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172067 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmwcfo" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Schlobin@ wrote: > > > > Perhaps he plans to supplant Dumbledore AND Voldemort and become > the most powerful wizard in the world. > > > > > JW: > Susan, welcome to the land of the clear-thinking and sure-sighted. > > There are many reasons to believe Snape is evil. There are many > equally valid reasons to believe he is on DD's team. IMO, both sides > in the debate are correct, in a sense. Snape is indeed evil, but he > is temporarily allied with DD. His pragmatic strategy has been "any > enemy of my enemy is my friend." His worthy adversary is LV; DD was > an ally of convenience, to be disposed of when no longer useful. > > For the reasons Susan cited, and more, I concluded while reading OotP > that SS was playing each side against the other. Further, I > conjectured that the reason he was so concerned about saving the > hated HP's life (SS/PS, PoA) was that SS needs a way to defeat LV. I > believe he selected the Chosen One as his prime weapon. His > pragmatic strategy is to keep HP alive and ultimately assist HP in > defeating LV. > > I thank the History Channel for providing me with an interesting > historic metaphor. Around the year 200 C.E., Roman > general/politician Septimus Severus became Emperor by (among other > things) playing two rivals against each other. Their names were > Albinus (Albus?) and Niger (Dark Lord?). I see this as an > opportunity for art to imitate history. > snip..... Susan replies: Actually Septimus Severus was actually LUCIUS Septimus Severus.... given JKR's classical bent, I think this theory has more and more credence. Susan McGee From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 18 04:37:20 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:37:20 -0000 Subject: Where is Dumbledore's wand? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172068 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: > > Whatever became of Dumbledore's wand? The last we saw of it, it was > flying over the battlement when Draco's "Expelliarmus" propelled it > out of Dumbledore's hand. > > Eddie > Eddie again: Sorry to reply to my own message. I should have searched first. Then I would have found this thread: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165799 Funnily enough, it has the same Subject as I picked, and now Yahoo thinks my message was part of the same thread. So now that I'm referencing the message at the beginning of my own thread, it will become an infinitely looping loop, the worst kind of time turner. Eddie From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 05:32:19 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:32:19 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172069 Miss Vassy wrote: But I have a question, in all but one of the cases that you mentioned of people not being what they seemed, they were using polyjuice potion. Do you think that the Dumbledore who swallowed the potion was someone else using a polyjuice potion and pretending to be Dumbledore? Or did you mean he was like Tom Riddle, pretending to be a good guy when he was really evil and someone else (Snape maybe?) was the goody guy that got the bad wrap from everyone? vmonte responds: No, I meant that he may have had a checkered past. He may have not been a good guy when he was younger. From missvassy at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 05:04:47 2007 From: missvassy at yahoo.com (missvassy) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:04:47 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hidden via Fidelius Charm ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172070 > Joan of Anarchy: > So... Voldemort and Secret-Keeper X do the Fidelius Charm to > hide the location of a horcrux. (X wouldn't even have to know > that it's a horcrux. Knowing it's a locket/wand/cup/dragon/door > knob would be enough, right?) Voldemort immediately kills X, > before X even has the chance to divulge the secret to anyone. > The secret (and the horcrux) remain hidden for eternity. Miss Vassy: I find it interesting that you mention a door knob. My friend has a theory, and I don't know if it was ever mentioned on this site, that the knocker on Dumbledore's office is a horcrux that Tom made when he was leaving Dumbledore's office after he was refused a job at Hogwarts. After all, it is a "griffin door knocker." Hmmmm... From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 06:14:47 2007 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 06:14:47 -0000 Subject: Predictions revised Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172071 I solemly swear that I have read or seen any of the disgusting spoilers etc..I also solemly swear that my hubby has completely tried to ruin my weekend by inviting company down this weekend and I have thoroughly decided that he has ruined their weekend..not mine or HIS LOL--our poor houseguests...I did warn them afterwards, they didn't change their mind...and casseroles are in the freezer! Doddie Compulsory Questions (50 points total): If you believe the answer to a question is a new character, write "new character" *and* describe relationships to old characters or characteristics of new character for full credit. 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Nope 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? yep, but not because Harry AK'd him! 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? D.Umbridge(dare I hope) Dare I hope NOT...Molly Weasley(I think this would be the saddest) 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His new Dark Mark(although would have liked it to be his horrible breath) 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No(at least not at the beginning of the year..it may be his only chance to visit Godrics Hollow) b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Fleur and Bill 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Dudley 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Tonks(although I really want it to be Shaklebolt) d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn(safest place in the ww despite DD's death..if Sluggy was that chicken he wouldn't have been at the funeral) e. Headmaster or -mistress? McConogal 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With himself--he is exactly what he accuses other's to be an "insufferable know-it-all" because he is...it matters not where his loyalties lie..he always does and has done what he consideres to be the most beneficial to himself and those he may care about the most(so much for NOT letting emotions rule you)...hence his grandiose sense of self-righteousness..(on the scale of black and white Snape is most definitely charcoal gray..he may have the best of intentions, but he is truly a nasty person-which makes him useless for most character development) HAHA Snape--the GRAND red herring! No one can explain to me yet why on earth Filch is bandaging his leg in PS/SS..simply makes no sense after we saw how he healed Draco.. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Slytherins Ring b. Riddle's Diary c. the locket d.Riddle's trophy at Hogwarts(the one Ron kept barfing up slugs all over) e.. Harry(not enough pages in a book if he is not one) f. Nagini(his "test drive" of creating Horcruxes in a living creature--can you imagine if he could control Harry like he did Nagini--I think he thought he could given his actions in the OOP battle..I believe Voldemort thought he could make Harry kill DD or DD kill Harry..but DD didnt and Voldemort couldn't do anything with Harry because Harry had all that love and other caring emotions within him)._ In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Snape cannot conjure a patronus..hence his tired lessons about dealing with dementors in HBP which had nothing much to do with dementors; and his nasty remarks towards Tonk's Patronus in HBP (although he may have thought Tonk's was "playing with his emotions" to send a werewolf patronus(however she did send the message to Hagrid--this also means that Snape is in the habit of intercepting messages of OOP members)..Snape's boggart is Petunia Dursley dying. (He loved her once and like JK said, "Who wants Snape in love with them?"would be hilarious if Dudley was the love child of Snape and Petunia--I don't believe so but it would be hilarious--everyone would laugh until the last of the last book so that's truly a joke LOL)) Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? A love memory room...heaven forbid all those who have never known love that step across the threshhold. Those who have not known true love perish in the vacuum of their emotional nothingness, anger, hatred, self-righteousness, revenge simply have no place there... Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. 1.Harry WAS a HORCRUX....Harry was a made a horcrux that night at Godrics Hollow...Hence his connection with Voldemort--his scar hurting him, his forays into voldy's mind, his speaking parseltongue, his having visions from Nagini's point of view, his scar hurting when he first saw Snape("one I believe has left me forever")--I do not believe quirrel was possed at the feast--too much risk with DD close by)and his being able to open the chamber of secrets (which apparently only the heir or one possessed by the HORCRUX of the heir of Slytheryin(like Ginny) can do--or perhaps a person who's a HORCRUX--something the Horcrux diary Tom would have never expected)...HOWEVER, after Voldy possessed Harry at the end of OOP Harry's scar has stopped hurting and Harry hasn't had any insights into Voldy's mind. Hence the portion of Voldemort's soul in Harry's scar left with Voldemort after his possesion of Harry in the MOM in OOP.(one's soul wants to remain whole ). This also explains DD's look of "triumph" in oop...(if there had not been a "blood connection" the little piece of Voldemort's soul would have never returned....In essence Harry's blood, provided a conduit for whomever may have possesed him. Also DD doesn't insist on occlumency lessons anymore, yet Harry describes him as having a "look of satisfaction" when he learns their are no more forays into either Harry's nor Voldemort's minds. I believed Harry learned parseltongue from speaking/hearing it over the years...or he may well have inherited it who knows what all the Slytherins were up to thousands of years ago.(wouldn't run it past some crazy Slytherin to try to "breed out" the muggles hence the increase of muggle borns over time.). 2. Snape loved Petunia, HOWEVER, Petunia would NEVER love Snape naturally(The Evans turn out lived down the lane from the Snape home)...it was PETUNIA that wanted a muggle life(and Lily knew this) and Snape pleaded Lily's help..what's worse...Snape discovered that he didn't like Petunia so much or, realized that there would be no future for them as he would never sacrifice his magical abilities for her. Then, Snape set his sights on Lily for her magical talent- -hence his margin notes in his potions book--he took while watching Lily). In the end, Petunia had no magical talent but adored Snape being being devoted to her told lily who in turn told snape...and the worst memory of Snape in OOP was the worse because Lily finally knew the type of person Snape was after him calling her a mudblood and knew he was no hubby for her sister...hence Snape's running and telling Voldie ALL about the prophecy..I wouldn't be surprised if Trelawney hadn't given Snape a prophecy or two over the years...even if she didn't Snape is a superb occlumens/legulimens...I'm sure he got more of the prophecy over the years.especial during Trelawney's "sherry years"..(in the end I'm sure DD's greatest mistake was trusting Snape, also his greatest windfall would be trusting Snape..) Snape hates Harry because he has his mum's eyes...what Lily saw in his worse memory was his true heart...if he called Lily a "mudblood"..then Lily would never want that for her SISTER of all folks... 3. Madame Pince and Filch are Snape's parents....(probably the only other anagram of seeming importance after book #2 (Irma Pince=I'm a prince))..Also it is also the only plausible explanation of why Filch would be bandaging Snape's wounds in Sorcerer's/Philosopher's stone...especially after we'd seen him heal Malfoy after Draco's battle with Harry in HBP with wand waving and incantations! Uggh can you imagine Snape's humility his muggle father posing as a "squib"..and Snape purchasing the cheapest Kneazle he can find to assist his muggle dad...who's the janitor at the school he's employed at. .That's why DD thought he could trust Snape...because Snape would never submit to such humiliating circumstances unless he truly loved his parents(maybe he didn't). Probably the only instance in the books were love is under estimated, or perhaps not if Snape AND DD are trying to conceal a Snape/Petunia/Lily connection... (something too big for Harry to keep to himself and just the sort of thing that gossip mongers hunger for) 4. Tom Riddle's trophy in the trophy room at Hogwarts is a horcrux....the first horcrux he created after killing Moaning Myrtle. 5. Harry will learn wandless magic..he must..and he may learn a thing or two from Kreacher and Dobby and perhaps anyother of the non- humans he's met over the years--especially before he goes on a mission to Gringotts.(who temporarly will freeze all assets in book seven..perfect place to take a non-human--gringots) 5b. . Just had to say that the prophecy does refer to three folks...and the "neither may live while the other survives"...I believe the "OTHER" to be DD(the generalized meaning of "other" was the only other wizard that took on the last dark lord(grindenwal) and was victorious)...now DD is dead, both Harry and Voldie will get about their living business...(and how true it is seeing as, for the most part, DD's decisions regarding Harry truly set him up for survival more than living(perhaps he thought he had little choice) and perhaps those same decisions kept Voldie in the same manner of life)...Hence Harry's hairs standing up on the back of his neck while going to Slughorns home in HBP when he looked at DD's blackened hand thinking "neither can live while the other survives").. Doddie who hates that she found a glaring error so she has to submit 'email again and apologizes profusely to the judges. From missvassy at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 05:54:17 2007 From: missvassy at yahoo.com (missvassy) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:54:17 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172072 > vmonte responds: > No, I meant that he (Dumbledore) may have had a checkered past. > He may have not been a good guy when he was younger. Miss Vassy: Sorry that I missed the point. I agree that Dumbledore probably has a checkered past. I wonder if it has to do with the Grindewald? From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 06:35:15 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 06:35:15 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172073 I wrote: No, I meant that he (Dumbledore) may have had a checkered past. He may have not been a good guy when he was younger. Miss Vassy responded: Sorry that I missed the point. I agree that Dumbledore probably has a checkered past. I wonder if it has to do with the Grindewald? vmonte again: Yes, I think so. JKR would have given us Grindewald's life story before now, unless there was something unpleasant about Dumbledore she didn't want anyone to know. Did they start out as friends? I'll probably be wrong about this too. lol From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 06:50:39 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 06:50:39 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172074 Thanks Lisa & Juli. Juli, my mother's language is Hebrew, but I really do know the difference between 'locket' and 'necklace', I just wanted to know if it would be a terrible mistake to call a locket 'necklace' in english, because in hebrew it wouldn't. From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 07:06:20 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:06:20 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172075 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "missvassy" wrote: I will quote JKR's response on the question "Was Lily a DE?": HOW DARE YOU! DD was already revealed as not being saint in OotP, as were all of Harry's other father figures - by the terrible mistakes he's made. I think Grinwald will not at all play a part in DH. It was only JKR winking at us and reffering to WW2 (and our LV - Adolf - or is it just me being jewish? No... I think the English have WW2 deep into their nation's culture and conscious as well). This is ofcourse due to the date. We know that at 1945 DD won against Grinwald, and we know that at the muggle world something parallel happened at the same year. As a matter of fact, it is obvious that DD was responsible for the victorious end of WW2, so how could he be evil? From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Wed Jul 18 09:27:36 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 09:27:36 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172076 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > I wrote: > No, I meant that he (Dumbledore) may have had a checkered past. > He may have not been a good guy when he was younger. > > Miss Vassy responded: > Sorry that I missed the point. I agree that Dumbledore probably has a > checkered past. I wonder if it has to do with the Grindewald? > > vmonte again: > Yes, I think so. JKR would have given us Grindewald's life story > before now, unless there was something unpleasant about Dumbledore she > didn't want anyone to know. Did they start out as friends? I'll > probably be wrong about this too. lol > Brothergib: DD seems at great pains in HBP to try and find any humanity in LV. To illustrate to Harry that there are reasons why LV should be pitied. Let us suppose that DD killed (AK'd?) Gindelwald. Maybe this action has haunted DD for the rest of his life - that he acted without pity. Maybe he doesn't want Harry to follow the same path? From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 09:48:56 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 09:48:56 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Waiting for the Last Can(n)on In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172077 Phlytie Elf strolled into the George just as Vexxy shot up from a butter-beer induced stupor and staggered toward Alika. She tripped over Phlytie's oversized shoes and flew across Shorty's table, did a handspring off an empty chair, and landed in a heap across from Blinky. "Vexxy knows the secret!" Vexxy shouted, or perhaps it only sounded like shouting to an elf who had been immersed in butterbeer most of the evening. "Vexxy has just had revelation from Great Elf!" Blinky turned her glass upside down and shook it. A lone drop splashed onto the table. "Blinky thinks Vexxy is having too much butterbeer," she said, and signalled to the barman to bring her another. "No! No! No! No! Yes! Alika must listen to Vexxy!" Shorty groaned at the next table and held her head. Most of the elves just wanted peace and quiet. Blinky, who had come in late, merely sighed. "I is Blinky Elf, not Alika. Alika is snoring in the corner." "Alika is not snoring now," Alika staggered to the table and just missed sitting in Blinky's lap. This only made Blinky's dog start to snuffle. Alika usually kept some extra-special kibble just for her. Alika couldn't find her pocket. Vexxy found an eclair and passed it to Bianca, who siezed it and began chomping on it at Blinky's feet. "What is special message from Great Elf?" Alika whispered. "Snape." Every elf in the George moaned and muttered. Every canon shot returned to Snape. Blinky shook some cream from her foot and patted her dog. "What does Great Elf say about Snape?" "Snape has been dead since many years. He is always associated with female imagery: cauldrons, vulture hats, acts like old woman sometimes - This is because he is an old woman. "He" is really Eileen Prince. She was protected by Dumbledore, and disguised as her son." "Tell prediction to someone awake," Alika said as she drifted off to sleep. "That isn't all! Listen! Eileen Prince and Albus Dumbledore had an affair. Harry was their son!" Blinky blinked. She reached down and patted Bianca's head again. "Blinky thinks Vexxy hears this prediction not from Great Elf, but from Great Butterbeer." Phlytie Elf leaned over and gave Blinky a rakish nudge. "Did Phlytie ever mention that Winky Elf is mastermind behind all the evil in Harry Potter, and that one day, elves will take over the Wizarding World?" Even Vexxy was quick enough to duck as the other elves threw tomatoes at Phlytie. ---------------------------------- Ceridwen. From ida3 at planet.nl Wed Jul 18 10:39:53 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:39:53 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172078 Annemehr: > Hmmm. I seem to recall that these books were written with years of > research, boxes and boxes of notes, complicated charts for each > chapter detailing what has to happen, clues, misdirection, and red > herrings. I'd say they *are* complex. *And* logical. > > Even if she's writing "for children" she's apparently doing them > the favor of assuming they can think. Dana: But does that mean that JKR would set up her story so that when the final installment is released, everything in the books as they stand now would become a lie? Is that really how logic works? So in other words, this is not a story between good vs. evil but between evil vs. evil in which evil is the only thing that could possibly win from evil? Annemehr: > It's not so much that JKR couldn't have written a character with > imperfect second sight; she *could* have just modified Mopsus a > bit. But she didn't. > > What Talisman further points out is that Trelawney's utterances > come in two extremely different varieties. When she's aware of > herself, she's no better than a RL "psychic" charlatan and can't > properly read the tea leaves in a beginning student's cup -- and > then on the other hand she goes into some kind of trance and lets > loose with these two prophecies. Dana: Would it really be an interesting story development if the prophecy was fake and implanted? Does this change anything about LV's choice to follow up on that said prophecy and make it a real one by doing so? Why would DD possessing Trelawney make the story concerning the prophecy a more interesting read? Also if the prophecy is fake, then how would LV making it a true one fit into the story? You can't put on fake pants so how would a fake prophecy work? It actually wouldn't because there would be nothing to fulfill. It would make the entire story surrounding the prophecy a black whole that would create a plot whole in its own right. For instance how would LV know to mark his opponent as an equal if he never heard that part of the fake prophecy? How would anyone faking a prophecy foresee this happening as JKR herself said that the effect of Lily's sacrifice was something no one could have foreseen as it never happened before? Unless you want to imply that DD is the seer but doesn't want to be credited for it and uses Trelawney as a vessel. Annemehr: > Rude? You think people don't try to alter the facts to fit their > preconceptions?! Dana: Sure they do but that doesn't mean that you have to call other people incapable of reading the books and interpret the presented evidence. In real life the smug cop thinks he has found the right evidence to convict the criminal, only to later find that the one he put in jail has been innocent all along. In HP the facts can never be totally supported by other facts as JKR has carefully constructed her story that way. So the so-called evidence that is supposedly leading the way is largely open to interpretation, which still requires filling in the blanks or filling in the missing link to connect two facts. Either way it is still the readers perception that is presented as evidence to support the theory and therefore one should remain open to except to be proven wrong in, an as of yet, incomplete story. A theory is just that a theory and even if the theory in the mind of the theorist is true and can be represented really well, the person is still not the author and therefore one can't make the claim that the evidence found somehow proofs you have uncovered the authors intend when she developed/ created a character. Also you can't rectify the rudeness of one by pointing out the rudeness of others. If everybody is wrong then no one is right and not if everyone behaves rude then I'm allowed to do so as well. We all get carried away in our own cleverness but just because someone is better with words then someone else doesn't make the theory truer by definition. Annemehr: > No one is calling DD a "red herring." I assure you, Talisman is > not ignoring anything about what we've been shown about > Dumbledore. I should know -- I've argued plenty of the details > with her in the past. It all comes straight from the text (see her > published works - all rife with canon references). Dana: She might not ignore anything that is shown about DD but she does give her own interpretation to what she sees as facts about this character. The series has been largely about choice and if DD, as in her theories, would be guilty of said crimes then actually no one in the series had a choice at all and there are not many plots overlapping the main plot of Harry's journey but just one plot in all the books orchestrated by the evilest man around Albus Dumbledore. If this theory turns out to be true then the enter story as told thus far becomes false. Would you really want to believe that JKR wrote the enter series just so in the end she would make it all a lie and that no one can be hold accountable for their actions because they were manipulated into doing what they did? So let's give Wormtail back his Order of Merlin because he was in DD's service when he betrayed his best friends and not out there to safe his own neck. Let's make Lily's sacrifice a lie by having DD orchestrate the entire event and not something Lily chose to do out of love for her son. Let's redeem Voldemort for his evil acts because it was not his fault he was manipulated into his choices by DD, as in some type of large scientific experiment. He is actually a fluffy bunny that is not responsible for his own actions. It might all come straight from the text but that doesn't mean that the intentions behind the actions are as clear cut as she wants to present them. Annemehr: > He used Imperius -- on Mrs. Cole, to make her believe a blank piece > of paper was an official document regarding Tom Riddle's > registration with Hogwarts (HBP 265 US). Her eyes "slid out of > focus and back again" -- that was no Obliviate; there was nothing > to *forget*; that was mind control. Dana: Could you provide evidence that DD showed Mrs. Cole a blank piece of paper and made her believe it was an official document? And what purpose would a fake Hogwarts admission letter present to the story? Tom Riddle already showed magical abilities as Mrs. Cole confirmed when she talks about the strange things that always seem to surround young Tom. So why would there be a need for a fake admission letter? What would it add to the story? Again to make Tom a product of DD's experiments and not responsible for his own actions? That somehow DD chose a non-magical boy and turned him into the greatest Dark Lord of all times so he can then, 50 years later, hand pick another young boy to defeat his own creation? That Dr. Frankenstein ehm Dumbledore lost control over his creation and needed to create a new one in order to get ride of the old one? Would that really make a good story? To me this is actually proof of fitting the text to the theory. Mrs. Cole is a muggle and doesn't know anything about wizards and witches so why wouldn't her eyes slide out of focus and back again, especially as she was drinking gin as if her life depended up on getting to see the bottom of the glass? She probably thought she had one to many when DD gave her the document. Annemehr: > Those are a couple of the simplest examples I can give. There are > plenty more **in canon** where those came from, and Talisman has > used them to show the self-consistent character of Dumbledore -- > the one who guides events all through the series. I know Talisman represents her theory really well and I love to read her interpretations but unfortunately they are nothing more then that even if she claims that she knows her canon better then anyone. It is still implying that DD is so powerful that he can direct everyone's actions and behavior at all times, at any time. That all the other, so well developed, characters are actually nothing more then inferi moved around on a giant chessboard. If he is that powerful what does he need Harry for? He can checkmate the other king in just one move as he is in total control of everything. Annemehr: > What he said was that his desire to protect Harry jeopardized The > Plan. What he said, was: > > 'I cared about you too much,' said Dumbledore simply. 'I cared more > for your happiness than your knowing the truth, more for your peace > of mind than my plan, more for your life than the lives that might > be lost if the plan failed.' [OoP 838 US] Dana: Sure DD was talking about his plan but why does this automatically mean that his plan involved implanting a fake prophecy, leaking said prophecy, sacrificing the boy's parents by manipulating them into choosing the wrong SK and then having set up the mother's sacrifice so Voldemort could mark her son as his equal? Why can't DD's plan not have its starting point at the night the Potters died trying to protect their son? When LV made the choice to follow up on the part of the prophecy that was relayed to him? Therefore making the prophecy one that will have to be fulfilled because LV made it so? DD did not have to do anything but LV would not stop hunting down Harry at every chance he gets so DD makes up a plan to hide the boy away until he is ready and decides to have him trained when it is time for him to come to Hogwarts. He then runs into the problem that he can't just see Harry as just the boy the prophecy was talking about but comes to love him. That he no longer wants the prophecy to be about Harry. That he doesn't want a young boy to have to face an evil Dark Lord and the possibility of him getting hurt in the process. Does that mean he can prevent Harry to take matters into his own hands time and time again? No, he can't and therefore he can only offer his help there where he is able to do so. Also think about what DD says, would you want to have someone that you love face a dangerous task? How many loved ones of soldiers that are send to war would rather they stayed home and let someone else solve the problem? Why does it have to be their fight? To me that is what DD is telling Harry. That he doesn't want Harry to have this burden even if he can't change anything about the choice LV made and LV will never let it go just because DD doesn't want Harry to be part of it. In the second part about him not telling Harry right away about the Horcruxes and why LV did not die the night of GH, might have been because DD wanted to tackle them himself but knew that LV's focus had shifted and that there was a possibility DD was not around long enough to do this task for Harry and why he needed to teach Harry about them. It is still the same text, yet the interpretations of intentions are entirely different and it does not make it inconsistent with DD's speech in OotP. Besides as we see DD first checks out if there is merit to his knowledge before he sends Harry on a wild goose chase. Annemehr: > Absolutely. But, trust me, Talisman's not the one ignoring what > we've been shown. Dana: Well she does ignore other interpretations of the text as possibilities and crams unproven facts into her theory to proof her point. Like for instance Sirius being moved through the veil by DD's hand. Show me canon that proves this as fact? Just because DD is present doesn't proof anything or even that he lets the fight between Bella and Sirius go on, while he rounds up the other DEs, is proof that he had the intention of letting Sirius be killed. That he wanted to activate weapon Harry by having him experience personal loss of a loved one. Show me canon that actually states this as fact and not just mere interpretation of what a person wants it to be. Just because a theorist can bring his or her theories in a convincing way doesn't make the theory truer then other interpretations of that same text. I have had many discussions about canon and what seems proof to me but people that do not want to see it that way will not read it in the same way. Does this mean I'm more right and they just do not get it? Maybe yes and maybe no, as I could very well be the one seeing and reading it all wrongly. We'll have to wait and see but to claim that you ARE right in your assessments while, unlike others, you let the evidence (that is clearly not there) guide you is indeed rude because what you are saying is that only you are intelligent enough to understand where the author has been going with her story and others are to dumb to see it like you. JMHO Dana From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 11:58:50 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:58:50 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172079 "missvassy" wrote: > > I re-read the cave scene in HBP and was paying really close attention > to what DD was saying when he had to drink that potion. It sounded > like Dumbledore was being forced to tell someone something that was > going to lead or had lead to hurting someone. I got to thinking that > the liquid might make the drinker think of his/her worst memory. > SNIP I've always thought it sounds like a child being tortured or horribly punished somehow. I figured at first it had something to do with whatever Riddle did to those other orphans in the cave. Perhaps the drinker has to relive their experience. It's a mystery, though, what the child is being made to do and what he or she has done "wrong." Perhaps made fun of the child Riddle? It could also be the last words of the person LV killed to make the horcrux. Perhaps a follower who displeased the budding Dark Lord. It also occurs to me that the drinker could be reliving some horrible experience of little Tom Riddle's, though it seems unlikely LV would want to reveal such a weakness to an enemy who infiltrated his cave. Still it would offer some explanation as to why he's so evil. We're told that he fears death, but not everyone who fears death is evil. There must be some other psychological explanation, unless JKR wants us to believe that some people are just born evil. Sort of a conservative point of view and unlike her, IMO. It's going to be hard for Harry to discover anything private about LV. Maybe this is the method JKR came up with for revealing one of his secrets. In any case, I'm sure all will be revealed shortly. That scene is also a nice bit of foreshadowing, if the DDM!Snape theory is correct, because it has DD begging to be killed and Harry, who we know is DDM!, doing the "killing." Sneeboy2 From rrettger at verizon.net Wed Jul 18 12:01:44 2007 From: rrettger at verizon.net (rrettger) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:01:44 -0000 Subject: Petunia's comment Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172080 I've been lurking here on the list for a while and had not seen this discussed before, please forgive me if this has been beaten to death already. I was re-reading OOTP in preparation for Saturdays Release of DH when I read something interesting . In the Chapter Dudley Demented while Harry and the Dursleys are "talking" in the kitchen Petunia says "they guard the wizard prison"(not exact quote I don't have the book here with me) she then says "I heard that awful boy tell her" Harry immediately assumes Petunia is talking about James...(Harry has often jumped to the wrong conclusion in the past) I think Petunia Was Talking about Snape! I really don't know how relevant this may be,or how it ties in, But JKR has many times in the past slipped in important clues, even if they need a lot of other explaining, in simple off hand statements. What do you think? Ray J From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 13:15:11 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:15:11 -0000 Subject: Petunia's comment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172081 Ray J: >In the Chapter Dudley Demented > while Harry and the Dursleys are "talking" in the kitchen Petunia > says "they guard the wizard prison"(not exact quote I don't have > the book here with me) she then says "I heard that awful boy tell > her" > > Harry immediately assumes Petunia is talking about James...(Harry has > often jumped to the wrong conclusion in the past) I think Petunia > Was Talking about Snape! Ceridwen: That has been discussed, though I don't know now if it had a thread of its own or not. The most likely candidate would, in my opinion, be James, since he probably came to see Lily at her parents' before they were married. Another possibility would be Sirius, who may have accompanied James on his visit to Lily. It could have been Remus or Peter, on the same possibility that they came to see Lily with James. Snape is a possibility, since he was a classmate of Lily's, and we now know they were both good at Potions. I always thought it would be funny if Petunia meant Sirius. I imagined a scenario where Sirius comes by with James, and Petunia falls for him. When he snubs her, she starts calling him "that awful boy". Of course, this would mean she either knew Sirius Black, the escaped criminal, was a wizard in PoA and connected to James, or she didn't connect the name to the person, so that's probably not it. Still, it was fun to think of before I started trying to connect dots! Ceridwen. From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 13:59:24 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:59:24 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "missvassy" wrote: > > > vmonte responds: > > No, I meant that he (Dumbledore) may have had a checkered past. > > He may have not been a good guy when he was younger. > > Miss Vassy: I wonder if it has to do with the > Grindewald? JW: I always thought there was a connection between the 150-year-old DD and the great dark wizard of 100 years ago. LV is often called "the greatest dark wizard in 100 years." It would appear that both LV and this unnamed wizard overshadowed GW. I find it quite strange that we are never given any other info - not even a name - for this villain. We do not even know how his reputation was earned. Is this a mystery hidden in plain sight? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jul 18 14:05:29 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:05:29 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172083 **Shorty Elf shuffles into the room, head bowed, ears waggling as she shakes her head from side to side. ** Last night, dear listmates, the HPfGU group was inundated with over 50 messages, all from the same person, each of which contained many, many spoilers, with no attempt made to provide advance warning of them. In fact, we are certain that this was a deliberate attempt to spoil the fun for thousands, given that the subject line was something quite innocent. Ever so fortunately, you all were spared having to see this by the fact that the submissions came from a still-moderated member, and some of our brave list elves who are okay with seeing spoilers were able to handle the situation and delete the offending messages before they ever hit the list. (So next time you see Penapart Elf, Alika Elf, Cardi Elf, Vexxy Elf or Kranky Elf, you might want to give `em a pat on the back.) Folks, while we hate to say this, we elves must admit outright that we cannot *guarantee* that an unmoderated member couldn't do the same thing that the moderated member attempted to do last evening. Even if the elves quickly catch and delete any such posts, those who receive their messages via individual email or daily digest *will* still receive them. So, even though we are still holding fast to the POST NO SPOILERS! policy here at HPfGU, you may want to, for your own protection, treat the list... alas, even now... as read at your own risk. Depending upon your own tolerance for spoilers, you may want to change your settings to Special Notices only at this time. And just a reminder -- even when the list does shut down for the release of Deathly Hallows, members will still be able to visit the HPfGU site, to read posts, review poll results, etc. Shorty Elf, for the List Elves From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 14:18:26 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:18:26 -0000 Subject: Friday is so soon! Loving it/Hating it Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172084 So, I was reading HBP this morning before work...and it hit me. This is it. After DH, no more books. No more waiting for two years to spend a whole weekend with my nose in the newest book. No more midnight release parties. No more theorizing, no more wondering whether Snape is good or bad, no more anything. This singular moment of being a part of the magic as it unfolded over the last ten years...it's all over. And while I am certainly excited about DH, and almost desperate to find out what will happen and how it will all end...I'm also beginning to feel pretty sad. And also a little bit like I'm not ready! I don't know that I'm ready to find out all the answers! I definately know I will savor this one, instead of rushing through it without sleep or rest the way I did with the last 4 books (I read SS and CoS at the same time, so no waiting). I am going to really try to make DH last into next week. We'll see... Anyone else feeling this love/hate towards the end of the series? Katie, feeling more and more certain that Harry will live, with absolutely no proof to back up that feeling. : ) From colwilrin at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 14:40:12 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:40:12 -0000 Subject: NO SPOILERS HERE - just my wish list! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172085 Just wanted to wish everyone good reading this weekend. I will not be checking the site until after I read the book. The chance for spoilers has become too great for me to chance it. It is sad that some VERY SELFISH people wish to spoil the enjoyment of countless others. They are akin to DE's in my book...and deserve to be figuratively Crucio'd Happy Reading...talk to you all in a week or so! Colwilrin: Hoping: Harry Lives, and does end up with Ginny DD...though very manipulative, was not evil, Sirius returns from behind the veil in the 11th hour, later to share Grimmauld Place with Harry and Ginny...and their twin mischievous DAUGHTERS. Ron and Hermione live...date for a while...realize they are better friends...and Ron is the best man at Hermione's wedding to Krum, before he (years later) hooks up with Fleur's little sister Fred and George both live and become multi-millionaires by developing a charm to make wands "unbreakable" Neville avenges his parents by dispatching Bellatrix in a GREAT FEAT of magic and that his parents are restored to health. Voldemort is taken into an area of pure love and light...by all those he has killed...where he will cringe in pain, writhing in love for all eternity Norbert comes back and IS the dragon on the DH book jacket Arthur Weasley is the one to Kick some serious LUCIUS BUTT...before being named the next MOM. Snape is found to be good, having been on the side of the order since Voldy killed his only true love (Lily)...and that everyone realizes it...and he later becomes the second-best headmaster Hogwarts ever had. YES...I do love happy endings...and hope one is on its way! From shmantzel at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 14:37:11 2007 From: shmantzel at yahoo.com (Dantzel Withers) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <545251.95624.qm@web56514.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172086 <<**Shorty Elf shuffles into the room, head bowed, ears waggling as she shakes her head from side to side. ** Last night, dear listmates, the HPfGU group was inundated with over 50 messages, all from the same person, each of which contained many, many spoilers, with no attempt made to provide advance warning of them. In fact, we are certain that this was a deliberate attempt to spoil the fun for thousands, given that the subject line was something quite innocent. Ever so fortunately, you all were spared having to see this by the fact that the submissions came from a still-moderated member, and some of our brave list elves who are okay with seeing spoilers were able to handle the situation and delete the offending messages before they ever hit the list. (So next time you see Penapart Elf, Alika Elf, Cardi Elf, Vexxy Elf or Kranky Elf, you might want to give `em a pat on the back.) Folks, while we hate to say this, we elves must admit outright that we cannot *guarantee* that an unmoderated member couldn't do the same thing that the moderated member attempted to do last evening. Even if the elves quickly catch and delete any such posts, those who receive their messages via individual email or daily digest *will* still receive them. So, even though we are still holding fast to the POST NO SPOILERS! policy here at HPfGU, you may want to, for your own protection, treat the list... alas, even now... as read at your own risk. Depending upon your own tolerance for spoilers, you may want to change your settings to Special Notices only at this time. Shorty Elf, for the List Elves>> Oh dear oh dear... I am getting really nervous now! I wanted to understand something further so that my mind will be eased. Since all the posts are still unwisely coming to my inbox, I will see them if (1) an unmoderated member posts and/or (2) a moderated member posts and you approve it. If you do NOT approve option 2, then it won't come to my inbox? Meaning that I can read the rest of my email from last night and be safe from the nasty spoilers? I suppose I never really understood how that worked before. Thank you so very much for your diligence, Dantzel --------------------------------- Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 14:00:40 2007 From: thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com (thesweetestthings23) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:00:40 -0000 Subject: my latest theory about Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172087 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Schlobin at ... wrote: > I started out with the realization that Snape might be the type of > double agent (most common in real life) who really has no side -- > who is planning on going with the winner. Another option (if this > has been imagined before, my apologies, and send me to the message > or messages where it was talked about) is that Snape wants to take > over. We know he has grandiloquent tendences (the Half-Blood > PRINCE), and like Voldemort rejected his muggle father's name. > > Perhaps he plans to supplant Dumbledore AND Voldemort and become > the most powerful wizard in the world. Paris: Reply - I am of the mind that Dumbledore knew he was dying. The one thing that locked this theory up was re-reading the 6th book. I hadn't thought about it before but in the beginning when DD comes to pick up Harry, the speech he gives the Dursleys was very final. It was almost as if he knew he had to ensure Harry would be able to come back after 6th year and he knew that he would not be around that next summer to make sure it happens. In the past, DD never comes out and gives future requests to the Dursleys. He reminds Petunia once in fifth year. But then he is only dealing with matters as they arise. This scene in the sixth book seems like preparation to me. As if he knew he wasn't gonna make it. I am still on the fence about Snape though I am leaning towards him being on DD's side. Just my opinion. Can't wait until I get my hands on the book! Paris From loptwyn at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 13:52:45 2007 From: loptwyn at yahoo.com (Alice) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:52:45 -0000 Subject: Petunia's comment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172088 > Ceridwen: > That has been discussed, though I don't know now if it had a thread > of its own or not. The most likely candidate would, in my opinion, > be James, since he probably came to see Lily at her parents' before > they were married. Another possibility would be Sirius, who may have > accompanied James on his visit to Lily. It could have been Remus or > Peter, on the same possibility that they came to see Lily with > James. Snape is a possibility, since he was a classmate of Lily's, > and we now know they were both good at Potions. I would say pretty much any of the Marauders or young Snape could qualify as an "awful boy", from what's said about them in the books (except maybe Lupin, he sounds like he would have been a "good" boy (or at least a polite one), even back then...) MadAlice >:> From red-siren at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 14:49:58 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:49:58 -0000 Subject: Harry a Horcux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172089 No, I don't think Harry is a horcrux. In being one, Harry would hold a piece of Voldemort's soul and his (Harry's) death would destroy that piece. Voldemort, on at least two occations (ss/ps & GoF) has either ordered someone else to kill Harry or has said he was going to kill him. Reguardless of the prophesy, Voldy wouldn't want to destroy a piece of himself in which killing Harry, would do that. sue From rkdas at charter.net Wed Jul 18 14:59:24 2007 From: rkdas at charter.net (rkdas at charter.net) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 7:59:24 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU Message-ID: <2013108318.1184770764420.JavaMail.root@fepweb02> No: HPFGUIDX 172090 Dear Really Wonderful House Elf, Thank you for your vigilence in the effort to protect all us unsuspecting readers of HPFGU. I think this is such an upsetting time for some of us, maybe it's loosed a few screws in those that would normally only be common pranksters. I plan to stay away from the list (have been away for a while) until I have read every last word of the last words. Evil does exist in the world and I suspect I will have to have an entire media black out to protect my innoncence, not just HPFGU. Again sincerest thanks for your unflagging protection of us readers. Jennifer Das From horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 18 15:02:41 2007 From: horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk (horadesiesta) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:02:41 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172091 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > **Shorty Elf shuffles into the room, head bowed, ears waggling as she > shakes her head from side to side. ** > > Last night, dear listmates, the HPfGU group was inundated with over > 50 messages, all from the same person, each of which contained many, > many spoilers, with no attempt made to provide advance warning of > them. In fact, we are certain that this was a deliberate attempt to > spoil the fun for thousands, given that the subject line was > something quite innocent. > > Ever so fortunately, you all were spared having to see this by the > fact that the submissions came from a still-moderated member, and > some of our brave list elves who are okay with seeing spoilers were > able to handle the situation and delete the offending messages before > they ever hit the list. (So next time you see Penapart Elf, Alika > Elf, Cardi Elf, Vexxy Elf or Kranky Elf, you might want to give `em a > pat on the back.) > > Folks, while we hate to say this, we elves must admit outright that > we cannot *guarantee* that an unmoderated member couldn't do the same > thing that the moderated member attempted to do last evening. Even > if the elves quickly catch and delete any such posts, those who > receive their messages via individual email or daily digest *will* > still receive them. > > So, even though we are still holding fast to the POST NO SPOILERS! > policy here at HPfGU, you may want to, for your own protection, treat > the list... alas, even now... as read at your own risk. Depending > upon your own tolerance for spoilers, you may want to change your > settings to Special Notices only at this time. > > And just a reminder -- even when the list does shut down for the > release of Deathly Hallows, members will still be able to visit the > HPfGU site, to read posts, review poll results, etc. > > Shorty Elf, for the List Elves An Extremely Annoyed Clara would like to warn everyone that: Someone has e-mailed me to tell me I?m totally correct/extremely mistaken regarding one of my many theories of XXX for the DH book. That is as vague as I can express it, as I?m not spoiling anyone?s fun! (This person is not a member of this group, AFAIK.) Please please be careful if you don?t want to be spoiled, as I didn?t. Clara who is now signing off to go and live in a cave somewhere till Friday night. From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 15:38:25 2007 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:38:25 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172092 While trying to write out my own predictions last weekend I came up with a whole new thought about what might happen at Hogwarts. I'm sure that bits of this have come up, if so, sorry to repeat. I was trying to figure out who was going to take the places as Headmaster and various other teaching positions. I think that McGonagall will not only became Headmistress (with Flitwick as the new deputy) but I think, for lack of other candidates, she will maintain her role as Transfiguration teacher and head of Gryffindor. I think that about halfway through the year Slughorn will recieve a visit from Voldemort himself, and be tortured into revealing the fact that he revealed his knowledge of Tom Riddle's interest in horcruxes to Dumbledore. Voldemort can then guess (or not) whether Dumbledore shared this information with anyone else. Slughorn will, of course, be killed. This will then prompt Voldemort into looking after his horcruxes, complicating things for our Harry. I think that at this point, rather than scramblng to find another potions master/head of slytherin, McGonagall will simply combine houses (I see Hogwarts as being much less populated this year, making this an easy move). I think that Ravenclaw and Slytherin and then Hufflepuff and Gryffindor to be likely groupings, with Flitwick and Sprout as heads. This will help with the whole house unity issue, as well as free up a bit of McGonagall's time. As for potions master, I think that maybe McGonagall will try to find someone, but I'm not sure whether or not she will succeed, and the subject may have to be dropped for a time (Unless she wants to use one of her divination teachers, as she has two!) As many people have stated, I think that Viktor Krum will be the new DADA teacher. It makes sense in a lot of ways. He went to Durmstrang which, as Draco so kindly lets us know, actually teaches the dark arts to its students, not just "this defense rubbish we do". I think that Krum likely knows *something* about horcruxes, which could possibly help Harry. Also, Krum did tell Hermione that he preferred Hogwarts to Durmstrang and Jo did tell us that Krum would be back. What do you think? Janelle From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Wed Jul 18 15:55:39 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:55:39 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172093 "cubfanbudwoman" < wrote: > > **Shorty Elf shuffles into the room, head bowed, ears waggling as she > shakes her head from side to side. ** > > Last night, dear listmates, the HPfGU group was inundated with over > 50 messages, all from the same person, each of which contained many, > many spoilers, with no attempt made to provide advance warning of > them. In fact, we are certain that this was a deliberate attempt to > spoil the fun for thousands, given that the subject line was > something quite innocent. > > Ever so fortunately, you all were spared having to see this by the > fact that the submissions came from a still-moderated member, and > some of our brave list elves who are okay with seeing spoilers were > able to handle the situation and delete the offending messages before > they ever hit the list. (So next time you see Penapart Elf, Alika > Elf, Cardi Elf, Vexxy Elf or Kranky Elf, you might want to give `em a > pat on the back.) > > Shorty Elf, for the List Elves > Anne Squires now: I just want to say thank you to all the elves for all that y'all do. I haven't been spoiled yet, and I greatly appreciate it. Anne From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 16:02:26 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:02:26 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172094 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > **Shorty Elf shuffles into the room, head bowed, ears waggling as she > shakes her head from side to side. ** > > Last night, dear listmates, the HPfGU group was inundated with over > 50 messages, all from the same person, each of which contained many, > many spoilers, with no attempt made to provide advance warning of > them. In fact, we are certain that this was a deliberate attempt to > spoil the fun for thousands, given that the subject line was > something quite innocent. > > Ever so fortunately, you all were spared having to see this by the > fact that the submissions came from a still-moderated member, and > some of our brave list elves who are okay with seeing spoilers were > able to handle the situation and delete the offending messages before > they ever hit the list. (So next time you see Penapart Elf, Alika > Elf, Cardi Elf, Vexxy Elf or Kranky Elf, you might want to give `em a > pat on the back.) > > Folks, while we hate to say this, we elves must admit outright that > we cannot *guarantee* that an unmoderated member couldn't do the same > thing that the moderated member attempted to do last evening. Even > if the elves quickly catch and delete any such posts, those who > receive their messages via individual email or daily digest *will* > still receive them. > > So, even though we are still holding fast to the POST NO SPOILERS! > policy here at HPfGU, you may want to, for your own protection, treat > the list... alas, even now... as read at your own risk. Depending > upon your own tolerance for spoilers, you may want to change your > settings to Special Notices only at this time. > > And just a reminder -- even when the list does shut down for the > release of Deathly Hallows, members will still be able to visit the > HPfGU site, to read posts, review poll results, etc. > > Shorty Elf, for the List Elves > *******KATIE REPLIES: THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! I can't imagine how time-consuming it is to check this busy list, and I really appreciate the time you Elves put in on our behalf. I have not been spoiled yet, obviously thanks in major part to you all, and I am sticking only to Mugglenet and HPfGu until after I have read the book. Thank you again for all you do, and HARRY ON, ALL! Katie From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 16:12:01 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:12:01 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172095 Annemehr wrote: > It's not so much that JKR couldn't have written a character with imperfect second sight; she *could* have just modified Mopsus a bit. > But she didn't. > > What Talisman further points out is that Trelawney's utterances come in two extremely different varieties. When she's aware of herself, she's no better than a RL "psychic" charlatan and can't properly read the tea leaves in a beginning student's cup -- and then on the other hand she goes into some kind of trance and lets loose with these two prophecies. > > (And you know, we can't even call her a seer of any sort on the strength of those two prophecies, because she didn't ever *see* them - > - she's completely oblivious to them.) > > The contrast between the two doesn't allow you to call Trelawney an imperfect seer, a la Mopsus Lite. The so-called "prophecies" aren't instances of her doing what she does more successfully than usual, > they're something else entirely. And the something else they look to > be is nothing so much as possession as we know it. > Carol responds: That's one possible explanation. But we have no evidence elsewhere in the books that DD has the power of possession, and he isn't present when Trelawney performs her second Prophecy in PoA. In contrast, we know from SS/PS that Voldemort (who could not possibly be responsible for the Prophecy of his own defeat nor wish it revealed to Dumbledore) has that power. (I wouldn't be surprised if Harry acquired it at GH and uses it in DH.) Granted, she isn't a Seer in the sense that she "sees" into the future in her normal state, but evidently some sort of spirit or numina is passing through her during her real Prophecies. And she certainly read the cards pretty accurately in HBP. Also, she does see things in the crystal ball that HRH can't see. She just misreads Sirius Black's Animagus form as a Grim (or maybe that's what it is, ), she sees death hovering over Hogwarts in Gof but misreads the death as Harry's, and so on. Maybe she's like Neville. If she really believed in her own powers, she wouldn't be the old fraud she appears to be. (I expect her to make another Prophecy in DH, and it won't be because she's possessed by an evil Dumbledore, who is thoroughly dead.) Anyway, she *sees* what's in the tea leaves, the cards, the crystal ball. She just (generally) interprets it incorrectly. It would be no fun if she were always right, and JKR was right, from a plot standpoint, to get rid of Mopsus. Also, unless the future is fluid, determined by choices and circumstances in the present and not predetermined, there is no free will--and no point in doing what is right rather than what is easy. (I just hope she's as wrong about the length of Harry's lifeline as she was about his being born in midwinter.) > Annemehr: > Rude? You think people don't try to alter the facts to fit their preconceptions?! > Carol: I think the reference was to "supposedly rathional people," implying that anyone who defends DD is irrational. The thing is, we, too, are taking the evidence where it leads us, and all of us are interpreting it. Dumbledore *does* lie, usually by dealing in halr-truths like snape, but sometimes an out-an-out lie like telling Draco that they're "quite alone." That lie harms no one, though, and allows him to help Draco understand that he's not a killer. It's not like Rita Skeeter's lies, which hurt people. (I wonder, BTW, whether telling Harry that only they two know the complete Prophecy is another lie of the same sort, protecting Snape.) Annemehr: > He used Imperius -- on Mrs. Cole, to make her believe a blank piece of paper was an official document regarding Tom Riddle's registration with Hogwarts (HBP 265 US). Her eyes "slid out of focus and back again" -- that was no Obliviate; there was nothing to *forget*; that was mind control. Carol responds: The trouble with nonverbal spells and Harry's pov is that unless Harry is casting them, he, and therefore the reader, doesn't know what they are. McGonagall and Voldemort, opposite ends of the spectrum, have both stated that there are certain spells that DD won't cast. Barty Sr. has been presented (admittedly by Sirius Black, who has an understandable grudge against him) as cruel and ruthless for stooping to use them. And Dumbledore is unquestionably a great wizard. Who's to say that he needs to stoop to Imperius when when he knows every spell in the book and then some? He may not even need a spell; all he needs to do imagine what he wants (a change of decoration, for example) and wave his wand or clap his hands. (Obviously, this sort of magic has limits. He can't just imagine the fall of Voldemort and make it happen.) So maybe all he has to do is imagine Mrs. Cole seeing an official document instead of a blank piece of paper and voile! that's what she sees. Alternatively, maybe the spell *is* a form or variant of Obliviate that makes her see something that isn't there (rather than forgetting something). Certainly, the effects are much more similar than the effects of Imperius, and he isn't making her *do* anything. She just thinks that everything is in order when it isn't. (A forged document would have had the same effect.) The problem, IMO, is not with Dumbledore but with the Statute of Secrecy, which prevents him from telling Mrs. Cole that Tom Riddle is a wizard and he wishes to admit him to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. The alternative is to let Tom Riddle stay in the orphanage, and whether he's a good little wizard or a bad one, that's a bad idea. The whole point of Hogwarts is to teach young witches and wizards to control their magic. (Imagine if little Tommy had been allowed to continue as he was. Actually, I'd rather not.) Carol, who considers herself and her interpretation perfectly rational (if not absolutely accurate on all counts) and Talisman's marvelously imaginative From josturgess at eircom.net Wed Jul 18 16:35:22 2007 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:35:22 -0000 Subject: [TBAY] My DH predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "or.phan_ann" wrote: >> 'You can have this back if you like,' she offers to Faith. 'Should > make up for me not sinking. Thanks for the heads up, Mooseming. I > appreciate it... been a while since I checked my canon. Want to go for > a drink in the George?' > Love to go for a drink, several indeed! You will recognise me as I shall be the one wearing the natty spoiler repelling tin hat, pulled low over the ears and eyes. The bang and whistle of too many near misses requires me to be far from the madding crowd for a bit. May the wind fill your sails and SEIGE CATAPULT run ahead of the storm. Float on. Mooseming From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 16:34:47 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:34:47 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU: A Little of How Pendings Works In-Reply-To: <545251.95624.qm@web56514.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172097 Dantzel: > Oh dear oh dear... I am getting really nervous now! I wanted to understand something further so that my mind will be eased. Since all the posts are still unwisely coming to my inbox, I will see them if (1) an unmoderated member posts and/or (2) a moderated member posts and you approve it. If you do NOT approve option 2, then it won't come to my inbox? Meaning that I can read the rest of my email from last night and be safe from the nasty spoilers? I suppose I never really understood how that worked before. Vexxy Elf: A post from an unmoderated member goes straight to the list, if Yahoo so wills. Posts from members who are still moderated go into a separate place for moderated posts, Pendings. Each moderated post must be approved by an elf, and sent on its way to the board by that elf. If a post is not approved by an elf, it is not sent to the main list. Only posts appearing on the main list are sent to members' e- mail boxes. Posts which are from unmoderated members go immediately to the list, and to other members' e-mail boxes. Yes, rest easy, none of the spoiler posts made it to the list or to members' mail boxes. However, if you are receiving e-mails or digest, you might want to change your settings to reading on the list only, until you've finished Deathly Hallows. At this point, even well-meaning, unmoderated posters might slip if they have seen the spoilers. ***Vexxy blushes. While we really appreciate the thanks which are appearing on the list, those really are considered off-topic. >;-)*** From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 16:39:41 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:39:41 -0000 Subject: Ultimate and Final Predictions Contest for DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172098 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No, absolutely not. No way. Harry has a long life ahead. 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Not sure. 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Snape (boo, hoo, hoo)I am miserable about this, but convinced that the only way Harry will ever believe Snape is if he sacrifices himself for the cause. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? Definitely a Dark Mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No. b. Draco? No. c. Hermione? No. d. Luna? Yes. e. Ron? No. f. Neville? Yes. g. Ginny? Yes. 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Petunia Dursley 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? - Neville b. Head Girl? - Not sure, since I don't think Hermione will return for year 7. c. DADA Instructor? - Krum d. Potions Master or Mistress? - Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? - McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? DDM ALL THE WAY. 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Locket d. Hufflepuff's Cup e. Ravenclaws something f. Nagini g. In Voldemort In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus : Lion (the prince of the beasts) Boggart: Himself before he was redeemed by DD Mirror of Erised: Himself as a hero, having people see him for who he is. Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? No flippin clue. Predictions (10 points each / 50 points total): 1 - Hagrid will be able to finish his schooling and become a fully- fledged wizard, based on his loyalty and bravery. 2 - Draco will change sides and become Harry's ally. 3 - Umbridge will get her comeuppance and will also be revealed to be in league with Voldemort. 4 - Sirius will come back. 5 - R.A.B. IS Regulus Black, and he is alive. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 16:44:28 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:44:28 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172099 Miss Vassy wrote: > > Thank you for pointing me to your post with a similar theory. I searched high and low on here and wasn't able to find any other ostings with this type of theory, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it. > > Just as a clarification, I do not think that Dumbledore gave this information about the Potters and the Prophecy voluntarily. I think he was tortured into doing it and is not evil, just weaker than Voldemort. Carol responds: If Dumbledore had told Voldemort the Prophecy under torture, why would Voldie waste a whole book trying to learn the rest of it? And why would Dumbledore be "the only one he ever feared" if DD were weaker than Voldemort? Why didn't Voldie just destroy DD during the DADA interview and take over Hogwarts then? And note that Voldie fled the MoM, defeated by Dumbledore, in OoP. Now, granted, Voldie expected the assassination plan to fail and Draco to die, but he seems to have "intended [Snape] to do it in the end. Punishing Lucius is petty revenge; destroying Dumbledore is an essential step to killing the Chosen One and taking over the WW. Dumbledore's weakness at the end of HBP results from two things: the curse of the ring Horcrux (Snape saves his life but can't save his wand arm) and the poison, both the result of his own choices. Age alone has not weakened him, as demonstrated by his easy defeat of the Aurors and MoM officials and again by his battle with Voldie in OoP. Snape says that DD "has been" a great wizard and that he's weakened by the battle with Voldie and "has since sustained a serious injury." That sounds to me like a cover story, along with the "reflexes aren't what they used to be" idea used with Slughorn and the DEs. DD shows that withered hand to the whole school. He wants it to be seen, wants Draco and anyone who's helping him, including Voldie, to think he's weak. Something is up. DD is manipulative (but not a puppetmaster, IMO!). Both he and Snape are cunning, and it seems to me that they've agreed upon a tale. And I do think that DD is dying throughout HBP, but not because he's weaker than Voldemort to begin with. He acts as if he's either expecting or planning to die. But if it weren't for the ring and the green poison, the 150-plus-year-old DD would still, IMO, be stronger than Voldie. And Voldie, defeated and humiliated in the MoM, wants him dead. From Voldie's pov, Draco is small potatoes. If he dies in the attempt, satisfying Voldie's desire to punish Lucius Malfoy, the DEs or Snape will kill him, and if Snape fails or refuses, he'll die, too. There can be no question that Voldie really want Dumbledore dead. He's lucky, however, that he was dealing in HBP with a weakened Dumbledore who really could be killed. Any attempt made before the encounter with the ring Horcrux would certainly have failed. As for capturing and torturing Dumbledore, who says that he could escape from Azkaban if the Aurors were foolish enough to arrest him and then knocks them all out with one spell and disappears from under their noses, I just can't see it. And if DD had leaked the Prophecy to LV under torture, why on earth would he have offered himself to the Potters as Secret Keeper? The whole point was that he alone was strong enough to keep Voldie from discovering their whereabouts, just as he kept him and the DEs from discovering the headquarters of the Order of the Phoenix. Carol, who thinks that DD had to die for Harry's sake, but that Voldie could not have hurt him, any more than Snape or Voldie himself could have killed him, had DD himself not willed it From psych12 at gmail.com Wed Jul 18 16:16:45 2007 From: psych12 at gmail.com (leggrachel) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:16:45 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hidden via Fidelius Charm ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172100 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "joan of anarchy" wrote: > > Do ya think Voldemort could've used the Fidelius Charm to hide the > location of a horcrux? Mmmm, I like this. It does seem like something Voldemort would do. But then, why not do that for all of his horcruxes? He wouldn't have to do that at the time of making them. He could suddenly realize that they can still be found, so why not create one secret keeper for all of them and kill the poor sod? Rachel P.S. "griffin door knocker" lol From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 16:57:16 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (Kewpie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:57:16 -0000 Subject: good LOLLIPOPs discussion (support or against) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172101 I've searched the database and there's a lot to weed through, so it's probably quicker to ask if somebody cab point me to some good LOLLIPOPs discussion, either for or against (especially). Thanks Jo From augustinapeach at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 17:12:19 2007 From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:12:19 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU In-Reply-To: <2013108318.1184770764420.JavaMail.root@fepweb02> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172103 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Evil does exist in the world and I suspect I will have to have an entire media black out to protect my innoncence, not just HPFGU. Again sincerest thanks for your unflagging protection of us readers. > Jennifer Das > It's the Dementors among us! "They're getting hungry . . . Dumbledore won't let them into the school, so their supply of human prey has dried up . . . I don't think they could resist the large crowd aroung the Quidditch field. All that excitement . . . emotions running high . . . it was their idea of a feast." (POA, p. 188, US ed.) Keep your Patronus at the ready!!! > From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 17:18:57 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:18:57 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172104 "jelly92784" wrote: SNIP > > I think that at this point, rather than scramblng to find another > potions master/head of slytherin, McGonagall will simply combine > houses (I see Hogwarts as being much less populated this year, > making this an easy move). I think that Ravenclaw and Slytherin and > then Hufflepuff and Gryffindor to be likely groupings, with Flitwick > and Sprout as heads. This will help with the whole house unity > issue, as well as free up a bit of McGonagall's time. As for > potions master, I think that maybe McGonagall will try to find > someone, but I'm not sure whether or not she will succeed, and the > subject may have to be dropped for a time (Unless she wants to use > one of her divination teachers, as she has two!) Sneeboy2: My own theory is that Hogwarts will not be reopened until LV is vanquished, and that when it does reopen, the separate houses will be abolished. I think JKR wants to teach readers to ignore arbitrary divisions, predjudices, and rivalries. We can't be expected to believe that one quarter of the population is brave, one quarter ambitious, one quarter loyal, and so on, and the traits of the characters belie any accuracy to the "sorting." Families are sorted the same, for example: ever known an entire family whose members are all loyal, or smart, or whatever? Anyway, I think the sorting hat will be destroyed somehow, making it impossible to keep the houses separate. "jelly92784" wrote: > > As many people have stated, I think that Viktor Krum will be the new > DADA teacher. It makes sense in a lot of ways. He went to > Durmstrang which, as Draco so kindly lets us know, actually teaches > the dark arts to its students, not just "this defense rubbish we > do". I think that Krum likely knows *something* about horcruxes, > which could possibly help Harry. Also, Krum did tell Hermione that > he preferred Hogwarts to Durmstrang and Jo did tell us that Krum > would be back. > > What do you think? Sneeboy2: I like the idea that Krum will have knowledge of the dark arts that will help Harry. I expect he's too young to be made a professor, though. From dossett at lds.net Wed Jul 18 17:23:22 2007 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:23:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172105 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > > > Lisa: > > > I've never really understood why she didn't grab Baby Harry and > > > disapparate. I'd rather live life on the run than hand my baby > over to > > > what could mean certain death. > > > > Eddie: > > Haven't you read "Godric's Hollow, A History?" :-) Seriously, maybe > > she couldn't apparate or dis-apparate from the house because of all > > the magical protections around it. On the other hand, Fred and George > > successfully apparated all over 12 Grimmauld Place even though it was > > full of magical protections. > ====================================== > > Lisa: > > ::::snort::::: Oh, how I wish there WAS a "Godric's Hollow, A > History!" LOL! > > I, too, thought that the only reason she wouldn't disapparate with Baby > Harry would be that she physically couldn't because of the magical > protections on the house. Then, once we saw Fred & George apparating > in Grimmauld Place, it made me question even that; and further, when > Harry and Dumbledore went to see Slughorn to offer him the Potions job, > Harry asked why they couldn't just apparate into the house. Dumbledore > told him that magical persons have protections that keep others from > doing so (much like Muggles have locks), but didn't say that they > themselves couldn't do so. > > Very curious. > now Pat: I believe there was once a discussion about apparition, particularly with children. The concept of side-along apparition in HBP, along with the suggestion that parents practice this with their children, has always suggested to me that anyone involved in apparating has to *want* to go along, which leaves babies out altogether (you can't explain to a baby.) So the apparatee's will must be involved in the experience of apparating. I have made the assumption that Lily knew she couldn't flee in this manner, or any manner, once LV was in the room with her and baby Harry, thus the reason for her sacrifice. Pat, anxiously waiting for midnight Friday night and avoiding most of the Internet like the plague. From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Wed Jul 18 17:39:11 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:39:11 -0000 Subject: good LOLLIPOPs discussion (support or against) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172106 Jo: > I've searched the database and there's a lot to weed through, so it's > probably quicker to ask if somebody cab point me to some good > LOLLIPOPs discussion, either for or against (especially). Here's one at msg #28782: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/28782. You can also try weeding through the LOLLIPOPS description and related posts at http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#lollipops. Joan of Anarchy, who is too sad about Book 7 coming out to reread 1-6 (as planned) and too obsessed about Book 7 coming out to think about much else... (so she keeps coming back here and rereading archives) From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 17:39:25 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:39:25 -0000 Subject: Petunia's comment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172107 "rrettger" wrote: > > I've been lurking here on the list for a while and had not seen this > discussed before, please forgive me if this has been beaten to death > already. > > I was re-reading OOTP in preparation for Saturdays Release of DH > when I read something interesting . In the Chapter Dudley Demented > while Harry and the Dursleys are "talking" in the kitchen Petunia > says "they guard the wizard prison"(not exact quote I don't have > the book here with me) she then says "I heard that awful boy tell > her" > > Harry immediately assumes Petunia is talking about James...(Harry has > often jumped to the wrong conclusion in the past) I think Petunia > Was Talking about Snape! > I really don't know how relevant this may be,or how it ties in, But > JKR has many times in the past slipped in important clues, even if > they need a lot of other explaining, in simple off hand statements. > What do you think? > Sneeboy2: I'm inclined to think you're right. There seems to be a hidden connection between Snape and Lily, though the exact nature of it isn't clear. I think the awful boy isn't James, since Harry jumps to that conclusion and Petunia doesn't respond. Having it be Sirius or Lupin seems rather dull to me. Why not just let it be James? Peter is an intriguing possibility, especially if he and Petunia speak after he's turned sides. But at that point she hasn't had contact with Lily in a year or more, so the potential is limited. From sgahagen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 17:35:33 2007 From: sgahagen at yahoo.com (sgahagen) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:35:33 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret and Dudley Demented Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172108 I was reading the first few chapters of Order of the Phoenix the other night, and I began (once again) pondering just what Aunt Petunia knows, why she knows it, and why she has never told Harry any of it. As I was reading and thinking, a new theory (at least to me) occurred to me. What if Peter had not been the Potter's secret keeper after all? What if Petunia was the secret keeper? I did a couple of searches through past posts to this list, and I couldn't find any other discussion of this particular theory. Reading through the scene in the shrieking shack at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban, Sirius tells Harry and Lupin that the Potters switched secret keepers at the last minute, and he tells them that he (Sirius) encouraged them to use Peter. Peter, however, never actually confirms (or denies) this. JKR leads the reader to believe that what Sirius tells us is true, but we don't really know this is true. We know the Potters knew Voldemort was after them, and we know they suspected a spy amongst their friends. They would, therefore, not have told their friends who was the secret keeper. We know this because even Dumbledore believed Sirius had been secret keeper (as he says at the end of PoA). Petunia would have been a great choice for secret keeper as she was as far removed from the wizarding world as it is possible to be while still knowing about it. The only way Voldemort could have found her is if one of the Potters friends let him to her. This is where Peter comes in. He would most likely have known that Sirius suggested using Peter as secret keeper. So Peter knew the Potters still trusted Sirius, and, most likely, Peter himself. This means they all suspected Lupin of being the spy. So if Peter was not the secret keeper, and he knew that neither Sirius or Lupin was either, he could have figured out that the Potters may have turned to Lily's muggle sister as secret keeper. She would have been a particularly good choice as we know that she liked to pretend her sister and the Potter's didn't exist. Peter could then have led Lord Voldemort to Privet Drive, where they attempted to force Petunia to reveal the Potter's hiding place. When she refused, they probably tortured either her or Dudley (or both) with the crucio curse. Aunt Petunia buckles under the pressure and pain and reveals the Potters hiding place. This explains the Dursley's intense fear and hatred of magic, Dudley's experience with dementers (re-living the crucio curse), the Dursley's spoiling and coddling of Dudley, and their willingness to take Harry in (guilt over his parents' murder). sgahagen From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 18:59:01 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:59:01 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hidden via Fidelius Charm ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172109 --- "joan of anarchy" wrote: > > Do ya think Voldemort could've used the Fidelius Charm > to hide the location of a horcrux? > > ... > > The major snag I see is that the Fidelius Charm is > like a buddy system, and Voldemort isn't a team > player. However: > > "When a Secret-Keeper dies, their secret dies with them, > .... Everybody in whom they confided will continue > to know the hidden information, but nobody else." > -- JKR website > (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_poll.cfm) > > > So... Voldemort and Secret-Keeper X do the Fidelius > Charm to hide the location of a horcrux. ... > Voldemort immediately kills X, ... The secret (and > the horcrux) remain hidden for eternity. > > ... > > Joan of Anarchy bboyminn: First, by way of pointing out the flaw in this plan, let me ask, is anyone immune from the Fidelius Charm? Further, do people other than the Secret Keeper actually forget the secret information, or are they simply unable to reveal it to anyone. For example, many people know about the existence of the Black Family House. The Blacks were at one time a prominent wizarding family. They must have had parties, they must have had guest and family stop by. So, have Bellatrix and Narcissa completely forgotten about the existence of the Black House, or are they simply and subconsciously prevented from talking about it? Next, and regarding immunity, once Voldemort assigns and consecrates the Secret Keeper, does he himself then forget the secret? Or...does he remember the secret, but is prevented from revealing it? Further, would the presents of a Secret Keeper Charm only protect the secret or would it protect the object? In other words, is there anything to prevent Harry from discovering the secret location on his own and going there? Some will say that the Black House couldn't be found, but was that unique to the nature of the secret aspect of the Secret Keeper Charm that was created for that specific circumstance, or are we seeing an aspect common in all Secret Keeper Charms? Or... are we seeing a secondary aspect of charms that have existed on the house for many years before the Secret Keeper Charm was created? I just don't see the Fidelius Charm as being all that common in the wizard world, and I see it as having enough conflicting aspects to make it inadvisable for Voldemort to use it to protect the Horcruxes. But then, that's just my opinion. Steve/bboyminn From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 19:17:50 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:17:50 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172110 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sneeboy2" wrote: > I've always thought it sounds like a child being tortured or horribly > punished somehow. I figured at first it had something to do with > whatever Riddle did to those other orphans in the cave. Perhaps the > drinker has to relive their experience. It's a mystery, though, what > the child is being made to do and what he or she has done "wrong." ronnie: Wow!That's brilliant sneeboy2! I always thought it might be something very private to DD (either a great fear, a terrible memory, or something to cause the specific drinker of the potion great suffering). But that's a real cool thought, even if it would turn out to be wrong. I also thought that the potion DD was drinking at the cave might be connected to the Draught of the Living Death mentioned at the beginning of the book.Was this ever discussed? sneeboy2 also wrote: > Still it would offer some explanation as to why he's so evil. We're > told that he fears death, but not everyone who fears death is evil. > There must be some other psychological explanation, unless JKR wants > us to believe that some people are just born evil. Sort of a > conservative point of view and unlike her, IMO. ronnie: Harry is good because his mother (and father) loved him. LV is evil (or has no love in him) because his mother & father didn't love him, even enough to live (in merope case). LV is described as non affectionate even as a baby. It's not because of something that happened later in his childhood. From valerie at calithwain.com Wed Jul 18 19:13:06 2007 From: valerie at calithwain.com (Valerie Frankel) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:13:06 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172111 I feel I should point out that many of Sybil's visions (when she's looking a tea leaves and so on) do come true: A black dog is really chasing Harry. He may be in for a dire fate. All the teacup type comments in her first appearance come true. In book 6, she's mumbling with her tarot cards about finding someone who dislikes her and it's Harry, hidden. In book 3, she says the first to stand up will die (and focuses on Ron and Harry) but actually Dumbledore stood first while giving a toast. My bottom line is that she's made some decent predictions. Why don't we believe her? Hermione and Harry (who can't do divination) think she's a fraud. McGonagall never believes her and Sybil tells Harry he's going to live and be successful when she's rewarding him. I blame JKR and misdirection. All the same... In Greek myth, Cassandra, a sybil (and Trewlany's ancestor) ALWAYS predicted doom, gloom, disaster, and death. These prophecies came TRUE each time. However, as with Harry Potter, no one ever believed her until it was too late. Harry may, thus, be in big trouble. That's my 2 cents. Valerie Frankel Author of Henry Potty and the Pet Rock: An Unauthorized Harry Potter Parody From retired153 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 19:18:12 2007 From: retired153 at yahoo.com (j15300) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:18:12 -0000 Subject: Not a spoiler Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172112 New from "The Quibbler;" After graduating, Harry Potter is set on marrying young Luna Lovegood. He is also rumored to be on the fast track to becoming the youngest managing editor ever of this fine journal. Rubeus Hagrid intends to move to California, and seriously contemplates running for Governoor. Hogwarts is rumored to be up for auction, and likely will become the winter home of the "Ringling Brothers and Barnum and Bailey Circus." What fun to see the elephants on the green. Sources say Minerva McGonagall has signed on with the company as their new publicity agent. j15300 From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 19:28:40 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:28:40 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172113 --- "sneeboy2" wrote: > > ... > > Sneeboy2: > > My own theory is that Hogwarts will not be reopened > until LV is vanquished, and that when it does reopen, > the separate houses will be abolished. ... > > Anyway, I think the sorting hat will be destroyed > somehow, making it impossible to keep the houses > separate. > bboyminn: The rivalry between Houses is very common though, and has nothing to do with Sorting. At the college I went to, we has several Residence Halls where students lived on campus. These Residence Halls had their strong rivalries. Our Hall had the best parties, the coolest guys, the prettiest girls, the best inner-school teams, while the other Houses were just...well...lame. The same is true of the Fraternities and Sororities on campus, the one you belong to was always the best, and the others were losers. So, even without Sorting, Hogwarts will still have four Residence Halls, and these Halls will still create their own Quidditch teams, which is the source of much rivalry and conflict on campus. I don't think that what we are seeing is so much an aspect of Sorting or Houses, as it is an aspect of human nature that will always be there. People will always divide themselves into US and THEM. Plus, being Sorted into a specific House doesn't completely define you. Harry could have been Slytherin or Gryffindor, Hermione could have been Ravenclaw or Gryffindor, and many fans suspect that Neville could have been either Hufflepuff or Gryffindor. So, there is a danger to assume the House characteristics are one dimensional. That all Slytherins are [insert Slytherin characteristic here]. Yet, there is nothing to prevent Slytherins from being highly intelligent or dumb as a rock. They can be brave or cowardly. They can be hard working or lazy. They can be immensely loyal or completely selfish. Look at Peter Petigrew, he was a Gryffindor, yet, he doesn't seem to be that brave. Yet, bravery doesn't necessarily translate to honorable and heroic. Bravery can manifest itself in many subtle ways. I suspect that in his own twisted way, Peter has shown great bravery, he has just done it in a very negative way. These House characteristics are a very complex matter, and I don't think we can define someone completely by what House they were in, as human nature is far more complex than a set of defined characteristics. So, let me say, that it is possible that the Sorting will come to an end. But, if it does, then students will likely be arbitrarily assigned to a 'residence' house and likely those Houses will still retain their same names for historical and traditional reasons, and likely the same fierce House rivalries will continue. > "jelly92784" wrote: > > > > As many people have stated, I think that Viktor Krum > > will be the new DADA teacher. ... > > Sneeboy2: > I like the idea that Krum will have knowledge of the > dark arts that will help Harry. I expect he's too young > to be made a professor, though. > bboyminn: Viktor may be young, but these are extraordinary times, and willing DADA teachers are as scarce as Hen's Teeth. In these extraordinary circumstances, I think Krum could be DADA teacher if he was willing to take the position. The only other alternative is for the Ministry to assign one of the Aurors to the task. In a sense, the implication would be, be the DADA teacher or you're fired. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 18 19:42:43 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:42:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What if...? - My last minute theory Message-ID: <21923713.1184787763420.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172114 From: ronnie >Harry is good because his mother (and father) loved him. LV is evil >(or has no love in him) because his mother & father didn't love him, >even enough to live (in merope case). LV is described as non >affectionate even as a baby. It's not because of something that >happened later in his childhood. Bart: If you think about it for a minute, that is highly unlikely. There had to be something else about Morty. After all, the overwhelming majority of kids whose are orphaned by their mother's death in childhood come out fine. Morty may not have received a lot of love, but he had as much opportunity as the other kids in the orphanage. Morty is mentally ill, and, as near as anybody can tell, he was born that way. Among other things, he is entirely incapable of empathy. To use more WW parlance, his mind has never been in touch with his soul; that is why he had no horror of creating horcruxes, and it is also a major reason why he has such a horror of death. To him, when he dies, the Universe disappears. Whether or not he might have been cured is a moot point, now that he has split up his soul; he is no longer human, but a soulless monster. Bart From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 19:43:37 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:43:37 -0000 Subject: Friday is so soon! Loving it/Hating it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172115 Hi Katie, I so know what you mean! I woke up yesterday morning with the terrible feeling that DH is going to be released today (I was still not fully conscious) - and I wasn't disapointed to find out I was wrong. As a matter of fact, in my twilight fogged feelings of the morning, more than anything else I felt terrified, and also, like you, that I'm not ready just yet... perhaps this is why I was so insomnic the following night... ronnie From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 19:48:55 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:48:55 -0000 Subject: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: <21923713.1184787763420.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172116 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: >> Bart: > If you think about it for a minute, that is highly unlikely. There had to be something else about Morty. After all, the overwhelming majority of kids whose are orphaned by their mother's death in childhood come out fine. Morty may not have received a lot of love, but he had as much opportunity as the other kids in the orphanage. > > Morty is mentally ill, and, as near as anybody can tell, he was born that way. Among other things, he is entirely incapable of empathy. ronnie: I just don't believe babies can be born mentally ill (although I totaly agree with your diagnosis). DD showed Harry LV history exactly for him to understand the roots of this mental illness. Sure, plenty of orphan children (including Harry) grow up to be healthy, loving, sane people. But LV's mother was in deep depression even as he was a fetus in her womb, and on top of it all, there was no-one to compansate for this lack of parents love. From joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 19:46:48 2007 From: joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com (joyfulstoryteller) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:46:48 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret and Dudley Demented In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172117 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sgahagen" wrote: > > I was reading the first few chapters of Order of the Phoenix the other > night, and I began (once again) pondering just what Aunt Petunia > knows, why she knows it, and why she has never told Harry any of it. > As I was reading and thinking, a new theory (at least to me) occurred > to me. What if Peter had not been the Potter's secret keeper after > all? What if Petunia was the secret keeper? > -snip- > > Petunia would have been a great choice for secret keeper as she was as > far removed from the wizarding world as it is possible to be while > still knowing about it. The only way Voldemort could have found her > is if one of the Potters friends let him to her. This is where Peter > comes in. He would most likely have known that Sirius suggested using > Peter as secret keeper. So Peter knew the Potters still trusted > Sirius, and, most likely, Peter himself. This means they all > suspected Lupin of being the spy. So if Peter was not the secret > keeper, and he knew that neither Sirius or Lupin was either, he could > have figured out that the Potters may have turned to Lily's muggle > sister as secret keeper. She would have been a particularly good > choice as we know that she liked to pretend her sister and the > Potter's didn't exist. > > Peter could then have led Lord Voldemort to Privet Drive, where they > attempted to force Petunia to reveal the Potter's hiding place. When > she refused, they probably tortured either her or Dudley (or both) > with the crucio curse. Aunt Petunia buckles under the pressure and > pain and reveals the Potters hiding place. > -snip- > > sgahagen > I think I'm leaving lurkerdom for good... Oh! I wish I had read this before sending in my predictions! What a wonderful theory.... it ties in well with Dudley's first word "won't" if he heard Petunia saying "I won't tell you" or something along those lines over and over again. This theory also makes Jo's assertion that we will learn Petunia's "secret" in DH so much more tongue-in-cheek. Well, I will take this opportunity to add the other prediction that I forgot about ... Hagrid will be the new Head of Gryffindor, and Slughorn will return to his position as head of Slytherin. Hoping that UPS will break with their standard policy of not making deliveries on Saturdays so I can get my book along with the rest of the world.... Joyfulstoryteller From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 19:57:21 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:57:21 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172118 Right now, I'm all for SPEW! (and I can't imagine an elf not being upset by a spoiler he had to read for others benefit). Your faithfull Ronnie From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 20:09:19 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:09:19 -0000 Subject: A Really Wild Idea Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172119 As you can see my addiction is getting worse as the clock ticks closer to our final hour... So, what if the dragon on the DH cover (don't remember witch edition) is non other than Draco Malfoy, the famous animagus with the wierd name, who turnes over to the right side (as is expected by many of us...) I always thought that the famous saying "Drago Dormiens Nunquam Titilandus" (never tickle a sleeping dragon - for the non Latin reading population), has something to do with Draco being not so bad (unless being tickled in his sleep). I know, I'm really losing it here... Ronnie From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 20:13:45 2007 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:13:45 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172120 bboyminn: So, even without Sorting, Hogwarts will still have four Residence Halls, and these Halls will still create their own Quidditch teams, which is the source of much rivalry and conflict on campus. I don't think that what we are seeing is so much an aspect of Sorting or Houses, as it is an aspect of human nature that will always be there. People will always divide themselves into US and THEM. Janelle: I agree that the division between the houses will always exist. I believe that after the war is over, the house system will go back to normal: four houses named after four founders, sorting hat and all. However, I believe that during the war, things need to be different. For Hogwarts to stay open, something is going to need to change. I see the situation as being one in which the decreased number of students and available faculty will make a joining of the houses necessary. This will allow students a chance to form bonds and friendships with those in other houses, which hopefully will carry over in future years when the four houses are reestablished. The sorting hat warned that the houses need to join or else Hogwarts will "crumble from within". I think it likely, therefore, that some forced joining will take place, allowing "bonds of friendship" to strengthen, thus strengthening Hogwarts itself. From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 20:07:37 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:07:37 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret and Dudley Demented In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172121 sgahagen wrote: > > I was reading the first few chapters of Order of the Phoenix the other > night, and I began (once again) pondering just what Aunt Petunia > knows, why she knows it, and why she has never told Harry any of it. > As I was reading and thinking, a new theory (at least to me) occurred > to me. What if Peter had not been the Potter's secret keeper after > all? What if Petunia was the secret keeper? > Sneeboy2: It seems highly plausible that Petunia has had an unpleasant encounter with the WW, but it says in book 1, chapter 1 that she hadn't seen Lily for a couple of years at the time of Lily's death. Could she be their secret keeper without having been in their presence? Also it would be pointless for the DE's to try to get information from Dudley, who was an infant at the time. From michael at flyingbullsoftware.com Wed Jul 18 18:19:08 2007 From: michael at flyingbullsoftware.com (Miguel Blanco) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:19:08 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172122 > sassymomofthree Said: > I believe there was once a discussion about apparition, particularly > with children. The concept of side-along apparition in HBP, along > with the suggestion that parents practice this with their children, > has always suggested to me that anyone involved in apparating has to > *want* to go along, which leaves babies out altogether (you can't > explain to a baby.) So the apparatee's will must be involved in the > experience of apparating. I have made the assumption that Lily knew > she couldn't flee in this manner, or any manner, once LV was in the > room with her and baby Harry, thus the reason for her sacrifice. Hi There! Well it is a matter of timing really, Harry is asleep in one room, and they are in the other room, Voldemort breaks in and James and him fight, but Voldemort kills him and gets into the room before Lily can get to Harry. She begs for his life if you remember, so she might simply have never been able to get to him, and stood between Harry and Voldemort, which in the end caused him to kill her and then attempt to kill Harry. Miguel Blanco From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 21:27:49 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:27:49 -0000 Subject: My last-minute predictions and hopes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172123 Having just read my own response to Miss Vassy, I realize that I'm currently incapable of composing a coherent counterargument. (My apologies to anyone who was confused by that post!) So instead, I'm just going to list what I think happened and/or will happen, just to have a record of what I believe in case I'm right on even one point. I'm not supplying canonical evidence, just pure opinion on all counts. Godric's Hollow and Horcruxes: No one was present with Voldemort except Wormtail watching the action in rat form (which explains why James didn't see him and how he could return Voldemort's wand. Voldemort's "Stand aside, silly girl" had nothing to do with Snape and everything to do with his desire to murder Harry and only Harry. He did not have an object with him that he intended to make into a Horcrux; the soul bit from murdering Harry would have been reserved for the Sword of Gryffindor, which he intended to steal after having murdered Harry and becoming, in his own mind, invincible. DD would be killed after the sword was made into a Horcrux. His soul bit, however significant, would have been superfluous as LV would have his quota of six Horcruxes (with the seventh bit in himself as the main soul anchored by the soul bits). Neither Harry nor his scar is a Horcrux. Voldemort wanted him dead and would have used the soul bit to create a final Horcrux, but he didn't have the object yet and the spell was never cast. Harry has some of Voldemort's powers in his scar (which was created by the AK bursting outward thanks to Lily's accidental Love magic) but not a soul bit. (One of those powers is probably possession, which Harry may discover and use against LV in DH.) Nagini is a Horcrux and will be the last to be destroyed (with the Sword of Gryffindor) before the final confrontation with Voldemort. Snape (who is DDM!) was not present at Godric's Hollow because he was at Hogwarts. He rushed to inform DD that his Dark Mark was fading just at the point when Dumbledore, alerted to the Potters' danger by the broken Fidelius Charm (he remembered where the Potters were hiding) realized with the aid of the silver instruments in his office that they were dead. DD sent Snape to tell Hagrid to hurry to Godric's Hollow (or help him get there using side-along Apparition) and then Snape returned to DD to help him prepare the blood protection and possibly some other protective charm or potion that we'll learn about later. We'll find out about all this through Hagrid or a Pensieve memory in relation to the Missing 24 hours.) The Fidelius Charm was broken when Peter broke faith with the Potters and betrayed their hiding place to the Dark wizard they were hiding from. Dumbledore and Snape: Dumbledore, having defeated Grindelwald by destroying his Horcrux in 1945, suspected long before CoS that Riddle/Voldemort was making Horcruxes. Riddle/Voldemort's changed appearance during the DADA interview confirmed this opinion, as did the murder of Hepzibah Smith and the theft of the locket and cup. DD had begun collecting memories related to his murders before the death of Morfin Gaunt. The theft of the ring in connection with the cup/locket theft led him to believe that all three had been made into Horcruxes. The action of the diary and its destruction confirmed the multiple-Horcrux theory but DD still did not know how many Horcruxes there were, which is why he wanted Slughorn's memory. (BTW, I don't think Tom Riddle knew how to create a Horcrux at that point. The diary, though "written" with the memories embedded in it to prove that he was the Heir of Slytherin, was not yet a Horcrux.) Dumbledore has a true "ironclad" reason to trust Snape (not an Unbreakable Vow, which DD would never perform) and has trusted him with more information than any other Order member or colleague (he wasn't a member of the first Order; he worked for DD along). He either knew or suspected the existence of LV's Horcruxes from GH forward and he knew when he "stoppered" the ring Horcrux curse that the ring was a Horcrux. I predict that he'll help Harry find and destroy at least one Horcrux (though Harry may not know that it's him). He has been working since SS/PS to protect Harry and killed DD on DD's orders or at his request. (See my multitudinous earlier posts on this topic.) Dumbledore knew that he was dying as a result of the Ring Horcurx curse, which could only be slowed, not cured. He planned to give Snape the DADA post even before Snape told him about the UV (all three provisions) for a variety of reasons that I've already specified. (He intended for Slughorn to take Snape's place as both Potions Master and, after the DADA curse struck, HoH of Slytherin.) The argument in the forest involved Snape's willingness to kill DD if the circumstances they were both working to prevent fell into place. "You take too much for granted, Dumbledore" means that DD thought they could prevent DEs from getting into Hogwarts to back up Draco or something of that sort. Snape didn't want to kill DD; DD said that he had promised and must go through with it if they could not protect Draco any other way. Predictions: Harry will forgive Snape and Snape will either be exonerated or given a light sentence such as charity work for St. Mungo's. He will have the chance to do the research he's so intellectually and magically qualified to do, either as a textbook writer or an Unspeakable. He will not return to Hogwarts as either a teacher or headmaster, but he will live. If he's still infamous, he'll shrug it off, caring only about his research. Maybe, just maybe, he'll get an Order of Merlin for saving Harry from the DEs and getting them out of Hogwarts (or some more conspicuous act of bravery in DH). Okay, that part is wishful thinking. HRH will survive. Harry and Ron will go back to school after the defeat of LV and become Aurors. Hermione will have already completed school (as Head Girl) and will become Head of the Department for the Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures, instituting all sorts of liberal reforms (hopefully taking the house-elves feelings into account rather than freeing them against their will). Ron and Hermione will marry but wait to have children (probably only one), and despite their contrasting personalities will be happy. Harry will marry Ginny but will not have twelve children or become Minister for Magic (I hope). He will lose only the powers in his scar and retain those he was born with. He and Ron will bore Hermione to tears discussing Quidditch but will not play professionally. Neville will also survive and become (yeah, I know it's boring) the new Herbology teacher, Professor Sprout having been killed in the Battle of Hogwarts. Wishful thinking: No Weasley will die and Percy will be reconciled to his family after saving Ron from, erm, Rufus Scrimgeour? Seriously, I hope all the Weasleys will survive but fear that at least one will die as foreshadowed by Mrs. W's Boggart and the Weasley clock (which is a *grandfather clock* and could not have been carried around by Molly easley in her laundry basket, and what's the point of doing so if all the hands are already pointing to Mortal Peril)? Carol, who thought that this would be a short post and has knots in her stomach worrying that what she'll find in DH will not at all resemble what she anticipates and hopes for From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 21:43:50 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:43:50 -0000 Subject: "That awful boy" (Was: Petunia's comment) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172124 Ray J wrote: > >In the Chapter Dudley Demented while Harry and the Dursleys are "talking" in the kitchen Petunia says "they guard the wizard prison"(not exact quote I don't have the book here with me) she then says "I heard that awful boy tell her" > > > > Harry immediately assumes Petunia is talking about James...(Harry has often jumped to the wrong conclusion in the past) I think Petunia Was Talking about Snape! > Ceridwen replied: > That has been discussed, though I don't know now if it had a thread of its own or not. The most likely candidate would, in my opinion, be James, since he probably came to see Lily at her parents' before they were married. Another possibility would be Sirius, who may have accompanied James on his visit to Lily. It could have been Remus or Peter, on the same possibility that they came to see Lily with James. Snape is a possibility, since he was a classmate of Lily's, and we now know they were both good at Potions. > > I always thought it would be funny if Petunia meant Sirius. I imagined a scenario where Sirius comes by with James, and Petunia falls for him. When he snubs her, she starts calling him "that awful boy". Of course, this would mean she either knew Sirius Black, the escaped criminal, was a wizard in PoA and connected to James, or she didn't connect the name to the person, so that's probably not it. > Still, it was fun to think of before I started trying to connect dots! Carol responds: I thought for a long time that the "awful boy" was James, and in fact took it for granted (always a mistake with JKR), but her coyness regarding that question in interviews leaves me wondering--Lily is clearly "her," but could Harry be wrong that James is "that awful boy"? (Yeah, he was one, but that's beside the point.) Harry is often wrong in his interpretations and Petunia doesn't respond, so the identity of the boy is still open. It could be Severus, though I really don't think he'd have visited a Gryffindor at home, especially one who liked James. And while Peter would certainly qualify as an "awful boy," it seems more likely that James would have his best friend with him on a visit to Lily rather than Remus or Peter. I'm not sure why you reject Sirius as the possibility based on her reactions. She's suppressing a lot, and the "awful boy" comment only comes out later in relation to Dementors and Azkaban. But notice Petunia's reaction when they see Black on the news. At first, she's silent, but when Vernon says, "Lunatic could be coming up the street right now!" she rushes to the window and looks out. Why do that unless she knows that Sirius Black is a wizard who knew the Potters? And if she believes him to be a murderer (Harry's godfather or no) as of OoP, his youthful self would certainly qualify in her mind as an "awful boy." Carol, who hopes that the "awful boy" is Severus and that we'll learn more about him through Petunia but thinks, based on Petunia's reaction to the news story, that he's more likely to be Sirius From SMacLagan at msn.com Wed Jul 18 21:10:28 2007 From: SMacLagan at msn.com (Susan MacLagan) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:10:28 -0000 Subject: A Really Wild Idea In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172125 >Ronnie says: >So, what if the dragon on the DH cover (don't remember witch edition) > is non other than Draco Malfoy, the famous animagus with the wierd > name, who turnes over to the right side (as is expected by many of > us...) > > > > I know, I'm really losing it here... I think I'll join Ronnie who's admitted to losing it with last minute wild ideas.... I just finished re-reading HBP and noticed that Fenrir Greyback says he enjoys biting kids now (HBP US 593). Since Luna means moon, and people were once thought crazy because of effects from a full moon, I'm wondering if it's foreshadowing that Greyback will bite Luna in DH. As for the Lovegood part, no ideas on a ship there. London Granddaughter, who likes Ronnie's Dragon/Draco idea From kathy.m.mandrell at pfizer.com Wed Jul 18 21:19:12 2007 From: kathy.m.mandrell at pfizer.com (kmmand2000) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:19:12 -0000 Subject: Last minute question of no account - probably Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172126 Hi, first posting... In OotP, Dudley Demented, Harry is in the garden under the window listening to the news, he hears the loud "crack", whacks his head and gets grabbed around the neck by Uncle Vernon. What is it that pulses through Harry which caused UV to not be able to hold on to him anymore? Why would UV be sensitive to it? Thanks! Kathy, who sadly can only read HP books at lunch at work cuz the DH thinks they're a waste of time. From aholm006 at gmail.com Wed Jul 18 22:24:25 2007 From: aholm006 at gmail.com (rummage8) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:24:25 -0000 Subject: My last-minute predictions and hopes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172127 Just Carol wrote: > > Godric's Hollow and Horcruxes: > No one was present with Voldemort except Wormtail watching the action > in rat form (which explains why James didn't see him and how he could > return Voldemort's wand. Rummage8: Where did he keep this wand the whole time? Did he leave it some hiding spot? Did he bring it with him to the weasleys? Can you carry objects when you change form as an Animagus? Rummage8 who HATES SPOILERS From sgahagen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 22:25:08 2007 From: sgahagen at yahoo.com (sgahagen) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:25:08 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret and Dudley Demented In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172128 > Sneeboy2: > -snip- > Also it > would be pointless for the DE's to try to get information from Dudley, > who was an infant at the time. > Yes, Dudley was an infant. But if Petunia was the secret keeper, the death eaters may have tortured Dudley in order to make Petunia reveal the Potters' hiding place. What mother wouldn't crack seeing their baby tortured that way? sgahagen From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Jul 18 22:57:48 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:57:48 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Last minute question of no account - probably References: Message-ID: <019f01c7c98f$0ffc5590$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172129 From: "kmmand2000" > Hi, first posting... > In OotP, Dudley Demented, Harry is in the garden under the window > listening to the news, he hears the loud "crack", whacks his head and > gets grabbed around the neck by Uncle Vernon. What is it that pulses > through Harry which caused UV to not be able to hold on to him > anymore? Why would UV be sensitive to it? Shelley: There are many, many spells that Rowling doesn't name in the 6 books we've seen so far. This one may have been a "stinging hex." There is no reason at all why a spell wouldn't work also on Muggles- they are not immune to the effects of Wizard spells, as we've seen time and time again as LV and the DEs harasses, torture and kill Muggles. Shelley From orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk Wed Jul 18 23:25:18 2007 From: orphan_ann at hotmail.co.uk (or.phan_ann) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:25:18 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Waiting for the Last Can(n)on In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172130 Just then the door of the George opens and for a moment the cruel reality of the Bay intrudes, the howling of the winds and a swirl of dust from the gathering storm. Then Mooseming (with her handy spoiler-repelling tinhat) and Ann (freshly relieved of her Harbourmaster's licence by Sincher Phlote) roll in, arm in arm, belting out the old Bay favorite "Ship Over Troubled Water": Float on, sailorgirl, Float on by, Your time has come to sink The last book is in your hands See how it ends! With a hearty bellow of 'Quadruple rums and keep 'em coming, George!' they force their way to a pair of stools and join the conversation. 'Theory Bay worthless, Ceridwen?' scoffs Ann. 'Just a monument to the victors and some hovercraft-shaped ruins?(1) You might as well say the list itself is useless. No, TBAY'll last as long as we do. Look at all that great discussion pre-OotP. Sure, the Fourth Man Avery stuff is sunk, but there's plenty of stuff that's still interesting. Someone mentioned Elkins earlier, who's got all her old posts archived at http://www.theennead.com/elkins/hp/, and lots of it's still worth reading.' A chorus of boos (for they are out of tomatoes) greets this shameless plugging. 'Give us a theory!' shouts someone. 'All right,' says Mooseming, 'Here's one we thought of outside. Dumbledore is another character from the future... Voldemort! He's redeemed in DH and goes back in time after Hermione points out that he has no recorded relatives.' 'We have another!' yells Ann, downing her Rum. 'Regulus Black isn't R.A.B., because lots of people are! Regulus found the Cave and went and fetched his friends to help him sort it out. Maybe a dozen of them. And they all got to the little island by *flying on their broomsticks* from the shore, shared the potion, and took the Locket. None of them drank enough for it to leave any permanent scars, so of course there isn't any evidence for it!' A moment of seriousness redeemed by daft speculation, the party goes on. Who knows what the next crazy theory to rear its head may be? Ann, who used to drink quadruple rums in real life - ah, student days... (1) Debbie put this into Ceridwen's mouth in 172033. From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 22:50:12 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:50:12 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret and Dudley Demented In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172131 "sgahagen" > > Yes, Dudley was an infant. But if Petunia was the secret keeper, the > death eaters may have tortured Dudley in order to make Petunia reveal > the Potters' hiding place. What mother wouldn't crack seeing their > baby tortured that way? > Sneeboy2: I'm going to predict that the torture of infants is off limits in the HP books, even for LV and his cronies. From SnowyHome at aol.com Wed Jul 18 19:41:06 2007 From: SnowyHome at aol.com (Cathy) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:41:06 -0000 Subject: Bizarre Take on Snape & Harry's Relationship Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172132 I just posted this thought on the HPFS's List and wondered if anyone here had a similar bizarre thought like this. Is it possible that Snape raped Lily in the past and that Harry is Snape's son and not James' son? I know this idea has shades of Darth Vadar being Luke Skywalker's father in "Star Wars" but it popped into my head as they kept saying on the A & E special "Hidden Secrets of Harry Potter" that no one in Harry Potter is how they seem to be when we first read about them. I know its a bizarre thought and I think Harry Potter fever is at a frenzy now that we are only 3 days away from the ending so this thought just came up. Has anyone here considered this? Cathy From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Jul 18 22:50:00 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:50:00 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What if...? - My last minute theory References: Message-ID: <018801c7c98d$f8fc8960$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172133 >> Bart: >> Morty is mentally ill, and, as near as anybody can tell, he was > born that way. Among other things, he is entirely incapable of > empathy. > > ronnie: > I just don't believe babies can be born mentally ill (although I > totally agree with your diagnosis). DD showed Harry LV history exactly > for him to understand the roots of this mental illness. > Sure, plenty of orphan children (including Harry) grow up to be > healthy, loving, sane people. But LV's mother was in deep depression > even as he was a fetus in her womb, and on top of it all, there was > no-one to compensate for this lack of parents love. Shelley: We know medically that babies born to depressed moms turn out ok- they can inherit a family tendency for depression later, yes, but no, depression itself during pregnancy does not cause the baby to be born mentally ill. It's possible that babies can be born mentally ill, though- I'll give you several examples: - the brain is an organ or a body part just like the testes and bones and limbs- it can have mutations or incomplete development coupled with other profound birth defects. The vast majority of the babies born this way either never made it out of the womb alive, or die shortly afterward. - bad birth experience- we know that babies who are deprived of oxygen right before birth or during the birth process can have long lasting mental problems- a cord around the neck, a premature separation of the placenta from the mom before the baby is out can each contribute to the baby being starved of oxygen. Oddly enough, one of these symptoms of this shows up in a lack of connection to other people- lack of empathy, emotion and bonding. (sounds like Voldemort, eh?) - the brain of the developing baby is just as sensitive to drugs that the mom takes in pregnancy as other organs. Babies born to crack addicted moms clearly show mental problems immediately at birth- they are restless, cry a lot, and cannot be comforted. It's also theorized that some pesticides can cross the blood brain barrier to affect babies still in the womb, such as DDT. We know those kids show lower intelligence, but we really can't separate out the effects of contaminated food the mom ate while pregnant, what amounts crossed over in the breastmilk, and what foods the very young child ate, since the diets of people groups still using harmful pesticides is relatively stable and there are multiple chances for exposure. There are drugs that were banned because there were shown to yield definite problems in unborn babies, and as I said in point #1, the brain isn't immune to irregular development. Drugs that cross the blood-brain barrier in the mom do so also in the baby. - nutrition of the mom does play a part in the development of the baby. The brain is mostly fatty tissues, and we know birth weight makes a huge difference in the survival rate of the babies. A severely starved mom will, by extension, will have a starved baby. It's these last two that we don't know about Voldemort's mom- we don't know what means she used to keep herself alive long enough to give birth. We don't know if that wacky Gaunt history had some nutritional practices of ingesting potions that would harm the development of their babies' brains. We know that she was very poor, and I wonder how she ate- but either way, I very highly doubt if the baby Tom Riddle was a fat one, rather, I think he was lucky to have been born and survived at all given his mom's condition at the time of his birth. Tom's mental illness, therefore, I think is a combination of two things: Gaunt family history, and his mom's dire circumstances during her pregnancy. Most curious is the orphanage worker's recollections: he was a funny baby, and didn't cry. Mentally ill babies go one of two ways- consistently crying, and never consoled, or they never cry at all because that normal means of communication has been somehow disrupted in the brain. Shelley From buddahtuffah at hotmail.com Wed Jul 18 22:06:32 2007 From: buddahtuffah at hotmail.com (buddahtuffah) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:06:32 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret and Dudley Demented In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172134 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sgahagen" wrote: > I was reading the first few chapters of Order of the Phoenix the > other night, and I began (once again) pondering just what Aunt > Petunia knows, why she knows it, and why she has never told Harry > any of it. As I was reading and thinking, a new theory (at least > to me) occurred to me. What if Peter had not been the Potter's > secret keeper after all? What if Petunia was the secret keeper? I think this is a very good theory, but as you said even Dumbledore didn't know that Sirius wasn't the Secret Keeper. If even he (Dumbledore) didn't know who the Secret Keeper was, then why would he send Petunia a letter reminding her about what she promised to do? Donna From ida3 at planet.nl Wed Jul 18 23:55:27 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:55:27 -0000 Subject: Bizarre Take on Snape & Harry's Relationship In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172135 Cathy: > I just posted this thought on the HPFS's List and wondered if > anyone here had a similar bizarre thought like this. Is it possible > that Snape raped Lily in the past and that Harry is Snape's son and > not James' son? Dana: Besides Harry being almost a carbon copy of James, it has been suggested about LV being Harry's father but JKR shot that down by stating that James and no one else but James is Harry's father. "James is DEFINITELY Harry's father," and Harry is not a descendent of Slytherin. [Read the exact quote from Jo's website] http://www.accio-quote.org/themes/potters.htm Dana From aholm006 at gmail.com Thu Jul 19 00:04:28 2007 From: aholm006 at gmail.com (rummage8) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:04:28 -0000 Subject: Bizarre Take on Snape & Harry's Relationship In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172136 Cathy wrote > I just posted this thought on the HPFS's List and wondered if anyone > here had a similar bizarre thought like this. Is it possible that > Snape raped Lily in the past and that Harry is Snape's son and not > James' son? Rummage8 writes: I can honestly say that I have never thought about this. But I would have to say, why doesn't Harry look anything like Snape? And why does he look so much like James? Rummage8, who loves theories to death From rdsilverstein at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 00:30:33 2007 From: rdsilverstein at yahoo.com (hpfan_mom) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:30:33 -0000 Subject: Friday is so soon! Loving it/Hating it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172137 Katie wrote: > I definately know I will savor this one, instead of rushing through > it without sleep or rest the way I did with the last 4 books (I read > SS and CoS at the same time, so no waiting). I am going to really > try to make DH last into next week. We'll see... > > Anyone else feeling this love/hate towards the end of the series? hpfan_mom now: I really, really want to savor it too . . . but I'm afraid to. Afraid I'll open the paper Sunday morning to "Harry Lives!" Afraid I'll get on the train Monday morning and sit in front of two people discussing the big "surprise ending" at full volume. Afraid that when I log into my Yahoo account the first news brief I see will be "Snape Good After All." Am I too Harry-centric? It does seem as if the whole world is waiting for this book, much more than ever before. hpfan_mom From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 00:28:15 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:28:15 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172138 Alla: Heee, well, there is a really big one that could be proven wrong for sure - that Snape is not DD!M, but see the funny thing for me is that I was never much of the theoriser. Lupinlore: I wouldn't be at all surprised if Snape does end up being against Voldy, for whatever reason. Not the big moral question at stake, I think. > Let's see ... predictions that didn't come through? Well, I thought Harry's grief over Sirius and relationship with DD would be handled in HBP with a great deal more sophistication and believability. More minor predictions were that DD would be the Half-Blood Prince, and that Harry would get into Advanced Potions because Draco's poor OWL showing would force Snapey-poo into more reasonable policies. Carol: who agrees with vmonte that people don't like unpalateable truths and who expects a roar of outrage from the Snape haters when Snape is revealed as DDM Alla: Trying to imagine myself roaring in outrage if Snape is DD!M and bursting into giggles instead. Can we expect something if he is not? Lupinlore: Well, as I said I think the fact of Snape being for or against Voldy, or something in-between, is not the main moral issue that needs to be addressed with regard to Snape's character. His abuse of Harry, and DD's apparent approval thereof, fills that role, I think. But the revelation of Snape as DDM? Depends on how it's done, I suppose. I agree that there are some DDM! plotlines that could induce giggles, others that would induce howls, and still others that would leave me rolling on the floor in serious danger of a hernia. But, I didn't seriously injure myself guffawing in derision at Harry's approach to DD in HBP (i.e. nothing at all to worry about, I adore you, let's go get Voldemort!) so I doubt I'll need a surgeon this weekend. Lupinlore, who will put pads down for rolling on, just in case From saraquel_omphale at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 00:55:13 2007 From: saraquel_omphale at yahoo.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:55:13 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172139 >>1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No >>2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Tricky. The prophecy said vanquished not killed, although HP and DD talk about killing. Sooo - I think Voldemort will be mentally and emotionally crushed, but possibly will remain "suspended" in the locked room in perpetuity. (See my own predictions to make more sense of that.) >>3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent >>character to die and stay dead? Sorry, but Snape will probably have to go. Neville (he really should have left Bellatrix well alone. Will probably get points deducted for this one!) >>4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio >>were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin >>that scared him? Dark Mark >>5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a >>student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend >>the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? No b. Draco? No c. Hermione? No d. Luna? No e. Ron? No f. Neville? No g. Ginny? No I don't think Hogwarts will be open - no-one would trust the security with DD gone. >>6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during >>the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur >>7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first >>time "very late in life?" Filch. >>8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Terry Boot b. Head Girl? Hannah Abbot c. DADA Instructor? None d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonegall >>9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbledore - so now with himself asDumbledore is gone and not there to protect him. I don't think he feels loyalty to the Order. Ultimately I see him paring up with Lucius Malfoy - before Snape gets snuffed that is - IMO they both want Voldemort out and Lucius in. >>10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or >>less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. >>Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes >>must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul >>pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the >>bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the >>answers.) a. Diary b. Ring c. Hufflepuff's cup d. Ravenclaw's tiara - either in room of requirement or at Bill/Fleur's wedding e. Slytherin's Locket - probably with Aberforth or in Kreacher's den f. Harry g. In Voldemort >>In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have >>sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two >>alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 >>and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions >>will be used as tiebreakers. >>Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggart? Boggart - James telling him that he still owes him a life debt. Patronus - bat (which possibly turns into a phoenix) >>Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of >>Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Love in its most potent, purifying form - like 'last judgement' love, a mirror in which the soul sees itself, and every action it has ever done. Other Predictions 1 The final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort takes place in the Locked room in the Department of Mysteries which is purifying love. Harry will destroy all other horcruxes (or they will have been destroyed) leaving himself as the last Horcrux. Harry will lure Voldemort into the locked room. Voldemort and the part of his soul that is in Harry will be unable to survive the experience of purifying love. Harry survives because his heart is pure and he can therefore withstand the awsome judgemental power of love. In other words, he will survive because he can love. Possibly, you can only get out of the locked room if you have successfully faced yourself, and as Voldemort refuses to do that, he may just have to stay in there. 2 Harry will get bitten by Nagini at some point. Just as Voldemort got some of Harry's blood into him, which was important, so Harry will get some of Nagini's venom, which created Voldemort's body. This will be significant. Don't ask me why, the intricacies of the prophecy are just too mind boggling, but it could be something to do with being able to get into the locked room in the Department of Mysteries. The antidote to Nagini's venom is known by Healer Smethwyk and is probably dragon's blood, which Slughorn has a small bottle of. 3 Harry will find out information through the pensieve. DD left memories in his pensieve - memories can survive the death of their owners. Harry uses his own memories of Godric's Hollow via the pensieve to find out what happened there. 4 Going out on a limb here - what the heck! The reason Dumbledore trusts Snape is because Snape told him that Wormtail was the spy right from the off. Dumbledore used Wormtail to feed false information to Voldemort for the year before the Potters were killed, and had no idea that the secret keeper had been swapped. This perhaps was one of Dumbledore's huger mistakes. 5 Caradoc Dearborn will come back into the story. He has been hidden by DD since Voldies downfall. From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 18 23:22:25 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:22:25 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172140 Hold for tomorrow - this is his sixth post for the day. michele Good post, btw. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > Sneeboy2: > > > > My own theory is that Hogwarts will not be reopened > > until LV is vanquished, and that when it does reopen, > > the separate houses will be abolished. ... > > > > Anyway, I think the sorting hat will be destroyed > > somehow, making it impossible to keep the houses > > separate. > > > > > bboyminn: > > The rivalry between Houses is very common though, and has > nothing to do with Sorting. At the college I went to, we > has several Residence Halls where students lived on campus. > These Residence Halls had their strong rivalries. Our Hall > had the best parties, the coolest guys, the prettiest > girls, the best inner-school teams, while the other > Houses were just...well...lame. Sneeboy2: The house system definitely has a parallel in the real world. And you're right that there will still be separate residence halls and sporting teams. I didn't mean to suggest that there was something wrong with rivalries, per se. What fun would life be without them? Stereotypes about different groups of people, however, are something I would hope JKR would want to discourage. The whole idea of the sorting hat placing people according to some aspect of their character encourages stereotyping. I've seen many people use it to support their theories about the books: "So-and-so couldn't do that; he's a Syltherin," or a Griffindor. Bboyminn: > > Plus, being Sorted into a specific House doesn't > completely define you. Harry could have been Slytherin > or Gryffindor, Hermione could have been Ravenclaw or > Gryffindor, and many fans suspect that Neville could > have been either Hufflepuff or Gryffindor. So, there > is a danger to assume the House characteristics are one > dimensional. That all Slytherins are [insert Slytherin > characteristic here]. Yet, there is nothing to prevent > Slytherins from being highly intelligent or dumb as a > rock. They can be brave or cowardly. They can be hard > working or lazy. They can be immensely loyal or > completely selfish. Sneeboy2: I agree that JKR has given us examples that defy the stereotypes, and I consider it a promising aspect of the books. She's also warned readers in interviews not to make assumptions about characters based on what house they're in. I hope she's setting people up for the idea that there's really nothing to the whole sorting idea. But it will take some bold change to convince them. The fact is that in reality people aren't often deterred from their belief in stereotypes by one or two examples to the contrary. I think JKR will give us some much stronger evidence that there's no truth to the types and no need for them. Simplest way to do it plotwise is to get rid of the hat. bboyminn: > > These House characteristics are a very complex matter, > and I don't think we can define someone completely by > what House they were in, as human nature is far more > complex than a set of defined characteristics. Sneeboy2: I couldn't agree more about human nature and defining people. I wish I could say that the way the houses are presented in the books were more complex already, but the fact is that, with a few exceptions, JKR has put all the good guys in one house and all the bad guys in another, and the fact certainly hasn't escaped young readers, who are quick to identify with one house or the other, depending on whether they think it's cooler to be bad or good. If JKR does get rid of the houses, or at least the idea that they are character-defining, it will likely be unpopular with many readers, who seem to relish how easy it makes things. Bboyminn: > So, let me say, that it is possible that the Sorting > will come to an end. But, if it does, then students > will likely be arbitrarily assigned to a 'residence' > house and likely those Houses will still retain their > same names for historical and traditional reasons, > and likely the same fierce House rivalries will > continue. Sneeboy2: I agree that there will be different residence halls and sports teams regardless. But if students are assigned to them randomly and don't persist in ideas that all Slytherins are jerks, for example, it would satisfy my prediction/hope about a rejection of the present system, which offers a magical basis for stereotypes -- the equivalent of a scientific basis in the real world. There's a difference between a fierce rivalry (Beat Duke!) and a ridiculous stereotype (All Duke students are a**holes.) Can you tell I went to UNC? From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 19 01:49:19 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:49:19 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What if...? - My last minute theory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <469EC31F.8050106@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172141 ronnie wrote: ronnie: > I just don't believe babies can be born mentally ill (although I > totaly agree with your diagnosis). Bart: Psychiatrists believe it. Remember, many mental illnesses ARE organic in nature. In fact, Morty exhibits the symptoms of what is called "primary psychopathy", which is believed to be biological in nature, as opposed to "secondary psychopathy", which is believed to be environmental. ronnie: > healthy, loving, sane people. But LV's mother was in deep depression > even as he was a fetus in her womb, and on top of it all, there was > no-one to compansate for this lack of parents love. Bart: The other orphans in the orphanage appeared to get enough love. Bart From red-siren at hotmail.com Thu Jul 19 01:58:16 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 01:58:16 -0000 Subject: Bizarre Take on Snape & Harry's Relationship In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172142 > Cathy: > > Is it possible that Snape raped Lily in the past and that > > Harry is Snape's son and not James' son? James would have killed Snape if he'd raped Lily. Besides, I don't think JKR would introduce that kind of story content into what is essentially a children's book. There's enough evil going on as is. Sue From cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com Thu Jul 19 02:28:30 2007 From: cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com (clairvoyant812) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 02:28:30 -0000 Subject: Friday is so soon! Loving it/Hating it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172143 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hpfan_mom" wrote: > > Katie wrote: > > I definately know I will savor this one, instead of rushing through > > it without sleep or rest the way I did with the last 4 books (I read > > SS and CoS at the same time, so no waiting). I am going to really > > try to make DH last into next week. We'll see... > > > > Anyone else feeling this love/hate towards the end of the series? > > My biggest fear is standing in line at Barnes & Noble on Friday night and some stupid person gets their book before me, turns to the end, and shouts out the big reveal. I want to be there early enough to get my book, get the heck out of there and get home where it's safe and not one is going to spoil it. I want to savor the book, too. It's the last and none will come after. Claire (delurking after a year or so) From sk8maven at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 02:26:17 2007 From: sk8maven at yahoo.com (sk8maven) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 02:26:17 -0000 Subject: Bizarre Take on Snape & Harry's Relationship In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172144 > > Cathy wrote: > > > > Is it possible that Snape raped Lily in the past and that > > > Harry is Snape's son and not James' son? > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sue" wrote: > James would have killed Snape if he'd raped Lily. Besides, I > don't think JKR would introduce that kind of story content into > what is essentially a children's book. There's enough evil going > on as is. There's SOMEthing between Snape and Lily, I have no doubt. But it isn't THAT. IMHO Snape was hopelessly, unrequitedly in love with Lily - and he's so unable to deal fairly with Harry not merely because he looks so much like his father (whom Snape hated), but he also "has his mother's eyes" (and brings back all that old frustration and stifled grief). Maven From bearhug at tpg.com.au Thu Jul 19 01:39:18 2007 From: bearhug at tpg.com.au (The Cuthills) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:39:18 +1000 Subject: My go at predicting Book 7 References: Message-ID: <000f01c7c9a5$a083af80$0301a8c0@userb26c5552b3> No: HPFGUIDX 172145 The Facts we already have (or *think* we have) vis a vis Snape: a.. Snape hated James Potter b.. Snape hates Harry Potter c.. Snape was a Death Eater d.. Snape is sad, bitter and twisted e.. Snape killed Dumbledore JKR has indicated a number of things that are important in interviews and at book readings/signings. These include that: a.. Lily's eyes are significant b.. Snape is a "redemptive character"...this statement caught JKR by surprise (can't find a link to the exact quote so you'll have to trust me on this one) The Bare Bones aka My Predictions regarding motivations and who's is good and who is not: a.. Snape, the unloved, loved Lily Potter. She was kind to him, she encouraged James/Sirius/Remus to be kind to him, too b.. His love for her was all encompassing and deep. c.. Lily married James, whom Snape despised with a hatred as deep as his love for Lily. d.. He told Voldemort the bit of the prophecy that he heard little realising that it would end in Lily's death e.. Voldemort killed both James and Lily f.. Snape knows that he was responsible for Lily's death g.. He confessed all to Dumbledore as a broken man and has been working on deep undercover since as a double agent h.. He doesn't hate, loathe or despise Harry at all and never has. i.. He hates, loathes and despises himself. Every time he looks at Harry, he sees Lily's eyes. Every time he sees Harry he is reminded of the fact that he himself was responsible for Lily's death. That's why he treats Harry so badly. j.. The only way he can redeem himself is to work for the Order and bring about the end of Voldemort. k.. ???Snape will ultimately kill/have a major hand in killing Voldemort, not Harry. He will most likely be killed himself in the process, probably saving Harry's life along the way. l.. He will sacrifice his life in order to save Harry thus completing his redepmtion. m.. Dumbledore's death is part of a bigger plan and had to take place in order that something else be fulfilled. n.. All of this is most likely garbage, but thank you for reading through to the end anyway :) Two sleeps to go and I can hardly control myself. Anne From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 03:39:31 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 03:39:31 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Spoilers at HPfGU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172146 Leslie41: Personally, I would suggest crawling into a hole if you don't want to be spoiled. Just go off the internet, and don't read anything at all until you've got your copy in your hot little hands. And then sequester yourself in the bathroom with the fan running until you finish the book. That's what I would do, if I didn't love spoilers. I do love spoilers (don't worry, none are included here!), and as of this very second I'm completely and totally spoiled, as I have searched for them. When my copy comes I will already know everything there is to know. It's not citing a spoiler to say the book has already been completely leaked--that's according to USA Today this a.m. BUT that's my choice--truthfully if I didn't want to be spoiled I wouldn't even go to a Potter Party. I would just wait faithfully for my book to arrive on Saturday. Or I would send someone into the bookstore at midnight that doesn't give a freak about Harry Potter. I'll never forget in 1983, waiting in line for hours with my brother to see "The Return of the Jedi". As we finally filed in, some idiot filing out of the previous show screamed "LEIA IS LUKE'S SISTER!" at us. ARGH! I think this is the origin of my love of spoilers. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, eh? Well, hat's off to all of you who can beat 'em, and see you back here when the forum opens up again! --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > **Shorty Elf shuffles into the room, head bowed, ears waggling as she > shakes her head from side to side. ** > > Last night, dear listmates, the HPfGU group was inundated with over > 50 messages, all from the same person, each of which contained many, > many spoilers, with no attempt made to provide advance warning of > them. In fact, we are certain that this was a deliberate attempt to > spoil the fun for thousands, given that the subject line was > something quite innocent. > > Ever so fortunately, you all were spared having to see this by the > fact that the submissions came from a still-moderated member, and > some of our brave list elves who are okay with seeing spoilers were > able to handle the situation and delete the offending messages before > they ever hit the list. (So next time you see Penapart Elf, Alika > Elf, Cardi Elf, Vexxy Elf or Kranky Elf, you might want to give `em a > pat on the back.) > > Folks, while we hate to say this, we elves must admit outright that > we cannot *guarantee* that an unmoderated member couldn't do the same > thing that the moderated member attempted to do last evening. Even > if the elves quickly catch and delete any such posts, those who > receive their messages via individual email or daily digest *will* > still receive them. > > So, even though we are still holding fast to the POST NO SPOILERS! > policy here at HPfGU, you may want to, for your own protection, treat > the list... alas, even now... as read at your own risk. Depending > upon your own tolerance for spoilers, you may want to change your > settings to Special Notices only at this time. > > And just a reminder -- even when the list does shut down for the > release of Deathly Hallows, members will still be able to visit the > HPfGU site, to read posts, review poll results, etc. > > Shorty Elf, for the List Elves > From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 04:35:13 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 04:35:13 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172147 > > >Talisman: > > I just go where the evidence takes me. > > Eddie: > > T'man, I'm sure you are a very nice fellow. And I find your theory > quite engaging. Mike: I'm sure she'll appreciate that! > Eddie: > Having said that, here's the fundamental problem I have with your > theory: what is Dumbledore's motivation? That he's Ever So Evil and > that he, and not Voldemort is the real villain of the story? I'm > unconvinced. Entertained by the notion, but unconvinced. Mike: Dumbledore's motivation is obviously in question, Dana and Carol have both called to task this aspect of Talisman's theory. But I call into question the motivations of the other characters in this supposed master plan. Up until the night of the prophesy, we are looking at Dumbledore somehow manipulating only Tom Riddle. This is because we don't know much of what Tom/LV has done to the other characters in the story. But now DD has to manipulate lots of folks we know into the story we have read. I'll leave out the problem of Dumbledore knowing James and Lily have conceived a boy, because he needs a couple that have "thrice defied" LV. Or did DD convince the Potters to get busy around Holloween of '79 and make sure you get a boy out of the deal. Ditto the Longbottoms. Heh, I guess I didn't leave it out. ;) Let's start with Peter. "Pete, ole rat, get in there and spread rumors that Lupin is the traitor. Then just hang around with James and Sirius, I'll figure out how to make them make you their Secret Keeper. Then betray the secret to Voldemort, stop that cringing when I say his name." How exactly does DD manipulate Sirius to come up with the idea of making Peter the SK and the Potters to follow Sirius' dumb plan? Or does DD just recognize the inherent traitorness of Peter and trust that he will go to LV? But that's not much manipulating. And why does Peter want to spend his life as a fugitive instead of getting the all powerful Dumbledore to protect him? Now, what does DD tell James and Lily to gain their cooperation in the plan? "Kids, Voldemort is going to come calling eventually, I'd like you James to futilely fight him and die. Lily, I'd like you to not defend yourself and make a sacrificial death protecting your son, it'll activate some major old magic, that will protect him." Yeah, I'm sure they'd go for that plan. Assuming, of course that Dumbledore can convince them of this plan instead of him just protecting them. But wait, they didn't trust DD, that's why they went with Sirius as SK, switching to Pete at the last minute. So they don't trust DD as their SK but they're perfectly willing to die for DD's master plan. I'm sure Talisman has DD using a much more subtle method of getting the job done, but it all comes down to the same thing. Either DD manipulated things or he didn't, and Lily did her thing of her own free will. JKR has also told us that the deflected AK has *never* happened before. So we have to not only have a lying manipulative Dumbledore, we have to have him counting on something happening that has never happened before,... or JKR is lying to us. This is only the start of the whole story. We have so many more characters acting in specific ways because of DD's manipulation, with no consideration for their motivations, or lack thereof. Snape's motivations, back story, et al becomes meaningless, he's simply acting his part according to Dumbledore's script. All the stuff between him and the Marauders, so what? And after all this, Dumbledore allows himself to be killed before the final act. Hmm, hell of a manipulator. I ascribe to the theory that Dumbledore took advantage of Sybill's prophesy, what did he have to lose? But him making up the prophesy and manipulating all the characters into action,... it makes a mockery of the whole story. Mike From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 19 04:42:35 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 04:42:35 -0000 Subject: New York Times Review ***NO SPOILERS!!*** Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172148 I just wanted to alert everyone that according to Mugglenet the New York Times has obtained an early copy of DH and has posted a review on their website which contains MAJOR spoilers. I don't know if the review will show up in their hard copy newspaper too, but BEWARE if you read the New York Times. I also suspect other papers may get a copy of the book, or copy the NYT review. It looks like it may be time to completely disconnect from any and all news sources until the book comes out. FYI, Julie, who has read NO spoilers and will continue not to do so... er, to not do so...er... From k12listmomma at comcast.net Thu Jul 19 04:50:44 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:50:44 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] New York Times Review ***NO SPOILERS!!*** References: Message-ID: <037d01c7c9c0$5db734e0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172149 "julie" >I just wanted to alert everyone that according to Mugglenet > the New York Times has obtained an early copy of DH and has > posted a review on their website which contains MAJOR spoilers. > I don't know if the review will show up in their hard copy > newspaper too, but BEWARE if you read the New York Times. That stupid review is mostly a poorly written review of the past 6 books. Maybe they did it that way hoping not to get sued. Shelley From ardiningtiyaspitaloka at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 06:01:11 2007 From: ardiningtiyaspitaloka at yahoo.com (ardiningtiyaspitaloka) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 06:01:11 -0000 Subject: Bizarre Take on Snape & Harry's Relationship In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172150 > Cathy: > I just posted this thought on the HPFS's List and wondered if > anyone here had a similar bizarre thought like this. Is it > possible that Snape raped Lily in the past and that Harry is > Snape's son and not James' son? Dear Cathy... WOW ...ur idea really HITS me.. ^_^ n brings me to Hogwarts 'POP'... Ur theory could be possible, since Snape seems try to protect Harry on and on.. but.. I hope.. for surprise ending in the 7th book. I haven't read HP 7 yet.. Why Snape hates Harry so much.. also can be mysterious reason.. hmm.. wondering. Piet From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 19 07:17:53 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 07:17:53 -0000 Subject: Little bit more theorising - no, just guessing. No spoilers. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172151 Haven't read any spoilers, don't want to, you won't find any here. Just a couple of things - the idea that the Hogwarts houses need to be dumped to create a unified stance against Voldemort: the easiest way to bring this about is, as was done in PoA, with the whole school, probably somewhat reduced, brought to the Great Hall for lights out. After a while, I could see the House rivalries breaking down as people want information. As for the problem of everyone being in together, well, I'd guess magic could sort out some privacy. I'm also hoping the shower of Grawp's blood that Harry and Hermione had in OotP will come back as some sort of added protection for them. I didn't think he would, but maybe that means Ron gets it? B?"$%^ - that might explain JKR's tears - Ron was modelled after her best friend. The insomnia thing is strange - I wonder how many others are having it in the run-up to DH? I didn't get it before with the other books. I'm loving every last moment before the big reveal. Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Thu Jul 19 09:14:31 2007 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:14:31 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172152 ethveg: And I find Petunia's reply hilarious (remember they're in England!) - it's one of the first things to let me know that there was more to the HP series than a story for children. Anyone else find it as funny as I did/do? KATIE RESPONDS: I don't get it. I want to get the joke...I just don't. The exact conversation is: V: "Their son -- he'd be about Dudley's age now, wouldn't he?" P: "I suppose so." V: "What's his name again? Howard, isn't it?" P: "Harry. Nasty, common name, if you ask me." V: "Oh, yes, yes, I quite agree." This is from page 7 of the US Collector's Edition. I just don't get it. Please explain? : ) Katie Sandy now: I'm pretty sure I get it, and I'm not English. Petunia refers to the name of Harry as being common and nasty yet one of the Royal Princes name is Harry. Sandy ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Thu Jul 19 10:01:25 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:01:25 -0000 Subject: My last-minute predictions and hopes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172153 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Having just read my own response to Miss Vassy, I realize that I'm > currently incapable of composing a coherent counterargument. (My > apologies to anyone who was confused by that post!) > > So instead, I'm just going to list what I think happened and/or will > happen, just to have a record of what I believe in case I'm right on > even one point. I'm not supplying canonical evidence, just pure > opinion on all counts. > > Godric's Hollow and Horcruxes: > No one was present with Voldemort except Wormtail watching the action > in rat form (which explains why James didn't see him and how he could > return Voldemort's wand. Voldemort's "Stand aside, silly girl" had > nothing to do with Snape and everything to do with his desire to > murder Harry and only Harry. He did not have an object with him that > he intended to make into a Horcrux; the soul bit from murdering Harry > would have been reserved for the Sword of Gryffindor, which he > intended to steal after having murdered Harry and becoming, in his own > mind, invincible. DD would be killed after the sword was made into a > Horcrux. His soul bit, however significant, would have been > superfluous as LV would have his quota of six Horcruxes (with the > seventh bit in himself as the main soul anchored by the soul bits). > Brothergib now: Agreed. I was always interested by DD questioning LV's intentions in asking for a job (Lord Voldemort's Request, HBP) that he would not receive. I am pretty sure that it was to confirm that DD possessed Gryffindor's sword and it was now on display in his office. Carol again: > Neither Harry nor his scar is a Horcrux. Voldemort wanted him dead and > would have used the soul bit to create a final Horcrux, but he didn't > have the object yet and the spell was never cast. Harry has some of > Voldemort's powers in his scar (which was created by the AK bursting > outward thanks to Lily's accidental Love magic) but not a soul bit. > (One of those powers is probably possession, which Harry may discover > and use against LV in DH.) Nagini is a Horcrux and will be the last to > be destroyed (with the Sword of Gryffindor) before the final > confrontation with Voldemort. Brothergib again: I agree that Harry is not a Horcrux. It seems reasonable that as LV was stripped of his body, Harry would absorb some of his power. I think part of his strength in dealing with the Dark Arts also came from LV. Must admit that I have never understood why Harry was so ordinary with two such phenomenal parents. I don't agree that Nagini is a Horcrux - possible that he is a magical incarnation of LV's patronus. If LV had wanted to make the Sword of Gryffindor a Horcrux before, I don't think anything would have changed this! In fact I can see LV entering Hogwarts while Harry is out attempting to find Horcruxes. He will then inform Harry that his friends (Neville, Luna?) are held ransom until Harry returns. The intention is to make the sword a Horcrux with Harry's death. Carol again: > > Snape (who is DDM!) was not present at Godric's Hollow because he was > at Hogwarts. He rushed to inform DD that his Dark Mark was fading just > at the point when Dumbledore, alerted to the Potters' danger by the > broken Fidelius Charm (he remembered where the Potters were hiding) > realized with the aid of the silver instruments in his office that > they were dead. DD sent Snape to tell Hagrid to hurry to Godric's > Hollow (or help him get there using side-along Apparition) and then > Snape returned to DD to help him prepare the blood protection and > possibly some other protective charm or potion that we'll learn about > later. We'll find out about all this through Hagrid or a Pensieve > memory in relation to the Missing 24 hours.) The Fidelius Charm was > broken when Peter broke faith with the Potters and betrayed their > hiding place to the Dark wizard they were hiding from. Brothergib again: This also makes sense to me. However, JKR has stated that the whole series hinges on the events at GH. If this is the case, it suggests that we do not know, as yet, exactly what happened at GH. I think we have had the argument before about the Fidelius charm. As secret keeper, Wormtail had the right to tell LV, so the secret should have remained intact. As a result, it might have proved difficult to find Harry in the rubble! Hagrid also trusts Snape implicitly, and it could be due to his actions at this time. Carol again: > > Dumbledore and Snape: > Dumbledore, having defeated Grindelwald by destroying his Horcrux in > 1945, suspected long before CoS that Riddle/Voldemort was making > Horcruxes. Riddle/Voldemort's changed appearance during the DADA > interview confirmed this opinion, as did the murder of Hepzibah Smith > and the theft of the locket and cup. DD had begun collecting memories > related to his murders before the death of Morfin Gaunt. The theft of > the ring in connection with the cup/locket theft led him to believe > that all three had been made into Horcruxes. The action of the diary > and its destruction confirmed the multiple-Horcrux theory but DD still > did not know how many Horcruxes there were, which is why he wanted > Slughorn's memory. (BTW, I don't think Tom Riddle knew how to create a > Horcrux at that point. The diary, though "written" with the memories > embedded in it to prove that he was the Heir of Slytherin, was not yet > a Horcrux.) Brothergib again: Agreed. Did Grindelwald communicate with Riddle? Is this how Riddle first learnt of Horcruxes? Carol again: > > Dumbledore has a true "ironclad" reason to trust Snape (not an > Unbreakable Vow, which DD would never perform) and has trusted him > with more information than any other Order member or colleague (he > wasn't a member of the first Order; he worked for DD along). He either > knew or suspected the existence of LV's Horcruxes from GH forward and > he knew when he "stoppered" the ring Horcrux curse that the ring was a > Horcrux. I predict that he'll help Harry find and destroy at least one > Horcrux (though Harry may not know that it's him). He has been working > since SS/PS to protect Harry and killed DD on DD's orders or at his > request. (See my multitudinous earlier posts on this topic.)# Brothergib again: Agreed again. I'm sure it is a link between Snape and Lily. I'm sure he is 'that awful boy' and that Petunia's role in book 7 is to reveal to Harry that Lily and Snape had a connection (a converstion brought about by the Dursleys disparaging remarks about DD and Harry commenting that Snape has killed him). DD trusted Snape more than anyone because he knew that Snape could block his thoughts from LV. Still not entirely sure whether Snape did join DD before or after LV's defeat. I don't think we will see Snape much in this book. He will be behind the scenes destroying Horcruxes. His role was to gain LV's trust, implant the seed that the Order knew about the Horcruxes, and then volunteer to check whether the Horcruxes are intact. Carol again: > > Dumbledore knew that he was dying as a result of the Ring Horcurx > curse, which could only be slowed, not cured. He planned to give Snape > the DADA post even before Snape told him about the UV (all three > provisions) for a variety of reasons that I've already specified. (He > intended for Slughorn to take Snape's place as both Potions Master > and, after the DADA curse struck, HoH of Slytherin.) The argument in > the forest involved Snape's willingness to kill DD if the > circumstances they were both working to prevent fell into place. "You > take too much for granted, Dumbledore" means that DD thought they > could prevent DEs from getting into Hogwarts to back up Draco or > something of that sort. Snape didn't want to kill DD; DD said that he > had promised and must go through with it if they could not protect > Draco any other way. Brothergib again: 'You take too much for granted' - I don't think this was a comment regarding the White Tower. I think this is all to do with Snape's dislike of Harry. DD is asking Snape to kill him to allow Harry the chance to finish off LV. Snape thinks that Harry is decidedly ordinary, and cannot see how he could possibly defeat the Dark Lord. I think this is the biggest bone of contention between Snape and DD. This is the reason for Snape's angry outburst after fleeing the White Tower. In fact it is possible that Snape (once he suspects that the Horcruxes are destroyed) will have a go at LV himself. Carol again: > > Predictions: > Harry will forgive Snape and Snape will either be exonerated or given > a light sentence such as charity work for St. Mungo's. He will have > the chance to do the research he's so intellectually and magically > qualified to do, either as a textbook writer or an Unspeakable. He > will not return to Hogwarts as either a teacher or headmaster, but he > will live. If he's still infamous, he'll shrug it off, caring only > about his research. Maybe, just maybe, he'll get an Order of Merlin > for saving Harry from the DEs and getting them out of Hogwarts (or > some more conspicuous act of bravery in DH). Okay, that part is > wishful thinking. Brothergib; I think that if, as we both suspect, Snape is involved in destroying Horcruxes, then at some point his pride will force him to inform LV of this fact. That, in itself, may bring about Snape's death. However, JKR talked about one character getting a reprieve. Perhaps LV will decide to deal with Snape after he has finished off Harry. So he may survive. I can't see him and Harry ever sharing a tender moment though! But maybe he will finally see Lily in Harry. Carol again: > > HRH will survive. Harry and Ron will go back to school after the > defeat of LV and become Aurors. Hermione will have already completed > school (as Head Girl) and will become Head of the Department for the > Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures, instituting all sorts of > liberal reforms (hopefully taking the house-elves feelings into > account rather than freeing them against their will). Ron and Hermione > will marry but wait to have children (probably only one), and despite > their contrasting personalities will be happy. Harry will marry Ginny > but will not have twelve children or become Minister for Magic (I > hope). He will lose only the powers in his scar and retain those he > was born with. He and Ron will bore Hermione to tears discussing > Quidditch but will not play professionally. Brothergib again: Absolutely agreed. The end of the book will probably focus on Harry and Ginny's child i.e. 'has Ginny's eyes but looked like Harry, only without the scar'. Carol again: > > Neville will also survive and become (yeah, I know it's boring) the > new Herbology teacher, Professor Sprout having been killed in the > Battle of Hogwarts. Brothergib again: Poetic justice will see Neville kill (or at least defeat) Bellatrix. He will become Hebology teacher in the future, but hopefully only due to Professor Sprouts retirement! Carol again: > > Wishful thinking: No Weasley will die and Percy will be reconciled to > his family after saving Ron from, erm, Rufus Scrimgeour? Seriously, I > hope all the Weasleys will survive but fear that at least one will die > as foreshadowed by Mrs. W's Boggart and the Weasley clock (which is a > *grandfather clock* and could not have been carried around by Molly > easley in her laundry basket, and what's the point of doing so if all > the hands are already pointing to Mortal Peril)? Brothergib again: I worry that the 'two people' JKR mentioned would be lost during DH are the twins! Some ridiculous act of bravery no doubt. Bill may meet his maker attempting to break the curse on the locket. One final prediction - the Marauders Map is going to come in handy. I think LV will enter the castle during Harry's absence. HRH (+ F&G + Order?) will enter Hogwarts via Honeydukes. > > Carol, who thought that this would be a short post and has knots in > her stomach worrying that what she'll find in DH will not at all > resemble what she anticipates and hopes for > Brothergib again: Agreeing for one last time. I think I have a good idea how DH will unfold. I think the biggest surprise will be how Harry defeats LV - something I remain very uncertain about. From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Jul 19 11:59:36 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:59:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: <469b8291.1498600a.6fe0.ffffbe3d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Gomes wrote: > > Vivamus wrote: > He fully expects to die doing what he believes is right, damned forever with > no redemption by everyone on both sides, including Harry. > It is probably the bravest act by any character in the entire series, for he > cannot even take comfort in being called a hero when he dies. He is doing > these things FOR Harry, and yet Harry himself calls him a coward. No wonder > he is enraged. > > JKR said a long time ago that SS was a "deeply horrible" person, or > something like that. This fits it, and finally exposes a full set of > motivations for him, that fit everything we've seen him do so far. > > So, what do you all think of "Brave Snape" as a theory? > > vmonte: > How does being deeply horrible equate to being brave? I think Snape is a > coward. some people don't like being told the truth. Especially when it's > something negative. > > > > Sherry now: > > I can never accept murder being considered an act of bravery. I think Snape > reacted with such rage because he knew he acted out of cowardice. He saved > his own neck and murdered an old man, the one person who had stood by him > for years. not very brave in my opinion. > > Sherry Vivamus again: I guess that all depends on whether it was in fact murder, or if he thought he was doing the right thing by killing DD. If it was in fact betrayal and murder, I would have to agree with you. If DD was pleading with SS to kill him, as is the big question from HBP (and it does not matter for this if the "please" was about killing DD or protecting Harry, as it meant SS had to carry out what he had promised to do) -- if that is the case, then SS was doing the right thing IN HIS OWN ESTIMATION. Even if what he did was something the entire WW world would reject, including everyone here on this list, if SS thought it was the right thing to do, then it was bravery, not cowardice. Going a step further from that, is it possible to be both brave and evil? Hmm, interesting philosophical question and outside this list, but I would argue that it IS possible, and an evil person can still conquer their fears and accomplish their evil goals by doing so, which is what I think of as bravery. In that case, it would be bravery even if SS were Ever So Evil and following his own ends. Going back to vmonte's comment, I don't think being deeply horrible equates to being brave at all, but they are not related. I think SS is deeply horrible because he has this very believable but highly twisted motivation that lets him hate and torment Harry while working to save his life. If the theory is right, it is hard to imagine a life more horrible than that, with all his dreams gone forever, having to live with the knowledge that he betrayed the only person (Lily) he ever loved to her death, and having to serve (probably how SS sees it) the son of James, who (we have to admit) is every bit as arrogant as his father in some ways. (That's looking at it from Snape's perspective, not the books'.) SS is also extremely brave, because he has chosen this very narrow and lonely life for himself, without the faintest hope of redemption in anyone else's eyes. He is doing this for his own sense of personal honor, even though he hates himself more than he ever hated Harry, or even LV. While I still despise Severus Snape as a character because of the way he has chosen to take out his pain on Harry, the very courage of the man takes my breath away. Vivamus From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Jul 19 13:12:21 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:12:21 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172155 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > vmonte: > > I'm glad Lily didn't decide to just step aside and let Voldemort kill > > Harry. I mean, why would she step in front of Harry unless she > thought > > he could die? And surely she knew that stepping in front of him > would > > sentence her to death as well. But she did it anyway. > > Ceridwen: > Actually, I've thought about this sort of scenario a lot. . . . > Thinking about something like this when not in the situation, when you > wuold react instinctively instead of thinking, makes you consider all > sides. A truly selfless parent would throw themselves between their > child and death without a thought. > > Without a thought of what would happen to the child once the parent is > dead. That car isn't going to stop a dime's breadth away from the > child just because the parent is lying dead. Those bullets won't stop > just because they have a victim. The ocean won't get shallower just > because the parent is dead. In most of those cases, the child will die > anyway. Vivamus: While I appreciate your approach, I think there is more intelligence behind parental sacrifice than you are giving credit for. In the animal world, the parent usually protects the offspring until the moment in which the parent would die. At that point, the animal parent abandons the offspring and lives to breed again. For humans, as much as we'd like it to be different, it usually works the same way, EXCEPT that human orphans usually live. So human parents are much more likely to die for their offspring, but still only if the offspring can be saved. So yes, parents will throw themselves in front a car for their child, but not to die WITH the child; they will do so to shove the child out of the way of the car. The parent dies, but the child lives -- and that is something virtually every human parent will agree is worth dying for, whether in the heat of the moment or in considered thought. > Ceridwen: > In the Potter's case, James is dead. Lily can be fairly certain of > this. Voldemort is in the room, and ordering her to step aside. If > she does, Voldemort kills Harry. If she doesn't, Voldemort, to her > knowledge at that time, kills her, and then kills Harry because there's > no one to protect him. Toddler Harry doesn't know magic. Toddler > Harry can't wield a wand: he doesn't even have one. Accidental magic > might serve to protect him for a time, but not for long. > > At that point, no one knew what Lily's sacrifice would accomplish. It > had never been done before. Lily made the same sacrifice parents have > been making for millenia, knee-jerk and without thought. In her case, > it turned out differently. > > Snape isn't Lily. Snape is human. Why should he trust that his death > would provide magical protection to Draco, Harry and Dumbledore? Did > Lily do something to prepare for such an eventuality, given that > someone knew about the prophecy, which was why they were in hiding? Or > did it just happen, randomly, the handmaiden to the prophecy? How > would Snape know whether his sacrifice would protect those he leaves > behind? > > I wouldn't trust to luck. As I said, I've thought about this a lot. > People I have known love stories about parental sacrifice, and make a > big deal out of how selfless the parents all were. But, really, what > happens to the child, as far as we know in the real world, when it's > left in a situation like that all alone? A parent will react on > instinct. Unless the fanfics are true, Snape is neither Harry's nor > Draco's father, and he's too young to be Dumbledore's dad. Vivamus: Without other information, I would agree with this in terms of the instinctive responses of Lily, but she did not merely step in front of Harry. She performed an apparently brilliant protection charm for him -- possibly of her own invention, but certainly prepared (or at least researched) ahead of time. What she did may have LOOKED like a mother instinctively (and uselessly) standing between her child and death, but was actually a highly-considered plan to protect her child at the certain cost of her own life. Since the charm had to be powered by love, according to the bits in canon we've heard about it, Snape could never have performed it, no matter how much he knew -- probably not even for Lily. Just because someone has an instinctive motivation to stand between another person and death, that does not mean they are not able to think, plan, and operate intelligently when the time comes. I don't think Lily's reaction was knee-jerk or thoughtless at all. Vivamus From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Jul 19 13:18:48 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:18:48 -0000 Subject: Snape's Rage at Being Called Coward : No, just a coward In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172156 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > > > Lisa: > > > I've never really understood why she didn't grab Baby Harry and > > > disapparate. I'd rather live life on the run than hand my baby > over to > > > what could mean certain death. > > > > Eddie: > > Haven't you read "Godric's Hollow, A History?" :-) Seriously, maybe > > she couldn't apparate or dis-apparate from the house because of all > > the magical protections around it. On the other hand, Fred and George > > successfully apparated all over 12 Grimmauld Place even though it was > > full of magical protections. > ====================================== > > Lisa: > > ::::snort::::: Oh, how I wish there WAS a "Godric's Hollow, A > History!" LOL! > > I, too, thought that the only reason she wouldn't disapparate with Baby > Harry would be that she physically couldn't because of the magical > protections on the house. Then, once we saw Fred & George apparating > in Grimmauld Place, it made me question even that; and further, when > Harry and Dumbledore went to see Slughorn to offer him the Potions job, > Harry asked why they couldn't just apparate into the house. Dumbledore > told him that magical persons have protections that keep others from > doing so (much like Muggles have locks), but didn't say that they > themselves couldn't do so. > > Very curious. > Vivamus: I wondered about this, too, since the Weasleys disapparate from their homes, and Kreacher apparently disapparated out of 12GP. But the problem of someone disapparating when the DEs are coming must be a universal problem for the DEs. I would expect that the process for attacking ANY WW household would be to place an anti-disapparation jinx over the house before beginning the attack. Vivamus P.S. Can you imagine the disapparating that would happen when people are in public? Someone calls "Hey!" meaning to greet an old friend, and ten people in the area vanish. From dougsamu at golden.net Thu Jul 19 13:53:42 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:53:42 -0400 Subject: On the lighter side! Message-ID: <1CF8F72A-A4DC-4146-9661-AAC991CA0CBF@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172157 Re: the "Harry" name.... I believe it is somewhat traditional in Royal Families to name children after the more accomplished ancestors with the better reputations. So you will not likely see a royal child named "John". I believe "Harold" or "Harry" was one of those Kings with a sullied past, so Prince Harry was a daring break with that tradition. Any actual British here to conform this poor Canadian Colonists speculation? ___ __ From dougsamu at golden.net Thu Jul 19 13:58:00 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:58:00 -0400 Subject: My last-minute predictions and hopes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172158 Brothergib again: I agree that Harry is not a Horcrux. It seems reasonable that as LV was stripped of his body, Harry would absorb some of his power. Doug: Reasonable? Good Heavens, how? Brothergib again: ... However, JKR has stated that the whole series hinges on the events at GH. If this is the case, it suggests that we do not know, as yet, exactly what happened at GH. doug: Saturday... Saturday... Saturday... and hopefully this issue will be settled. Reasonably. ___ __ From lmkos at earthlink.net Thu Jul 19 14:11:43 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:11:43 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: <1CF8F72A-A4DC-4146-9661-AAC991CA0CBF@golden.net> References: <1CF8F72A-A4DC-4146-9661-AAC991CA0CBF@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172159 Doug: >Re: the "Harry" name.... I believe it is somewhat traditional in >Royal Families to name children after the more accomplished ancestors >with the better reputations. So you will not likely see a royal child >named "John". I believe "Harold" or "Harry" was one of those Kings >with a sullied past, so Prince Harry was a daring break with that >tradition. > >Any actual British here to conform this poor Canadian Colonists >speculation? I'm not British but I have always associated "Harry" with Henry V. Lenore From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 14:29:01 2007 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:29:01 -0000 Subject: Friday is so soon! Loving it/Hating it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172160 > My biggest fear is standing in line at Barnes & Noble on Friday night > and some stupid person gets their book before me, turns to the end, and > shouts out the big reveal. > Claire > (delurking after a year or so) > I personally will employ ear plugs on that night. It will probably be enough to drown out the vicious spoilers that will definitly be floating around in the air like Wrakspurts. -Chys. From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 14:24:31 2007 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:24:31 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Involvement- There are only two? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172161 How does the one who records the names on the prophecies know that it is the "Dark Lord" and "Harry Potter(?)" if he doesn't know the full contents of the prophecy, as Dumbledore told Harry in the Weasley's smelly broomshed, 'only two people in the world know the full contents of the prophecy now?' I would guess that Dumbledore had shared some of this information but knowing how jealously he's guarded it, I doubt he would have done such a thing, knowing how important it is. -Chys, apologizing in advance if anyone already asked this, but I didn't find it anywhere and am very curious. From beatrice23 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 14:39:17 2007 From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:39:17 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172162 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saraquel_omphale" wrote: > > >>1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > > Yes > > > >>2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? > > Yes > > > >>3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > >>character to die and stay dead? > > Snape and Mrs. Weasley > > > >>4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > >>were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin > >>that scared him? > > Werewolf bite. > > > >>5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > >>student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend > >>the classes (answer yes or no for each): > > a. Harry? Yes (good cover for his quest) > b. Draco? No > c. Hermione? Yes > d. Luna? Yes > e. Ron? Yes > f. Neville? Yes > g. Ginny? Yes >. > > > >>6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during > >>the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? > > Lupin and Tonks > > > >>7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > >>time "very late in life?" > > Mrs. Figg > > > >>8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? Ernie Macmillion > b. Head Girl? Hermione Granger > c. DADA Instructor? Harry Potter > d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn > e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall > > > >>9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? > > With Dumbledore, he will die helping Harry. > > > >>10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > >>less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > >>Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > >>must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > >>pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > >>bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the > >>answers.) > a. Diary > b. Ring > c. Hufflepuff's cup > d. Ravenclaw's wand > e. Slytherin's Locket - probably with Aberforth or in Kreacher's > den > f. Harry > g. In Voldemort > > > > > Other Predictions > > 1 The final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort takes place in The Hogwart's Great Hall. LV and the Death Eaters attempt to take over the school for two reasons 1. LV knows that he can lure Harry there to save the school and 2. LV will see it as coming full circle and completing his defeat of Dumbledore. And the last horcrux is located there. 2. Pettigrew will ultimately be the one to kill LV to pay back the life debt he owes Harry. 3. either one of the two following will happen: a. LV will remove the Horcrux from Harry's scar and Harry will destroy it so LV can be destroyed. or b. Harry will sacrifice himself to destroy the horcrux in his scar and LV will be killed by another. 4. The blood LV took from Harry in GoF will provide LV's downfall and Harry's salvation as it has been strengthened from Lily's sacrifice and Harry's own sacrifices, injuries and healings (loss of bones and re-growth, bitten by basilisk and healed by Falkes (CoS), injured by the dragon and healed (GoF), etc.). 5. A horcrux will be found in Gringott's bank - most likely the cup. 6. Ollivander was forced to make LV a new wand and has been killed to prevent him from revealing this info. From kellymolinari at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 14:42:15 2007 From: kellymolinari at yahoo.com (Kelly Molinari) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:42:15 -0000 Subject: IS ANYBODY PAYING ATTENTION ??? was: New York Times Review ***NO SPOILERS!!*** In-Reply-To: <037d01c7c9c0$5db734e0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172163 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma" wrote: > > "julie" > >I just wanted to alert everyone that according to Mugglenet > > the New York Times has obtained an early copy of DH and has > > posted a review on their website which contains MAJOR spoilers. > > I don't know if the review will show up in their hard copy > > newspaper too, but BEWARE if you read the New York Times. > > > That stupid review is mostly a poorly written review of the past 6 books. > Maybe they did it that way hoping not to get sued. > > Shelley > I hope this is not OFF TOPIC but Kelly really wants to know: How come some people are selling this book ahead of the release date? This reporter says "purchased" not "obtained" or "given an advanced copy in order to write a review". It certainly seems as if anyone could have gone into that same store and gotten their own copy. It's no wonder there are SPOILERS out there. I'm sure this is not the only instance of a breach in security, which I know is very tight. My daughter is working for a children's museum that is hosting a HP Midnight Party and they had a terrible time getting permission to even get a shipment of books for their guests. The books were expected Wednesday but didn't arrive. The person in charge, the one who signed her life away in order to get them, is planning on hiding them so they aren't tampered with. I for one am really mad about this. Kelly From karen.eidukas at googlemail.com Thu Jul 19 15:10:44 2007 From: karen.eidukas at googlemail.com (karen.eidukas@ntlworld.com eidukas) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:10:44 +0100 Subject: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: References: <1CF8F72A-A4DC-4146-9661-AAC991CA0CBF@golden.net> Message-ID: <49312c440707190810l736f1b05scd81ea202be09b53@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172164 Doug: > Re: the "Harry" name.... I believe it is somewhat traditional in Royal Families to name children after the more accomplished ancestors > with the better reputations. So you will not likely see a royal child > named "John". I believe "Harold" or "Harry" was one of those Kings > with a sullied past, so Prince Harry was a daring break with that > tradition. Lenore: > I'm not British but I have always associated "Harry" with Henry V. Hi all, Harry is a short version of Henry, of which we have several Kings! I think the most well known would be Henry VIII...with his many wives and also he was the one to bring about the Church of England. Karen...English !! In Manchester actually! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 15:55:16 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:55:16 -0000 Subject: On the lighter side! (with a touch of Ricardian!JKR thrown in) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172165 Doug: > >Re: the "Harry" name.... I believe it is somewhat traditional in Royal Families to name children after the more accomplished ancestors with the better reputations. So you will not likely see a royal child named "John". I believe "Harold" or "Harry" was one of those Kings with a sullied past, so Prince Harry was a daring break with that tradition. > > > >Any actual British here to conform this poor Canadian Colonists speculation? > Lenore: > I'm not British but I have always associated "Harry" with Henry V. Carol responds: Also not British, but I, too, thought of Henry V, only to remember later that he's Prince Hal, not Prince Harry, in Shekespeare's "Henry IV," "Harry" in that play being Henry Hotspur (no commoner but not a prince). I didn't think of the present Prince Harry, nor did I think the joke particularly funny, but it did make me wonder whether Petunia knew that England has had eight kings named Enery, erm, Henry, more than any other name except Edward. As for Harry being a nickname for Harold, I suppose it could be, but its a medieval English form of Henry (like Robin, Rob, Bob, and Hob(!) for Robert). And Harold means "leader" or "ruler," making it no "nasty, common name" (if there is such a thing). Poor Harold the Saxon wasn't evil. He had just dispatched a horde of Vikings only to be set upon by William of Normandy, whose claim to be the rightful king of England was as spurious (IMO) as Henry Tudor's (Henry VII) some five hundred years later. Harold's body was hacked to pieces by William's soldiers, and William became known as the Conqueror. True, England has had no King Harold since that time, but not because Harold was a weak and corrupt king like John. Doug is right about the tradition of members of the royal family being named after ancestors or illustrious predecessors, as Charles Philip Arthur George testifies. (Arthur, of course, is a fictitious king--don't tell the witches and wizards who swear by Merlin's beard--and the two Prince Arthurs whose existence I'm aware of must have had very short lifelines considering that both died in their teens.) To return to the scene with the Dursleys, "Howard," another name Vernon pretends to think is Harry's, is no "nasty, common name," either, being the last name of a noble house that probably goes back as far as the fictitious Blacks. The Howards (now Fitzalan-Howards) have been Dukes of Norfolk since the reign of Richard III's older brother, Edward IV. I have a funny feeling that JKR knows considerably more about history than she does about math or herpetology. I know I'm not alone in thinking of Richard III in connection with "The Cat, the Rat, and the Dog" in PoA: "The Cat, the Rat, and Lovell our dog Rule all England under an Hog." The Cat and the Rat are Richard's supporters, Catesby and Ratcliffe. Richard's friend Francis Lovell had a spaniel on his coat of arms and Richard had a white boar ("bore" being an anagram of "Ebor," short for "Eboracum," the Roman name for York). Inns and taverns with the sign of the white boar or boar's head were probably fairly common during his brief reign; ostensibly, at least one of these boar signs was painted blue after Richard's death on Bosworth Field. The Hog's Head and the flying boar statues and all the hog imagery (Hogsmeade, Hogwarts) always make me think of Richard and make me wonder whether JKR is a Ricardian, i.e., a defender of Richard III. "The House of Gaunt" gave me the same feeling, John of Gaunt being the father of Henry IV, founder of the Lancastrian line, which opposed the Yorkists (Edward IV and Richard III) in the Wars of the Roses--interesting that the House of Gaunt in HBP is corrupt and ends with the evil megalomaniac Voldemort. (I think Lewis Carroll was a Ricardian, too, as evidenced by the Red Queen in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, but I could be misreading the evidence in both cases.) I almost forgot--I want to follow up on the intention of the original poster to the thread and mention some of the humorous tidbits that make me love the HP books. One is Harry, not usually the wit, telling Ludo Bagman that he thinks he can find his way back to the castle by himself (are you sure, Harry?). Another is the Twins calling Percy "Weatherby." One thing I don't care for is the attempts to appeal to the fondness of prepubescent readers for gross-out humor or mild scatology: troll bogeys, puns on Uranus, etc. *Those* I won't miss. But the puns, Ron's jokes (other thn Uranus), Harry forgetting how to make a Forgetfulness Potion--all the playful love of language that can't possibly come through in a translation--those I'll miss as much as I miss the characters and Hogwarts itself. Carol, wishing she could recall more of the moments that nearly caused her to spew coffee onto the pages of her books but too worried about her imaginary friends to think straight From susanawhite123 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 15:47:41 2007 From: susanawhite123 at yahoo.com (Sue White) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:47:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] IS ANYBODY PAYING ATTENTION ??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <728.98324.qm@web33108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172166 Hi, I normally lurk to read the excellent commentary here. I run a library in the US and quite literally had to promise the soul of my first born child so that I could have books available and processed for the release. My books will be in my hot little hands Friday, and we will have a few hours to process and catalog them. Everyone on my staff is under penalty of termination if they so much as open the books past the first leaf for cataloging purposes. Spoliers in my cranky opinion are grounds for termination - as they are cruel and unethical for all of us who have waited. Also there was much the scholastic made everyone who was to touch the books needed to sign. I love what these books have done for literacy, it's amazing and worth protecting Sue (Currently doing a jig because her books are less than 100 miles away according to UPS) --- Kelly Molinari wrote: SNIP*** > I hope this is not OFF TOPIC but Kelly really wants > to know: > It certainly seems as if > anyone could have gone into that same store and > gotten their own copy. > It's no wonder there are SPOILERS out there. I'm > sure this is not the > only instance of a breach in security, which I know > is very tight. My > daughter is working for a children's museum that is > hosting a HP > Midnight Party and they had a terrible time getting > permission to even > get a shipment of books for their guests. The books > were expected > Wednesday but didn't arrive. The person in charge, > the one who signed > her life away in order to get them, is planning on > hiding them so they > aren't tampered with. I for one am really mad about > this. > > Kelly > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting From k12listmomma at comcast.net Thu Jul 19 15:18:51 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:18:51 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] IS ANYBODY PAYING ATTENTION ??? was: New York Times Review ***NO SPOILERS!!*** References: Message-ID: <016401c7ca18$1cdbef30$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172167 > I hope this is not OFF TOPIC but Kelly really wants to know: > > How come some people are selling this book ahead of the release > date? This reporter says "purchased" not "obtained" or "given an > advanced copy in order to write a review". It certainly seems as if > anyone could have gone into that same store and gotten their own copy. > It's no wonder there are SPOILERS out there. I'm sure this is not the > only instance of a breach in security, which I know is very tight. My > daughter is working for a children's museum that is hosting a HP > Midnight Party and they had a terrible time getting permission to even > get a shipment of books for their guests. The books were expected > Wednesday but didn't arrive. The person in charge, the one who signed > her life away in order to get them, is planning on hiding them so they > aren't tampered with. I for one am really mad about this. > > Kelly You are right- they are saying that while security is ultra tight in the UK, they are comparing this incident with "the Boston tea party", and it angers me that the action of one renegade bookstore and one irresponsible journalist casts an ill-light on our entire country. It's a slap in the face to the rest of us who are holding out and doing things proper. That, coupled with the known early shipment of more than 1000 books in the Boston area, and the pictures that were first posted on a California web server on Monday, and the world thinks that we just don't care. You can write the New York Times to register your anger- I did. Here's the address to email to: letters at nytimes.com and the information to include to say which article you are complaining about: An Epic Showdown as Harry Potter Is Initiated Into Adulthood By MICHIKO KAKUTANI, Published: July 19, 2007 I got back a note saying this: ____________________________________ Thank you for your letter to The New York Times. If your letter is selected for publication, we will contact you within a week. We regret that because of the volume of letters received, we are not able to respond to all submissions, other than by this automated reply. Here are some guidelines: Letters should be no longer than 150 words and may be shortened to fit allotted space. They must be exclusive to The Times (no prior submission to, or publication in, any other medium, including the Web). They should generally refer to an article that has appeared within the last seven days. To be considered for publication, letters must include the writer's name, address, current location (where you are writing from) and daytime and evening phone numbers at your current location (for verification, not for publication). We generally do not publish more than one letter from the same writer within any 60-day period. (This applies to the daily letters page, but feel free to submit letters to the weekly sections.) If you submit your contact information as a result of this automated reply, please re-send the letter with it. (In the subject line, please indicate the headline of the article you're responding to, and delete "The New York Times - automated reply.'') Because of computer security concerns, we do NOT accept attachments; they will not be opened. Please resubmit your letter pasted into the body of an e-mail message. If you send us more than one message in any seven- day period, you will receive only one automated reply. Letters submitted for publication in other sections may be sent directly to these addresses: artsleis at nytimes.com (Arts & Leisure) books at nytimes.com (Sunday Book Review) dining at nytimes.com escapes at nytimes.com home at nytimes.com magazine at nytimes.com oped at nytimes.com (for Op-Ed submissions, not letters) public at nytimes.com realestate at nytimes.com region at nytimes.com (the regional weeklies) scitimes at nytimes.com sports at nytimes.com (SportsSunday) sunbiz at nytimes.com sundaystyles at nytimes.com travelmail at nytimes.com For a complete list of departmental e-mail addresses, please write to directory at nytimes.com. Sincerely, The New York Times _____________________________________ Hope that helps. Shelley From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 16:23:54 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:23:54 -0000 Subject: IS ANYBODY PAYING ATTENTION ??? was: New York Times Review ***NO SPOILERS!!*** In-Reply-To: <016401c7ca18$1cdbef30$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172168 Well I just read the review, I don't mind getting spoiled as long as it is from a serious site. If it's in the news I want them. Just like previous listers wrote, don't read it if you trying to remain spoler-free. The aticle doesn't give much away, jut tidbits (very little ones) of information. It DOESN'T say thet Harry lives or dies, or that DD is Ron from the future, it just drops hints of previously shown objects that reapear. That's all, so no big worries there Juli From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 16:27:33 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:27:33 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Involvement- There are only two? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172169 Chys: > How does the one who records the names on the prophecies know that it > is the "Dark Lord" and "Harry Potter(?)" if he doesn't know the full > contents of the prophecy, as Dumbledore told Harry in the Weasley's > smelly broomshed, 'only two people in the world know the full contents > of the prophecy now?' > > I would guess that Dumbledore had shared some of this information but > knowing how jealously he's guarded it, I doubt he would have done such > a thing, knowing how important it is. > > -Chys, apologizing in advance if anyone already asked this, but I > didn't find it anywhere and am very curious. > Deepthi: I'm looking at OoP, US edition, and I think there are three possibilities. (a) The keeper of the Hall of Prophecy has no knowledge of the contents of the prophecy. We can reject this outright based on canon - On OoP page 842 Dumbledore says "It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy that Voldemort could only have tried to kill you..." (b) The keeper had full knowledge of the prophecy in order to make the recording but is no longer alive, and hence Dumbledore is right in saying that only two people know it now. If the keeper is still alive, then Dumbledore is lying, and I can't see the purpose of lying in this instance (even if you concede MAGIC DISHWASHER to be correct) (c) The keeper knew only the part of the prophecy that had been overheard. The first part of the prophecy had been heard. The record in the MoM might itself have been incomplete (we don't know for sure), but the part that was heard has "the Dark Lord" in it. The prophecy was relabeled with Harry's name only after Voldemort's attack on him. It had been labeled with (?) to start with. You don't need to know the full contents of the prophecy to do that. The part that was overheard is sufficient. Quote: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches.. Born to those who thrice defied him.. Born as the seventh month dies.." OoP page 843 Of course thinking about this only raises more questions. - Are you required to record every prophecy? - Why did Dumbledore decide to record it? If you subscribe to MAGIC DISHWASHER, of course, he did it to lure LV to MoM. - Does the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy need to know the prophecy to record it? How are prophecies recorded anyway? - If only LV & Harry could lift the prophecy from the shelf, how did the keeper relabel it? By performing a spell with a wand? Deepthi - hoping that at least some of these questions will be answered in DH, but realizing that most of them are minor points and we may never know for sure. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 19 16:31:28 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:31:28 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: List Closure -- Change! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172170 The George was curiously quiet. The lone wanderer noticed a bit of parchment fluttering on the door, affixed to the ancient planks by a kitchen knife. It read: "The very real threat of very real spoilers has scared the elves. Most of us have fled the scene. The rest are going quietly (or not so quietly) mad from the extra work. In an attempt to save our souls, we're shutting down the list. See you on the flip side! :-D Love, The List Elves (what's left of us anyway)" Voices seemed to whisper from the barrel and the rainspout. The lone wanderer shivered and hurried away. ************************************************************ Seriously, everyone, we have unfortunately reached the point where the list elves are so concerned about what is a spoiler, what might be a spoiler, what might not be a spoiler but looks like a spoiler... that we're tearing our hair out. We're even concerned about rejecting pending messages which appear to be spoilers, only to have the information that we think something is a spoiler be a spoiler to the member who wrote it... you get the picture. And the bottom line is, we want HPfGU to be a fun and positive experience for all members. We believe that we are now at the point where we need to shut the list down earlier than we had planned, in order to preserve that experience. So... the vital information you'll need to know follows: *The list will close down tonight, Thursday, July 19, at 11:59 pm BST (British Summer Time). (This translates to 6:59 pm EDT, for instance; you might want to use http://www.timezoneconverter.com to calculate for your own time zone.) *The list will reopen at 9:00 pm BST, Tuesday, July 24. *The main HPfGU list will remain available for reading during this time, but new posts will not be accepted. *Our sister lists (Off-Topic Chatter, Movie, etc.) will remain open to posting; however, they will be SPOILER-FREE ZONES. Please comply with that policy! There's still some time available, so launch those last-minute thoughts, everyone. Just be sure to not 'SPOIL' [pun intended!] the fun for the whole group. As always, if you have questions or comments about the list closing, spoilers or anything else, please email us at hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com hpforgrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com [minus the space] or bring it up at the Feedback group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/ Thanks! The HPfGU List Elves From dwalker696 at aol.com Thu Jul 19 16:33:59 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:33:59 -0000 Subject: Draco scares Borgin with....? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172171 I have been deliberating over this, and didn't change it in my 'bragging rights' in time, and was wondering if anyone else thinks this: What if what Draco shows Borgin in the shop is a werewolf bite? A Fenrir bite? I had been guessing it was a Dark Mark (even if a forged one) but it has always bugged me in the back of my mind, why would a man who runs a shop of Dark artifacts be that horrified to see the Dark Mark? Wouldn't Death Eathers be regular customers? We know Lucius was, I am sure Lucius wasn't just a customer during the 'post-Voldemort's Death #1" days. Here are the points that make me think this may be a possibility: Draco's "Ouch" could have been genuine pain if Mdm. Malkin touched his bite. We assume Draco's lengthy absences from school grounds are assumed to be due to working on the cabinet situation, but that would also be a perfect way for JKR to hid this other bit of information. When Draco misses the Slyth-Gryff Quidditch match because he is "sick", for ex., maybe he really is sick (not just with nerves). Even Harry finally notices Malfoy's "dark shadows under his eyes and a distinctly grayish tinge to his skin", which we assume to be stress, but her descriptions of Malfoy's deteriorating appearance in HBP become more and more similar to how JKR has described Lupin. This idea is probably a long shot, but we do know that Narcissa was absolutely opposed to Draco performing 'the task' for Voldythingy, and a visit from Fenrir surely would have been persuasive. Much as I dislike but also pity Malfoy, I would love to hear backup why this theory is rubbish. As a post script, THANK YOU to our Amazing List Elves, who must be nearly blind from reading the volume of posts and nearly confunded with spoilers. Donna From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 19 16:40:57 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:40:57 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! Message-ID: <19699511.1184863257324.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172172 From: "karen.eidukas at ntlworld.com eidukas" >Harry is a short version of Henry, of which we have several Kings! >I think the most well known would be Henry VIII...with his many wives and >also he was the one to bring about the Church of England. Bart: Don't be so hasty. I also recall that there was a King Harry of England who fought some bastard named Bill (no relation to Beel), and it didn't come off very well. It resulted in a major drift from the norm. I'd better stop; the whole thing puts a frog in my throat. Bart From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu Jul 19 16:51:01 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:51:01 -0000 Subject: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: <19699511.1184863257324.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172173 Bart: > I'd better stop; the whole thing puts a frog in my throat. Ceridwen: Oh, please don't sing! ;) Just kidding. Giddy, you know, release is... Tomorrow Night! *happy Snoopy dance* Petunia may have said Harry's name was common because of the phrase, "Every Tom, Dick and Harry". These are, or were, common men's names, and if you said them, you included nearly every male. Ceridwen. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 17:23:28 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:23:28 -0000 Subject: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172175 --- Lenore wrote: > > Doug: > >Re: the "Harry" name.... I believe it is somewhat > > traditional in Royal Families to name children after > > the more accomplished ancestors... ... I believe > > "Harold" or "Harry" was one of those Kings>with a > > sullied past, so Prince Harry was a daring break with > > that tradition. > > > ... > > > I'm not British but I have always associated "Harry" > with Henry V. > Lenore > bboyminn: Well, Lenore is closest. Prince Harry's real name is - Henry Charles Albert David Windsor So, 'Harry' is short for 'Henry'. I did get this when I read it in the books, although only found it mildly amusing. I'm sure Petunia was surprised when only a few years later, there was a royal 'Harry' on the scene. Her attitude toward the name probably changed, but clearly her attitude toward /our/ Harry hasn't. Yet, after the Dementor attack in OotP, I did sense a shift in Petunia. I think she will still have a case of 'attitude', but I can foresee her and Harry having a heart-to-heart in the final book. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From cdayr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 17:41:14 2007 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:41:14 -0000 Subject: OPEN: Ultimate and Last Bragging Rights by TigerPatronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172176 Celia predicts: I have been off the list for two weeks in fear of spoilers, and am not checking it now- I don't even know if any rules have changed in this or what, but I'm going to submit my entry anyway. I solemnly swear that I am unspoiled 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent character to die and stay dead? Even though a little part of me will die too, I think it will be Snape. Guh. 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that scared him? His Dark Mark. 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a student, which means enrolled in classes whether or not they attend the classes (answer yes or no for each): a. Harry? Yes b. Draco? No c. Hermione? Yes d. Luna? Yes e. Ron? Yes f. Neville? Yes g. Ginny? Yes 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry, if any, during the time period covered in DH, excluding any epilogue? Bill and Fleur 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first time "very late in life?" Aunt Petunia (still holding out for the Feb. 29th, 11th birthday and Hogwart's letter for Petunia- thanks, very old theory of Elisabet's) 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: a. Head Boy? Ron b. Head Girl? Hermione c. DADA Instructor? Aberforth Dumbledore d. Potions Master or Mistress? Slughorn e. Headmaster or -mistress? McGonagall 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? Loyal to the end, to Dumbledore, of course 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. a. Diary (destroyed) b. Slytherin's Locket (Mundungus has it) c. Hufflepuff's Cup (in Gringott's) d. Ravenclaw's wand that is with Olivander e. The Ring (destroyed) f. In Harry (was supposed to be implanted in the Gryffindor item, possibly the invisibility cloak? But went in Harry instead) g. In Voldie In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will be used as tiebreakers. Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Um Patronus: Phoenix Boggart: Himself, killing Lily Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Lots of little cut out paper hearts and small chalky candies proclaiming the power of LOVE. Real answer: When you walk into the room, you reunite with all of those who truly love/ loved you. Very dangerous, like the Mirror of Erised, only much more real. Make 5 predictions not covered in the Compulsory Question section. Neville will capture Bellatrix during the final battle, using some sort of herbology knowledge to do it. All of the Weasley brothers various skills will be used in the horcrux hunt. Bill will break a horcrux curse, Charlie will provide a dragon, Percy (now doubting his loyalties) will sneak them into the Ministry, Fred and George will have some useful products, and Ron, of course, will be there the whole time. Snape is either directly or indirectly responsible for Regulus Black's death. Regulus was his friend, and causing his death was one of the reasons Snape switched sides during VW1. Peter Pettigrew will die in some manner that gives him a bit of honor. Perhaps he dies saving Ron? Pay back for the rat years? Nah, most likely he dies saving Harry, what with the whole life debt thing. And I can't resist: My old theory gets out for one last spin, I'm loyal to this until the end I believe that Voldie/Tom did a bit of time turning while he was traveling the earth becoming evil, and at some point was the "traveler" who gave Aragog's egg to Hagrid when Hagrid was 13. He was also able to manipulate his younger self towards the Dark Arts (maybe he was the person who told himself to ask Slughorn about horcruxes?) and this period of time turning may be important to locating the horcruxes. Celia From monalila662 at earthlink.net Thu Jul 19 17:40:55 2007 From: monalila662 at earthlink.net (lisa graves) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:40:55 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: List Closure -- Change! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <97DA1849-9CC3-4748-AF8F-E61EF556732C@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172177 List elves... don't let the muggles get you down. It will all be over soon... sniff. On Jul 19, 2007, at 12:31 PM, cubfanbudwoman wrote: > The George was curiously quiet. The lone wanderer noticed a bit of > parchment fluttering on the door, affixed to the ancient planks by a > kitchen knife. It read: > > "The very real threat of very real spoilers has scared the elves. > Most of us have fled the scene. The rest are going quietly (or not > so quietly) mad from the extra work. In an attempt to save our > souls, we're shutting down the list. > > See you on the flip side! :-D > > Love, > The List Elves (what's left of us anyway)" > > Voices seemed to whisper from the barrel and the rainspout. The lone > wanderer shivered and hurried away. > > ************************************************************ > > Seriously, everyone, we have unfortunately reached the point where > the list elves are so concerned about what is a spoiler, what might > be a spoiler, what might not be a spoiler but looks like a spoiler... > that we're tearing our hair out. We're even concerned about > rejecting pending messages which appear to be spoilers, only to have > the information that we think something is a spoiler be a spoiler to > the member who wrote it... you get the picture. > > And the bottom line is, we want HPfGU to be a fun and positive > experience for all members. We believe that we are now at the point > where we need to shut the list down earlier than we had planned, in > order to preserve that experience. > > So... the vital information you'll need to know follows: > > *The list will close down tonight, Thursday, July 19, at 11:59 pm BST > (British Summer Time). (This translates to 6:59 pm EDT, for > instance; you might want to use http://www.timezoneconverter.com to > calculate for your own time zone.) > *The list will reopen at 9:00 pm BST, Tuesday, July 24. > *The main HPfGU list will remain available for reading during this > time, but new posts will not be accepted. > *Our sister lists (Off-Topic Chatter, Movie, etc.) will remain open > to posting; however, they will be SPOILER-FREE ZONES. Please comply > with that policy! > > There's still some time available, so launch those last-minute > thoughts, everyone. Just be sure to not 'SPOIL' [pun intended!] the > fun for the whole group. > > As always, if you have questions or comments about the list closing, > spoilers or anything else, please email us at > hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com > hpforgrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com [minus the space] > or bring it up at the Feedback group: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/ > > Thanks! > The HPfGU List Elves > > > ? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 17:43:37 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:43:37 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Involvement- There are only two? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172178 --- "sdeepthi" wrote: > > Chys: > > How does the one who records the names on the > > prophecies know that it is the "Dark Lord" and > > "Harry Potter(?)" if he doesn't know the full > > contents of the prophecy, as Dumbledore told Harry > > in the Weasley's smelly broomshed, 'only two people > > in the world know the full contents of the prophecy > > now?' > > > > ... > Deepthi: > ... I think there are three possibilities. > > (a) The keeper of the Hall of Prophecy has no knowledge > of the contents of the prophecy. > > We can reject this ... - On OoP page 842 Dumbledore > says "It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of > Prophecy that Voldemort could only have tried to > kill you..." > > (b) The keeper had full knowledge of the prophecy ... > but is no longer alive, ... > > (c) The keeper knew only the part of the prophecy that > had been overheard. > ... bboyminn: Keep in mind there is a difference between knowing /about/ something, and actually /knowing/ it. I'm sure Dumbledore told several people /about/ the Prophecy. Certain people at the Ministry seem to know and I have always assumed that is why the give Harry extra protections and monitoring. But that doesn't mean Dumbledore quotes the Prophecy to everyone he meets. He simply explains it to certain necessary individuals to the extent and in the detail necessary for them to do their job. It is entirely possible that many people know about the Prophecy in the working sense, but only Dumbledore and Harry can quote it exactly. So, the Keeper of the Hall might have had a general explanation, and when Harry was attack concluded that certain /uncertain/ aspects had now become clear, and made the correction to the label. > Deepthi continues: > > Of course thinking about this only raises more > questions. > ... > - Does the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy need to know > the prophecy to record it? How are prophecies recorded > anyway? > - If only LV & Harry could lift the prophecy from the > shelf, how did the keeper relabel it? By performing a > spell with a wand? > > Deepthi - ... bboyminn: No, I don't think the Keeper of the Hall needs to know the details of the Prophecy. All he needs is a working summary. To record a prophecy, I suspect a method is used very similar to the one Dumbledore uses to store memories in the Penseive. The memory goes straight from the mind into the Orb, it is not necessarily listened to by the Keeper of the Hall or anyone else. As to relabeling the Prophecy, keep in mind that he didn't relabel the Prophecy, he relabeled the label; or to put it another way, he relabeled the shelf. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From lmkos at earthlink.net Thu Jul 19 17:53:25 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:53:25 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172179 > > Doug: > > >Re: the "Harry" name.... I believe it is somewhat > > > traditional in Royal Families to name children after > > > the more accomplished ancestors... ... I believe > > > "Harold" or "Harry" was one of those Kings>with a > > > sullied past, so Prince Harry was a daring break with > > > that tradition. > > > > > I'm not British but I have always associated "Harry" > > with Henry V. > > Lenore > >bboyminn: >Well, Lenore is closest. Prince Harry's real name is - >Henry Charles Albert David Windsor >So, 'Harry' is short for 'Henry'. Lenore: A wee correction here. The first paragraph above was Doug's where he made a connection with the current Prince Harry. I thought there was recurrent historical usage as well. So I thought the joke was a tug at the Brits' fondness of the name "Harry" for figures of royalty, and how frequently the name crops up in the history so that it has become "common", heh. A bit subtle, but I like it. Lenore From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 18:10:29 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:10:29 -0000 Subject: Favorite Moments in Potter History Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172180 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol, wishing she could recall more of the moments that nearly caused > her to spew coffee onto the pages of her books but too worried about > her imaginary friends to think straight > ================================ Carol lead me to thinking about my own favorite moments in HP. While I loved reading the description of Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade, and I loved seeing the flashbacks of the Marauders and Snape in OotP, the point that really sticks out in my mind was the one time I literally laughed out loud imagining the scene as it happened: when Harry was reading the HBP's Potions book and tried out the "levicorpus" spell and made the sleeping Ron shoot up into the air! I get the giggles each time I read it! What are your favorite moments? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 18:25:12 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:25:12 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Involvement- There are only two? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172181 bboyminn wrote: > > Keep in mind there is a difference between knowing /about/ something, and actually /knowing/ it. > > I'm sure Dumbledore told several people /about/ the Prophecy. Certain people at the Ministry seem to know and I have always assumed that is why the give Harry extra protections and monitoring. But that doesn't mean Dumbledore quotes the Prophecy to everyone he meets. He simply explains it to certain necessary individuals to the extent and in the detail necessary for them to do their job. > > It is entirely possible that many people know about the Prophecy in the working sense, but only Dumbledore and Harry can quote it exactly. > > So, the Keeper of the Hall might have had a general explanation, and when Harry was attack concluded that certain /uncertain/ aspects had now become clear, and made the correction to the label. Carol responds: Good answer, Steve. I'm sure that DD only summarized or paraphrased the Prophecy, suppressing the details. He could simply have said that it involved the approach of the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord and left it at that. He would then have placed a copy of his memory of Trelawney delivering the Prophecy (identical to Trelawney rising from the Pensieve with no context) in the orb exactly as he placed other memories in crystal vials and magically sealed it. I think that DD himself would have had to place the Prophecy on its shelf as the Keeper of the Hall watched. (As the one to whom it was delivered, he would be able to touch it.) The Keeper would have assigned it a place and given it a label, as well as altering the label after GH. As for others not knowing about the Prophecy, clearly the Death Eaters, while not knowing the content of the Prophecy, knew what it was and whom it concerned. So, almost certainly, did Snape. As for the other Order members, I'm not at all convinced, as other list members appear to be, that their reference to the Prophecy as a "weapon" indicates that they didn't know what they were protecting. I think it's a cover story, invented by Sirius Black on the spot when Lupin and Mrs. Weasley thought that Harry was hearing more than he ought to hear. Carol, hoping that others will get a chance to chime in on this point before the list closes From iluv_bunnies at hotmail.com Thu Jul 19 16:27:28 2007 From: iluv_bunnies at hotmail.com (ddorrer) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:27:28 -0000 Subject: Theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172182 I think Harry will get married as well as Hermione...What do you think? ddorrer From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 18:42:28 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:42:28 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172183 Carol wrote: ...who agrees with vmonte that people don't like unpalatable truths and who expects a roar of outrage from the Snape haters when Snape is revealed as DDM. vmonte wrote: No, I wouldn't be outraged. I don't like Snape but I've made plenty of mistakes before--and so has everyone on this site. I think part of the problem is that this type of forum causes people to really over-think the Harry Potter books. Count Snape, DD=Ron, ESE!Lupin, all of those theories happened because we (I'm including myself) got carried away and started looking for things that were not there. My best theories were the ones that came off the top of my head, without deep thought. In 2005 before book five came out everyone was speculating on why Voldemort didn't die the night the Potters were killed. I immediately posted something about storing your soul in a box for protection. It wasn't something that I thought deeply about; it just popped into my head. But let's get back to Snape. A few days ago someone commented on what Dumbledore said in the cave in HBP. It reminded me of what I thought immediately after reading that passage: that it sounded like a confession. I looked my old post up and noticed that the more I thought about that scene the more convoluted and ridiculous my later posts about it became. I may still be wrong about Dumbledore having a checkered past but at least my first thought regarding that scene was a lot more reasonable than some of the other crap I came up with later. Actually, it was while I was responding about the Dumbledore cave scene (from the other day) that the thought occurred to me that perhaps Dumbledore understands Snape because of his checkered past. Maybe Voldemort's relationship with Snape is similar to what Grindelwald's relationship with Dumbledore was. Well, before I go on a tangent I'll stop there. (Carol, do you read what I'm saying?) If Snape turns out to be Dumbledore's man I will be shocked, but I will not be angry. I just wish he wasn't such an ass. lol From talisman22457 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 18:51:09 2007 From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:51:09 -0000 Subject: Dark Mirror, Part 2: Who's Your DADA?.. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172184 Chained to the wall in Azkaban, Talisman turns a nervous eye to the dwindling hourglass. Suddenly, a harassed-looking elf runs in and gives it a shake, sending half the remaining contents to the bottom. Egad! *Hey. Hey, Lucius, snap out of it. Could you hold this napkin still for me--with your free foot there? Thanks.* Talisman dips her preternaturally long toenail in a puddle of unidentified dark liquid, and begins to scribble. *What's that? Yes dear, you look magnificent in leather. Now, shhhhh. I have to get this banged out.* In part one, I revealed how Harry follows a pattern of emulating the deepest secrets of the initial DADA professors in the pattern: 1/5, 2/6, 3/7. The scrying mirror has long since spoken, and it's time for me to answer the question for Dark Mirror Part II: Who's Your DADA? Here the mirror reveals the pattern's effect on the DADA professors, themselves. Once again, the pattern folds around the center, causing those in the *jinxed seat* to reflect each other, this time correlating the books thusly: 3/5, 2/6, 1/7. First up for consideration is the 3/5 combination of Lupin and Umbridge. This is the matter of the Humane Beast, and the Beastly Human. List the salient qualities of one, and you will find the complimentary quality in the other. Lupine looks entirely human, but harbors a potential wild beast within. Umbridge looks like a toad, but is, contrary to much speculation, entirely human. The werewolf is, obviously, affiliated with the wolf, feral primogenitor of all canines. Via her office d?cor, Umbridge is identified with cloyingly sweet kittens, a most domesticated iteration of the feline family (OoP Chpt. 28, p 628, et seq.) Lupin's attire is patched and shabby. Umbridge is priggishly neat. Lupin was an animal-loving, hands-on professor who commences his first lesson with: "Would you please put all your books back in your bags. Today's will be a practical lesson. You will need only your wands" (PoA 130). Umbridge, as we know, was all "Wands away and quills out"(OoP239); whereafter she proceeds to tell an indignant class that "as long as you have studied theory hard enough" there is no need for practical applications (OoP 244). Indeed, her absolute refusal to give hands- on experience leads to the establishment of the D.A. As a werewolf, Lupin is considered a *half-breed* (OoP 243). He is an outcast, suffering the prejudice of the greater wizarding community. We are specifically made to understand how difficult it has been for him to find employment. "I have been shunned all my life, unable to find paid work because of what I am" (PoA 356). Umbridge is the exact other half of the equation: "Does Lupin know her?" asked Harry quickly, remembering Umbridge's comments about dangerous half-breeds during her first lesson. "No," said Sirius, "but she drafted a bit of anti-werewolf legislation two years ago that makes it almost impossible for him to get a job" (OoP 302). And yes, now we must face what will be, for some, a bitter pill. Whereas werewolves are supposed to be "murderous beast[s]" (FBAWTFT 42), during the year of his professorship, through and including the episode of his revelation, Lupin was a totally, consummately, impeccably safe werewolf. On the other hand, at the moment of Umbridge's complete revelation we learn that she is a worse-than-murderous human being, having sweetly arranged to have young Harry's soul sucked during his summer vacation (OoP 747). Now, now, don't fuss about Ever-So-Tame!Lupin. The evidence--which is laid on with a trowel and absolutely bulwarked by the patterning-- has been before us all along. We can dredge all that up again at our leisure, long after Book 7 has settled into history. The focus of the moment is predictive, not remedial. So, we'll return to noticing how Snape's repeated, voluntary preparation of the complex potion for Lupin's benefit is reversed in his non-cooperation with Umbridge: giving her pseudo-Veritaserum--and later claiming to have made no more--though evidence suggests that he keeps the real stuff, in stock. As a werewolf, Lupin is also considered a *half-breed;* Umbridge, of course, is a notorious half-breed hater. "Does Lupin know her?" asked Harry quickly, remembering Umbridge's comments about dangerous half-breeds during her first lesson. "No," said Sirius, "but she drafted a bit of anti-werewolf legislation two years ago that makes it almost impossible for him to get a job." Harry remembered how much shabbier Lupin looked these days and his dislike of Umbridge deepened even further. "What's she got against werewolves?" Said Hermione angrily. "Scared of them, I expect," said Sirius, smiling at her indignation. "Apparently she loathes part-humans; she campaigned to have merepeople rounded up and tagged last year, too. "So, what are Umbridge's lessons like?" Sirius interrupted. "Is she training you all to kill half-breeds?" (OoP Chpt. 14, p. 302-303) For Lupin, the Forbidden Forest is a refuge, while for Umbridge it is the most dangerous place, of all. Half-breed Lupin reports that he didn't attack anything in the forest, the night of the Shrieking Shack episode; whereas on the critical night in Book 5,Umbridge is attacked by an entire herd of half-breeds. It's petty clear, that Umbridge is Lupin's opposite, reversing him in both his salient characteristics, and his revealed secret. It is important to note, however, that in regard to the central secret and primary characteristic of each professor, the two images are not only reversals, they are reversals that complete each other in such a way as to form the two halves of a whole. Persecuted werewolf/werewolf persecutor. Other supportive details are merely opposites: harmless/murderous; dog/cat; practical/theoretical, etc. The special nature of the prime reflection is again demonstrated in the 2/6 imagery of Professors Lockhart and Snape. As expected, when it comes to Lockhart's primary revelation, Snape balances the equation with the mirror-opposite secret. Talent-less rip-off artist/ripped-off genius. Lockhart is a great phony--publishing books in which he claims the talents of others as his own. Faced with the prospect of pursuing the creature in the Chamber, he confesses himself a poseur of the worst sort. Snape, conversely, is the genius who penned innovative ideas in his own personal book, for his own private use. This recorded brilliance was ripped-off throughout year 6 (by Harry, who was emulating Lockhart), with Snape only revealing himself (to those who didn't already know) as the puissant, savant, HBP, in his final scene. Then we have the list of opposites: Lockhart primps and fusses with his blonde curls, keeping them immaculately styled. With his oft-mentioned greasy curtains of black, Snape clearly pays little attention to his coiffure. Lockhart boasts a dazzlingly perfect, *award-winning* smile. Snape's fangs, we are told, are yellow and uneven. Lockhart is an incompetent boob, constantly jockeying for undeserved praise. Snape is a wizard of extraordinary power and genius, who not only foregoes rightful credit, but routinely allows himself to look bad, *for the cause.* Lockhart seeks attention, Snape keeps a low profile. Lockhart favors costumes of lavender or baby blue; Snape goes all in black. Lockhart is a coward; Snape is the epitome of courage. Molly Weasley relies on Lockhart's *expertise* to solve her quotidian problems. Molly's opposite, Narcissa Malfoy, relies on Snape for much graver concerns. Molly has a fatuous, superficial *crush* on Lockhart. Narcissa has deeper, more authentic, feelings for Snape, as I mentioned back in message #83546, posted October 25, 2003--well before HBP was released. In CoS, Lockhart offers himself as a soi-disant duel master, only to demonstrate that he is a worthless twit. He cannot teach Harry anything. In HBP, Snape duels effortlessly with Harry, demonstrating his facility with a wand, not to mention the exponential value of a combined prowess in both nonverbal spells and Legilimency. As so often noted, he continues to teach Harry, even as he parry's the lad's offense. In CoS, Lockhart tries to attack Harry (and Ron). In HBP, Snape repeatedly protects Harry, while defending himself from Harry's attacks. The last we see of Lockhart in CoS, he is headed for the hospital wing. After the climatic action, Snape does not go to the hospital wing-- this non-event is made significant--for artistic purposes--in that the rest of the *Hogwarts* team is summoned to Madam Pomfrey's domain, by McGonagall. In sum, Snape clearly reverses Lockhart, just as Umbridge reverses Lupin. Here, I shall pause to mention, that I discovered this pattern back in the summer of 2003 when, upon completing Book 5, I noticed how perfectly Sirius's plot arced in *mirrored symmetry* between books 3 and 5. (From that nub, I have since teased out a subtler, more complicated, plotting system.) Many of the implications were clear to me at that time. Significantly, Snape is so obviously Lockhart's opposite that, after reading OoP, and seeing the post-GoF pattern emerging, I was able to predict that Snape would be DADA in Books 6 & 7 (~circa July of 2003). I first hinted at it in Post # 73715, posted July 28, 2003 and then explained further in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81961? threaded=1&l=1 "Crying Wolf," posted September 30, 2003, in (partially superfluous) part: >Talisman then: I'm hanging tight with the position that Lupin was very >well informed. >You don't think it was a coincidence that he showed up to teach DADA >this particular year, do you? No, he was a planned part of the >Sirius comeback tour. >Lupin is old Order, and never has a paying job unless DD gives it to >him. He has always been available for DADA Prof. DD brings him in >NOW because of his special connection to Sirius. He has a definite >role to play, and he is fully aware of the program. >(DD didn't have to settle for Quirrell or Lockhart, he chose them >for reasons having to do with his plan, as well. >He knows the effect of his DADA seat, he's the one who enchanted the >position. >Actually he could have any of the Order any year, if he wanted >them. He uses the old warrior Moody for LV bait/alarm in Gof, and >he'll use Snape in 6& 7, because it specifically suits his purposes >to do so.) >If you just relax and accept it, you'll find it all fits so easy. ***************end old post************** We can discuss DD's clever little jinx later. ; ) For the record, I also predicted Snape as the HBP, in various places, including this site's pre-HBP poll: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1294134 . What then shall we expect in Deathly Hallows? Why, that the DADA professor will reverse Quirrell, naturally. That much is sure. How will it play out? Here's my prediction: The *completing* symmetry establish by the first two pairs has serious implications, here. Where Quirrell was LV`s servant, our DADA professor will be seen to be *someone`s* master. Where Quirrell was subjugated by LV's dominating insertion of himself, our DADA Professor will be seen to empower *someone* by inserting a critical part of his essence into his very willing host. ::Talisman pauses to regain a grip on herself and dip her toe in more goo:: ::sigh:: Where Quirrell infiltrated DD's stronghold, Hogwarts, for the purpose of bringing LV back to power, our DADA professor will be seen to have infiltrated LV`s stronghold, for the purpose of *defeating* the Dark Lord. Or should I say our DA professor? Because, as I predict in Part I, Hogwarts will fall to Voldemort, soon, if it hasn't already. In such a case, the professor in question will likely not teach Defense Against Dark Arts, but the Dark Arts, proper. This, as we close the narrative circle, sorts well as a sequential reversal of Harry's unrealized Book 1 fear that if Voldemort is able to come back, he will take Hogwarts and *turn it into a school for the Dark Arts* (PS/SS Chpt. 16, Scholastic paperback p 270). Therefore our forthcoming DA qua DADA professor has infiltrated Voldemort's ranks, working against the DL, covertly, from the heart of Darkwarts. Flowing from that, the reversals continue: where Quirrell was a person of weak resolve and character, our DA professor will be a person of singular personal strength. Where Quirrell was a nervous stammering wreck, our DA professor will be cool, capable, and smooth. Where Quirrell was *fine while he was studying' outta books* but came back from his hands-on sabatical *scared of his own subject* (PS/SS Chpt. 5, p.70-71.), our anticipated DA professor will be seen to revel in application. Where Quirrell's lessons *turned out to be a bit of a joke* (PS/SS Chpt.8, p. 134), the DA professor's instructions will be critical. Where Quirrell found the Potter boy too *nosy* (PS/SS Chpt. 17, p. 288), the DA professor will lead the fledgling on to deeper discoveries. Where Quirrell tries to kill Harry, the DA Professor will protect him. Why be coy? Where Quirrell sports a certain wrap-around chappeau, our DA professor would never *put on a turban.* (J.K. Rowling, America Online chat transcript, AOL.com, 19 October 2000, http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-aol-chat.htm ) Oh, yes, it's Snape all the way. Back to my prediction of 2003. We are told that merciless Voldemort abandons Quirrell, leaving him to die (PS/SS Chpt.17, P. 298). I know there are some gentle souls who believe Quirrell is still out there, waiting to be kissed until he is good, but Rowling was really quite explicit in the Edinburgh Book Festival interview: "Someone said that Harry saw Quirrell die, but that is not true. He was unconscious when Quirrell died, in Philosopher's Stone. He did not know until he came around that Quirrell had died when Voldemort left his body." (JKR Official Site: News Section, 15 August 2004 http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80 ) This, in my opinion, has delightful ramifications for Snape. For in reversing the scenario, with Snape playing anti-Quirrell, I expect DD to reverse Voldemort. Therefore, I predict a Book 7 revelation of Snape's *special bond* with DD. Unlike the bond between Quirrell and Voldemort, this will be no bond of weakness, punishment, and domination. Based on the nature of the anticipated reversal, it will have been a voluntary offering, an act of generosity and love. Snape will be seen to have willingly extended this bond--for it will be he who has *entered* DD--in an act of manifest selflessness, which I extrapolate, will have sustained an otherwise dead Dumbledore-- likely for the past fifteen plus years. The posters who suspected that, on the night of the Tower, Snape was merely removing life-support, at the patient's request, will be validated. DD, therefore, has been supremely vulnerable--indeed, living at Snape's pleasure--during the entire adventure, until the events on the Tower. Little wonder Dumbledore trusts Snape. It's also why DD says, in GoF, that Snape is no more a DE than he is. They have a very close relationship. ; ) As to the nature of this bond, I imagine we will learn the new magical word Rowling warned us, in her September 29, 2006 Diary entry, that she was conjuring for this final book: "Sitting at my desk trying to invent a word yesterday brought back memories of the last time I did so." http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/sources/jkr.com/jkr-com-diary.html#8 Though I'm moving into areas of less certainty, I will speculate about some of the details. The Q!Mort connection was via the head. I think a fitting Snapledore connection to occur in the heart. Indeed, I rather like the prediction that Snape gave DD his heart. Sing it Celestina: "Oh, my poor heart where has it gone? / It's left me for a spell " (HBP Chpt. 16, p.332). Of course Snape didn't wear his heart on his sleeve, heh, he deposited it in an excentric old wizard. But now he has it back. Just in time for us to find out who he loves. ::Talisman really shivers:: Where was I? ::blink:: Oh, yes. Voldemort mercilessly abandoned Quirrell, but DD insited that Snape release him to the next great adventure. This was all part of DD's plan for year 6. Snape undertook the UV because he was supposed to. It worked toward solidifying his cover for Book 7. But he never liked it. Hence the flinch. He had no doubt promised DD that he would release DD at DD's request-- but as the argument in the forest demonstrates, Snape found it a loathsome proposition and wanted to demur. Yes, yes, yes, as others have felt. Snape's look of deepest loathing on the tower was not a demonstation of his malice toward DD, it was the look of someone doing what they hate to do. And yes, when DD said "Severus please " (HBP Chpt. 27., p. 595) he *did* mean sever us, please. A list member named drcarole71 suggested, in message #161669, that that the green goo DD drank was a Hx, from which he desired severance. That was a good guess; at least warm to the idea of Rowling's wordplay and that there was some special connection that DD wanted to unbind. But it's neither the green goo nor a Voldemortian Hx at issue, rather it is Snape's long-extended yet-to-be-revealed *life support* tether from which DD sought release. And yes, as others have variously speculated, the Avada Kedavra was ineffective, a mere cover for the actual nonverbal spell which *unplugged the machine.* Best of all, Quirrell's death gives more reason to hope that Snape survives. And with his heart restored. Huzzah. You know, at this point I hear DD's echoing words: Neither can live while the other survives. This brings me back to a post I wrote circa October 3, 2003 in the thread called "Snape is Number One," Message #82229. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/82229 Well, it's no secret that Snape has always been the Chosen One in my book. ; ) And for those who argue that the books are all about Harry, let me remind you that they are all about growing up. A big step in growing up--specifically from adolescence to adulthood, is the epiphany that it is *not* all about you. Adolescence--a time which nicely includes the span of years from 11 to 17--is a time when one is supposed to develop the ability for what Piaget called *formal operations.* Drawing on Piaget's work, Developmental Psychologist David Elkinds asserted a theory that the new abstract cognitive abilities of the formal operations phase --which include the thinker's ability to reflect upon his or herself--feed a great deal of practice in this very enterprise--resulting in a distinct phase of adolescent egocentrism. Arising from this be-pimpled ego-fest are such phenomena as *the personal fable* wherein the teen fantasizes that his or her life is unique and heroic (I am the Chosen One!); the *imaginary audience* in which our pubescent hero believes that everyone is staring at his scar and whispering about him, and a sense of invincibility, which leads to jumping down dark holes without any plan for getting back out. Part of the wisdom (which, sadly, some people never gain) of emerging adulthood, is a matured theory of mind that allows the individual to realize that others have differing views and priorities, that every headache or opinion one has is actually not newsworthy, and that one may, alas, not be the center of the magical universe. Indeed, we all know that the center of the magical universe is Severus Snape. ; ) Get over it Harry. Oh, alright. He's a little important, too. ;) Back to Dark Mirror Part Deux, the 7 hurdles en route to the stone likely line up with the 7 Hxes. Quirrell was unable to solve the riddle of the Mirror of Erised, but Snape will know exactly how to employ any mirror that pops up in Deathly Hallows. Do you suppose, in DH, it will be the two-way mirror? Instead of his *heart's desire,* will it help reveal to him the thing for which Rowling has been preparing him? it will take 7 books to get Harry to the point where he has to face, um I can't say. But in Book 7, you know, there's a big climax coming here and it will take that many books to get him there. (J.K. Rowling interview transcript, The Connection (WBUR Radio), 12 October, 1999, http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/1099-connectiontransc2.htm ) When Harry looks in the mirror, just which Hx do you suppose he'll see? I hate to trucate this exploration unnecessarily, but there are more posts to bang out and that elf may be back. But, by all means, a you await the midnight hour, take the time to consider the Quirrellish implications for Snape in Deathly Hallows. I'll be back with the Dark Mirror, part the third. I hope. (*Do you see another napkin around here, Lucius? Dang. Do you wear boxers? No, a thong won`t do. No. Just put it away.*) Talisman, noting that a circle-in-a-triangle is the symbol for a magick mirror, from whence a Sorcerer conjured his deamons. Makes a nice metaphor for an author, conjuring er producing her creative work. Especially a work involving magic. Not to mention mirroring. Rowling has added an additional line, which seems nothing so much as a line of symmetry. And did I mention? The circle-in-the-triangle mirror was also used for scrying. P.S. I did promise to tell you about that pesky DADA jinx. Sure, LV put the whammy on the position. Pure spite--maybe with the added benefit that he might have an easier time upon reapplication. Thin out the competition for the job. But do you think LV's jinx is still running the program? Jinxes are the weakest from of negative magic. If you didn't pick that up from Rowling's site then you probably missed another WOMBAT III question. Not only that, but you should have noticed that you've been hit in the head with a sack of clue bricks. Come off it. What, Bill can lift ancient Egyptian curses but DD can't sponge out a dirty little jinx? It was handled long ago. So why the revolving door in the DADA office? Simple. DD wanted LV to believe his jinx was still in effect. Why? Because DD has had his plan mapped out for a very long time. At least as far back as Tom Riddle's childhood. (Which reminds me, I still owe Scarah a post.) As I have explained here and elsewhere, over the years, most recently in The Plan, Message #159930: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159930, DD wanted LV to believe his jinx was still effective for the same reason DD purchased Riddle Manor, all those years ago. Both of these preparations play out in year 4. With respect to the jinx, DD wanted LV to count on the need for a new incoming DADA professor in year 4--which he did--and to have no suspicion whatsoever when this in fact transpired, let alone when the person whom LV's servant would have to capture and impersonate was DD's old pal, Moody. If the jinx has been disposing of DADA professors for decades, it's no wonder DD is down to retired ex-Aurors with more loyalty to DD than ambition for a new career. And it worked, LV took the bait and, from the moment the first dustbin clanked, DD was all over Fake!Moody. I won't try to lay out the lengthy GoF evidence here, but suffice it to say that LV is not the author of the reigning jinx. The jinx, as we know it, isn't indifferent as to *how* a DADA professor is ousted. It isn't like any of them declined a second year because they had more lucrative offers or were marrying Romanian Counts. No, the jinx *always* nixes a second term by revealing the darkest secret of the person who holds the seat. LV would never have sent Fake!Moody into such a situation. It was his profound desire to achieve Harry's blood without anyone being the wiser--that's why he bothered set up an *accidental* death attributable to the historically dangerous TWT (which DD arranged for just this year--he`s so accommodating). If LV had ever made such a jinx, he would have removed it himself, prior to sending Fake!Moody in. He didn't plan for Fake!Moody to remain more than one year, so his own old jinx was no issue, but he would never have risked a jinx that would disclose Fake!Moody's secret. It wasn't his jinx. I doubt that there is any jinx at all. Voldemorts was removed years ago. It seems more likely to me that DD merely achieves the revelation of his DADA profs by his own devices. But, if we must have one, at least it is one of DD own design, suited to his purposes. Oh, and that's why Snape outed Lupin (as if Lupin wasn't already a known WW). Snape was supposed to. The jinx must be seen to be in effect. Lupin was there to accomplish a mission, no more. DD was always planning on LV's mole, for year 4. PSS I'll add one more prediction: That little rant Harry has near the end of HBP. The one, speaking of Snape, where he says: "Yeah, that fits He'd play up the pure-blood side so he could get in with Lucius Malfoy and the rest of them He's just like Voldemort ashamed of his parentage, trying to make himself feared using the Dark Arts, gave himself an impressive new name--*Lord* Voldemort--the Half-Blood *Prince*--- That will all be demonstrated to be totally opposite. So soon, so soon From lmkos at earthlink.net Thu Jul 19 18:58:36 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:58:36 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: On the lighter side! (with a touch of Ricardian!JKR thrown in) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172185 >Carol responds: >Also not British, but I, too, thought of Henry V, only to remember >later that he's Prince Hal, not Prince Harry, in Shekespeare's "Henry >IV," "Harry" in that play being Henry Hotspur (no commoner but not a >prince). I didn't think of the present Prince Harry, nor did I think >the joke particularly funny, but it did make me wonder whether Petunia >knew that England has had eight kings named Enery, erm, Henry, more >than any other name except Edward. Lenore: Well, there you are. I didn't know there were eight! kings named Henry, I just knew there were more than a few. If they were all called Harry at one time or another, that would make it the most "common" royal nickname. (snipped the history, which I enjoyed) Carol: >The Hog's Head >and the flying boar statues and all the hog imagery (Hogsmeade, >Hogwarts) always make me think of Richard and make me wonder whether >JKR is a Ricardian, i.e., a defender of Richard III. Lenore: It seems that Sir Francis Bacon's family crest also featured a wild boar-- the type which becomes white in the winter. I wonder if there is any sort of connection with Richard III. On the surface, Richard III looks like another Snape-like figure, especially as depicted in the Josephine Tey novel where we see a huge gap between how historians have viewed Richard and the serious lack of indisputable evidence to back it up. After reading that book, I've become a bit of a Ricardian myself. -------- Lenore: I'm tacking this onto the end here since I won't be posting till we all meet again. Carol: BTW, there's a poll at Leaky (which I couldn't access because so many people were apparently using the site) where you can vote on what to do with people who spoil the books. The choices include handing them over to Snape and handing them over to Fluffy. I think Filch is also a choice (he'd need his whips and manacles to be effective) as is Umbridge. Too bad they didn't offer "All of the above" as a choice. Lenore: Heehee! I'll vote for that one! At least we still have our sense of humor. How about: a few centaurs and a giant named Grawp to terrify a little sense in them? Or, how about having Trelawney read their tea leaves? (eg) Other ideas? Lenore (getting punchy now, but wishing we were really in a pub, all waiting together and sharing our favorite humorous bits) From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 19 19:02:24 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:02:24 -0000 Subject: Last minute thoughts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172186 It seems the time has come to stop speculating madly about what *may* happen next in the Harry Potter saga and to find out what *does* happen next, and to bid a very bittersweet goodbye to one era of Harry Potter fandom and prepare to enter a new era. Anticipation is always half the joy of any venture, and I will certainly miss the fun of analyzing the characters and events in hopes of predicting what might be ahead, not to mention reading so many great theories, from the well-reasoned to the wildly speculative (but always still possible when it comes to predicting the workings of JKR's brilliantly inventive mind). Yet I do look forward to finally knowing EVERYTHING (as JKR recently put it)--at least everything important to the story. And even that "knowing" won't fill in every blank, not by a long shot. I'm sure there will still be much room left for continuing character analysis and speculation on motivations, relationships, the pasts and perhaps futures of the characters, and so on. We're not done yet, folks! I hope everyone enjoys the final book and finds satisfaction in however JKR resolves the story of Harry Potter and his friends (and enemies, real or suspected). I suspect we will get a few unexpected twists, some heartwarming moments, and some heartrending moments. Which is not much more than one can ask in a good story, right? Thanks to the list-elves for keeping this list unspoiled (and I'm working to remain so until I have the book in my hands). I'm sure it's been a lot of work. I look forward to returning to what are sure to be many fascinating discussions as the new Harry Potter era begins next week. Good reading to all, Julie From lkotur at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 16:12:39 2007 From: lkotur at yahoo.com (Damit Lazarus) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:12:39 -0000 Subject: Friday is so soon! Loving it/Hating it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172187 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chys Sage Lattes" wrote: > > > > My biggest fear is standing in line at Barnes & Noble on Friday > night > > and some stupid person gets their book before me, turns to the end, > and > > shouts out the big reveal. > > Claire > Reminds me of a youtube video of the queue in front of Barnes & Noble waiting for "The Half Blood Prince" and the prankster drives by shouting, "Snape kills Dumbledore" and the crowd went nuts. I know that was inapprppriate, but the looks on the stunned faces in the crowd was, well priceless. Damit Lazarus From tifflblack at earthlink.net Thu Jul 19 19:03:19 2007 From: tifflblack at earthlink.net (tiffany black) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:03:19 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Favorite Moments in Potter History In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <015001c7ca37$790a7910$6401a8c0@TIFFANY> No: HPFGUIDX 172188 > Carol, wishing she could recall more of the moments that nearly caused > her to spew coffee onto the pages of her books but too worried about > her imaginary friends to think straight > ================================ Carol lead me to thinking about my own favorite moments in HP. While I loved reading the description of Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade, and I loved seeing the flashbacks of the Marauders and Snape in OotP, the point that really sticks out in my mind was the one time I literally laughed out loud imagining the scene as it happened: when Harry was reading the HBP's Potions book and tried out the "levicorpus" spell and made the sleeping Ron shoot up into the air! I get the giggles each time I read it! What are your favorite moments? Tiffany: My absolute favorite is the quidditch match between Ravenclaw and Gryffindor in Prisoner of Azkaban, where Malfoy and friends get caught playing dementor, although Draco the amazing bouncing ferret is pretty good as well. Another favorite is the won't won't won't bit in HBP. Lol. I was reading that part at something like 8 in the morning and didn't want to laugh too loud in case I woke my sister in the next room. 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 __________ NOD32 2374 (20070703) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com From kamilaa at gmail.com Thu Jul 19 19:14:20 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:14:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172189 ...who agrees with vmonte that people don't like unpalatable truths and who expects a roar of outrage from the Snape haters when Snape is revealed as DDM. If Snape turns out to be Dumbledore's man I will be shocked, but I will not be angry. I just wish he wasn't such an ass. I won't be shocked, or angry, as I think the text supports both readings at this point. I will, however, be deeply disappointed. Talk about wasting a "gift of a character." If he's evil then he's managed to pull the wool over Dumbledore's eyes for lo, these many years. And as Dumbledore has always been set up as the cleverest, hardest-to-fool wizard known to all of wizardkind then it'd be very interesting to see all of his assumptions proved wrong in the end - especially if Harry knew better than his mentor did on this one thing. But if he's good? Bleh, how very, *very* trite and overdone. Snape can be added to the 32489304832 other fannish characters who once were bad, now are good, and have very poor attitudes. See, as for example, Methos, Spike, Vila, etc., etc., etc.. Only without the snarky one-liners. Bah. Kamil --->keeping her fingers crossed until the end for an interesting Snape From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Jul 19 19:49:53 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:49:53 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Involvement- There are only two? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172190 Carol: > As for others not knowing about the Prophecy, clearly the Death > Eaters, while not knowing the content of the Prophecy, knew what it > was and whom it concerned. So, almost certainly, did Snape. As for the > other Order members, I'm not at all convinced, as other list members > appear to be, that their reference to the Prophecy as a "weapon" > indicates that they didn't know what they were protecting. I think > it's a cover story, invented by Sirius Black on the spot when Lupin > and Mrs. Weasley thought that Harry was hearing more than he ought >to hear. Jen: That's my take, that the Order members knew they were guarding a prophecy found in the Dept. of Mysteries, one re: Harry. No more than that, none of the specific wording. After finishing OOTP, my interpretation was Sirius used the word 'weapon' as a cover (and JKR used it to divert the reader; I fell for it completely!). Technically the prophecy *is* a weapon in Voldemort's hands, or at least he thinks he can glean something from it that will help him kill Harry. Whether he could have learned something valuable is open to intepretation, because even if he learned Harry had a power that he, LV, 'knew not,' I suspect Voldemort would believe that meant Harry had a magical power that LV had overlooked rather than realizing the words meant a power the Dark Lord 'knew not' - as in didn't understand. At least that's my interpretation of 'knew not' after reading HBP and hearing JKR's comments about LV never knowing love. Jen, most likely sending her last post before closing time and hoping everyone enjoys DH! From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 19:52:36 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:52:36 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172191 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kamil wrote: But if he's good? Bleh, how very, *very* trite and overdone. Snape can > be added to the 32489304832 other fannish characters who once were > bad, now are good, and have very poor attitudes. =========================== Lisa: Isn't it funny how we can all read the same words and have totally opposite reactions to them?! I've thought that if Snape turns out to be on the side of the Order (I can't say "good," because he's just too nasty a man to his students and contemporaries to be called "good") he will have been a well-fleshed-out character about whom the author has kept us on the fence all these years. But if he's been evil all along, then I'd consider him to be a trite, flat, shallow character in whom the author invested little. Ah, how I will miss these ruminations ... ! :*****0( From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 20:00:01 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:00:01 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172192 I (vmonte) wrote: If Snape turns out to be Dumbledore's man I will be shocked, but I will not be angry. I just wish he wasn't such an ass. Kamil responded: I won't be shocked, or angry, as I think the text supports both readings at this point. I will, however, be deeply disappointed. Talk about wasting a "gift of a character." If he's evil then he's managed to pull the wool over Dumbledore's eyes for lo, these many years. And as Dumbledore has always been set up as the cleverest, hardest-to-fool wizard known to all of wizardkind then it'd be very interesting to see all of his assumptions proved wrong in the end - especially if Harry knew better than his mentor did on this one thing. vmonte again: I agree with you. I think it would be a lot more interesting if in the end Snape and Harry had to fight each other. I've never been interested in Voldemort was a character. He is such a cartoon- like/moustache twirling kind of villian that I just can't get into him at all. Snape, whether he is ESE or DD's man, is very cool (in a dirty hair/dirty underwear kind of way). One thing that really bothers me is the idea of people blindly following a leader, without ever questioning or thinking on their own. How many characters told Harry that they trust Snape because Dumbledore said so. What the hell is that? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 19 20:10:31 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:10:31 -0000 Subject: Interesting poll result :) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172193 Don't forget! Many of the polls will be closing in just a few hours, when the list itself is closed for the release of Deathly Hallows. (Woo hoo! it's almost here!!) As I took a peek just now, to see how the voting has been going these past few days, one thing really struck me, in the "Whom Do You Actually Hope WILL Die By the End of Deathly Hallows?" poll. Do you know which character has nary a vote? Not ONE person who has said s/he wants this person to die? Is it Harry? Nope. Is it Hermione? Nope. Is it Grawp? (Ha!) Nope. It's... it's... Neville!! Go look for yourself: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540032 So, what does this say about us Harry Potter fans, do you think? And/or what does it say about the way JK Rowling has written Neville Longbottom?? Thoughts, anyone? Siriusly Snapey Susan From elync at eclectic-egg.com Thu Jul 19 20:10:31 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:10:31 -0000 Subject: Predictions for Harry Potter Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172194 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > And it's equally understandable > that DDM!Snape would do everything in his power to prevent James's > son, the only one who can save the WW from Voldemort, from turning > into a second James, puncturing his status as "our new celebrity" from > Day One. Lyn says: I've been thinking recently that, whether intentionally or not, Snape plays somewhat the same role for Harry within the WW that the Dursleys do when he's with them. I can't remember which book it's in, but somewhere early on (I think) Dumbledore tells Harry that he could've been given to any wizarding family to raise and they would have been honored to have him... and I'm thinking, yes, and very possibly they would also have indulged him and catered to his every whim and treated him like the "treasure" that James was in his own parents' estimation. And what would that have done to Harry's character? Those ten years living with the Dursleys non-stop - as horrible as they were - did keep Harry from growing up as the spoiled, celebrated darling of the entire WW, which might have made him, in the long run, completely unfit to play the role he now knows he must play in saving it. Snape, for whatever reasons you want to theorize, does a pretty good job of balancing out any "spoiling" of Harry that might take place at Hogwarts. And I'm not sure that's an entirely bad thing in the long run, even if Snape's motives are not laudable in and of themselves. (This fits nicely in with the idea of Slytherin needing to be there to maintain the proper "balance" within the microcosm that is Hogwart's if you agree with the notion that it's the rift between Slytherin's house and the rest of the school - a reflection of the original rift between the SS and the other founders - that is a big part of the overall problem to begin with. And at this point in the story, the rift is being reinforced by intolerance and prejudice from both sides.) Lyn From talisman22457 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 20:25:00 2007 From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:25:00 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172195 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dana" wrote: > Annemehr: > > Hmmm. I seem to recall that these books were written with years >>of research, boxes and boxes of notes, complicated charts for each > > chapter detailing what has to happen, clues, misdirection, >> and red herrings. I'd say they *are* complex. *And* logical. > Dana: > But does that mean that JKR would set up her story so that when the > final installment is released, everything in the books as they >stand now would become a lie? Is that really how logic works? Talisman: 1) The final installment will involve major twists and revelations; 2) It is customary to find, at the end of a Quest, that the answer is the *opposite* of what the hero expected-when he started out-and so it will prove in the HP series; 3) your assertion of *everything the books stand for* is really a proxy for *the way Dana has interpreted the books.* Rowling does not bear the burden of validating your reading. > Dana > So in other words, this is not a story between good vs. evil but > between evil vs. evil in which evil is the only thing that could > possibly win from evil? > Talisman: No one else involved in this exchange has said that. That is your own argumentative fallacy. > Annemehr: > > It's not so much that JKR couldn't have written a character with > > imperfect second sight; she *could* have just modified Mopsus a > > bit. But she didn't. > > > > What Talisman further points out is that Trelawney's utterances > > come in two extremely different varieties. When she's aware of > > herself, she's no better than a RL "psychic" charlatan and can't > > properly read the tea leaves in a beginning student's cup -- and > > then on the other hand she goes into some kind of trance and lets > > loose with these two prophecies. > > Talisman: I do not believe Trelawney is an authentic vessel of the oracle. Rowling has indicated that no character alive during Harry's story is. > > Dana: > Would it really be an interesting story development if the prophecy > was fake and implanted? Talisman: Apparently it is one that has you quite exercised. Dana: >Does this change anything about LV's choice > to follow up on that said prophecy and make it a real one by doing > so? Talisman: Does it change anything? Your hostility is based on how it alters your preferred reading. Does it change things if someone--who had been studying Voldemort all his life, and knew him pretty darn well--crafted a pseudo-prophecy anticipating the effect it would have on him? Do you prefer that Trelawney--a person whom the author tells us has no prophetic gifts at all--inexplicably goes into a trance and unknowingly utters an impotent prophecy, just when a DE spy is at the door, the content of which just happens to be what the Dark Lord fears most? Or what *is* your theory? As to LV's Choice, how do you interpret Oedipus? Have you, thoughtfully or ever, read Macbeth? When people make *choices,* does it matter *why* they make them? Do people choose to be psychopaths? Do people, like Merope, *choose* to be so depressed they lose their magic? I don't think this issue is as simplistic as some readers assume. Nor do I think Rowling is writing a series-- in which the *worst* character is the arch-Muggle (her opinion), and which prefers and favors the *unconventional*--as a vehicle for conventional ideology. I have a great deal written on this subject, 2/3 of which I published between a few readers long ago, the completion, polishing and general publication of which--as time is so short--will probably have to wait until after DH. Dana: >Why would DD possessing Trelawney make the story concerning the > prophecy a more interesting read? Talisman: I can't account for what *interests* everyone. You seem to care about it, though. Let's recall some assistance from our author: ES: Why is Slytherin house still ? JKR: Still allowed! [All laugh] ES: Yes! I mean, it's such a stigma. JKR: But they're not all bad. They literally are not all bad. [Pause.] Well, the deeper answer, the non-flippant answer, would be that you have to embrace all of a person, you have to take them with their flaws, and everyone's got them. It's the same way with the student body. If only they could achieve perfect unity, you would have an absolute unstoppable force, and I suppose it's that craving for unity and wholeness that means that they keep that quarter of the school that maybe does not encapsulate the most generous and noble qualities, in the hope, in the very Dumbledore-esque hope that they will achieve union, and they will achieve harmony. Harmony is the word .So again, it was this idea of harmony and balance, that you had four necessary components and by integrating them you would make a very strong place. But they remain fragmented, as we know. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli- 3.htm Talisman: One train of thought might involve why DD's plan goes at least as far back as Tom Riddle's youth. Hmmm, in a series where Slytherin's re-incorporation into Hogwarts (a symbol for both the personal psyche and the body politic) is anticipated as an important feature of the denouement, how could an intentional plan involving the last heir of Slytherin possibly be interesting? If you aren't familiar with the Jungian pursuit of (aka quest for) a fully *integrated* Self, now would be a good time to read up. Dana: >Also if the prophecy is fake, then how would LV making it a true one fit into the story? Talisman: DD and Rowling have both said it's fake. That much you'll have to deal with-- unless you just want to keep your eyes closed. In my world LV's response is the one DD wanted. It has continued to impact LV's behavior, series to date--enhancing the predictability of his actions. See my works generally. I also think Harry is a Hx made at GH: LV did the murder; DD did the spell. I think that plays right into the integration theme. Harry carries the Dark Lord within. He has to accept that and to understand his own capacity for evil. It's not just the other guy, it's you, too. Indeed, Jung tells us that the more negative emotion we feel toward a person...ehem...the more we are projecting our own shortcomings onto them. Harry is going to have to face this, about Snape...and LV. The fight that can never be won, at least during one's lifetime, is the fight involving one's own personal portion of the Dark Lord. That's part of it. But, as you keep announcing, you can make up your own explanation. Dana: >You can't put on fake pants so how would a fake prophecy work? Talisman: ::blink:: They're the same? I hereby deny the reality of everybody's pants!!! Dana: >It actually wouldn't because there would be nothing to fulfill. It would make the entire > story surrounding the prophecy a black whole that would create a plot > whole in its own right. Talisman: I wonder how you interpret the term *real.* How does an utterance of the Oracle differ from an accurate prediction of someone's reaction? Rowling has already said that no one in the story is a true seer. I've explained before how DD was equivocating when he agreed with Harry that, what we call Trelawney's prophecies 1 & 2, were *real.* DD *thinks* they are *real* because he expects these utterances to be fulfilled in the course of his plan. However, when Harry says *real* he does not include the possibility that DD is organizing this fulfillment--and DD knows there is this disconnect in communication. The question of how or whether a *real* prediction by the Oracle differs from a *real* prediction by DD goes to considerations of how *fate* unfolds through human agency, *why* people make the choices they do, and the level of *freedom* they actually enjoy. I believe you are having trouble grasping a significant range of philosophical and literary issues. Perhaps later, in the yawning eternity after DH we can vet them all out. For the nonce, the fact that Trelawney wasn't guided by the numina (which will never *literally* appear in this mode of literature--but for which DD is the symbolic referent)--as explained by Rowling--is a good starting point. Dana: >For instance how would LV know to mark his opponent as an equal if he never heard that part of the fake > prophecy? Talisman: Even surface canon tells us LV did *not* intend to mark Harry. He intended to kill Harry. Re-read DD's debreifings in PS/SS and OoP. Dana: >How would anyone faking a prophecy foresee this happening > as JKR herself said that the effect of Lily's sacrifice was something > no one could have foreseen as it never happened before? Talsiman: Rowling didn't ever use the term *foreseen.* And, obviously, whatever Lily *knew* as an empirical (previously experienced) *fact,* she *counted on,* and *expected* her sacrifice saving Harry--not just postponing his death for a few seconds. I've covered this before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/163793 DD fully understood that LV 1) had a deeply feared and expected the rise of a usurper; 2) knew that two wizarding babies would be born before the end of July; 3) knew that LV would identify them and act to snuff them out before they could topple him, 3) expected him to start with the one most like himself, i.e. the one with Muggle in the family. It's pretty straightforward. Dana: >Unless you want to imply that DD is the seer but doesn't want to be credited for > it and uses Trelawney as a vessel. Talisman: Not at all. On the surface level DD is a wise old, extremely powerful, and, per the author, "almost godlike" wizard, who has a keen understanding of human motivations and behavior--and a talent for possession/magical ventriloquism. Symbolically, he is god. Literally he is not. Nowhere is he channeling a different numinal source. > Annemehr: > > Rude? You think people don't try to alter the facts to fit their > > preconceptions?! > > > Dana: > Sure they do but that doesn't mean that you have to call other people > incapable of reading the books and interpret the presented evidence. Talisman: It depends on the situation. When people are being intentionally obnoxious and are clearly off the map, I think they've earned a complimentary kick in the pants--even if their pants are illusory. I'm never prickly with people of goodwill--no matter how many errors they weave into their opinions. And, I find the arrogance of the truly talented part of their charm. But intentional snot--that isn't even trying to be entertaining-- coupled with patent ignorance--deserves a comeuppance. Not every perp gets one--I can't devote that much time to universal justice--but now and then one jumps in front of the sights . The line that has you so worked up is an artifact from the time the post was written ~circa February of this year, in proximity with an outbreak from a soi-disant expert who insisted that he, and anyone who agreed with him, were *more rational* than other theorists. This, though the target seemed unable to challenge my explication with any argument, let alone a justified one, a fortiori supremely rational one. Moreover, the poster--like many readers--seems both unable to make justified intuitive leaps--and not surprisingly--unwilling to consider them essential and desirable phenomena in the hermeneutic process. Rowling, and successful readers, know better. That's why the W.O.M.B.A.T. Exams always required intuitive application of the text. Emphasis on *justified* intuitive application. All I was doing was parrying the thrust of an opponent's self- serving blade. But, if you want to take ownership of the charge--even though you were never before involved in the exchange--have it. Dana: > In real life the smug cop thinks he has found the right evidence to > convict the criminal, only to later find that the one he put in jail > has been innocent all along. Talsiman: Smug =wrong. Only the obsequious know for sure. Life interpreted by formulaic t.v. ; the hegemony of the hoi-polloi. Then to, smug and confident are a close thing. If you can't play with flare on the battlefield of ideas, don't jump in front of the blade. The list is rampant with artless sarcasm supposedly neutralized by an obligatory JMO. If that works for you, play with those people. Your own uncomplimentary assumption includes the notion that I haven't given due consideration to every other theory offered, am not receptive to justified argument, and don't have solid bases for rejecting the explications (or non-explicated assertions) I reject, let alone a background to support my confidence. You, perforce, are in no position to justify this assumption. Asserting it simply satisfies your grudge. Dana: > In HP the facts can never be totally supported by other facts as JKR > has carefully constructed her story that way. Talisman: I don't agree. And, if you want respect for this assertion, instead of indulging in sweeping generalizations, you need to demonstrate it. Prove it, or quit the field of contending ideas. I *am* long on record asserting that Rowling's art mirrors her thesis; that there is a Muggle and a Magic level to the stories. Nonetheless, I will not yield to the notion that there are multiple, equally valid, interpretations. Nor even two. The Muggle interpretation is necessarily, and demonstrably, inferior. Dana: >So the so-called evidence that is supposedly leading the way is largely open to > interpretation, which still requires filling in the blanks or filling > in the missing link to connect two facts. Talisman: The final chapter, has just barely, not yet been read. But at 6/7 of the way in, there is sufficient evidence to establish quite a lot-- and to rule out quite a lot, as well. It's not as open as you would like to assert. On the other hand, people who suffer from an inability to grasp literary implicature (the written version of conversational implicature--wherein a great deal of human meaning occurs) may never have the level of concrete certainty they require for understanding. As a neurological fact, some people just can't read between the lines. This is neither the author's problem, nor mine. Dana: >Either way it is still the readers perception that is presented as evidence to support the > theory and therefore one should remain open to except to be proven > wrong in, an as of yet, incomplete story. Talisman: All of the conversation on this list--and in life as we know it-- would be eradicated if one had to wait for epistemological certitude before speaking. Your attempt to radicalize the argument is just another in a long string of argumentative fallacies. I am open to justified arguments. Make one. And, no, all readers' perceptions are not equal. In the array of ideas, some have superior support, some come out of an excretory orifice. Dana: > A theory is just that a theory and even if the theory in the mind of > the theorist is true and can be represented really well, the person > is still not the author and therefore one can't make the claim that > the evidence found somehow proofs you have uncovered the authors > intend when she developed/ created a character. Talisman: Believe what you want. You are free to ignore my reasoning and my proofs. I agree with E.D Hirsch, that the verbal meaning intended by the author is reproducible in readers who are competent in the same conventions, and norms actualized in the authors words, and knowledgeable as to how to employ these, in their interpretive practice. Even where such interpretation is less than absolute, it is nonetheless adequate to yield objective knowledge of the verbal intentions of the author (as opposed to the author's state of consciousness). Now, what I posit in my posts is an admixture of personal certainties, and extrapolations--some of the details of which certainly do tease out into my own proclivities--albeit informed ones. But, where I'm sure, I am very sure. And this, unlike your fervent hope, is not a product achieved by conforming the text to my preferred preconceptions. It is the product of the hermeneutic cycle--which involves forming a *corrigible* hypothesis, meaning that it can be confirmed or disconfirmed by continuing reference to the text--and where disconfirmed--replaced with an alternative that conforms most closely with all components of the text. This is exactly what brought me--over the years--to see that DD is indeed managing all the significant events in the series. (This does not include shipping per se --though DD's understanding of who loves whom does play a role.) I don't need to read the last book to be certain of this--more than sufficient evidence is already in place. Dana: > Also you can't rectify the rudeness of one by pointing out the > rudeness of others. Talisman: Perhaps you should apply your axiom to yourself. Dana: >If everybody is wrong then no one is right and > not if everyone behaves rude then I'm allowed to do so as well. Talisman: Yet you seem to have exercised your right, repeatedly now, paragraph after paragraph, in response to one line, in someone else's conversation, that lit your wick. Dana: >We all get carried away in our own cleverness but just because someone > is better with words then someone else doesn't make the theory truer > by definition. Talisman: Your personal feelings are valid insofar as they are your feelings and you are entitled to them; however, substantively better arguments deserve equal caliber in rebuttal, or failing that, deference in the field of theory. > Annemehr: > > No one is calling DD a "red herring." I assure you, Talisman is > > not ignoring anything about what we've been shown about > > Dumbledore. I should know -- I've argued plenty of the details > > with her in the past. It all comes straight from the text (see her > > published works - all rife with canon references). > > > Dana: > She might not ignore anything that is shown about DD but she does > give her own interpretation to what she sees as facts about this > character. Talisman: Yes, but where my *interpretation* integrates and accounts for all of the text du jour and yours requires turning a blind eye to evidence or constructing a patchwork quilt of disconnected--and extra- canonical--explanations, my interpretation is superior. Dana: >The series has been largely about choice and if DD, as in > her theories, would be guilty of said crimes then actually no one in > the series had a choice at all and there are not many plots > overlapping the main plot of Harry's journey but just one plot in all > the books orchestrated by the evilest man around Albus Dumbledore. Talisman: These are your erroneous assumptions. Why, Harry, himself, decides in HBP, that his only choice is to march into the arena or be dragged in. He also decides that this is a significant choice, but the reader is free to disagree. Especially when so many questions have been raised about how meaningful a choice can be when it's forced in a situation where information is managed and withheld. Or, when the actor is clinically depressed or psychotic. Indeed, Merope quit the arena altogether. Harry wants to fault her-- but Dumbledore understands that life had beaten the heart out of her-- her depression was too great--and he does not suggest that she could have decided to spunk up and want to live. People *choose* according to who they *are,* but they don't choose to be psychopathic, depressed, or resilient, for that matter. If the main plot and all of the subplots intermesh, I call that a consummate work of literary workmanship. I do tease DD about being an old scoundrel, but the mode is sardonic, and meant to rile the anticipated wet hen society. He is Rowling's White Hat, sans dout. But he is also the one in the control room--with dominos in place even now. Will Rowling have Harry break free? We'll have to wait and see. Dana: >If this theory turns out to be true then the enter story as told thus > far becomes false. Talisman: If true, only your reading of the story would be false. Who's smug now? Dana: >Would you really want to believe that JKR wrote > the enter series just so in the end she would make it all a lie Talisman: The art of the mystery is like the art of legerdemain, the audience simply doesn`t see what is right in front of them. Rather like *the overwhelming majority of present-day Muggles [who] refuse to believe in magical beasts [and] appear satisfied with the flimsiest non-magical explanation" (FBWTFT xvii). Any reading that is belied will merely be a misreading. Not to say that she won't intentionally turn the screw on the more inobservant, conventional, ideologically complacent, readers Dana: > that no one can be hold accountable for their actions because they > were manipulated into doing what they did? Talisman: If we were actually arguing the epistemologically un-provable dogma of free-will, this would merely be the argumentative fallacy of including the conclusion in the premise. But you aren't really exploring that deeply. So, not being interested in supplying the want of the argument, I'll stay at the apparent level. In the context of Rowling's fictional world, DD does not preordain the individual characters personalities, he simply makes use of what he understands about them. Sirius's hubris, Wormtail's cowardice, Lily's courage, Lucius's instinct for self-preservation, Quirrell's weak character, Fudge's corrupt ambition, Bertha's nosiness, etc. are all extant characteristics' of these individuals. DD merely employs his understanding of human behavior to nudge here, suggest there, shrewdly calculating the effect. When this leads to catastrophe for the character involved, it can often be seen as a consequence of their persistence in what some might call *bad behavior.* Dana: >So let's give Wormtail back his Order of Merlin because he was in DD's service when he > betrayed his best friends and not out there to safe his own neck. Talisman: You love your strawmen, don't you? Wormtail was totally out to save his own cowardly hide, DD merely counted on him acting true to form. By the way, all the evidence supports the conclusion that DD knew exactly who was the spy in the Order. Wormtail is no Occlumens--Rowling specifically has LV call him out as a poor liar---and we know that DD is a great Legilimens who already knew there was a spy in the nest. It wrenches the text to persist in believing that DD would not examine his small band of operatives, and in doing so, would not easily penetrate Wormtail's head. Indeed, DD penetrates LV's head in the Atrium--not only demonstrating the knowledge that LV is about to possess Harry, before it happens, but also knowing instantly when and *why* he was repulsed. Dana: > Let's make Lily's sacrifice a lie by having DD orchestrate the entire > event and not something Lily chose to do out of love for her son. Talisman: Well, there is certainly enough straw here to feed a lot of sacred cows. And enough snot to deserve a wiping. DD didn't make Lily courageous--but he did rely on her courage. Dana: > Let's redeem Voldemort for his evil acts because it was not his fault > he was manipulated into his choices by DD, as in some type of large > scientific experiment. He is actually a fluffy bunny that is not > responsible for his own actions. Talisman: Voldemort is murderous psychopath. DD tells Harry he *had no idea* that LV was going to grow up to be the most dangerous Dark wizard of all time (HBP 276). There are a couple of interesting qualifications in that statement: most dangerous, and Dark (as opposed to the most dangerous Light? ). Plus, killing animals is a textbook indication of a burgeoning psychopath--so I'm not convinced he had *no* idea that LV would be bent. And, he does not seem to intervene in Riddle's formative years. Just *watches.* He has allowed LV be what LV is. I think it's very interesting that you might re-apportion culpability in such a case. Controversial, even; as this applies so neatly to real life. If you don't watch out you may question the ideology under which you've been uncritically living. In any event, Voldemort does become a psychopath, and as such, is no more--and no less-culpable than any psychopath, of the same type (i.e. severe, murderous, and unable to function within societal norms). However, many readers *have* noticed that DD has gone right on *allowing* LV to be..er..himself..by passing up opportunities to destroy him. Rowling has acknowledged what was especially evident in the Atruium: that DD did not try to kill LV. There certainly isn't any convincing explanation for DD's failure to zap him back to vapor--and allow everyone to hunt Hxes in peace-- except that DD wants him around. Why, he's even brought him back from Albania, twice. It is interesting to note the note of sadness and compassion in DD's voice, when he address LV during the battle in OoP. This is reinforced in his conversation with Harry in HBP: where Harry expresses outrage that Merope acceded to death, leaving Tom to grow up in the orphanage: "Dumbledore raised his eyebrows. "Could you possibly be feeling sorry for Lord Voldemort?" (HBP 262). I will unapologetically interpret this as something DD considers desirable. In general, DD has banked on his understanding of Voldemort's reactions, in order to channel the Dark Lord's extant proclivities, to Dumbledorian ends. Subtextually LV represents the destructive behavior of which all humans are capable. In the surface mystery he plays, at a minimum, a crucial role in reconciling the houses--thereby bringing harmony to Hogwarts, and in inducing a level of self-realization in Harry. His antics have certainly also played a role--with DD's help--in revealing a number of other characters for what they are--and feeding them a dose of karma. Dana: > It might all come straight from the text but that doesn't mean that > the intentions behind the actions are as clear cut as she wants to > present them. Talisman: Hmmm. Do you mean Rowling? Shall I interpret this to mean that you think she doesn't intend what she wrote? That certainly *is* the fallback position for readers who want to keep DD's fingers out of the mix. That is, that the evidence (plentiful) of DD's involvement is a consequence of Rowling's poor writing--not their own poor reading. Or do you mean me? How clear the intentions behind the actions are, is dependent in large part on one's perceptive acuity. > Annemehr: > > He used Imperius -- on Mrs. Cole, to make her believe a blank piece > > of paper was an official document regarding Tom Riddle's > > registration with Hogwarts (HBP 265 US). Her eyes "slid out of > > focus and back again" -- that was no Obliviate; there was nothing > > to *forget*; that was mind control. > > > Dana: > Could you provide evidence that DD showed Mrs. Cole a blank piece of > paper and made her believe it was an official document? Talisman: Sure: **** "`Who registered him? His parents?' There was no doubt that Mrs. Cole was an inconveniently sharp woman. Apparently Dumbledore thought so too, for Harry now saw him slip his wand out of the pocket of his velvet suit, at the same time picking up a piece of perfectly blank paper from Mrs. Cole's desk. `Here,' said Dumbledore, waving his wand once as he passed her the piece of paper, `I think this will make everything clear.' Mrs. Cole's eyes slid out of focus and back again as she gazed intently at the blank paper for a moment. `That seems perfectly in order,' she said placidly " (HBP 265). ***** Dana: >And what purpose would a fake Hogwarts admission letter present to the story? > Tom Riddle already showed magical abilities as Mrs. Cole confirmed > when she talks about the strange things that always seem to surround > young Tom. So why would there be a need for a fake admission letter? > What would it add to the story? Talisman: The evidence that DD bewitched Mrs. Cole into believing that there was proper Muggle paperwork to release Riddle to Hogwarts, is manifest. I hope you don't seriously intent to deny the text. Therefore, you are merely doing again, what you so often resort to in your opposition: when you can't deny the evidence, you seem to think you can shift the burden to your opponent by switching the question to *why,* instead of acceding that the evidence disconfirms your own hypothesis. The fact that it is there, and the reason it is there are two different things. *Why* is an ultimate revelation--the evidence that certain things are so is the trail to understanding. No one has to get all the way to the end of the trail to see where to get on it. Here, *you* are the one who wants to deny this literary fact,because you don't like DD doing it. You don't like DD doing it, because you want to ignore the text and generate a character of your own choosing. What it says about DD is that he will use magic on people when he finds it necessary. I don't have a problem with it--but apparently it *is* important to the text, because it contradicts your notion of DD's character. If you have an open mind, and an interest in reading what Rowling actually wrote, you'll reform your hypothesis to conform to this literary *fact.* Not such a thorough champion of free will that he is above some practical magical *lubricant,* eh? Dana: >Again to make Tom a product of DD's > experiments and not responsible for his own actions? That somehow DD > chose a non-magical boy and turned him into the greatest Dark Lord of > all times so he can then, 50 years later, hand pick another young boy > to defeat his own creation? Talisman: It seems that he did it to get Riddle (who was never non-magical, btw) to Hogwarts, without further ado. Dana: >That Dr. Frankenstein ehm Dumbledore lost > control over his creation and needed to create a new one in order to > get ride of the old one? Would that really make a good story? Talisman: Where do you get this stuff? Who is asserting a loss of control? In another book, it might make a good story--but how is that germane? Dana: > To me this is actually proof of fitting the text to the theory. Mrs. > Cole is a muggle and doesn't know anything about wizards and witches > so why wouldn't her eyes slide out of focus and back again, > especially as she was drinking gin as if her life depended up on > getting to see the bottom of the glass? She probably thought she had > one to many when DD gave her the document. Talisman: Ah--there you go--hoist on your own petard. The text that I provided, supra, clearly demonstrates DD using magic to make Mrs. Cole believe the blank paper is whatever document she thinks she needs. While I've been on this list too long to believe there isn't *someone* who'll take the most outrageous position possible, I think you're in a rarified minority, here. Indeed, if there was ever a *blatant* case of fitting the text to theory, you, yourself, have just demonstrated it. Why in the world do you think Rowling wrote that DD pulled out his wand simultaneously with picking up the paper, and waved his wand over the paper saying "I think this will make everything perfectly clear," if gin--of which Mrs. Cole had not yet had even a sip--was the reason she thought the entirely blank piece of paper was an authoritative document? If you really are not able to see how your argument is invalid, and how perfectly the text supports Anne's assertion that DD has used mind-altering magic on Mrs. Cole, then you are beyond the reach of discourse. Anne slipped a bit in her choice of spell, but she is dead-on in the assertion that DD bewitched a Muggle to induce her to comply with his request that she release Tom to Hogwarts. An act that the Muggle was otherwise resisting. > Annemehr: > > Those are a couple of the simplest examples I can give. There are > > plenty more **in canon** where those came from, and Talisman has > > used them to show the self-consistent character of Dumbledore -- > > the one who guides events all through the series. > Dana: > I know Talisman represents her theory really well and I love to read > her interpretations but unfortunately they are nothing more then that > even if she claims that she knows her canon better then anyone. Talisman: I can't recall ever claiming to know my canon better than anyone. I do claim that my fundamental reading of DD is accurate. It cannot be refuted by canon, and is only further confirmed when all components of the text are brought to bear. It is more than just another interpretation among the pack, it is a superior interpretation. > Dana: > It is still implying that DD is so powerful that he can direct > everyone's actions and behavior at all times, at any time. That all > the other, so well developed, characters are actually nothing more > then inferi moved around on a giant chessboard. Talisman: We've been through this already. Put the straw away and address what I've actually asserted. > Annemehr: > > What he said was that his desire to protect Harry jeopardized The > > Plan. What he said, was: > > > > 'I cared about you too much,' said Dumbledore simply. 'I cared more > > for your happiness than your knowing the truth, more for your peace > > of mind than my plan, more for your life than the lives that might > > be lost if the plan failed.' [OoP 838 US] > > > Dana: > Sure DD was talking about his plan but why does this automatically > mean that his plan involved implanting a fake prophecy, leaking said > prophecy, sacrificing the boy's parents by manipulating them into > choosing the wrong SK and then having set up the mother's sacrifice > so Voldemort could mark her son as his equal? Talisman: The vintage of DD's plan is neither solely or *automatically* evoked from the debriefing in OoP. The evidence there is only part of the evidence that grows with every volume. *Why* is a separate question than that the evidence demonstrates that this is so. I've offered some possible *why's*--DH is the volume that will answer this best. Dana: > Why can't DD's plan not have its starting point at the night the > Potters died trying to protect their son? Talisman: Because the evidence shows DD busily setting things up before then. Dana: >When LV made the choice to follow up on the part of the prophecy that was relayed to him? Talisman: Which he certainly did. Dana: > Therefore making the prophecy one that will have to be fulfilled > because LV made it so? Talisman: Because it motivates LV's actions? How does this negate DD's role in the matter? I'm snipping the rest of your preferred version, which doesn't engage my specific arguments. I`ve given this more than generous time, and am not going to accept the burden of re-explaining what I've already posted in response to so vauge a challenge. Dana: > Also think about what DD says, would you want to have someone that > you love face a dangerous task? How many loved ones of soldiers that > are send to war would rather they stayed home and let someone else > solve the problem? Why does it have to be their fight? Talisman: My 23-year old is in the 11th month of his second--currently scheduled 15 month--tour in Iraq where he serves as a combat medic with the 10th Mountain Division. He has been living 24/7 *forward* of the main base, i.e. in a bombed out building with no bathing facilities and an improvised bed that is rotated to other soldiers when he is *out,* and vice versa, because there isn't enough room for everyone to be there at the same time, encountering IEds, being attacked by suicide bombers, taking small arms fire, and being put into every dangerous position imaginable. How perfectly ludicrous for you to preach to me or pretend to a position of superior insight. Perhaps you should try *thinking about* the self-serving and unwarranted nature of your assumptions. Dana: >To me that is > what DD is telling Harry. That he doesn't want Harry to have this > burden even if he can't change anything about the choice LV made and > LV will never let it go just because DD doesn't want Harry to be part > of it. Talisman: Unfortunately, as Anne tried to point out to you, what DD says is that his unexpected feelings for Harry --feelings which DD had previously determined he could-and must--avoid--had crept in and were endangering his--DD's--plan. This is explicit on pages 838-839 of OoP. > DD tells us, unequivocally, that caring for Harry is detrimental to his plan. Dana: > In the second part about him not telling Harry right away about the > Horcruxes and why LV did not die the night of GH, might have been > because DD wanted to tackle them himself but knew that LV's focus had > shifted and that there was a possibility DD was not around long > enough to do this task for Harry and why he needed to teach Harry > about them. Talisman: One wonders why DD wouldn't explain--nay--why Rowling wouldn't bother to inform us by having him explain--that he didn't initially expect or want Harry to take care of these matters--instead of waiting for someone to invent and supply this extra-textual explanation, for her readers. Do you see the difference? Dana: > It is still the same text, yet the interpretations of intentions are > entirely different and it does not make it inconsistent with DD's > speech in OotP. Talisman: I'm sorry. It is not the same text. You have invented text that the author would have no reason--under your theory of the narrative--to hide from us, and yet which she did not supply. And it *is* inconsistent with his speech in OoP, because DD says, straight out, that caring for Harry is contrary to his plan. I will grant you this, DD knew he was going to buy it at the end of the year, and this was the phase where he needed to set Harry his final tasks. But far from there being no evidence that DD planned it all along, DD admits he should have done it sooner--if he'd stuck to his commitment not to care about Harry. That's not interpretation, that's black letter text. >Dana: >Besides as we see DD first checks out if there is >merit to his knowledge before he sends Harry on a wild goose chase. Talsiman: None of what DD has Harry do is a wild goose chase, all of it is tailored to achieved specific ends. > Annemehr: > > Absolutely. But, trust me, Talisman's not the one ignoring what > > we've been shown. > > > Dana: > Well she does ignore other interpretations of the text as > possibilities and crams unproven facts into her theory to proof her > point. Talisman: I'm glad you're not rude or smug. Can't imagine what this would be like otherwise. By the way, what is your authority for pronouncing on what I consider or ignore? ESP? Legilimency? You certainly seem to feel entitled to privilege some interpretations above others--but find it a fault in me--even though I can offer better justification. Many of what you like to call unproven facts are literary implicatures and /or justified intuitive leaps, interpolated from strong evidence. Dana: >Like for instance Sirius being moved through the veil by DD's > hand. Show me canon that proves this as fact? Just because DD is > present doesn't proof anything or even that he lets the fight between > Bella and Sirius go on, while he rounds up the other DEs, is proof > that he had the intention of letting Sirius be killed. That he > wanted to activate weapon Harry by having him experience personal > loss of a loved one. Show me canon that actually states this as fact > and not just mere interpretation of what a person wants it to be. Talisman: You've already demonstrated your ability to ignore both direct textual statements and clear demonstrations. I think it unlikely that you'll acknowledge anything that isn't written in neon, and much that is. If you want to refute my original Guilty!DD post, go back and take on the canon. I see no reason to reiterate and explain arguments I've already laid out--let alone add to them--when you are unwilling or unable to deal with the canon already involved. Dana: > Just because a theorist can bring his or her theories in a convincing > way doesn't make the theory truer then other interpretations of that > same text. Talisman: Convincing theories are, per se, better theories than unconvincing ones. However, the most astute theory ever promulgated would elude some recipients--there are always two parties involved in the transmission of information. Dana: > I have had many discussions about canon and what seems proof to me > but people that do not want to see it that way will not read it in > the same way. Does this mean I'm more right and they just do not get > it? Maybe yes and maybe no, as I could very well be the one seeing > and reading it all wrongly. We'll have to wait and see but to claim > that you ARE right in your assessments while, unlike others, you let > the evidence (that is clearly not there) guide you is indeed rude > because what you are saying is that only you are intelligent enough > to understand where the author has been going with her story and > others are to dumb to see it like you. Talisman: Well, at least I'm right. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Jul 19 20:46:18 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:46:18 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172196 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kamil wrote: > But if he's good? Bleh, how very, *very* trite and overdone. Snape can > be added to the 32489304832 other fannish characters who once were > bad, now are good, and have very poor attitudes. See, as for example, > Methos, Spike, Vila, etc., etc., etc.. > > Only without the snarky one-liners. > > Bah. > > Kamil --->keeping her fingers crossed until the end for an interesting Snape > Hickengruendler: Without snarky onliners? How about (while speaking to Bella): "Of course you weren't a lot use to him in prison, but the gesture was undoubtly fine". Or the Wormtail smackdown in the same chapter. Or when he catches Harry and Ron in CoS, afte rthey arrived in the car. Or during his interactions with Lockhart. Snape can be very snarky, if he wants. From elync at eclectic-egg.com Thu Jul 19 19:05:57 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:05:57 -0000 Subject: Tonks In-Reply-To: <2C9F77FB-C5D7-45E2-A80E-138067D94DFE@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172197 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, dracojadon at ... wrote: > > > > Kris: > > The character of Tonks is very different in HBP than she is in OoTP. > > > is it really Tonks? > > > > I'm starting to think that she might be one of the ones who is > > helping Draco (they are cousins, afterall). I know she's an auror - > > but is it possible that she's (or someone disguised as her) is > > working the inside of the Order for LV? Lyn says: Hi all, new member delurking here. *waves at group* I just got to this point in my pre-DH rereading of HBP last night, and my gut feeling after reading that chapter again was that Dumbledore knew (perhaps before the school year even started, and probably via Snape) that Draco had been assigned some evil "task" and that Tonks was brought in to help keep an eye on him and try to find out what, specifically, he was doing to accomplish the goal he'd been set. Given her talents, any one of the other characters seen lingering outside the RoR over the course of the story could have been her in disguise, and not necessarily always just a Polyjuiced minion of Draco's keeping watch for him. This makes sense to me since Dumbledore appeared unconcerned at Harry's "revelation" that Draco was up to no good in general (it would have been old news to him at that point), but still questioned Draco about exactly how he'd managed to get DEs into the school (since none of the people who were watching Draco so carefully seemed to have realized that the Vanishing Cabinet was involved). Snape, as well, knew Draco was trying to do something on behalf of Voldemort, but didn't seem to know the details of how he was attempting to get it done. Another thing that struck me about that scene, I think Harry mentions something about the latest death or disappearance reported in the Daily Prophet, and Tonks makes some (I took it as half-sarcastic, half-sad) comment about the Prophet not always being up on the latest news or somthing to that effect. Very shortly thereafter, when HRH are back together, two other students - sisters, I think Hermione says "the Montgomery sisters" - walk by and Ron makes a comment about them looking unhappy, and Hermione reveals that they've just found out their little brother has died at St. Mungo's after being fatally bitten by a werewolf (and IIRC, it was Greyback). Which made me think back to Tonks' comment about "the latest news" and how Lupin's assignment has him working underground with the other werewolves, trying to convince them not to follow Greyback and Voldemort... which must put him in considerably more danger than he'd be almost anywhere else. And also there's the fact that some werewolves going around killing children just for kicks is not going to make life any easier for Lupin once this is all over, even if Voldy's defeated and dead and gone - people already fear werewolves enough, even one who is harmless as a human and makes every effort to remain harmless when he transforms, like Lupin. So that might account for some of her downheartedness as well. Lyn From psych12 at gmail.com Thu Jul 19 21:00:43 2007 From: psych12 at gmail.com (leggrachel) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:00:43 -0000 Subject: Draco scares Borgin with....? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172198 > Donna: > What if what Draco shows Borgin in the shop is a werewolf > bite? A Fenrir bite? leggrachel: Ooooh, I like this. The question would be where and when did that happen? And why? Why would either the Malfoy's or Voldemort allow Draco to be bitten? Wouldn't that be harmful to everyone's interests? It doesn't serve either the Malfoy's or Voldie to have the Malfoy heir be a werewolf. It could've been an accident, but then it seems like Fenir knows what he's doing and plans whom he bites. From josturgess at eircom.net Thu Jul 19 21:40:27 2007 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:40:27 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: List Closure -- Change! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > The George was curiously quiet. The lone wanderer noticed a bit of > parchment fluttering on the door, affixed to the ancient planks by a > kitchen knife. It read: > > "The very real threat of very real spoilers has scared the elves. > Most of us have fled the scene. The rest are going quietly (or not > so quietly) mad from the extra work. In an attempt to save our > souls, we're shutting down the list. > > See you on the flip side! :-D > > Love, > The List Elves (what's left of us anyway)" > Many, many, many thanks to the elves, I guess we were lucky to get away with it so far! It made a *huge* diiference to me to be protected I prostrate myself (slowly, I'm getting on you know). Anyway, looking forward to seeing you all on the other side. Respect Jo > > Thanks! > The HPfGU List Elves > From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 21:56:55 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:56:55 -0000 Subject: Favorite theories proved wrong In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172200 vmonte wrote: > But let's get back to Snape. A few days ago someone commented on what Dumbledore said in the cave in HBP. It reminded me of what I thought immediately after reading that passage: that it sounded like a confession. I looked my old post up and noticed that the more I thought about that scene the more convoluted and ridiculous my later posts about it became. I may still be wrong about Dumbledore having a checkered past but at least my first thought regarding that scene was a lot more reasonable than some of the other crap I came up with later. > > Actually, it was while I was responding about the Dumbledore cave scene (from the other day) that the thought occurred to me that perhaps Dumbledore understands Snape because of his checkered past. Maybe Voldemort's relationship with Snape is similar to what Grindelwald's relationship with Dumbledore was. Well, before I go on a tangent I'll stop there. (Carol, do you read what I'm saying?) > > If Snape turns out to be Dumbledore's man I will be shocked, but I will not be angry. > > I just wish he wasn't such an ass. > > lol Carol responds: Hi, Vivian. Actually, I'm not sure whether I understand what you're asking. First, I probably shouldn't have made my remark about the outrage of the anti-Snapers if Snape turns out to be DDM (though I fully expect that to happen). Heck, if Snape turns out to be evil, *I'll* howl with outrage, feeling that JKR has deceived and betrayed me (which is how I felt the first time I read the tower scene). I'll get over it, of course, but my fondness for the books may be seriously weakened. I'm not sure why; I suppose it's because Snape is such a marvelously rendered character, and most of my observations regarding narrative technique, plot structure, character development, etc., in some way relate to him. I see him as being almost as central as Dumbledore even though he's more in the background, and to have him turn out to be nothing but a predictable plot device will come close to ruining the books for me. So, really. I apologize. I was projecting my own fears for the outcome onto the other side. I shouldn't take it so seriously. It's just a book, after all. Regarding Dumbledore and the cave scene, I've thought from the beginning that he was experiencing some sort of poisoned memory. The bowl resembles a Pensieve; the green glow reminds me of an AK. LV, assuming that he's the potion maker, seems to have taken someone's anguished memory and added it to a potion that causes physical agony and burning thirst, debilitating the drinker and bringing about slow death. Alternatively, it may cause the drinker to relive his own worst memory, as you suggest. And yet, that memory doesn't seem to me to be DD's. My own thought was that it belonged to Tom Riddle Sr. and was taken from him right before his death. It would reflect LV torturing his parents, who had done nothing specifically to hurt young Tom, for his own sin of neglecting his son and letting him grow up in an orphanage. It's just a thought. I do hope that particular mystery (along with how many others?) is solved in DH. If not, JKR is going to spend the rest of her life answering the questions that she left unresolved in DH. As for Grindelwald, I think DD's connection with him consists solely of discovering and destroying his Horcrux. I think that young Tom Riddle either stole the secret of Horcrux-making from Grindelwald or charmed him into taking him on as an apprentice and teaching him the secrets of the trade. And then, like Darth What's His Name (not Vader), possibly he murdered his own master (after DD had made Grindelwald mortal, I mean). Wild speculation, of course, but Grindelwald is in the books for a reason, and it seems likely to me that he's the wizard known to both DD and LV who had made a single Horcrux. And how better to "defeat" such a wizard than to destroy that Horcrux? DD is a manipulator and he's not always truthful, but if he has a "checkered past," I'll eat a box of Bertie Botts jelly beans, ear wax and all. (Gah!) Snape's relationship with DD is too complex to discuss here; it will be a great topic post-DH, though. With luck, we'll have more canon than we have now, or be able to see the canon from books 1-6 more clearly. As for going on tangents--well, that's what a lot of us do, me in particular. (It's the way my mind works, unfortunately.) I've noticed them becoming less and less coherent as the end of all things, erm, the last HP book, approaches. Once DH comes out and we've all registered our initial reactions (grief, outrage, euphoria, triumph), those of us who are still serious about the books can discuss them somewhat more dispassionately. I'll bore anyone whose listening with narrative technique and plot structure and foreshadowing and atmosphere and etymology and theme and anything else that I think sheds light on the books. I might even take a stab at symbolism. (Carol visualizes half the group avoiding her future posts in horror at the prospect of such topics.) And we'll be free to analyze the characters as we would with any completed work, whether it's LoTR or an Austen novel, with the benefit of hindsight. Assuming that we're not so devastated by what JKR did to our favorite character that we can't bear to talk about it. Anyway, I hope not to experience a feeling of betrayal this time around, regarding Snape or Harry or Dead-but-good!Dumbledore or Neville or any other character I care about. Death is one thing, but revealing that DD was wrong to trust Snape or having Harry or Neville successfully cast an Unforgiveable Curse is another. I'll feel that JKR has betrayed the values that she's established for her own moral universe if either of those things happened. And I want Harry to be surprised by Snape's loyalty and courage, not boringly confirmed in his bad opinion. That would fit with the themes I see in the books and with the plot structure I anticipate. Carol, looking forward to redemption and forgiveness and reconciliation after the inevitable deaths, not to revenge and retribution and disillusionment regarding Dumbledore From doliesl at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 22:03:17 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:03:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Favorite theories proved wrong Message-ID: <798331.71257.qm@web82211.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172201 Kamil responded: I won't be shocked, or angry, as I think the text supports both readings at this point. I will, however, be deeply disappointed. Talk about wasting a "gift of a character." If he's evil then he's managed to pull the wool over Dumbledore's eyes for lo, these many years. And as Dumbledore has always been set up as the cleverest, hardest-to-fool wizard known to all of wizardkind then it'd be very interesting to see all of his assumptions proved wrong in the end - especially if Harry knew better than his mentor did on this one thing. Lisa: Isn't it funny how we can all read the same words and have totally opposite reactions to them?! I've thought that if Snape turns out to be on the side of the Order (I can't say "good," because he's just too nasty a man to his students and contemporaries to be called "good") he will have been a well-fleshed-out character about whom the author has kept us on the fence all these years. But if he's been evil all along, then I'd consider him to be a trite, flat, shallow character in whom the author invested little. Me: Agree with Lisa, JKR can't possibly satisified everyone (as she say, many will 'loathe' it but that's just how the story has been setup all along). It's either this way or that way. I thought the "Saint teen Harry is ultimately right and wiser than stupid gullible Dumbledore" is the most trite and eye rolling lame to me. Not only that but idiot!DD/evil!Snape has no revelation nor emotional satisfaction for a finale, other than serving those couple Snape-haters so-called 'poetic justice' and desperation to be right about their hate on a fictional character. I'd rather want revelation, moment of truth and ultimately well rounded characters and an emotional story, not badass for badass sake just because you want your most hated ficitonal character to be evil and died a villain death, or justice for justice sake just because you don't want to see him being heroic or sacrificial or tragic. Kamil responded: > Only without the snarky one-liners. Hickengruendler: Without snarky onliners? How about (while speaking to Bella): "Of course you weren't a lot use to him in prison, but the gesture was undoubtly fine". Or the Wormtail smackdown in the same chapter. Or when he catches Harry and Ron in CoS, afte rthey arrived in the car. Or during his interactions with Lockhart. Snape can be very snarky, if he wants. Me: LOL! Snape's awesome with snarky one-liners, we must be reading very different book. vmonte again: I agree with you. I think it would be a lot more interesting if in the end Snape and Harry had to fight each other. I've never been interested in Voldemort was a character. He is such a cartoon- like/moustache twirling kind of villian that I just can't get into him at all. Snape, whether he is ESE or DD's man, is very cool (in a dirty hair/dirty underwear kind of way). Me: As many people has pointed out endlessly on this list already, OFH/Dark Lord wannabe/self-serving Snape just sounds completely OOC and total lack of any possible believable nor interesting motivations to me. A grudge-obsessed Snape doesn't sound like someone who cannot commit to anything and suave enough to play both side and such. It's conflicting characterization. On the contray, Snape is someone who has a cause (no matter how trivial or petty it might be) and will see thru it till the grudging end, he's a 'die hard follow one leader/cause' type of man. vmonte again: For the "Greater good" I supposed? Fit with JKR's themes. D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dossett at lds.net Thu Jul 19 22:04:41 2007 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:04:41 -0000 Subject: Interesting poll result :) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172202 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Don't forget! Many of the polls will be closing in just a few hours, > when the list itself is closed for the release of Deathly Hallows. > (Woo hoo! it's almost here!!) > > As I took a peek just now, to see how the voting has been going these > past few days, one thing really struck me, in the "Whom Do You > Actually Hope WILL Die By the End of Deathly Hallows?" poll. Do you > know which character has nary a vote? Not ONE person who has said > s/he wants this person to die? > > Is it Harry? Nope. > > > Is it Hermione? Nope. > > > Is it Grawp? (Ha!) Nope. > > > It's... it's... Neville!! > > Go look for yourself: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=2540032 > > > So, what does this say about us Harry Potter fans, do you think? > And/or what does it say about the way JK Rowling has written Neville > Longbottom?? > > Thoughts, anyone? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > Pat: I was stunned when I first read this, but in thinking about it, Neville and Harry are the two characters bound by the prophecy and the loss of their parents when so young, and also the two characters that I'd like to see retain their purity right up to the very end. So - go Neville!! Pat From k12listmomma at comcast.net Thu Jul 19 22:20:20 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:20:20 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: List Closure -- Change! References: Message-ID: <009d01c7ca52$fe831140$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172203 It's just all terribly sad- so many of the lists have just stopped conversing at all because a lot of people have already gone on media blackout. I'm in mourning, and cursing at the same time those who are doing the spoiling, because this week we should have been doing all our cheerful comparisons of what we would be wearing and doing while we wait in line to get our books. Instead, we are each isolating ourselves, and it feels like a death has occurred. List elves, I salute you. Shelley From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 22:29:51 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:29:51 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172204 Annemehr said: > The so-called "prophecies" aren't > instances of her doing what she does more successfully than usual, > > they're something else entirely. And the something else they look to > > be is nothing so much as possession as we know it. > > > Carol responds: > That's one possible explanation. But we have no evidence elsewhere in > the books that DD has the power of possession, and he isn't present > when Trelawney performs her second Prophecy in PoA. Annemehr: First and most importantly, I'll point out that in a part that was snipped, Talisman said: Talisman replied, back then: > > The short answer is I think she was possessed--outright or some > > ventriloquistic variant yet to be named/revealed. > In other words, it *may* be possession, but her main point is that *whatever* it was, it was Dumbledore's doing. Second, the fact that DD was not present in the room for the second prophecy is no obstacle. In OoP, Voldemort apparated out of the Atrium (and deposited Bellatrix somewhere, and Harry began to move from behind the statue, and DD told him not to move) *before* he possessed Harry. (OoP ch. 36, p. 815 US) Carol: > Granted, she isn't a Seer in the sense that she "sees" into the future > in her normal state, but evidently some sort of spirit or numina is > passing through her during her real Prophecies. Annemehr: Well, if anyone were faking a prophecy, they'd certainly make it *look* that way. Carol: > And she certainly read > the cards pretty accurately in HBP. Also, she does see things in the > crystal ball that HRH can't see. She just misreads Sirius Black's > Animagus form as a Grim (or maybe that's what it is, ), she sees > death hovering over Hogwarts in Gof but misreads the death as Harry's, > and so on. Annemehr: We can't judge how accurately she read the cards, because we aren't really told. I'm no expert on Tarot, but one thing Trelawney says is: '- the lightning-struck tower,' she whispered. 'Calamity. Disaster. Coming nearer all the time ...' (HBP ch. 25, p. 543 US) It's my understanding that the this card does not merely mean calamity, but carries a sense that the old order will be brought down for a better one to take its place. It's also my understanding that there's a system to reading the Tarot -- so on the one hand, anyone who studies them can make *something* of them, seer or not, and on the other hand, we can't tell from what Trelawney says that she's correctly catching the subtleties. As far as Trelawney "just" misreading Sirius's animagus form as a grim, I call that a bit of proof that she is not a seer. She only "saw" what she wanted to see. Again, she's no more successful than the charlatans on TV. Carol: > Anyway, she *sees* what's in the tea leaves, the cards, the crystal > ball. She just (generally) interprets it incorrectly. Annemehr: I'll reiterate: that's exactly what proves her not a seer. Carol: > Also, unless the future is fluid, > determined by choices and circumstances in the present and not > predetermined, there is no free will--and no point in doing what is > right rather than what is easy. Annemehr: This is too much for the time available, and the scope of this post, to answer (and truth be told, largely beyond my ability to do it justice). I'll just say that it isn't at all safe to *begin* with this assumption and then interpret the text by it. JKR seems to be sending some very mixed messages regarding free will so far. > Carol: > Dumbledore *does* lie, usually by dealing in halr-truths like > snape, but sometimes an out-an-out lie like telling Draco that they're > "quite alone." That lie harms no one, though, and allows him to help > Draco understand that he's not a killer. It's not like Rita Skeeter's > lies, which hurt people. (I wonder, BTW, whether telling Harry that > only they two know the complete Prophecy is another lie of the same > sort, protecting Snape.) Annemehr: Now we're getting somewhere. Yes, DD lies, for good reasons. And what he may do in a small way, he may do in a very large and more varied way for correspondingly more compelling reasons. Keep going in this direction, and you wind up with Guilty!DD. > > Annemehr: > > He used Imperius -- on Mrs. Cole, to make her believe a blank piece > of paper was an official document regarding Tom Riddle's registration > with Hogwarts (HBP 265 US). Her eyes "slid out of focus and back > again" -- that was no Obliviate; there was nothing to *forget*; that > was mind control. > > Carol responds: > The trouble with nonverbal spells and Harry's pov is that unless Harry > is casting them, he, and therefore the reader, doesn't know what they > are. Annemehr: Yeah, I screwed up there. It really looks more like a Confundus Charm, doesn't it? The point remains, it was a form of mind control. Carol: > He may not even need a spell; all he needs > to do imagine what he wants (a change of decoration, for example) and > wave his wand or clap his hands. Annemehr: Well, in the passage I cited, he did use his wand. Carol: > She just thinks that everything is in order when it isn't. > (A forged document would have had the same effect.) The problem, IMO, > is not with Dumbledore but with the Statute of Secrecy, which prevents > him from telling Mrs. Cole that Tom Riddle is a wizard and he wishes > to admit him to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Annemehr: Well, that goes to my point, and to Talisman's theory. DD is using mind control -- *sort of like using a forged document* -- because he knows better than Mrs. Cole what must be done, and he does what he must to accomplish it. That's Guilty!DD. > Carol, who considers herself and her interpretation perfectly rational > (if not absolutely accurate on all counts) and Talisman's marvelously > imaginative > Annemehr: In an attempt to answer this, I am going to have to refer to your comments about abstractions and ontology in post 171270. These things may not interest you, but -- along with integrating all the various events in the text into one congruous whole -- they go to the heart of Talisman's analysis. I really believe (and JKR's interview comments seem to bear out), that they go to the heart of JKR's purpose in writing, also. This series is *about* something more than a fun story with plot twists. That's why JKR has said, very emphatically, that she *believes* in it. And I assure you that Talisman is doing real literary analysis, not fanfic. Annemehr From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:46:14 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:46:14 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885174.36.35281.w115@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172205 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Whom do you actually hope WILL die by the end of Deathly Hallows? Not who you think will necessarily, but whom would you actually like to see expire? Choose as many as you like. CHOICES AND RESULTS - Harry, 1 votes, 0.14% - Ron, 4 votes, 0.54% - Hermione, 3 votes, 0.41% - Neville, 0 votes, 0.00% - Luna, 2 votes, 0.27% - Ginny, 10 votes, 1.36% - Snape, 40 votes, 5.45% - Lupin, 7 votes, 0.95% - McGonagall, 4 votes, 0.54% - Hagrid, 12 votes, 1.63% - Pettigrew, 90 votes, 12.26% - Bellatrix Lestrange, 107 votes, 14.58% - Voldemort, 110 votes, 14.99% - Umbridge, 85 votes, 11.58% - Kreacher, 57 votes, 7.77% - Dobby, 6 votes, 0.82% - Arthur and/or Molly, 5 votes, 0.68% - Bill and/or Fleur and/or Charlie, 4 votes, 0.54% - Percy, 24 votes, 3.27% - Fred and/or George, 2 votes, 0.27% - Grawp, 26 votes, 3.54% - Vernon and/or Petunia and/or Dudley, 14 votes, 1.91% - Lucius and/or Narcissa, 56 votes, 7.63% - Draco, 23 votes, 3.13% - Crabbe, Goyle, Nott and/or Parkinson, 42 votes, 5.72% For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:47:42 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:47:42 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885262.71.35466.w115@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172206 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: JKR has stated that in the final chapter of Book 7, one character gets a "reprieve." Who do you think the character is who will get the reprieve? VOTE FOR ONE ONLY. CHOICES AND RESULTS - Harry, 21 votes, 9.17% - Ron, 11 votes, 4.80% - Hermione, 3 votes, 1.31% - Neville, 9 votes, 3.93% - Ginny, 6 votes, 2.62% - Lord Voldemort, 2 votes, 0.87% - Draco Malfoy, 49 votes, 21.40% - Lucius Malfoy, 5 votes, 2.18% - Crabbe or Goyle, 0 votes, 0.00% - Luna , 2 votes, 0.87% - Hagrid, 12 votes, 5.24% - Bellatrix Lestrange, 2 votes, 0.87% - Theo Nott, 2 votes, 0.87% - Percy Weasley, 11 votes, 4.80% - Remus Lupin, 12 votes, 5.24% - Severus Snape, 63 votes, 27.51% - McGonagall, 1 votes, 0.44% - Peter Pettigrew, 10 votes, 4.37% - Cornelius Fudge, 1 votes, 0.44% - Sybill Trelawney, 1 votes, 0.44% - Grawp, 0 votes, 0.00% - Dolores Umbridge, 1 votes, 0.44% - Rufus Scrimgeour, 0 votes, 0.00% - A Death Eater not listed here, 0 votes, 0.00% - OTHER (feel free to name this person onlist!), 5 votes, 2.18% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Harry - laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com - phrising at gmail.com - chnc1024 at bellsouth.net - vickik at umich.edu - Lambright at charter.net - jeanico2000 at yahoo.com - snoil at attbi.com - anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com - ianpaul2000 at yahoo.com - penhaligon at gmail.com - chrusokomos at gmail.com - milspils2004 at yahoo.co.in - chesterschick88 at yahoo.com - elfundeb at gmail.com - sandy at unforgettable.com - jabarac at yahoo.com - dsnylnd55 at aol.com - twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com - pretenderprofilergirl at yahoo.com - rogers77 at earthlink.net - Tgoswife325 at aol.com - Ron - manawydan at ntlworld.com - steven1965aaa at yahoo.com - chnc1024 at yahoo.com - progman62 at earthlink.net - blessedbe_charmed at yahoo.ca - kellymolinari at yahoo.com - mani_1960 at fibertel.com.ar - tim at marvinhold.com - jmh223 at yahoo.com - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - loquastar at yahoo.com - Hermione - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - tmarends at yahoo.com - Patrickjd9 at comcast.net - Neville - enlil65 at gmail.com - hpidentity at yahoo.com - cayseeme2 at yahoo.com - ornawn at 013.net - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - jwilliamson at rocketmail.com - clydebon1968 at yahoo.com - JainaDurron at chaoszone.de - m_warren17 at yahoo.com.au - Ginny - talisman22457 at yahoo.com - Englishlady at gmail.com - aturnbul at yahoo.com - danj725 at yahoo.com - momryden at yahoo.com - felicialso at yahoo.com - Lord Voldemort - dawn at shotwell.com - felix_quinn at yahoo.com - Draco Malfoy - mattbarlow99 at yahoo.com - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - sylviablundell at aol.com - lhuntley at fandm.edu - emysticaus at yahoo.com - roxy70072 at cox.net - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - glass_eyes at hotmail.com - seusilva at uol.com.br - stevejjen at earthlink.net - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - cory805 at yahoo.com - mora at vbbn.com - sbsheeley at yahoo.com - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - ciaranas at yahoo.com - unicorn67mom at yahoo.com - celeblezfan at yahoo.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - erikog at one.net - tab1669 at elnet.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - dossett at lds.net - kimenm at hotmail.com - solitary_shadow101 at yahoo.co.uk - matthew at mjwilson.demon.co.uk - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - freddykruegerre at yahoo.com - mz_annethrope at yahoo.com - drfan_100 at yahoo.com - zgirnius at yahoo.com - jmmears at comcast.net - ferry_wjaya at yahoo.com.sg - witherwing at sbcglobal.net - ibchawz at yahoo.com - whimsymoondesigns at yahoo.com - ivaldoo at yahoo.com - blairbare06 at yahoo.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - impherring13 at yahoo.com - mervin180 at yahoo.com - loopyzu at psni.us - jelly92784 at yahoo.com - mhersheybar at hotmail.com - kirp86 at yahoo.co.uk - tidblgr72 at yahoo.com - anaith at gmx.net - cdayr at yahoo.com - kblandon at hotmail.com - Lucius Malfoy - chieftainette at gmail.com - mgrantwich at yahoo.com - waianric at yahoo.com - spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com - sfcmac65 at yahoo.com - Crabbe or Goyle - Luna - lauralaylin at gmail.com - aceworker at yahoo.com - Hagrid - peckham at cyberramp.net - jade69_47331 at yahoo.com - msju08 at yahoo.com - harryp at stararcher.com - amis917 at hotmail.com - littleleah at handbag.com - aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au - Aixoise at snet.net - vinkv002 at planet.nl - gst_bb at yahoo.com.au - xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com - miamibarb at BellSouth.net - Bellatrix Lestrange - lisaew54 at yahoo.com - paulag5777 at yahoo.com - Theo Nott - pegasus0580 at yahoo.ca - scarah at gmail.com - Percy Weasley - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - delightms94 at yahoo.com - mhess66125 at yahoo.com - Littlelegz at gmail.com - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - carodave92 at yahoo.com - lwalsh at acsalaska.net - inkling_rg at yahoo.com - wilhelmtell35 at hotmail.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - buoybells at yahoo.com - Remus Lupin - hickengruendler at yahoo.de - luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca - rdoliver30 at yahoo.com - djklh2 at juno.com - marika_thestral at yahoo.se - caaf at hotmail.com - annie3x20 at aol.com - theworldisadeafmachine at yahoo.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - cassy_ferris at yahoo.com - hexicon at yahoo.com - q_02 at hotmail.com - Severus Snape - ithinkhard at gmail.com - dlmca at stny.rr.com - mark_pierre at interia.pl - shanhut at yahoo.com - jackcarrie at hotmail.com - bgrugin at yahoo.com - madparrothead at yahoo.com - ksd1955 at yahoo.com - marshsundeen at hotmail.com - cuimedono at gmail.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - lisabiles at grandecom.net - spookedook at yahoo.co.uk - sad1199 at yahoo.com - msmerymac at yahoo.com - kathealy at eircom.net - britneywbb at yahoo.com - Ronin_47 at comcast.net - ninakins_73 at yahoo.com - s_ings at yahoo.com - triinum at yahoo.com - snapes_witch at yahoo.com - lwilliams15209 at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - addynuff at bigpond.net.au - muellem at bc.edu - ceridwennight at hotmail.com - annemehr at yahoo.com - quigonginger at yahoo.com - dark_ally8 at yahoo.com - managing_mischief at yahoo.com - aida_costa at hotmail.com - loriw1017 at yahoo.com - pixieberry at charter.net - GeorgiannJ at cs.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - whiggrrl at erols.com - whtwitch91 at yahoo.com - trustno142 at verizon.net - djklaugh at comcast.net - smilingator81 at aol.com - kjones at telus.net - marydianne3123 at yahoo.com - marda.strib at yahoo.com - barefootpuppets at yahoo.com - pwaldrip at charter.net - SMacLagan at msn.com - cheryl2470 at yahoo.com - ginny343 at yahoo.com - maria8162001 at yahoo.com - grich277080 at aol.com - sharon8880 at yahoo.com - nbr1 at comcast.net - Goddess_of_fire2001 at hotmail.com - chikitsune at gmail.com - caiomhino at gmail.com - jenny328 at ameritech.net - jmaej07 at yahoo.com - SnapesSlytherin at aol.com - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - ellen_lihui at yahoo.com.cn - ancags at yahoo.com - porshia7 at yahoo.co.in - McGonagall - tracym255 at aol.com - Peter Pettigrew - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - wiffyboy2003 at yahoo.com - gregoryadamisin at yahoo.com - powellstarkey at yahoo.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - chellblanc at aol.com - lolita_ns at yahoo.com - joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net - ginnieliz333 at yahoo.com - hpfreakazoid at gmail.com - Cornelius Fudge - random832 at gmail.com - Sybill Trelawney - cosmos2688 at yahoo.com - Grawp - Dolores Umbridge - mnkmurphy885 at yahoo.com - Rufus Scrimgeour - A Death Eater not listed here - OTHER (feel free to name this person onlist!) - yolani_vdw at yahoo.com - radza at stofanet.dk - linneablack at yahoo.com - bearzy20012001 at yahoo.com - celizwh at intergate.com For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:43:58 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:43:58 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885038.92.78605.w123@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172207 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Pippin's Poll: "Inquiring Minds Want To Know...Is Snape A Vampire?" CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, he uses a potion to conceal it., 109 votes, 6.24% - Yes, he's part vampire, part human., 259 votes, 14.83% - No, the vampire references are a red herring., 1309 votes, 74.97% - (Unofficial choice) No, he's a Moderator. Same sort of blood-sucking fiend/daemon, right?, 69 votes, 3.95% For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:50:19 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:50:19 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885419.745.55753.w114@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172208 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Which of these presumably dead (or indisposed) characters will turn out to not be dead after all, or will come back to life? CHOICES AND RESULTS - The Basilisk, 55 votes, 2.47% - Mrs. Black, 42 votes, 1.89% - Regulus Black, 218 votes, 9.81% - Sirius Black, 290 votes, 13.05% - Broderick Bode , 48 votes, 2.16% - Any of the Bones family, 61 votes, 2.74% - Barty Crouch Jr., 70 votes, 3.15% - Barty Crouch Sr., 48 votes, 2.16% - Mrs. Crouch, 46 votes, 2.07% - Caradoc Dearborn, 75 votes, 3.37% - Cedric Diggory, 59 votes, 2.65% - Benjy Fenwick, 47 votes, 2.11% - Alice and/or Frank Longbottom, 449 votes, 20.20% - Mrs. Lovegood, 58 votes, 2.61% - Marlene McKinnon, 40 votes, 1.80% - Dorcas Meadowes, 44 votes, 1.98% - James Potter, 99 votes, 4.45% - Lily Potter, 82 votes, 3.69% - Gideon and/or Fabian Prewett, 50 votes, 2.25% - Quirrell, 70 votes, 3.15% - Rosier , 50 votes, 2.25% - Missing Weasley Child, should there prove to have been one, 95 votes, 4.27% - Wilkes, 47 votes, 2.11% - Other (specify onlist, motivating answer), 80 votes, 3.60% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - The Basilisk - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - ancalyme at yahoo.de - cosettar at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - freaky_ams at hotmail.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - kohararpo at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - kaixin90 at yahoo.co.uk - olly854321 at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - fabianamm at brturbo.com - jennistern at aol.com - vnagata at hotmail.com - SnapesRaven at web.de - tuky_queen_pluto at yahoo.co.in - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - noesumeragi at yahoo.es - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - TScheffler at rtlworld.de - lyraofjordan at yahoo.com - bharathib at yahoo.com - Mrs. Black - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - olly854321 at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - lisa_wescott at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - franthephoenix at yahoo.co.uk - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - Regulus Black - siriuslove71 at yahoo.com - jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com - muellem at bc.edu - zeldaricdeau at yahoo.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - carmelfagan at hotmail.com - kzingebret at gmail.com - ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com - isabelladomipete at yahoo.com.br - melissasims at yahoo.com - mario.pitre at videotron.ca - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - cul8ralleg8r at yahoo.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - dougsdoodlebug at yahoo.com - rh64643 at appstate.edu - ajk6405 at yahoo.co.uk - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - Zarleycat at aol.com - stanleys at sbcglobal.net - eclipse021342 at yahoo.com - ann.nalle at verizon.net - annemehr at yahoo.com - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk - siamkatze_33 at yahoo.com - zanelupin at yahoo.com - frost_indri at yahoo.com - dh.shrijnana at verizon.net - linlou43 at yahoo.com - nianya_c at yahoo.com - denise at emptymirrorbooks.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - tzakis1225 at netzero.com - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - star__victoria at hotmail.com - amy_marblefeet at yahoo.co.uk - daciah97 at yahoo.com - isadora474 at yahoo.com - kstewart at austin.rr.com - ladysilverbolt at yahoo.com - l_zinkiewicz at yahoo.com - pacificmile at cox.net - cdayr at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - keithrichgirl at yahoo.com - mary.hoerr at gmail.com - camiecat at comcast.net - humaira at gist.ac.kr - scully_med at yahoo.ca - arianesmum at yahoo.com - sara_hodsden at sbcglobal.net - marika_thestral at yahoo.se - twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com - borchi2a at yahoo.com - icebat78 at yahoo.es - chnc1024 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - ginny343 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - simonebirch at hotmail.com - apzdcmsw at yahoo.ca - kcamera at msn.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - CoyotesChild at charter.net - freaky_ams at hotmail.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - thesheltons1 at yahoo.com - mkeller01 at alltel.net - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - ppahuja1 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - mommystery at hotmail.com - philstar22 at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - rredordead at aol.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - hebrideanblack at earthlink.net - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - jennefer_pizza at muzak.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - sirius702003 at yahoo.com - halfdevoured at diaryland.com - sailorstarfairy at yahoo.com - Missgiggles11130 at aol.com - boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - lauren_mustac at yahoo.com - stevejjen at earthlink.net - tonks_op at yahoo.com - buckbeak1391 at yahoo.com - Deerhounder at telstra.com - candymg04 at yahoo.com - deanlawrence_us at yahoo.com - heos at virgilio.it - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - pandora_966 at yahoo.com - janacooney at yahoo.com - LydiiaAdleida at aol.com - ssattar5 at yahoo.com - aqua_eyes1999 at yahoo.com - radasgat at yahoo.com - dd_ur_great at yahoo.co.uk - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - corinne.nieto at gmail.com - noon_at_night at yahoo.com - bambi3186 at yahoo.com - Ronin_47 at comcast.net - kirklander368 at hotmail.com - arbrown at memphis.edu - clarinut76 at yahoo.com - aliasnance at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - tlpbupu at hotmail.com - maddmorgan at adelphia.net - isis11571 at yahoo.com - jordana at optusnet.com.au - jmmears at comcast.net - spi00000000 at yahoo.com - fabianamm at brturbo.com - cmjohnstone at hotmail.com - jennistern at aol.com - pedpiedmont at yahoo.com - eh1260 at yahoo.com - eyegortroll at hotmail.com - dawn at shotwell.com - ccneppl at yahoo.com - andie1 at earthlink.net - calimie_niphredil at yahoo.es - Barbara_MBowen at yahoo.com - lildrummergirl12005 at yahoo.com - nadja_rehberger at hotmail.com - kathleenjohnson at juno.com - captain_suburbia at yahoo.com.au - sean_dunphy at hotmail.com - benevolentferretgoddess at yahoo.com - veritabatim at yahoo.com - girl_next_door704 at yahoo.com - carleyco at earthlink.net - elwing.alcyone at gmail.com - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - tsavorite_1 at hotmail.com - raeangelavhs at msn.com - tamiart at prodigy.net.mx - glykonix at yahoo.com - saradelpozo at yahoo.es - npdolphin1 at yahoo.com - lovingly_black at yahoo.com - srgalactica1982 at yahoo.com - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - tfaucette6387 at charter.net - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - loopyzu at psni.us - seebloom95 at hotmail.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - thewifenwv at yahoo.com - kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - vickik at umich.edu - rvotaw at i-55.com - dragonhard_2000 at yahoo.com - blee_aida at msn.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - kywildhorse713 at msn.com - mrslightningbolt at yahoo.com.au - shalimar07 at aol.com - sawsan_issa at earthlink.net - R.Vink2 at chello.nl - hln321 at aol.com - dizzyadora at hotmail.com - italiangino_13 at hotmail.com - grodd752 at yahoo.com - dream_weeper at hotmail.com - ivanneth63 at yahoo.com - pamela823 at charter.net - lipa at pobox.com - agreensaver at yahoo.com - fienxjox at yahoo.com - emhutch at sbcglobal.net - racing_club_starz at yahoo.co.uk - mark.scott3113 at ntlworld.com - iluvmuffins at hotmail.com - messinamoore at sbcglobal.net - lyraofjordan at yahoo.com - rowena.lewis82 at gmail.com - stufforsaleinboston at yahoo.com - bharathib at yahoo.com - smithtaz at yahoo.com - butterflykisses427 at yahoo.com - albus_rh at yahoo.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - Tgoswife325 at aol.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - Sirius Black - siriuslove71 at yahoo.com - jayc57 at earthlink.net - marquis_de_sadde05 at yahoo.com - brwnidnolegrl at aol.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - carmelfagan at hotmail.com - melodiousmonkey at yahoo.com.au - amechan at virgilio.it - fotoger1 at hotmail.com - mario.pitre at videotron.ca - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - kathrin.p at gmail.com - dirgess13 at yahoo.com - ericas at one.net - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - dougsdoodlebug at yahoo.com - bluebird67au at yahoo.com.au - laura_momiji at tin.it - ajk6405 at yahoo.co.uk - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - waynerrn at yahoo.com - WFeuchter at msn.com - PurpleBear1976 at aol.com - floopy at shaw.ca - risako at nexusanime.com - veertje999 at yahoo.co.uk - raylady at metrocast.net - siamkatze_33 at yahoo.com - gallo at wpaccs.com - goalieracer at yahoo.com - barbarataku at yahoo.com - romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com - amdorn at hotmail.com - nianya_c at yahoo.com - daciah97 at yahoo.com - tonet_valdez at yahoo.com - entropymail at yahoo.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - solana_dd at yahoo.com - kstewart at austin.rr.com - rbfrey at hotmail.com - talented_bink at hotmail.com - llamadroid at hotmail.com - stefaniealexisread at yahoo.com - hplaluna at yahoo.com - AnyaSimbi at aol.com - dmthedragon at hotmail.com - rupertgrintblue at yahoo.com - scottebrecht at yahoo.com - sunshine_isis at fastmail.fm - radza at stofanet.dk - averyhaze at hotmail.com - slstepek at rocketmail.com - chnc1024 at AOL.COM - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net - ROWAN6MAYFAIR at AOL.COM - charlesemoss at yahoo.com - misspamlestat at yahoo.com - nancysplace at sbcglobal.net - jcrct at aol.com - lupa_larentia at yahoo.com - mariea817 at yahoo.com - njcunewbie at yahoo.com - adhaereovirtuti at sbcglobal.net - wellfleet4me at yahoo.com - camiecat at comcast.net - sammip2010 at yahoo.ca - jedynka0 at op.pl - veltara at yahoo.com - humaira at gist.ac.kr - stibbrine at yahoo.com - arwenrjl at aol.com - twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com - wrexx at hotmail.com - airfreightforwarder at yahoo.com - fallingmoon1971 at yahoo.com - kida_jolie at yahoo.com - mora at vbbn.com - cosmos2688 at yahoo.com - ammie19772 at yahoo.com - borchi2a at yahoo.com - jenny_johnson at heathfarm.freeserve.co.uk - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - kconn8 at yahoo.com - dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - blue_shamrock03 at yahoo.com - freaky_ams at hotmail.com - jackcarrie at hotmail.com - horseyxphile at yahoo.com - djrfdh at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - beth_bousquet at yahoo.com - ummnog at yahoo.co.uk - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - thesheltons1 at yahoo.com - ashleigh_snowhill at yahoo.ca - dlehman24 at yahoo.com - amanda_haffery at hotmail.com - petitlapingris at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - jennalei2003 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - kohararpo at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - ithildin at ondragonswing.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - ogirouar at yahoo.com - halfdevoured at diaryland.com - ryanweasley at yahoo.com - nosborn80 at yahoo.com - kaaryn4 at yahoo.com - cjsusice at yahoo.com - lemondrop5440 at yahoo.com - Missgiggles11130 at aol.com - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - Tao-Te-JPB at comcast.net - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - mcmartin023 at aol.com - griffin782002 at yahoo.com - sad1199 at yahoo.com - kaixin90 at yahoo.co.uk - kittybat at planet-save.com - nirupamashah at yahoo.co.in - lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com - olly854321 at yahoo.co.uk - w_ludvigsen at yahoo.com - djcloutier at hotmail.com - docallergy1968 at yahoo.com - kethryn at wulfkub.com - lrmartinez at justice.com - comtnlady at yahoo.com - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - janacooney at yahoo.com - covinor at kean.edu - missamal422 at yahoo.com - purpleandgoldumbrella at yahoo.com - mickey4president76 at yahoo.com - bmelser at netzero.com - darthtaz21 at yahoo.com - anjagiles at yahoo.de - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - mikenshell5 at yahoo.com - robinboss at gmail.com - bc_is_the_place_to_be at yahoo.ca - eljobu at yahoo.com - powellstarkey at yahoo.com - jessedforrer at yahoo.com - irishshedevil333 at yahoo.com - Ronin_47 at comcast.net - blessedbe_charmed at yahoo.ca - porshia7 at yahoo.co.in - gwhlevy at sbcglobal.net - kirklander368 at hotmail.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - gorbetta at hotmail.com - arbrown at memphis.edu - pks9231993 at yahoo.com - timelady_who at yahoo.com.au - barrie1111 at juno.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - ceeca at yahoo.com - jzare02 at yahoo.com - claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com - spi00000000 at yahoo.com - faded_mandarin at yahoo.com - arthanien at hotmail.com - jennistern at aol.com - willowsgreyghost at yahoo.com - betsyfallon at hotmail.com - teilani2002 at yahoo.com - sayitloud38 at yahoo.com - kmg300 at yahoo.com - atolson at emich.edu - vnagata at hotmail.com - yhammi2008 at yahoo.com - ginamiller at jis.nashville.org - Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com - SnapesRaven at web.de - drivefor5in2004 at yahoo.com - vcoler at chartermi.net - marlamountain at hotmail.com - nihil8750 at comcast.net - slmrn98 at bellsouth.net - lisa_wescott at yahoo.com - improbable_solution at yahoo.co.uk - princess_graceless31 at yahoo.com - ruby_red6669 at yahoo.com - sarnobes at yahoo.com - carleyco at earthlink.net - elwing.alcyone at gmail.com - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - girljudy2001 at yahoo.com - jaharnarishma at yahoo.com - yyssww2001 at yahoo.com - luvpooh20 at yahoo.com - lovingly_black at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - chesterschick88 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - amlygo at cox.net - carly_soprano at yahoo.com - HeartAndSoul4815 at ctel.net - ruciful13 at yahoo.com - Bakrfam313 at cs.com - stella37ca at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - artist_0308 at yahoo.com - kawfhw at earthlink.net - tab1669 at elnet.com - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - strangeangel12 at yahoo.com - emperors_soul at yahoo.com.sg - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - georgewgriffith at hotmail.com - egastin at earthlink.net - kywildhorse713 at msn.com - belofbree at yahoo.co.uk - shalimar07 at aol.com - tamara at stonesnyder.com - sawsan_issa at earthlink.net - biggypaw at yahoo.com - myangelsoflife at yahoo.com - shinrin_namida at yahoo.fr - yellowrainjacket at yahoo.com - grodd752 at yahoo.com - katiebug1233 at yahoo.com - rosie_27018 at yahoo.com - dream_weeper at hotmail.com - timnshell at hotmail.com - anthyroserain at yahoo.com - kmcghee3346 at charter.net - incamaya23 at hotmail.com - cazette_j at yahoo.com - fienxjox at yahoo.com - aletamay01 at yahoo.com - le_temps_perdu at web.de - mscott at wea.org.uk - cthauber at mail.com - lora at lilting.org - jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com - retrorose28 at comcast.net - dece1799 at uidaho.edu - sematar at sentex.net - avianasnowwolfe at yahoo.com - carmenherrerosuarez at hotmail.com - jlnbtr at yahoo.com - vero_313 at yahoo.com - indiasjones at msn.com - kimberlee_tipton at yahoo.com - jiajia0512 at 163.com - rowena.lewis82 at gmail.com - hiwatari_asutsuri at yahoo.com - butterflykisses427 at yahoo.com - without_wax_4_u at yahoo.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - albus_rh at yahoo.com - trpllatte2002 at yahoo.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - felicialso at yahoo.com - Broderick Bode - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - patientx3 at aol.com - dh.shrijnana at verizon.net - rbfrey at hotmail.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - k12isten at hotmail.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - jennistern at aol.com - mhbobbin at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - whereisthing2 at hotmail.com - Any of the Bones family - muellem at bc.edu - pfsch at gmx.de - melodiousmonkey at yahoo.com.au - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - l_zinkiewicz at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - apzdcmsw at yahoo.ca - abishag00 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - kohararpo at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - candymg04 at yahoo.com - pizziehl at yahoo.com - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - anjagiles at yahoo.de - retro_cool_cat at blueyonder.co.uk - eljobu at yahoo.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com - ziggy at zootsplace.com - mail at mark4christmas.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - vickik at umich.edu - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - fonzkat at yahoo.com - kjones at telus.net - Barty Crouch Jr. - ABadgerFan2 at msn.com - nae92168 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - elliecove at msn.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - ann.nalle at verizon.net - gallo at wpaccs.com - roulston112131 at yahoo.com - airscale at yahoo.com - tjprd2002 at yahoo.com - meriaugust at yahoo.com - slstepek at rocketmail.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - maricel_85 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hermowninny719 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - Janicem211 at aol.com - eljobu at yahoo.com - irishshedevil333 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - fabianamm at brturbo.com - jennistern at aol.com - pedpiedmont at yahoo.com - rhinobabies at hotmail.com - unc8401 at yahoo.com - topaz880 at yahoo.com - JainaDurron at chaoszone.de - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - italiangino_13 at hotmail.com - Tori100186 at aol.com - rubykelly at webtv.net - wikki20 at yahoo.com - laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - Barty Crouch Sr. - melodiousmonkey at yahoo.com.au - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - jwright at amdocs.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - Janicem211 at aol.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - theanimallover_11 at yahoo.com - cnidaria at gmail.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - vickik at umich.edu - emperors_soul at yahoo.com.sg - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - georgewgriffith at hotmail.com - wikki20 at yahoo.com - Mrs. Crouch - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - mhymei at aol.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - Nibleswik at aol.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - clehrenet at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - ccneppl at yahoo.com - kris_c_goalie at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - Caradoc Dearborn - jennivirides at yahoo.co.uk - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - mariaalena at purdue.edu - star__victoria at hotmail.com - omphale at onetel.com - tiamik72 at aol.com - sonorangal at aol.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - bleckybecs at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - dani814 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - elfundeb at comcast.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - crazytortilla79 at yahoo.com - jinxes_for_julie at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - halfdevoured at diaryland.com - dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu - madaxe at starspath.com - deatheaterjames at yahoo.co.uk - eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk - chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net - lierian at carolina.rr.com - stevejjen at earthlink.net - sali-ii at lycos.com - radasgat at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - mikefeemster at yahoo.com - bd88ns at blueyonder.co.uk - tinel at aladinscave.demon.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - blee_aida at msn.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - rachaelmcadams at yahoo.ca - shalimar07 at aol.com - john_the_walker82 at yahoo.co.uk - lindseyfaber at yahoo.com - moonyatemybaby at yahoo.co.uk - bharathib at yahoo.com - Cedric Diggory - kathrin.p at gmail.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - yswahl at stis.net - goalieracer at yahoo.com - AnyaSimbi at aol.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - supremewill at hotmail.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - freaky_ams at hotmail.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - Tao-Te-JPB at comcast.net - docallergy1968 at yahoo.com - milspils2004 at yahoo.co.in - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - snow15145 at yahoo.com - dracosmyth at yahoo.com - JainaDurron at chaoszone.de - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - HeartAndSoul4815 at ctel.net - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - egastin at earthlink.net - shalimar07 at aol.com - tamara at stonesnyder.com - biggypaw at yahoo.com - rebelslgb at aol.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - Benjy Fenwick - jjaco2 at comcast.net - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - crazytortilla79 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - griffin782002 at yahoo.com - stevejjen at earthlink.net - eljobu at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - templar1112002 at yahoo.com - hpluz at yahoo.com.au - tinel at aladinscave.demon.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - Alice and/or Frank Longbottom - siriuslove71 at yahoo.com - reesa86 at hotmail.com - jayc57 at earthlink.net - s_ings at yahoo.com - jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com - nae92168 at yahoo.com - pfsch at gmx.de - brwnidnolegrl at aol.com - penelop313 at yahoo.fr - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - kzingebret at gmail.com - brownwynne at msn.com - tcyhunt at earthlink.net - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com - fotoger1 at hotmail.com - mattlovescourtney at yahoo.com - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - mario.pitre at videotron.ca - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - kathrin.p at gmail.com - cul8ralleg8r at yahoo.com - jjaco2 at comcast.net - m_m_gregory at yahoo.com - sharon8880 at yahoo.com - elliecove at msn.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - monzaba at poczta.onet.pl - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au - arrafah at hotmail.com - artcase at yahoo.com - stanleys at sbcglobal.net - WFeuchter at msn.com - eclipse021342 at yahoo.com - ann.nalle at verizon.net - karen_nagy at yahoo.com - jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com - annemehr at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - bowlwoman at yahoo.com - risako at nexusanime.com - quigonginger at yahoo.com - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - jcobbuk at yahoo.co.uk - fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com - veertje999 at yahoo.co.uk - patientx3 at aol.com - siamkatze_33 at yahoo.com - grace701 at yahoo.com - Pottymouth65 at aol.com - belijako at online.no - gallo at wpaccs.com - frost_indri at yahoo.com - patskewa at yahoo.com - dh.shrijnana at verizon.net - barbarataku at yahoo.com - kcrani01 at hotmail.com - rmatovic at ssk.com - dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com - cowjock13 at yahoo.com - amdorn at hotmail.com - khlauf at fuse.net - kevinemail2000 at yahoo.com - denise at emptymirrorbooks.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - ajiva at yahoo.com - a_williams1 at pacific.edu - lmciver1 at cs.com - roulston112131 at yahoo.com - blaise_writer at hotmail.com - daciah97 at yahoo.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - witchwriter_no1 at yahoo.com - nichola1974 at yahoo.com - solana_dd at yahoo.com - djpayton1 at juno.com - wrinkle at cwnet.com - tgs at iaw.on.ca - anandini77 at hotmail.com - impherring13 at yahoo.com - kstewart at austin.rr.com - rbfrey at hotmail.com - celizwh at intergate.com - ValieV at att.net - les000us at yahoo.com - jweinert at infionline.net - hawkeye072 at sbcglobal.net - nepenthales at yahoo.com - playerdogyo at yahoo.com - rockit_esq at msn.com - joj at rochester.rr.com - sage2245 at msn.com - mstapleford at sympatico.ca - rxtlc at comcast.net - eliadedorme at yahoo.fr - muzicfreeak22 at yahoo.com - farmerdon59 at yahoo.com - Jackwolf17 at msn.com - scottebrecht at yahoo.com - michelewistar at yahoo.com - sunshine_isis at fastmail.fm - pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net - idlerat at yahoo.com - l_zinkiewicz at yahoo.com - craigpb at fastmail.fm - averyhaze at hotmail.com - ExSlytherin at aol.com - anneb_in at yahoo.com - eeyore6771 at comcast.net - cdayr at yahoo.com - jesmck at yahoo.com - slstepek at rocketmail.com - abbess_tsing at hotmail.com - gabydiehl at t-online.de - uath50 at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - witchypooh67 at yahoo.com - ajroland at earthlink.net - OneSweetWorld27 at msn.com - kristinedagostino at yahoo.com - littlebitgal at att.net - Aevumsemper at hotmail.com - bitty at fbcom.net - donkeynjo at yahoo.com - johnhern at hotmail.com - sammip2010 at yahoo.ca - norek_archives2 at hotmail.com - mandacat98 at yahoo.com - machaelf at yahoo.com - marshsundeen at hotmail.com - fallingmoon1971 at yahoo.com - borchi2a at yahoo.com - jeopardy18 at comcast.net - klsandre at mtholyoke.edu - sang_dencre12 at hotmail.com - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - hpfans at mamakelsy.net - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - apzdcmsw at yahoo.ca - abishag00 at yahoo.com - flyballcairn at bellsouth.net - hickengruendler at yahoo.de - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - gefrodsham at hotmail.com - jvovk22 at yahoo.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - djrfdh at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - sj_barton at yahoo.com - jmco at globetrotter.net - falkelihu at yahoo.com - ummnog at yahoo.co.uk - agbarnes2000 at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - thesheltons1 at yahoo.com - ecart8525 at hotmail.com - mkeller01 at alltel.net - maria.elmvang at gmail.com - amanda_haffery at hotmail.com - petitlapingris at yahoo.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - drjuliehoward at yahoo.com - ppahuja1 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - mommystery at hotmail.com - TwoHobbits at aol.com - baseball_07_05 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - lovefromhermione at yahoo.com - rtb333 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - dalriada26 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - kathryn-jones at comcast.net - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - christyj2323 at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - rgm at apex.net - dejjfan368 at aol.com - scb1066 at adelphia.net - nicolau at mat.puc-rio.br - Emza at lineone.net - apwbdumbledore1978 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hermowninny719 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - bldgblocks10 at yahoo.com - sfpeterso at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - hebrideanblack at earthlink.net - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - jennefer_pizza at muzak.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com - sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - Dirt_Diver05 at msn.com - grahadh at yahoo.com - dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu - stephie1179 at aol.com - bigbonedgal26 at hotmail.com - Janicem211 at aol.com - LadySawall at aol.com - sweetongoo at yahoo.com - angie at servit.org - tanja.musar at guest.arnes.si - elsyee_h at yahoo.com - annabella_coles at hotmail.com - trisana_farwell at yahoo.com - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - lalasnake at yahoo.com - mcmartin023 at aol.com - essorg_nire at yahoo.com - smhatreehugger at netscape.net - terpslover25 at yahoo.com - sixsunflowers at yahoo.com - hermioneclone at yahoo.com - kittybat at planet-save.com - stevejjen at earthlink.net - nirupamashah at yahoo.co.in - lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com - olly854321 at yahoo.co.uk - djcloutier at hotmail.com - kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk - u3232865 at student.anu.edu.au - buckbeak1391 at yahoo.com - dklopp at ptd.net - Deerhounder at telstra.com - erica_raec at yahoo.com - oiboyz at hotmail.com - hautbois1 at comcast.net - maryhotelling_92 at msn.com - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - jim27967 at yahoo.com - hpfan_cindy at yahoo.com - pandora_966 at yahoo.com - HBPrincess at gmail.com - janacooney at yahoo.com - amy79a at gmail.com - stix4141 at hotmail.com - starrchildsreb at yahoo.com - alisondd at yahoo.com - tynie19 at yahoo.com - dd_ur_great at yahoo.co.uk - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - irishshedevil333 at yahoo.com - hermy_202 at yahoo.co.in - gorbetta at hotmail.com - noelleisastar at yahoo.com - arbrown at memphis.edu - tellatalltale at yahoo.com - sharker469 at yahoo.com - florenceraynaud at yahoo.fr - mca at princeton.edu - barrythegirl at hotmail.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk - light_nell at yahoo.com - cnzjd at adelphia.net - rainnyday at aol.com - requiem at uswest.net - jordana at optusnet.com.au - rayheuer3 at aol.com - nobradors at hotmail.com - fabianamm at brturbo.com - riberam at glue.umd.edu - krirre.bokmal at telia.com - cmjohnstone at hotmail.com - jhnbwmn at hotmail.com - warhound at accessus.net - jennistern at aol.com - kerberusmon at yahoo.com.mx - bigmlfan at yahoo.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - eyegortroll at hotmail.com - toptopera at yahoo.com.br - sayitloud38 at yahoo.com - BostonCommon62 at msn.com - jennydowns at hotmail.com - libbieselden at yahoo.com.au - charlot7542 at yahoo.com - sarah__p at hotmail.com - yhammi2008 at yahoo.com - andie1 at earthlink.net - calimie_niphredil at yahoo.es - Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com - squireandknight at yahoo.com - SnapesRaven at web.de - drivefor5in2004 at yahoo.com - weildman at comcast.net - battleshipp at hotmail.com - kathleenjohnson at juno.com - michcv814 at yahoo.com - kamala_2347 at yahoo.com - beatrice23 at yahoo.com - jonyhornik at yahoo.com.ar - drcarole71 at yahoo.com - rhinobabies at hotmail.com - sean_dunphy at hotmail.com - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - famsle369 at yahoo.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - lolamozelle at yahoo.com - snorkack at jippii.fi - yahoo at stinsv.com - tinel at aladinscave.demon.co.uk - chilipepperpalmer at yahoo.com - khastiicatz at yahoo.com - odean at tiscali.co.uk - crt1072 at yahoo.com - shellbel at frontiernet.net - roseviolet66 at yahoo.com - carleyco at earthlink.net - ineskennes at yahoo.co.uk - ajillity at direcway.com - selkie1964 at yahoo.com - kenkettet at yahoo.com - bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com - lpetix at dpcc.com - sacha_vohra at yahoo.ca - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - annamhudson at yahoo.com - kelaino_urania at yahoo.com - millie at adr.dk - glykonix at yahoo.com - ni_see at comcast.net - mail at mark4christmas.co.uk - reaganomic6string at yahoo.com - lovingly_black at yahoo.com - tuky_queen_pluto at yahoo.co.in - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - arianaseibel at yahoo.com - thewifenwv at yahoo.com - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - amlygo at cox.net - caseytoll78 at aol.com - Chris967 at collegeclub.com - bob1987dole at yahoo.com - HeartAndSoul4815 at ctel.net - cynjo at earthlink.net - jdu at mail2.gcnet.net - cgperez217 at yahoo.com - kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - sk8sue at hotmail.com - Hunta_Girl at hotmail.com - kawfhw at earthlink.net - shoelessgirl at hotmail.com - maxximus787 at yahoo.com - vickik at umich.edu - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - Bkstrkbro at hotmail.com - florentinemaier at hotmail.com - blondeangelkiss at yahoo.com - julie_balfour at hotmail.com - emperors_soul at yahoo.com.sg - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - beckysbook1970 at yahoo.com - greenelizajw at yahoo.com - kywildhorse713 at msn.com - duppersgran at msn.com - wherr009 at umn.edu - spaebrun at yahoo.com - john_the_walker82 at yahoo.co.uk - sawsan_issa at earthlink.net - kellybeth11 at hotmail.com - m_warren17 at yahoo.com.au - TScheffler at rtlworld.de - rgbmcl at hotmail.com - earendil_fr at yahoo.com - lizaustin1303 at aol.com - sparky-wan at cox.net - bigbish13 at yahoo.com - a4annielauss at msn.com - zanaboo at aol.com - myangelsoflife at yahoo.com - slomudskipper at hotmail.com - yellowrainjacket at yahoo.com - italiangino_13 at hotmail.com - verosomm at yahoo.com - grodd752 at yahoo.com - katiebug1233 at yahoo.com - kaye60cc at yahoo.com - bd-bear at verizon.net - ginnywinny75 at hotmail.com - dream_weeper at hotmail.com - anthyroserain at yahoo.com - kandbmom at yahoo.com - anmsmom333 at cox.net - pandrea100 at hotmail.com - laura72 at sasktel.net - pamela823 at charter.net - Roolover93 at comcast.net - sunflowerlaw at cox.net - Tori100186 at aol.com - clehrenet_81 at yahoo.com - taniamf at terra.com.br - ealbistegui at yahoo.com - fienxjox at yahoo.com - g2grace at yahoo.com - aletamay01 at yahoo.com - le_temps_perdu at web.de - lora at lilting.org - jsteinb103 at aol.com - mz_annethrope at yahoo.com - retrorose28 at comcast.net - lucilaperezlascano at yahoo.com - watersign21 at yahoo.com - claredurina at yahoo.com - laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au - s.grafton at ntlworld.com - pegasus0580 at yahoo.ca - northsouth17 at yahoo.com - macabreparlor at aol.com - jlt38 at columbia.edu - mymusical_girls at yahoo.com - kimberlee_tipton at yahoo.com - mark.scott3113 at ntlworld.com - iluvmuffins at hotmail.com - forceman at SBCGlobal.net - rowena.lewis82 at gmail.com - chiefsmokey at yahoo.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - wilhelmtell35 at hotmail.com - pretenderprofilergirl at yahoo.com - Mrs. Lovegood - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - paulag5777 at yahoo.com - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - averyhaze at hotmail.com - abbess_tsing at hotmail.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - ppahuja1 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - mommystery at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - halfdevoured at diaryland.com - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - gorbetta at hotmail.com - timelady_who at yahoo.com.au - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - fabianamm at brturbo.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - yhammi2008 at yahoo.com - timo_bei at gmx.de - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - george.fisher at gmx.net - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - Marlene McKinnon - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - Dorcas Meadowes - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - tracym255 at aol.com - brentndiana at earthlink.net - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - franthephoenix at yahoo.co.uk - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - James Potter - nae92168 at yahoo.com - marquis_de_sadde05 at yahoo.com - hannah at starbrightdesigns.net - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - gallo at wpaccs.com - amdorn at hotmail.com - animagikat at yahoo.com - gandalph3 at hotmail.com - moochy4ro at hotmail.com - weasleyginerva at yahoo.com - hplaluna at yahoo.com - AnyaSimbi at aol.com - averyhaze at hotmail.com - jesmck at yahoo.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - animalspussycat at yahoo.com - kristinedagostino at yahoo.com - stibbrine at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - freaky_ams at hotmail.com - djrfdh at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - cschipper at nationsloan.com - docrheum at aol.com - amanda_haffery at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hermowninny719 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - molly_weasley_wannabe at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - ogirouar at yahoo.com - Janicem211 at aol.com - Missgiggles11130 at aol.com - Aisbelmon at hotmail.com - meandharrybff at yahoo.com - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - sirwonkalus at yahoo.com - hermioneclone at yahoo.com - bc_is_the_place_to_be at yahoo.ca - eljobu at yahoo.com - hermy_202 at yahoo.co.in - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - ankesh85 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - ceeca at yahoo.com - starrychica3000 at yahoo.com - claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com - dakers at pontotoc.k12.ms.us - spi00000000 at yahoo.com - hpfan543212345 at yahoo.com - eyegortroll at hotmail.com - yhammi2008 at yahoo.com - drivefor5in2004 at yahoo.com - artist_0308 at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - ethel0001 at aol.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - georgewgriffith at hotmail.com - egastin at earthlink.net - shalimar07 at aol.com - tamara at stonesnyder.com - yellowrainjacket at yahoo.com - grodd752 at yahoo.com - dream_weeper at hotmail.com - incamaya23 at hotmail.com - le_temps_perdu at web.de - kjane7779 at yahoo.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - Lily Potter - nae92168 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - roypone at yahoo.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - AnyaSimbi at aol.com - averyhaze at hotmail.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - animalspussycat at yahoo.com - humaira at gist.ac.kr - stibbrine at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - freaky_ams at hotmail.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - cschipper at nationsloan.com - ankesh85 at yahoo.com - amanda_haffery at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - ogirouar at yahoo.com - jojobinks1983 at yahoo.co.uk - jlanhammd at juno.com - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - w_ludvigsen at yahoo.com - wyldfirre at yahoo.com - bc_is_the_place_to_be at yahoo.ca - eljobu at yahoo.com - britneywbb at yahoo.com - hermy_202 at yahoo.co.in - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - ceeca at yahoo.com - claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com - im4bronte at yahoo.com - yhammi2008 at yahoo.com - nifer819 at yahoo.com - artist_0308 at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - bob1987dole at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - georgewgriffith at hotmail.com - egastin at earthlink.net - kywildhorse713 at msn.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - tamara at stonesnyder.com - meg_twin1 at hotmail.com - conart714 at yahoo.com - erinnmoo at yahoo.com - gergely.garami at freemail.hu - kjane7779 at yahoo.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - Gideon and/or Fabian Prewett - nae92168 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - tiamik72 at aol.com - pollbuster1hpfgu at yahoo.com - almostanangel011 at aol.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - meltowne at yahoo.com - nirupamashah at yahoo.co.in - candymg04 at yahoo.com - eljobu at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - shalimar07 at aol.com - rowena.lewis82 at gmail.com - bharathib at yahoo.com - Quirrell - ev From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:45:45 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:45:45 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885145.270.55266.w114@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172209 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Will Harry... CHOICES AND RESULTS - Live, 83 votes, 75.45% - Die -- that is, be 'properly dead', 10 votes, 9.09% - Die but return, 12 votes, 10.91% - Live but lose all his magical powers, 5 votes, 4.55% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Live - nidafatima at yahoo.com - hickengruendler at yahoo.de - poohtwo2000 at yahoo.com - xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com - Jen at alveymedia.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - olly at olly86.co.uk - doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - spaebrun at yahoo.com - zanelupin at yahoo.com - karen.eidukas at googlemail.com - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - chellblanc at aol.com - tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com - aturnbul at yahoo.com - acarter at new.rr.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - Schlobin at aol.com - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - desafio6 at gmail.com - aggieraggie at ntlworld.com - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - faithvsion at aol.com - michel56 at earthlink.net - sj_barton at yahoo.com - princessbitchykitty at yahoo.com - KJWhiteman at sbcglobal.net - hpidentity at yahoo.com - redskin91_a at yahoo.com - sherryb at derry.lib.nh.us - peckham at cyberramp.net - npdolphin1 at yahoo.com - mtandg at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - ffred_clegg at yahoo.co.uk - jelly92784 at yahoo.com - jenni.merrifield at jamm.com - babsheck at yahoo.com - snapes_witch at yahoo.com - anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com - bfiw2002 at yahoo.com - OctobersChild48 at aol.com - gone2dogz at hotmail.com - kamilaa at gmail.com - annie3x20 at aol.com - salla.klemetti at gmail.com - darksworld at yahoo.com - dianekasowski at yahoo.com - porshia7 at yahoo.co.in - muellem at bc.edu - marda.strib at yahoo.com - dejrgirl83 at yahoo.com - deeby8658 at yahoo.co.uk - loquastar at yahoo.com - lizthelucky at comcast.net - lmkos at earthlink.net - vmonte at yahoo.com - illyanadmc at thegiant.org - s_ings at yahoo.com - va32h at comcast.net - dreamy_dragon73 at yahoo.co.uk - djklaugh at comcast.net - marrz74 at aol.com - cdoolittle2007 at aol.com - lwilliams15209 at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - colwilrin at yahoo.com - manticoran at earthlink.net - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - ppahuja1 at yahoo.com - katydidtoo60 at yahoo.com - lisabiles at verizon.net - vickik at umich.edu - shmantzel at yahoo.com - annemehr at yahoo.com - eyegor at gmail.com - fluffysamsmom at yahoo.com - jlnbtr at yahoo.com - lauralaylin at gmail.com - Tgoswife325 at aol.com - hp_fan31 at yahoo.com - lyraofjordan at yahoo.com - Die -- that is, be 'properly dead' - solitary_shadow101 at yahoo.co.uk - harryp at stararcher.com - imamommy at sbcglobal.net - sweetophelia4u at yahoo.com - felicialso at yahoo.com - siamkatze_33 at yahoo.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - trojandc85 at yahoo.com - kjones at telus.net - Die but return - davidm at mpks.net - mz_annethrope at yahoo.com - dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com - hedwigno2 at yahoo.com - iam.kemper at gmail.com - hexicon at yahoo.com - amis917 at hotmail.com - juli17 at aol.com - Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com - slender_ocean at yahoo.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - dossett at lds.net - Live but lose all his magical powers - clio44a at yahoo.com - roxy70072 at cox.net - kvapost at yahoo.com.au - ladinechan at hotmail.com - whiggrrl at erols.com For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From talisman22457 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 22:49:50 2007 From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:49:50 -0000 Subject: Dark Mirror Part 3: The Dumbledorian Denouement: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172210 ... or How Twinkles Always Gets It In the End. A fretful House Elf sidles into the cell where Talisman and Lucius are still chained to the wall. It eyes the tiny portion of sand left in the hourglass, as if tempted to give the glass another shake. There is a sudden movement--a snap--and the neked elf runs squeeling from the room. A dingy dish towel dangles from Talisman's toes. *Here Luscious, grab the other side with your toes and help me spread it out, would ya? There's no time to lose.* Talisman dips her pointy toenail in the dirty puddle, once again, and begins: We'll keep this to the bare bones, because that elf is going to come back--with reinforcements--and this has to be tied to an owl in less than a half hour, now. The Dark Mirror has shown how Harry emulates the original DADAprofessors, by emulating their deepest secrets, in the pattern: 1/5, 2/6, 3/7. Thus Harry will emulate Lupin in book 7. It has also shown how the DADA professors reverse themselves in the pattern: 3/5, 2/6, 1/7. Leading to my prediction that Snape will reverse Quirrell in 7, as DD's mole at Darkwarts. To cut to the chase, the Dark Mirror has implications for DD, as well. One of the ways it controls his plot line is by causing him to reverse the original professor's denouements, in the pattern 3/5, 2/6, 1/7. Where Lupin was revealed as a werewolf in Book 3, DD confesses to being *too human* in Book 5 (and earlier people are said to want to prove he`s *only human*). Where Lupin returns to being an unemployed outcast and hunted criminal at the end of Book 3, DD--who over the course of the has become and outcast, unemployed and a hunted criminal--returns to full social, legal, and employment status at the end of Book 5. Where Lockhart is Obliviated in Book 2, DD is forced to drink extra memory goo in Book 6. Where Lockhart survives his ordeal, DD does not. This leads to my prediction that, in Book 7, he will reverse Quirrell's denouement in book 1. This may be basically the revelation of the other side of my prediction for Snape: i.e. that DD had been kept alive by Snape's life support bond, in order to complete his plan involving LV and Harry, and that he insisted the bond be severed , and chose---rather than being abandoned to--death. But still--Gandalf or no--there *may* be some sort of further reversal. Which, in contrast to Q's death, at least points to life-- even if not in a usual way. Phoenixy and all that. I'm not at all sure here. But it *is* fruitful to keep in mind--and look for DD's reversal of Q. We've already seen that he, like Quirrell, was burnt, not by love and goodness, but the hateful evil of LV's curse on the ring Hx. (Hmmm does that mean Lily is the opposite of a Hx? Are all order members? They re certainly people who would sacrifice their own lives prevent LV from becoming immortal. And not just as necessary casualties of battle. ) It was a little premature, but perhaps that is part of JK's sense that 6 and 7 are two halves of one book. Or, maybe it belongs to a different pattern thread. For DD also has a Dark Mirror thread that shadows Harry's DADA emulations: 1/5, 2/6, 3/7. The 2/6 connection is involved in patterns running both ways, a sort of double-whammy, so it can be more difficult to separate them too finely in that book. In 5, like Harry, DD can be seen to be in LV's head. As I've pointed out, he seems to be using Legilimens in the Atrium, on LV. Knowing when LV is about to possess Harry, knowing exactly when and why LV stops. In HBP, DD sports the plum suit --among other outfits--invoking memory of Lockhart's purple robes--yet with more whimsy than vanity. DD, like Lockhart, secretly collects other people's memories--but as important covert ops tools, rather than for personal aggrandizement. Lockhart amasses/ and cares about his honors and awards; DD loses honors --doesn't care--except for those chocolates frog cards. J So, we should expect some past or present Dumbledorian transformation to be revealed in Book 7, as well. Okay, I see I'm going to have to leave it here until after the list reopens. BTW, this is where Dark Phoenix went South-- I already knew that the DADA's reversed--I'd been making correct predictions since 2003 based on it. But, I didn't yet see that it broke out to include DD, too So I gave the whole crap-shoot to Snape--including the memory goo and the failure to survive. But, thanks to Rowling's clarification in that Evening with Harry, Carrie, and Garp, I took another look at the matter. I knew the pattern I had was correct to an extent, and when I applied Rolwing's correction: magically it became quite clear that DD gets the primary reversal--in the end. A pattern even more Byzantine then I had expected. Actually there are all sorts of other plot patterns, which in no way impinge on the one's I've offered. As just one more--and not really related to the Dark Mirror (which confines itself to reflections of the DADA profs.) is the Sirius/Snape imagery. Expect Sirius and Snape to be true opposing Rivals. That image of them in the kitchen at 12 GP is perfect--facing each other with wands drawn. Harry loves Sirius/hates Snape; DD keeps a tight reign on Sirius/trusts Snape; etc. When the true reasons for their enmity are revealed--Snape will come out better. They remind me of Edmund and Edgar in King Lear. I'm with you, Catlady, one of them may literally be a Bastard. Burnt right off that Black Family Tree. (I posted this on another site--back around the time the tree was released--and Catlady, who is also there, pointed me to her own pre- existent theory.) Only this time, the Bastard is the good guy. *Okay, Lucius, it's been fun, but I'm outta here. If that elf comes back, it`s all yours .* Talisman, Apparating to Darkwarts for as much Bastard time as she can get. See you on the other side . ; ) Yipeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee We'll just have to talk about Goblet Theory, after the fact.... From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:52:07 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:52:07 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885527.30.79814.w123@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172211 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: The following best describes my current thoughts about Severus Snape (vote for one): CHOICES AND RESULTS - I have always believed Snape was ESE!, and after reading HBP, I am SURE of it, 0 votes, 0.00% - I have always believed Snape was on the side of Good, and after reading HBP, I am SURE of it, 26 votes, 44.07% - I have always believed Snape was ESE!, but after reading HBP, I believe he is on the side of Good, 1 votes, 1.69% - I have always believed Snape was on the side of Good, but after reading HBP, I believe he is ESE!, 0 votes, 0.00% - I have always believed Snape was ESE!, but after reading HBP, I am torn, 0 votes, 0.00% - I have always believed Snape was on the side of Good, but after reading HBP, I am torn, 1 votes, 1.69% - I have always *wanted* to believe Snape was on the side of Good and still want to believe it, but after reading HBP I am not sure, 1 votes, 1.69% - I used to be on the fence about Snape, but now I am certain he is ESE!, 0 votes, 0.00% - I used to be on the fence about Snape, but now I am certain he is on the side of Good, 3 votes, 5.08% - I have always been on the fence about Snape, and I am still on the fence about Snape, 3 votes, 5.08% - Snape is between such moral absolute categories as good and evil; he partakes of both and is a frayed individual, 7 votes, 11.86% - Ultimately Snape is on no one's side but his own, 8 votes, 13.56% - Snape plays each side against the other and will align himself in the end with whichever side he believes will win, 2 votes, 3.39% - Snape will do whatever is necessary to ensure his own rise to the position of Dark Lord, 0 votes, 0.00% - I change my mind about Snape, corresponding to alternate HPfGU message numbers; on even numbers, I think he is Good, and on odd numbers, I think he is ESE!, 1 votes, 1.69% - I am hoping and expecting Snape to come down on the side of Good, but I am reserving judgment until I have Book 7 in my hands, 3 votes, 5.08% - I am hoping and expecting Snape to come down as ESE!, but I am reserving judgment until I have Book 7 in my hands, 1 votes, 1.69% - I have NO IDEA what to make of Snape, 1 votes, 1.69% - None of the above, 1 votes, 1.69% For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:51:30 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:51:30 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885490.61.85629.w111@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172212 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Just what *is* behind the locked door in the Department of Mysteries? Vote for your *best* guess. CHOICES AND RESULTS - Compassion, 44 votes, 6.39% - Courage, 15 votes, 2.18% - Faith, 16 votes, 2.32% - Heart, 25 votes, 3.63% - Hope, 34 votes, 4.93% - Humanity, 35 votes, 5.08% - Innocence, 15 votes, 2.18% - Love, 395 votes, 57.33% - Truth, 81 votes, 11.76% - Other (specify onlist, motivating answer), 29 votes, 4.21% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Compassion - muellem at bc.edu - ellcam at cox.net - jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net - romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com - rachelday at blueyonder.co.uk - a_williams1 at pacific.edu - chefeileen2002 at yahoo.com - zalil_z at hotmail.com - redearth3000 at yahoo.com - eeyore6771 at comcast.net - kristinedagostino at yahoo.com - ancalyme at yahoo.de - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - siamkatze_33 at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk - chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net - vivaecia at yahoo.com.au - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - gefrodsham at hotmail.com - barrythegirl at hotmail.com - tlpbupu at hotmail.com - impherring13 at yahoo.com - dunesayadina at yahoo.com - poonymelone at yahoo.de - benevolentferretgoddess at yahoo.com - ineskennes at yahoo.co.uk - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - GinnyWeasley31 at excite.com - ejssa17 at yahoo.com - zanaboo at aol.com - Courage - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - stibbrine at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - jhnbwmn at hotmail.com - cnidaria at gmail.com - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - ziggy at zootsplace.com - yonnab at cox.net - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - beatnik24601 at yahoo.com - amy79a at gmail.com - Roolover93 at comcast.net - Faith - carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk - njcunewbie at yahoo.com - jinxes_for_julie at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - kmg300 at yahoo.com - whimsymoondesigns at yahoo.com - maniacdeath at hotmail.com - happybean98 at yahoo.com - kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com - djklaugh at comcast.net - Heart - japanesesearcher at yahoo.com - jennivirides at yahoo.co.uk - mbfilippini at ckwarchitects.com - ctldx at aol.com - tgs at iaw.on.ca - sarahlizzy at hotmail.com - kmsprauer at yahoo.com - veltara at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com - florenceraynaud at yahoo.fr - errolowl at yahoo.com - evelyn_quirky at yahoo.com.au - ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com - michcv814 at yahoo.com - girl_next_door704 at yahoo.com - matt.brittain at charter.net - carleyco at earthlink.net - rachaol at yahoo.com - gratyvolt at yahoo.fr - kconn8 at yahoo.com - cricket25_69 at yahoo.com - conart714 at yahoo.com - laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au - Hope - hpfans at mamakelsy.net - kawfhw at earthlink.net - ann.nalle at verizon.net - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - jweinert at infionline.net - charlesemoss at yahoo.com - leahbrahms at yahoo.com - mkeller01 at alltel.net - bldgblocks10 at yahoo.com - kohararpo at yahoo.com - dally_1025 at hotmail.com - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - kittybat at planet-save.com - nirupamashah at yahoo.co.in - alisondd at yahoo.com - mickey4president76 at yahoo.com - truprince1 at email.com - light_nell at yahoo.com - amandita11 at yahoo.com - jennistern at aol.com - kerberusmon at yahoo.com.mx - midnightowl6 at hotmail.com - saradelpozo at yahoo.es - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - franthephoenix at yahoo.co.uk - plaid_cow42 at yahoo.ca - MorganAnnAdams at yahoo.com - rgbmcl at hotmail.com - ekrbdg at msn.com - ankesh85 at yahoo.com - famsle369 at yahoo.com - bkb042 at yahoo.com - gliese229b at aol.com - without_wax_4_u at yahoo.com - Humanity - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - hannah at starbrightdesigns.net - moneylover_moneylover at yahoo.com - linlou43 at yahoo.com - Thefatoneuk at aol.com - Jackwolf17 at msn.com - pmi2go at yahoo.com - averyhaze at hotmail.com - cyclone_61032 at yahoo.com - uath50 at yahoo.com - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - lovefromhermione at yahoo.com - Pottymouth65 at aol.com - castorandpollux2002 at yahoo.com - leon_no28 at yahoo.com - bigbonedgal26 at hotmail.com - Janicem211 at aol.com - bonoskite99 at yahoo.com - clinicallydead2003 at yahoo.com - slade_012001 at yahoo.com - murderedbygod at yahoo.co.uk - hpluz at yahoo.com.au - charlot7542 at yahoo.com - squireandknight at yahoo.com - kozmoz4 at yahoo.com - timelady_who at yahoo.com.au - Hunta_Girl at hotmail.com - lizaustin1303 at aol.com - biggypaw at yahoo.com - aprilthe16 at sbcglobal.net - hpathbp2003 at yahoo.com - bifnibbler at yahoo.ca - nicaly at shaw.ca - Innocence - mhymei at aol.com - amyshumaker89 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - baseball_07_05 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - smhatreehugger at netscape.net - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - teilani2002 at yahoo.com - dolphinmagic02 at yahoo.com - irishshedevil333 at yahoo.com - Love - calmdown at sbcglobal.net - ilexrdh at yahoo.com - siriuslove71 at yahoo.com - kelaino_urania at yahoo.com - roywking38 at yahoo.com - pks9231993 at yahoo.com - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - vickik at umich.edu - eliadedorme at yahoo.fr - stetchnik at yahoo.com - celizwh at intergate.com - m_m_gregory at yahoo.com - petr.pabian at ff.cuni.cz - jwilliams44118 at yahoo.com - claireandgeoff at hotmail.com - jzare02 at yahoo.com - jlnbtr at yahoo.com - grace701 at yahoo.com - irishprincesscjm at yahoo.com - PurpleBear1976 at aol.com - warhound at accessus.net - belijako at online.no - Veritas771 at hotmail.com - lmciver1 at cs.com - gallo at wpaccs.com - s_ings at yahoo.com - dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com - andie1 at earthlink.net - eclipse021342 at yahoo.com - harryingbg at yahoo.com - khlauf at fuse.net - alison.williams at virgin.net - mariaalena at purdue.edu - laurievuitton at yahoo.com - bowlwoman at yahoo.com - risako at nexusanime.com - altered.earth at ntlworld.com - peckham at cyberramp.net - kcox at wooster.edu - jmmears at comcast.net - profwildflower at mindspring.com - mcandrew at bigpond.com - constancevigilance at yahoo.com - star__victoria at hotmail.com - jeopardy18 at attbi.com - moochy4ro at hotmail.com - elihufalk at yahoo.com - elizabethhadzic at hotmail.com - msbeadsley at yahoo.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - chrisnicls at hotmail.com - bellemichellem at yahoo.com - steffy07 at aol.com - llamadroid at hotmail.com - solana_dd at yahoo.com - djpayton1 at juno.com - wrinkle at cwnet.com - anandini77 at hotmail.com - sbraunmom at yahoo.com - ryokas at hotmail.com - vineet_910 at yahoo.co.in - rbfrey at hotmail.com - iriepuff at yahoo.co.uk - talented_bink at hotmail.com - ValieV at att.net - etmatt at yahoo.com - hawkeye072 at sbcglobal.net - rach4001 at yahoo.co.uk - cruthw at earthlink.net - cressida_tt at hotmail.com - divinemissmom at yahoo.com - lysandrabellargus at yahoo.co.uk - estrilda_wolfegg at yahoo.com - mad_maxime at hotmail.com - amdorn at hotmail.com - cassin12004 at yahoo.com - carrot92285 at yahoo.com - rickyb321 at yahoo.com - idlerat at yahoo.com - margotcragg at hotmail.com - l_zinkiewicz at yahoo.com - cristinanne at evilemail.com - craigpb at fastmail.fm - harryp at stararcher.com - VelkaECS at aol.com - tiamik72 at aol.com - ballerinalaura at mac.com - ejblack at rogers.com - ExSlytherin at aol.com - popy70it at yahoo.com - slstepek at rocketmail.com - melissahyatt at umich.edu - henning2 at terra.com.br - kstewart at austin.rr.com - mario.pitre at videotron.ca - kgpopp at yahoo.com - bleckybecs at yahoo.com - donkeynjo at yahoo.com - adhaereovirtuti at sbcglobal.net - shellbel at frontiernet.net - joshism1981 at yahoo.com - camiecat at comcast.net - chnc1024 at AOL.COM - lupen07438 at yahoo.com - slamdancer at gawab.com - gaburon at adelphia.net - unicorn67mom at yahoo.com - sara_hodsden at sbcglobal.net - onlygoofy at yahoo.com - max_4253 at yahoo.com - wiffyboy2003 at yahoo.com - hpidentity at yahoo.com - jeopardy18 at comcast.net - chesterschick88 at yahoo.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - icebat78 at yahoo.es - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - clydebon1968 at yahoo.com - alishak at spu.edu - k12isten at hotmail.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - freakygeek101 at hotmail.com - kleiner_drache at mac.com - inkling_rg at yahoo.com - pandrea100 at hotmail.com - dicentra at xmission.com - CoyotesChild at charter.net - trinity31405 at yahoo.com - beckysmith at hotmail.co.uk - gherilain13 at yahoo.com - djrfdh at yahoo.com - ecart8525 at hotmail.com - Malady579 at hotmail.com - gily_ann at yahoo.com - drjuliehoward at yahoo.com - christianrooster at hotmail.com - lupinesque at yahoo.com - philstar22 at hotmail.com - rtb333 at yahoo.com - quigonginger at yahoo.com - kathryn-jones at comcast.net - christyj2323 at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - kevinemail2000 at yahoo.com - Emza at lineone.net - nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com - abbet69 at yahoo.com - molly_weasley_wannabe at yahoo.com - deeecha at yahoo.com - dfrankiswork at netscape.net - tim at marvinhold.com - frost_indri at yahoo.com - sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - gemini83 at bellsouth.net - sirius702003 at yahoo.com - grahadh at yahoo.com - dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu - stephie1179 at aol.com - lin_mcg at yahoo.com - nosborn80 at yahoo.com - celletiger at yahoo.com - michel56 at earthlink.net - dearthofdata at yahoo.com - selkie1964 at yahoo.com - LadySawall at aol.com - garybec at yahoo.com - fayelass at yahoo.co.uk - angie at servit.org - apoe at nmu.edu - eldermomx3 at yahoo.com - madaxe at starspath.com - boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com - Hines57 at comcast.net - trisana_farwell at yahoo.com - deatheaterjames at yahoo.co.uk - gwyneth521 at yahoo.com - sirwonkalus at yahoo.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - lalasnake at yahoo.com - jdarbonne at earthlink.net - cmw652 at yahoo.com - mca at princeton.edu - aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk - jojobinks1983 at yahoo.co.uk - nobradors at hotmail.com - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - hermioneclone at yahoo.com - kempermentor at yahoo.com - h_hawks_71 at yahoo.com - lierian at carolina.rr.com - tonks_op at yahoo.com - smithmari2002 at yahoo.com - beckysbook1970 at yahoo.com - lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com - buckbeak1391 at yahoo.com - dklopp at ptd.net - skip37m at yahoo.com - merlin4552002 at yahoo.co.uk - ajroland at earthlink.net - kbrandon at cbu.edu - deanlawrence_us at yahoo.com - nirupama76 at yahoo.com - dawnbenns at hotmail.com - yahoogroups at helux.co.uk - wyldfirre at yahoo.com - krams at walla.co.il - i_am_the_weirdo at hotmail.com - starrchildsreb at yahoo.com - spaebrun at yahoo.com - lelvani at gmail.com - dd_ur_great at yahoo.co.uk - itzgoodnite at yahoo.com - MnMWilliams at starpower.net - ornawn at 013.net - britneywbb at yahoo.com - cress11net at yahoo.com - dani814 at yahoo.com - exautonomous at yahoo.com - sj_barton at yahoo.com - noelleisastar at yahoo.com - siferkaja at email.si - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - darkangel765x at yahoo.com - flyballcairn at bellsouth.net - petitlapingris at yahoo.com - riti202 at yahoo.co.in - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - wherr009 at umn.edu - crazytortilla79 at yahoo.com - gwhlevy at sbcglobal.net - paul_terzis at yahoo.gr - mel_aldred at yahoo.com - Hiro57108 at hotmail.com - joanegandy at yahoo.com - rainnyday at aol.com - fabianamm at brturbo.com - cmjohnstone at hotmail.com - ellie_cove at btinternet.com - nemi51 at yahoo.no - hpfan543212345 at yahoo.com - mwahl at umich.edu - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - bigmlfan at yahoo.com - eh1260 at yahoo.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - toptopera at yahoo.com.br - benjen5 at sbcglobal.net - n2fgc at arrl.net - tracym255 at aol.com - ggericks at yahoo.com - libbieselden at yahoo.com.au - sarah__p at hotmail.com - jessg826 at yahoo.com - davidagabbard at hotmail.com - Barbara_MBowen at yahoo.com - lildrummergirl12005 at yahoo.com - caleb at skim.org.nz - weildman at comcast.net - drcarole71 at yahoo.com - rhinobabies at hotmail.com - unc8401 at yahoo.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - sad1199 at yahoo.com - luzzatto at via-rs.net - snorkack at jippii.fi - topaz880 at yahoo.com - angelafrank at lycos.com - mpjdekker at hotmail.com - HPLD711 at aol.com - M.Kortland at kabelfoon.nl - egastin at earthlink.net - khastiicatz at yahoo.com - odean at tiscali.co.uk - vcuram1999 at yahoo.com - PAUL-SUE at hamsterley.fsnet.co.uk - crt1072 at yahoo.com - sophiapriskilla at yahoo.com - roseviolet66 at yahoo.com - ruby_red6669 at yahoo.com - 4nerds at eskimo.com - elwing.alcyone at gmail.com - oiboyz at hotmail.com - aliasnance at yahoo.com - uiscenagealai at hotmail.com - agreensaver at yahoo.com - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - millie at adr.dk - tsavorite_1 at hotmail.com - debtwybird at yahoo.com - raeangelavhs at msn.com - motheroffenix at yahoo.com - steven1965aaa at yahoo.com - machaelf at yahoo.com - aida_costa at hotmail.com - lolita_ns at yahoo.com - giral_reyes at hotmail.com - srgalactica1982 at yahoo.com - kathyheilmann at yahoo.com - twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com - jprufrock17 at yahoo.com - arianaseibel at yahoo.com - essorg_nire at yahoo.com - julwalker7614726 at aol.com - Aisbelmon at hotmail.com - Seagrass44 at aol.com - jdu at mail2.gcnet.net - kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - michi-ted.abe at nifty.com - maxximus787 at yahoo.com - jennagaylene at gmail.com - meriaugust at yahoo.com - Bkstrkbro at hotmail.com - mary.hoerr at gmail.com - lissabee at grandecom.net - noesumeragi at yahoo.es - nawyecka at yahoo.com - just_smile_04 at yahoo.com - jplindy618 at yahoo.com - greenelizajw at yahoo.com - 520089239943-0001 at T-Online.de - meckelburg at foni.net - c-katsos at northwestern.edu - devika261 at hotmail.com - paulspilsbury at btinternet.com - sean_elisa at yahoo.com - john_the_walker82 at yahoo.co.uk - meg_twin1 at hotmail.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - earendil_fr at yahoo.com - renee.smith at zoom.co.uk - sparky-wan at cox.net - nepenthales at yahoo.com - templar1112002 at yahoo.com - aceworker at yahoo.com - hln321 at aol.com - yellowrainjacket at yahoo.com - dizzyadora at hotmail.com - lindseyfaber at yahoo.com - verosomm at yahoo.com - Stncold223 at hotmail.com - grodd752 at yahoo.com - dileas at rogers.com - breezy16186 at comcast.net - fienxjox at yahoo.com - pete_larkin at btinternet.com - kandbmom at yahoo.com - jennyemike3 at cox.net - laura72 at sasktel.net - sugarv at lycos.co.uk - sunflowerlaw at cox.net - kailincj at msn.com - jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl - HxM_fan at hotmail.com - jennabell74 at yahoo.ca - candlekicks at yahoo.ca - taniamf at terra.com.br - loony_lizz at yahoo.com - lordxn at yahoo.com.au - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - nae92168 at yahoo.com - neisha_saxena at yahoo.com - jimlam at optusnet.com.au - mich_acosta at hotmail.com - animagikat at yahoo.com - jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com - the10thviking at hotmail.com - dece1799 at uidaho.edu - bearyclare at hotmail.com - sematar at sentex.net - i_caesar_t at yahoo.com - muza_1 at yahoo.com - lipa at pobox.com - claredurina at yahoo.com - Tgoswife325 at aol.com - northsouth17 at yahoo.com - kith_groupie85 at yahoo.com - jlt38 at columbia.edu - cat_kind at yahoo.com - ibchawz at yahoo.com - indiasjones at msn.com - mariabronte at yahoo.com - talhal83 at gmail.com - gergely.garami at freemail.hu - amsmith422 at yahoo.com - mullemoren at yahoo.com - Nanagose at aol.com - candymg04 at yahoo.com - harry_potter_enemy at yahoo.es - silversarahs at yahoo.co.uk - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - ancags at yahoo.com - OctobersChild48 at aol.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - Truth - blue_shamrock03 at yahoo.com - sang_dencre12 at hotmail.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - dh.shrijnana at verizon.net - goalieracer at yahoo.com - cburchak at telusplanet.net - doliesl at yahoo.com - ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk - denise at emptymirrorbooks.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - wickedkitty3 at yahoo.com - Kimberly.Tarasenko at Colorado.edu - personality_98 at yahoo.com - tonet_valdez at yahoo.com - sacha_vohra at yahoo.ca - kaye60cc at yahoo.com - dmkolody at yahoo.com - scottebrecht at yahoo.com - hermionesmum at yahoo.com - radza at stofanet.dk - sonorangal at aol.com - sunshine_isis at fastmail.fm - ROWAN6MAYFAIR at AOL.COM - witchypooh67 at yahoo.com - mariea817 at yahoo.com - scully_med at yahoo.ca - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - nova_glitterfreak at yahoo.com - kcrani01 at hotmail.com - carly_soprano at yahoo.com - lilneona at yahoo.com - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - Dirt_Diver05 at msn.com - bobrodgers1950 at yahoo.com - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - m_warren17 at yahoo.com.au - olly854321 at yahoo.co.uk - blue1499 at earthlink.net - dawn at shotwell.com - LydiiaAdleida at aol.com - james_n_31513 at yahoo.com - pretenderprofilergirl at yahoo.com - ivaldoo at yahoo.com - kirklander368 at hotmail.com - jennefer_pizza at muzak.com - requiem at uswest.net - dakers at pontotoc.k12.ms.us - faded_mandarin at yahoo.com - wehatethatsam at yahoo.co.uk - cjsusice at yahoo.com - ccneppl at yahoo.com - vnagata at hotmail.com - Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com - kathleenjohnson at juno.com - lisa_wescott at yahoo.com - kenkettet at yahoo.com - kelley.meyer at comcast.net - mickyroop at yahoo.com - hpfan_cindy at yahoo.com - fhernly at iupui.edu - wilhelmtell35 at hotmail.com - Bakrfam313 at cs.com - starrychica3000 at yahoo.com - bob1987dole at yahoo.com - abced99 at hotmail.com - TScheffler at rtlworld.de - joy_d_writer at mail.ru - cathmorgan at cetian.net - cincimaelder at yahoo.com - anthyroserain at yahoo.com - anmsmom333 at cox.net - ginamiller at jis.nashville.org - watersign21 at yahoo.com - belofbree at yahoo.co.uk - bearlym6 at yahoo.com - HeartAndSoul4815 at ctel.net - messinamoore at sbcglobal.net - rowena.lewis82 at gmail.com - lordvoldemort_thehero at yahoo.co.in - Other (specify onlist, motivating answer) - yswahl at stis.net - erinellii at yahoo.com - Ali at zymurgy.org - stanleys at sbcglobal.net - ktd7 at yahoo.com - kking0731 at hotmail.com - amy_marblefeet at yahoo.co.uk - playerdogyo at yahoo.com - lilyp at superig.com.br - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - brightlywoven at yahoo.com - sawsan_issa at earthlink.net - foxmoth at qnet.com - cindysphinx10 at yahoo.com - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - kaixin90 at yahoo.co.uk - barrie1111 at juno.com - pandora_966 at yahoo.com - jaycat at kans.com - ummnog at yahoo.co.uk - trmw100 at yahoo.ie - nihil8750 at comcast.net - thesheltons1 at yahoo.com - martincpcc at yahoo.co.uk - anne_conda at web.de - eloiseherisson at aol.com - maureenshanahan at comcast.net - rnn_hansen at yahoo.com - euterpsoapin at yahoo.com For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:49:55 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:49:55 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885395.1856.7388.w106@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172213 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Which of these minor characters will either play an essential role in the plot, or will be revealed to have played one? (NB: There are far too many minor characters in the books to include them all, so we've chosen several - some who have been spoken about in the past, some randomly, some because we're personally suspicious of them.) CHOICES AND RESULTS - Aberforth Dumbledore, 702 votes, 19.04% - Bilius Weasley, 112 votes, 3.04% - Blaise Zabini, 180 votes, 4.88% - Caradoc Dearborn, 63 votes, 1.71% - Celestina Warbeck, 56 votes, 1.52% - Croaker, 50 votes, 1.36% - Davey Gudgeon, 49 votes, 1.33% - Dorcas Meadowes, 64 votes, 1.74% - Doris Crockford, 86 votes, 2.33% - Florence, 115 votes, 3.12% - Gabrielle Delacour, 105 votes, 2.85% - Gladys Gudgeon, 44 votes, 1.19% - Great Uncle Algie, 139 votes, 3.77% - Madam Marsh, 62 votes, 1.68% - Madam Rosmerta, 199 votes, 5.40% - Mark Evans, 242 votes, 6.56% - Penelope Clearwater, 133 votes, 3.61% - Perkins, 80 votes, 2.17% - Professor Sinistra, 140 votes, 3.80% - Regulus Black, 410 votes, 11.12% - Rodolphus Lestrange, 148 votes, 4.01% - Stubby Boardman, 77 votes, 2.09% - Trevor the Toad, 234 votes, 6.35% - Weasley cousin (the accountant), 103 votes, 2.79% - Other (specify onlist, motivating answer), 94 votes, 2.55% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Aberforth Dumbledore - rsteph1981 at yahoo.com - siriuslove71 at yahoo.com - sk8sue at hotmail.com - mkeller01 at alltel.net - jennivirides at yahoo.co.uk - s_ings at yahoo.com - pfsch at gmx.de - jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com - phoenix5 at btopenworld.com - janacooney at yahoo.com - lizzie_ellender at yahoo.co.uk - hermiones1 at yahoo.com - sammip2010 at yahoo.ca - siferkaja at email.si - carmelfagan at hotmail.com - jennagaylene at gmail.com - eyegortroll at hotmail.com - parantap.samajdar at gmail.com - pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk - pwaldrip at charter.net - aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk - deatheaterjames at yahoo.co.uk - prongs at marauders-map.net - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - isabelladomipete at yahoo.com.br - Hunta_Girl at hotmail.com - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - sunflowers1012001 at yahoo.com - mario.pitre at videotron.ca - Barbara_MBowen at yahoo.com - Aisbelmon at hotmail.com - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - vcuram1999 at yahoo.com - fienxjox at yahoo.com - gorbetta at hotmail.com - dawnbenns at hotmail.com - beckysbook1970 at yahoo.com - jjaco2 at comcast.net - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - bozo2138 at hotmail.com - gaburon at adelphia.net - reeves at msu.edu - saraquel_omphale at yahoo.com - janahooks at yahoo.com - m_m_gregory at yahoo.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - glykonix at yahoo.com - danceswithhippogriffs at yahoo.com - laura_momiji at tin.it - missbluepie at yahoo.com.au - karentheunicorn at msn.com - GeorgiannJ at cs.com - ajk6405 at yahoo.co.uk - abishag00 at yahoo.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - kilaue2612 at comcast.net - kevin_mcgoff at yahoo.com - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - jenniconejita at yahoo.com - hazelnites at yahoo.com - moonyatemybaby at yahoo.co.uk - Zarleycat at aol.com - erinellii at yahoo.com - jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com - WFeuchter at msn.com - eclipse021342 at yahoo.com - ann.nalle at verizon.net - PurpleBear1976 at aol.com - annemehr at yahoo.com - naama2486 at yahoo.com - prsawyer at uaa.alaska.edu - Kimberly.Tarasenko at Colorado.edu - gbannister10 at aol.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - bowlwoman at yahoo.com - chopsfold at yahoo.co.uk - risako at nexusanime.com - quigonginger at yahoo.com - jcobbuk at yahoo.co.uk - dfrankiswork at netscape.net - fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com - june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk - mariaalena at purdue.edu - altered.earth at ntlworld.com - hanbury at cbmi.upmc.edu - leu02ram at rdg.ac.uk - zanelupin at yahoo.com - lfreeman at mbc.edu - belijako at online.no - coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com - gallo at wpaccs.com - frost_indri at yahoo.com - yswahl at stis.net - kcrani01 at hotmail.com - cgperez217 at yahoo.com - romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com - amdorn at hotmail.com - constancevigilance at yahoo.com - alison.williams at virgin.net - manawydan at ntlworld.com - sarahlizzy at hotmail.com - Ali at zymurgy.org - denise at emptymirrorbooks.com - jdu at mail2.gcnet.net - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - kcox at wooster.edu - star__victoria at hotmail.com - blaise_writer at hotmail.com - amellaboowoo at yahoo.com - daciah97 at yahoo.com - snowbunny117 at hotmail.com - rlv2001 at hotmail.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - Royston_Vasey_2484 at hotmail.com - TBLYE at nyc.rr.com - katie_m_white at hotmail.com - steffy07 at aol.com - hiteshl at vsnl.com - arbrown at memphis.edu - solana_dd at yahoo.com - anandini77 at hotmail.com - meriaugust at yahoo.com - moochy4ro at hotmail.com - bhauersperger at hotmail.com - fionap19 at yahoo.co.uk - rbfrey at hotmail.com - ValieV at att.net - cortana.costume at free.fr - etmatt at yahoo.com - ladysilverbolt at yahoo.com - playerdogyo at yahoo.com - rockit_esq at msn.com - hallisallimalli at yahoo.com - mayeaux45 at yahoo.com - texas.aggie4 at verizon.net - staceymateo at verizon.net - cjsusice at yahoo.com - yodamarie78 at yahoo.com - jacksontm at chartermi.net - michel56 at earthlink.net - eliadedorme at yahoo.fr - sj_barton at yahoo.com - libbieselden at yahoo.com.au - alil2sarcastic at yahoo.com - Jackwolf17 at msn.com - carrot92285 at yahoo.com - amyshumaker89 at yahoo.com - michelewistar at yahoo.com - sunshine_isis at fastmail.fm - gopotter2004 at yahoo.com - radza at stofanet.dk - cristinanne at evilemail.com - aesob at yahoo.com - craigpb at fastmail.fm - soo at slashaholics.org - just_smile_04 at yahoo.com - VelkaECS at aol.com - balbu84 at yahoo.fr - averyhaze at hotmail.com - tiamik72 at aol.com - anneb_in at yahoo.com - eeyore6771 at comcast.net - pacificmile at cox.net - jesmck at yahoo.com - sunnybee6au at yahoo.com.au - cdayr at yahoo.com - abbess_tsing at hotmail.com - tomparksNN at yahoo.com - grahadh at yahoo.com - meowmix585 at yahoo.com - hking33 at msn.com - rising_venus at moonshinehollow.com - theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - Hiro57108 at hotmail.com - kennymod at yahoo.com - witchypooh67 at yahoo.com - darkangel765x at yahoo.com - hautbois1 at comcast.net - abarvi at yahoo.com - cosmicat60 at hotmail.com - scoring_opportunity at yahoo.com - jahralt21 at yahoo.com - jmmears at comcast.net - jo_stockton_2000 at yahoo.com - mercy_72476 at yahoo.com - Aevumsemper at hotmail.com - njcunewbie at yahoo.com - mary.hoerr at gmail.com - kat.rohts at gmx.de - bleckybecs at yahoo.com - samdavid at gmail.com - tonks_op at yahoo.com - falkel at macs.biu.ac.il - jbjalbrz at uchicago.edu - kaseystraatmann at sbcglobal.net - barrie1111 at juno.com - camiecat at comcast.net - mastshake82 at yahoo.com - chnc1024 at AOL.COM - deon_simon at sdstate.edu - veritie4 at yahoo.com - lupen07438 at yahoo.com - ohpfans at gmail.com - ancalyme at yahoo.de - slamdancer at gawab.com - kmsprauer at yahoo.com - ssattar5 at yahoo.com - maricel_85 at yahoo.com - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - debbie_srock at yahoo.com - darknstormynight at gmail.com - ear at scn.org - rh64643 at appstate.edu - sara_hodsden at sbcglobal.net - mobile125004 at yahoo.com - bgrugin at yahoo.com - machaelf at yahoo.com - arwenrjl at aol.com - catheyshields at comcast.net - torinduras at yahoo.com - wrexx at hotmail.com - airfreightforwarder at yahoo.com - mishehoo1 at walla.co.il - baby_girl2578 at yahoo.com - wiffyboy2003 at yahoo.com - mhess66125 at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - pretenderprofilergirl at yahoo.com - hpidentity at yahoo.com - unicorn67mom at yahoo.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - icebat78 at yahoo.es - castorandpollux2002 at yahoo.com - klsandre at mtholyoke.edu - angelprincess8802 at yahoo.com - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - orly_w at hotmail.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - dani814 at yahoo.com - caroleann74 at aol.com - grookill at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - c-katsos at northwestern.edu - simonebirch at hotmail.com - vickik at umich.edu - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - morkj007 at students.unisa.edu.au - wacokidcreations at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - calmdown at sbcglobal.net - gefrodsham at hotmail.com - trinity31405 at yahoo.com - kathrin.p at gmail.com - annie3x20 at aol.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - andie1 at earthlink.net - anthyroserain at yahoo.com - katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - egastin at earthlink.net - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - ornawn at 013.net - severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk - 520089239943-0001 at T-Online.de - happydogue at aol.com - clydebon1968 at yahoo.com - shadiness at gmail.com - txgrace02 at sbcglobal.net - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - ppahuja1 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - jkscherme at adelphia.net - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - abbet69 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - Nibleswik at aol.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - christyj2323 at yahoo.com - thomasmwall at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - dejjfan368 at aol.com - scb1066 at adelphia.net - nicolau at mat.puc-rio.br - Emza at lineone.net - pam at pamelatierney.co.uk - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - molly_weasley_wannabe at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - lupinesque at yahoo.com - nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com - sfpeterso at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - hebrideanblack at earthlink.net - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - jennefer_pizza at muzak.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - caros_groups at yahoo.de - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com - Dirt_Diver05 at msn.com - sirius702003 at yahoo.com - lahela2000 at yahoo.com - lavaluvn at yahoo.com - lucchaser at yahoo.com - tzipporah42 at hotmail.com - bigbonedgal26 at hotmail.com - lin_mcg at yahoo.com - celletiger at yahoo.com - boyd4150 at bellsouth.net - bridgetteakabiit at yahoo.com - jojobinks1983 at yahoo.co.uk - LadySawall at aol.com - fayelass at yahoo.co.uk - sailorstarfairy at yahoo.com - angie at servit.org - vineet_910 at yahoo.co.in - uctqmdu at ucl.ac.uk - apoe at nmu.edu - tanja.musar at guest.arnes.si - dzeytoun at fanfiction.net - felicitas at juno.com - aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com - trisana_farwell at yahoo.com - juliawatrous at hotmail.com - eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk - harparcat at yahoo.co.uk - bellemichellem at yahoo.com - Tao-Te-JPB at comcast.net - gwyneth521 at yahoo.com - sirwonkalus at yahoo.com - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - tsproffitt at hotmail.com - weasley_isourking at yahoo.com - lalasnake at yahoo.com - mcmartin023 at aol.com - essorg_nire at yahoo.com - smhatreehugger at netscape.net - lauren_mustac at yahoo.com - joeplugger at yahoo.com - desastreuse at yahoo.com - TScheffler at rtlworld.de - bonoskite99 at yahoo.com - xxscar_tissuexx at yahoo.com - terpslover25 at yahoo.com - sixsunflowers at yahoo.com - hermioneclone at yahoo.com - kempermentor at yahoo.com - dicentra at xmission.com - lierian at carolina.rr.com - Erthena at aol.com - jokevisschedijk at hotmail.com - nirupamashah at yahoo.co.in - iris123s at netscape.net - dlbal at worldonline.nl - spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com - lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com - nova_glitterfreak at yahoo.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk - sadistrasnape at yahoo.com - lipa at pobox.com - improbable_solution at yahoo.co.uk - revealme4u at yahoo.com - luzzatto at via-rs.net - s_m_whitton at hotmail.com - gratyvolt at yahoo.fr - erica_raec at yahoo.com - oiboyz at hotmail.com - sacassady at yahoo.com - elizafoxburg at yahoo.com - lrmartinez at justice.com - deanlawrence_us at yahoo.com - vidyuth_amp at yahoo.com - maryhotelling_92 at msn.com - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - yahoogroups at helux.co.uk - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - jamielatkinson at yahoo.co.uk - wyldfirre at yahoo.com - good_day_to_be_you at yahoo.com - alisondd at yahoo.com - baker1_1999 at yahoo.com - forttea at yahoo.com - i_am_the_weirdo at hotmail.com - iibeeii at aol.com - rxtlc at comcast.net - par22 at cornell.edu - beatrice23 at yahoo.com - mickey4president76 at yahoo.com - tynie19 at yahoo.com - dd_ur_great at yahoo.co.uk - itzgoodnite at yahoo.com - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - noon_at_night at yahoo.com - askmanas20 at yahoo.co.in - kathealy at eircom.net - eljobu at yahoo.com - britneywbb at yahoo.com - sdeepthi at yahoo.com - Ronin_47 at comcast.net - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - alishak at spu.edu - kirklander368 at hotmail.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - IrishMastermind at hotmail.com - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - jlnbtr at yahoo.com - Peaches_without_cream at yahoo.com - tcyhunt at earthlink.net - nae92168 at yahoo.com - iluvmuffins at hotmail.com - sophierom at yahoo.com - elfundeb at comcast.net - sarasmithrockstheworld at yahoo.com - muza_1 at yahoo.com - florenceraynaud at yahoo.fr - kohararpo at yahoo.com - sroginson at sbcglobal.net - brittrossiter at yahoo.com - kleiner_drache at mac.com - mca at princeton.edu - cmmc at alum.dartmouth.org - blue1499 at earthlink.net - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - tlpbupu at hotmail.com - readwithpatience at yahoo.com - carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk - templar1112002 at yahoo.com - ummnog at yahoo.co.uk - brinda_999 at yahoo.co.in - idlerat at yahoo.com - mbarclay at lee.edu - light_nell at yahoo.com - helgabirondo at gmail.com - rainnyday at aol.com - jordana at optusnet.com.au - rayheuer3 at aol.com - cburchak at telusplanet.net - daisy_axford at yahoo.com - suzchiles at msn.com - cmjohnstone at hotmail.com - jhnbwmn at hotmail.com - sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com - txtornado92 at yahoo.com - d.marchel at comcast.net - errolowl at yahoo.com - jennistern at aol.com - nyrae22 at yahoo.com - moon_stag at yahoo.com - mwahl at umich.edu - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - mymutedpresence at yahoo.co.uk - greenelizajw at yahoo.com - eh1260 at yahoo.com - katescott99 at hotmail.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - 4nerds at eskimo.com - toptopera at yahoo.com.br - benjen5 at sbcglobal.net - jennydowns at hotmail.com - thegreatwebguru at yahoo.com - GilMiriel at hotmail.com - keithrichgirl at yahoo.com - ginamiller at jis.nashville.org - calimie_niphredil at yahoo.es - Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com - chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com - squireandknight at yahoo.com - miamibarb at BellSouth.net - caleb at skim.org.nz - nadja_rehberger at hotmail.com - kozmoz4 at yahoo.com - vcoler at chartermi.net - kamala_2347 at yahoo.com - captain_suburbia at yahoo.com.au - hpofan2004 at yahoo.com - sean_dunphy at hotmail.com - unc8401 at yahoo.com - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - rhinobabies at hotmail.com - snorkack at jippii.fi - dunesayadina at yahoo.com - topaz880 at yahoo.com - johnbeth at aol.com - nihil8750 at comcast.net - angelafrank at lycos.com - khinterberg at yahoo.com - HPLD711 at aol.com - azakitpgr at yahoo.co.uk - khastiicatz at yahoo.com - odean at tiscali.co.uk - girl_next_door704 at yahoo.com - crt1072 at yahoo.com - DuchessSan at aol.com - snoil at attbi.com - easimm at yahoo.com - tuck668 at yahoo.com - ernestpfallowby at yahoo.com - strivingstarlet at yahoo.com - wildfireglitter at yahoo.com - trmw100 at yahoo.ie - u_scoil at yahoo.co.uk - HBPrincess at gmail.com - tal-cpa at bezeqint.net - dukeofpimptown at hotmail.com - krams at walla.co.il - davey_mccallister at yahoo.com - mudmen4 at yahoo.ca - aliasnance at yahoo.com - h2so3f at yahoo.com - Janicem211 at aol.com - bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com - indiasjones at msn.com - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - eandrews at bwlaw.co.uk - midnightowl6 at hotmail.com - girljudy2001 at yahoo.com - beauregardpendragon at yahoo.com.au - sophiapriskilla at yahoo.com - staceyv2220 at yahoo.com - debtwybird at yahoo.com - raeangelavhs at msn.com - saradelpozo at yahoo.es - steven1965aaa at yahoo.com - tia_w_1999 at yahoo.com - coleman_sarah_a at yahoo.com.au - peggy_hart at yahoo.com - reaganomic6string at yahoo.com - anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com - winston at selectivehouse.com - ogresmommy at yahoo.com - lydeeanne at yahoo.co.uk - srgalactica1982 at yahoo.com - hopestar1229 at yahoo.com - ivaldoo at yahoo.com - tfaucette6387 at charter.net - marshsundeen at hotmail.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - chieftainette at gmail.com - chesterschick88 at yahoo.com - KJWhiteman at sbcglobal.net - kjones at telus.net - jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - susankusel at yahoo.com - laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com - jez_two at yahoo.com - HeartAndSoul4815 at ctel.net - julwalker7614726 at aol.com - timelady_who at yahoo.com.au - tasanford at yahoo.com - franthephoenix at yahoo.co.uk - turner_727 at yahoo.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com - george.fisher at gmx.net - kzingebret at gmail.com - Sherry at PebTech.net - htfulcher at comcast.net - kawfhw at earthlink.net - rachaelmcadams at yahoo.ca - devika261 at hotmail.com - tab1669 at elnet.com - shoelessgirl at hotmail.com - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - peskipiksi_pesternomii at yahoo.com - maddmorgan at adelphia.net - noesumeragi at yahoo.es - trillian1978 at yahoo.com - florentinemaier at hotmail.com - poonymelone at yahoo.de - julie_balfour at hotmail.com - jplindy618 at yahoo.com - birdgirlya333 at yahoo.ca - henning2 at terra.com.br - jansart at oregonfast.net - milcg at yahoo.com - aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au - wherr009 at umn.edu - spi00000000 at yahoo.com - philippajrice at yahoo.co.uk - Debbie.C at sbcglobal.net - Tgoswife325 at aol.com - sowmya_k_98 at yahoo.com - spaebrun at yahoo.com - sawsan_issa at earthlink.net - abced99 at hotmail.com - kellybeth11 at hotmail.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - m_warren17 at yahoo.com.au - muellem at bc.edu - rgbmcl at hotmail.com - bigbish13 at yahoo.com - goalieracer at yahoo.com - idrinkjameson at hotmail.com - baite002 at bama.ua.edu - jls274 at yahoo.com - cricket25_69 at yahoo.com - hln321 at aol.com - joy_d_writer at yahoo.co.uk - yellowrainjacket at yahoo.com - laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au - grodd752 at yahoo.com - katiebug1233 at yahoo.com - hlwilliams17 at yahoo.com - bd-bear at verizon.net - hpathbp2003 at yahoo.com - jessg826 at yahoo.com - ivanneth63 at yahoo.com - pete_larkin at btinternet.com - kandbmom at yahoo.com - rtb333 at yahoo.com - pt4ever at yahoo.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - conart714 at yahoo.com - lauried1904 at yahoo.com - bneeweenee at yahoo.com - happybean98 at yahoo.com - sunflowerlaw at cox.net - Tori100186 at aol.com - ajroald at yahoo.com - dlmca at stny.rr.com - procyonblack at yahoo.co.uk - aravindsaradha at yahoo.com - cassin12004 at yahoo.com - rubykelly at webtv.net - ealbistegui at yahoo.com - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - mrebeccat at aol.com - h_hawks_71 at yahoo.com - kshorto at uark.edu - humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au - g2grace at yahoo.com - Miffy at hailes.com - pandora_966 at yahoo.com - neisha_saxena at yahoo.com - CariadMel at aol.com - lora at lilting.org - alvina3 at mail.ru - mich_acosta at hotmail.com - jcrct at aol.com - jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com - retrorose28 at comcast.net - emhutch at sbcglobal.net - jaycat at kans.com - lucilaperezlascano at yahoo.com - roseviolet66 at yahoo.com - bharathib at yahoo.com - chuck0823 at yahoo.com - carmenherrerosuarez at hotmail.com - kathysmedley at yahoo.com - claredurina at yahoo.com - lethe_lupin at yahoo.com - zurg423 at yahoo.com - pastordonna at adelphia.net - beatnik24601 at yahoo.com - slainetrevelyan at yahoo.co.uk - northsouth17 at yahoo.com - amorse at mikalix.com - saaras at snail-mail.net - jlt38 at columbia.edu - johansenshawna at yahoo.com - mark.scott3113 at ntlworld.com - aceworker at yahoo.com - mariabronte at yahoo.com - talhal83 at gmail.com - rkabhi at gmail.com - Nanagose at aol.com - srikanthk at gmail.com - hiwatari_asutsuri at yahoo.com - hickengruendler at yahoo.de - gjrmoonchild at yahoo.com - smithtaz at yahoo.com - kjane7779 at yahoo.com - tidblgr72 at yahoo.com - albus_rh at yahoo.com - msju08 at yahoo.com - anaith at gmx.net - ancags at yahoo.com - twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com - celeblezfan at yahoo.com - amis917 at hotmail.com - Bilius Weasley - pfsch at gmx.de - sammip2010 at yahoo.ca - elihufalk at yahoo.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - laura_momiji at tin.it - abishag00 at yahoo.com - moonyatemybaby at yahoo.co.uk - WFeuchter at msn.com - floopy at shaw.ca - Kimberly.Tarasenko at Colorado.edu - raylady at metrocast.net - sarahlizzy at hotmail.com - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - katie_m_white at hotmail.com - meriaugust at yahoo.com - cristinanne at evilemail.com - malinit at excite.com - gabydiehl at t-online.de - theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net - ROWAN6MAYFAIR at AOL.COM - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - darkangel765x at yahoo.com - barrie1111 at juno.com - fulgour at yahoo.com.au - whitetyger69_20002000 at yahoo.com - angelprincess8802 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - gefrodsham at hotmail.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - dorogaya at hotmail.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - kaaryn4 at yahoo.com - jvovk22 at yahoo.com - aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - lalasnake at yahoo.com - essorg_nire at yahoo.com - lierian at carolina.rr.com - nirupamashah at yahoo.co.in - rxtlc at comcast.net - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - freaky_ams at hotmail.com - iluvmuffins at hotmail.com - goodhuckcharm at yahoo.com - cmmc at alum.dartmouth.org - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - Magic_Amulet at hotmail.com - templar1112002 at yahoo.com - rainnyday at aol.com - moon_stag at yahoo.com - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - thegreatwebguru at yahoo.com - ccneppl at yahoo.com - vnagata at hotmail.com - ziggy at zootsplace.com - fonzkat at yahoo.com - khastiicatz at yahoo.com - DuchessSan at aol.com - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - sbarthell2001 at yahoo.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - kerberusmon at yahoo.com.mx - laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com - franthephoenix at yahoo.co.uk - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - milcg at yahoo.com - whereisthing2 at hotmail.com - joy_d_writer at yahoo.co.uk - dream_weeper at hotmail.com - anmsmom333 at cox.net - Tori100186 at aol.com - ajroald at yahoo.com - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - emhutch at sbcglobal.net - bharathib at yahoo.com - beatnik24601 at yahoo.com - mark.scott3113 at ntlworld.com - jtsnumba1gurl at yahoo.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com - Blaise Zabini - mkeller01 at alltel.net - jennivirides at yahoo.co.uk - phoenix5 at btopenworld.com - kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com - sammip2010 at yahoo.ca - jennagaylene at gmail.com - melodiousmonkey at yahoo.com.au - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - bozo2138 at hotmail.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - glykonix at yahoo.com - missbluepie at yahoo.com.au - abishag00 at yahoo.com - SnapesSlytherin at aol.com - arrafah at hotmail.com - doliesl at yahoo.com - ann.nalle at verizon.net - annemehr at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - veertje999 at yahoo.co.uk - barbarataku at yahoo.com - kcrani01 at hotmail.com - rlv2001 at hotmail.com - rosie_27018 at yahoo.com - yodamarie78 at yahoo.com - just_smile_04 at yahoo.com - balbu84 at yahoo.fr - averyhaze at hotmail.com - sonorangal at aol.com - padawan_jaina at yahoo.de - abbess_tsing at hotmail.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - Hiro57108 at hotmail.com - ineskennes at yahoo.co.uk - cosmicat60 at hotmail.com - scoring_opportunity at yahoo.com - jbjalbrz at uchicago.edu - barrie1111 at juno.com - captivity at gmail.com - ancalyme at yahoo.de - slamdancer at gawab.com - someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - sigep32606 at yahoo.com - wiffyboy2003 at yahoo.com - samwisep at yahoo.com - angelprincess8802 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - grookill at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - monzaba at poczta.onet.pl - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - kathrin.p at gmail.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thesheltons1 at yahoo.com - 520089239943-0001 at T-Online.de - shadiness at gmail.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - woolf at anencephalic.net - hebrideanblack at earthlink.net - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - anne_conda at web.de - bridgetteakabiit at yahoo.com - LadySawall at aol.com - vineet_910 at yahoo.co.in - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - gwyneth521 at yahoo.com - TScheffler at rtlworld.de - fabia_aconia at yahoo.fr - terpslover25 at yahoo.com - hermioneclone at yahoo.com - cassiepuff at hotmail.com - iris123s at netscape.net - spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com - lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk - red_light_runner08 at yahoo.co.uk - improbable_solution at yahoo.co.uk - gratyvolt at yahoo.fr - elizafoxburg at yahoo.com - vidyuth_amp at yahoo.com - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - yahoogroups at helux.co.uk - LydiiaAdleida at aol.com - aqua_eyes1999 at yahoo.com - aastha717 at yahoo.com - pizziehl at yahoo.com - noon_at_night at yahoo.com - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - Peaches_without_cream at yahoo.com - nae92168 at yahoo.com - iluvmuffins at hotmail.com - sroginson at sbcglobal.net - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk - jordana at optusnet.com.au - nobradors at hotmail.com - claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com - krirre.bokmal at telia.com - hpluz at yahoo.com.au - calimie_niphredil at yahoo.es - kity_twins at yahoo.com.br - squireandknight at yahoo.com - weildman at comcast.net - khastiicatz at yahoo.com - lisa_wescott at yahoo.com - elwing.alcyone at gmail.com - kenkettet at yahoo.com - aleenakenobi at yahoo.com - aliasnance at yahoo.com - Janicem211 at aol.com - calliandrea at yahoo.com - staceyv2220 at yahoo.com - tfaucette6387 at charter.net - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - susankusel at yahoo.com - wyldflwr623 at yahoo.com - jez_two at yahoo.com - lucy_diamond66 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com - rachaelmcadams at yahoo.ca - belofbree at yahoo.co.uk - spi00000000 at yahoo.com - Debbie.C at sbcglobal.net - john_the_walker82 at yahoo.co.uk - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - dream_weeper at hotmail.com - pt4ever at yahoo.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - sunflowerlaw at cox.net - ajroald at yahoo.com - rubykelly at webtv.net - agreensaver at yahoo.com - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - lordxn at yahoo.com.au - humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au - neisha_saxena at yahoo.com - alvina3 at mail.ru - bearyclare at hotmail.com - roseviolet66 at yahoo.com - zurg423 at yahoo.com - pastordonna at adelphia.net - moonlit_foxglove at hotmail.com - amorse at mikalix.com - cat_kind at yahoo.com - Nanagose at aol.com - silversarahs at yahoo.co.uk - tidblgr72 at yahoo.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - Caradoc Dearborn - stevejjen at earthlink.net - Aisbelmon at hotmail.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - saraquel_omphale at yahoo.com - moonyatemybaby at yahoo.co.uk - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk - mariaalena at purdue.edu - star__victoria at hotmail.com - meriaugust at yahoo.com - tiamik72 at aol.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - castorandpollux2002 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - madaxe at starspath.com - trisana_farwell at yahoo.com - chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net - sali-ii at lycos.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - gratyvolt at yahoo.fr - sdeepthi at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - elfundeb at comcast.net - blue1499 at earthlink.net - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - jennydowns at hotmail.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - Celestina Warbeck - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - moonyatemybaby at yahoo.co.uk - Kimberly.Tarasenko at Colorado.edu - gallo at wpaccs.com - llafleur276 at hotmail.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - andie1 at earthlink.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - angie at servit.org - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - Erthena at aol.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - goodhuckcharm at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - d.marchel at comcast.net - jennistern at aol.com - jesykaditri at yahoo.com - mhbobbin at yahoo.com - juleslllll at yahoo.com.au - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - cathyandharlon at yahoo.com - dizzyadora at hotmail.com - italiangino_13 at hotmail.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - Croaker - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - dfrankiswork at netscape.net - just_smile_04 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - stonehenge.orders at verizon.net - camiecat at comcast.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - essorg_nire at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - nobigbusiness at hotmail.com - mhbobbin at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - devika261 at hotmail.com - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - beatnik24601 at yahoo.com - Davey Gudgeon - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - chopsfold at yahoo.co.uk - mariaalena at purdue.edu - star__victoria at hotmail.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - barrie1111 at juno.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - lupinesque at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - smhatreehugger at netscape.net - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - mbarclay at lee.edu - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - Dorcas Meadowes - jjaco2 at comcast.net - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - moonyatemybaby at yahoo.co.uk - ann.nalle at verizon.net - june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk - star__victoria at hotmail.com - meriaugust at yahoo.com - averyhaze at hotmail.com - tiamik72 at aol.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - tracym255 at aol.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - kathrin.p at gmail.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - tsproffitt at hotmail.com - lierian at carolina.rr.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - iibeeii at aol.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - kleiner_drache at mac.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - riberam at glue.umd.edu - cmjohnstone at hotmail.com - arthanien at hotmail.com - Becky at Pemberly99.freeserve.co.uk - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - jprufrock17 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - claredurina at yahoo.com - kjane7779 at yahoo.com - Doris Crockford - mkeller01 at alltel.net - jennivirides at yahoo.co.uk - pfsch at gmx.de - fienxjox at yahoo.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - arrafah at hotmail.com - Kimberly.Tarasenko at Colorado.edu - gbannister10 at aol.com - gallo at wpaccs.com - Phoebeburk at rcn.com - star__victoria at hotmail.com - balbu84 at yahoo.fr - grahadh at yahoo.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - emem_m at hotmail.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - unicornspride at centurytel.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - egastin at earthlink.net - roulston112131 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hermowninny719 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - lupinesque at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - tsproffitt at hotmail.com - lauren_mustac at yahoo.com - dicentra at xmission.com - dklopp at ptd.net - candymg04 at yahoo.com - vidyuth_amp at yahoo.com - iibeeii at aol.com - rxtlc at comcast.net - askmanas20 at yahoo.co.in - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - beth_bousquet at yahoo.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - sarah__p at hotmail.com - rhinobabies at hotmail.com - ajillity at direcway.com - KJWhiteman at sbcglobal.net - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - evankimjeff at yahoo.com - julwalker7614726 at aol.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - rachaelmcadams at yahoo.ca - shoelessgirl at hotmail.com - emperors_soul at yahoo.com.sg - rtb333 at yahoo.com - rubykelly at webtv.net - alvina3 at mail.ru - mich_acosta at hotmail.com - cathmorgan at cetian.net - srikanthk at gmail.com - smithtaz at yahoo.com - Florence - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - laura_momiji at tin.it - doliesl at yahoo.com - ann.nalle at verizon.net - naama2486 at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk - amy_marblefeet at yahoo.co.uk - mariaalena at purdue.edu - hanbury at cbmi.upmc.edu - gallo at wpaccs.com - kcrani01 at hotmail.com - denise at emptymirrorbooks.com - jdu at mail2.gcnet.net - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - star__victoria at hotmail.com - blaise_writer at hotmail.com - bhauersperger at hotmail.com - libbieselden at yahoo.com.au - balbu84 at yahoo.fr - cdayr at yahoo.com - abbess_tsing at hotmail.com - gabydiehl at t-online.de - tomparksNN at yahoo.com - rising_venus at moonshinehollow.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - mary.hoerr at gmail.com - icebat78 at yahoo.es - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - andie1 at earthlink.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - lovefromhermione at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - Emza at lineone.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hermowninny719 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com - woolf at anencephalic.net - hebrideanblack at earthlink.net - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - fayelass at yahoo.co.uk - sailorstarfairy at yahoo.com - tanja.musar at guest.arnes.si - NightWolfAKABleu at aol.com - dicentra at xmission.com - Erthena at aol.com - dlbal at worldonline.nl - deanlawrence_us at yahoo.com - robinboss at gmail.com - eljobu at yahoo.com - felicialso at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - noelleisastar at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk - d.marchel at comcast.net - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - GilMiriel at hotmail.com - keithrichgirl at yahoo.com - calimie_niphredil at yahoo.es - captain_suburbia at yahoo.com.au - angelafrank at lycos.com - ajillity at direcway.com - timo_bei at gmx.de - ivaldoo at yahoo.com - kjones at telus.net - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - kawfhw at earthlink.net - maddmorgan at adelphia.net - florentinemaier at hotmail.com - julie_balfour at hotmail.com - abced99 at hotmail.com - jls274 at yahoo.com - dizzyadora at hotmail.com - italiangino_13 at hotmail.com - pamela823 at charter.net - happybean98 at yahoo.com - sunflowerlaw at cox.net - dlmca at stny.rr.com - talhal83 at gmail.com - Nanagose at aol.com - Gabrielle Delacour - r_snowdon at hotmail.com - melodiousmonkey at yahoo.com.au - Hunta_Girl at hotmail.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - kilaue2612 at comcast.net - mhymei at aol.com - rlv2001 at hotmail.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - llafleur276 at hotmail.com - rbfrey at hotmail.com - jferer at yahoo.com - dmthedragon at hotmail.com - sunshine_isis at fastmail.fm - flyballcairn at bellsouth.net - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - scoring_opportunity at yahoo.com - littlebitgal at att.net - jbjalbrz at uchicago.edu - captivity at gmail.com - fulgour at yahoo.com.au - whitetyger69_20002000 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - sharker469 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - katmac at katmac.cncdsl.com - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thesheltons1 at yahoo.com - terrainblack at yahoo.co.uk - txgrace02 at sbcglobal.net - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - Nibleswik at aol.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - Emza at lineone.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - bridgetteakabiit at yahoo.com - neil.chrissie at tesco.net - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - Tao-Te-JPB at comcast.net - smhatreehugger at netscape.net - improbable_solution at yahoo.co.uk - deanlawrence_us at yahoo.com - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - yahoogroups at helux.co.uk - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - amy79a at gmail.com - aastha717 at yahoo.com - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - eljobu at yahoo.com - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - iluvmuffins at hotmail.com - kohararpo at yahoo.com - barrythegirl at hotmail.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - Magic_Amulet at hotmail.com - claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com - ccneppl at yahoo.com - k_2324 at yahoo.com.au - katecryderman at hotmail.com - khastiicatz at yahoo.com - rickyb321 at yahoo.com - c_yancyhunter at yahoo.com - davey_mccallister at yahoo.com - aliasnance at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com - mrsbrooksathome at yahoo.com - renee.smith at zoom.co.uk - lindseyfaber at yahoo.com - clehrenet at yahoo.com - Miffy at hailes.com - lucilaperezlascano at yahoo.com - moonlit_foxglove at hotmail.com - mariabronte at yahoo.com - smithtaz at yahoo.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - Gladys Gudgeon - star__victoria at hotmail.com - hallisallimalli at yahoo.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - terpslover25 at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - squireandknight at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - claredurina at yahoo.com - Great Uncle Algie - mkeller01 at alltel.net - janacooney at yahoo.com - eyegortroll at hotmail.com - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - fienxjox at yahoo.com - gorbetta at hotmail.com - peaceful_protest1 at yahoo.com - sweetblonde818 at yahoo.co.uk - karentheunicorn at msn.com - WFeuchter at msn.com - gbannister10 at aol.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - grace701 at yahoo.com - leu02ram at rdg.ac.uk - lfreeman at mbc.edu - dh.shrijnana at verizon.net - gallo at wpaccs.com - yswahl at stis.net - sarahlizzy at hotmail.com - jdu at mail2.gcnet.net - Ariel141 at aol.com - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - star__victoria at hotmail.com - tgs at iaw.on.ca - meriaugust at yahoo.com - cortana.costume at free.fr - weasleyginerva at yahoo.com - banjw at yahoo.com - joj at rochester.rr.com - libbieselden at yahoo.com.au - averyhaze at hotmail.com - tomparksNN at yahoo.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - donkeynjo at yahoo.com - tonks_op at yahoo.com - barrie1111 at juno.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - hpfans at mamakelsy.net - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - monzaba at poczta.onet.pl - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - trinity31405 at yahoo.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - andie1 at earthlink.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - dalriada26 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - lupinesque at yahoo.com - nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com - vanyarelf at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - ogirouar at yahoo.com - sirius702003 at yahoo.com - dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu - bigbonedgal26 at hotmail.com - katiejune at yahoo.com - madaxe at starspath.com - mandyraetaylor at mac.com - joeplugger at yahoo.com - Erthena at aol.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - baker1_1999 at yahoo.com - sdeepthi at yahoo.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - nae92168 at yahoo.com - goodhuckcharm at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - entropymail at yahoo.com - templar1112002 at yahoo.com - jordana at optusnet.com.au - fabianamm at brturbo.com - cmjohnstone at hotmail.com - kaetae at hotmail.com - d.marchel at comcast.net - jennistern at aol.com - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - betsyfallon at hotmail.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - kmg300 at yahoo.com - GilMiriel at hotmail.com - jesykaditri at yahoo.com - squireandknight at yahoo.com - nadja_rehberger at hotmail.com - kamala_2347 at yahoo.com - drcarole71 at yahoo.com - skittles_24_7 at yahoo.com - strivingstarlet at yahoo.com - ajillity at direcway.com - aliasnance at yahoo.com - jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - jez_two at yahoo.com - franthephoenix at yahoo.co.uk - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - george.fisher at gmx.net - rachaelmcadams at yahoo.ca - florentinemaier at hotmail.com - m_sethre at yahoo.co.uk - michi_groups at yahoo.com - sowmya_k_98 at yahoo.com - spaebrun at yahoo.com - john_the_walker82 at yahoo.co.uk - cathyandharlon at yahoo.com - italiangino_13 at hotmail.com - Roolover93 at comcast.net - Tori100186 at aol.com - celine_bigoy at yahoo.fr - claredurina at yahoo.com - talhal83 at gmail.com - srikanthk at gmail.com - Madam Marsh - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - stanleys at sbcglobal.net - altered.earth at ntlworld.com - frost_indri at yahoo.com - rmatovic at ssk.com - star__victoria at hotmail.com - llamadroid at hotmail.com - sunnybee6au at yahoo.com.au - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - hautbois1 at comcast.net - jahralt21 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - k12isten at hotmail.com - hpfans at mamakelsy.net - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - andie1 at earthlink.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - abbet69 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated2 at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated3 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_1 at yahoo.com - are_listmembers_better_off_now at yahoo.com - elftermlimits at yahoo.com - elftermlimits1 at yahoo.com - madaxe at starspath.com - peaceful_protester1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest1 at yahoo.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - jannasams at hotmail.com - miamibarb at BellSouth.net - peacefulprotest2 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest3 at yahoo.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - dissentnottolerated1 at yahoo.com - dkkelly at ix.netcom.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - candlekicks at yahoo.ca - jtsnumba1gurl at yahoo.com - Madam Rosmerta - t_p0tz at yahoo.com - mkeller01 at alltel.net - janacooney at yahoo.com - jennagaylene at gmail.com - melodiousmonkey at yahoo.com.au - a1batross at yahoo.com - deatheaterjames at yahoo.co.uk - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - rob_drew15 at hotmail.com - dirgess13 at yahoo.com - gorbetta at hotmail.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - missbluepie at yahoo.com.au - GeorgiannJ at cs.com - cnzjd at adelphia.net - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com - eclipse021342 at yahoo.com - bowlwoman at yahoo.com - risako at nexusanime.com - altered.earth at ntlworld.com - dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com - barbarataku at yahoo.com - kcrani01 at hotmail.com - amdorn at hotmail.com - kcox at wooster.edu - blaise_writer at hotmail.com - mhymei at aol.com - hiteshl at vsnl.com - kstewart at austin.rr.com - rbfrey at hotmail.com - talented_bink at hotmail.com - cortana.costume at free.fr - jweinert at infionline.net - nepenthales at yahoo.com - rockit_esq at msn.com - texas.aggie4 at verizon.net - gopotter2004 at yahoo.com - averyhaze at hotmail.com - sonorangal at aol.com - silentsipher at yahoo.com - luolin88 at yahoo.com - rising_venus at moonshinehollow.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - hautbois1 at comcast.net - handyman_321 at yahoo.com - jahralt21 at yahoo.com - kat.rohts at gmx.de - jbjalbrz at uchicago.edu - ibchawz at yahoo.com - lupen07438 at yahoo.com - scully_med at yahoo.ca - ear at scn.org - machaelf at yahoo.com - mishehoo1 at walla.co.il - wiffyboy2003 at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - HeartAndSoul4815 at ctel.net - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely1 at yahoo.com - absolutepwrcorruptsabsolutely at yahoo.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - kcamera at msn.com - pks9231993 at yahoo.com - vickik at umich.edu - dissentnottolerated at yahoo.com - fairisfairisfair at yahoo.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - civil_disobedience5 at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - shadiness at gmail.com - Koinonia2 at hotmail.com - brightlywoven at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest4 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest5 at yahoo.com - peacefulprotest6 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off1 at yahoo.com - is_hpfgu_better_off2 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience1 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience3 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience4 at yahoo.com - civil_disobedience6 at yahoo.com - fundamentalfairness at yahoo.com - thirtyhyenas2 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_love_it_or_leave_it2 at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge at yahoo.com - hyenasincharge1 at yahoo.com - bldgblocks10 at yahoo.com - dissentnotto From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:51:49 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:51:49 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885509.389.55477.w122@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172214 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Who do you think will be Head Boy in Harry's seventh year at Hogwarts? (Poll created by Carol.) CHOICES AND RESULTS - Harry, 189 votes, 25.96% - Ron, 234 votes, 32.14% - Draco, 64 votes, 8.79% - Ernie MacMillan, 120 votes, 16.48% - Neville, 104 votes, 14.29% - Other (specify onlist, giving motivation), 17 votes, 2.34% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Harry - pscospoagofootp at aol.com - vividscribbler at yahoo.com - gbannister10 at aol.com - amechan at virgilio.it - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - vickik at umich.edu - mario.pitre at videotron.ca - m_m_gregory at yahoo.com - vanyarelf at yahoo.com - grace701 at yahoo.com - PurpleBear1976 at aol.com - kawfhw at earthlink.net - elvinprincess99 at aol.com - sarahlizzy at hotmail.com - laurievuitton at yahoo.com - peckham at cyberramp.net - floopy at shaw.ca - profwildflower at mindspring.com - Kimberly.Tarasenko at Colorado.edu - potter76 at libero.it - daciah97 at yahoo.com - ashleyjax2 at yahoo.com - bellemichellem at yahoo.com - steffy07 at aol.com - djpayton1 at juno.com - tgs at iaw.on.ca - anandini77 at hotmail.com - meriaugust at yahoo.com - weasleyginerva at yahoo.com - ladysilverbolt at yahoo.com - etmatt at yahoo.com - dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu - hawkeye072 at sbcglobal.net - rach4001 at yahoo.co.uk - jesykaditri at yahoo.com - r.v.oldridge at herts.ac.uk - cassin12004 at yahoo.com - farmerdon59 at yahoo.com - scottebrecht at yahoo.com - carrot92285 at yahoo.com - amyshumaker89 at yahoo.com - michelewistar at yahoo.com - hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu - Hawkfalco at comcast.net - sunshine_isis at fastmail.fm - uath50 at yahoo.com - hpfgu_in_trouble at yahoo.com - jujupoet29 at hotmail.com - andrew at rgmm.co.uk - Aevumsemper at hotmail.com - mariea817 at yahoo.com - johnhern at hotmail.com - kgpopp at yahoo.com - joshism1981 at yahoo.com - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - jenn_ivory at yahoo.com - kking0731 at gmail.com - kmsprauer at yahoo.com - remotta7 at yahoo.com - arianesmum at yahoo.com - kathyheilmann at yahoo.com - mora at vbbn.com - greenelizajw at yahoo.com - les000us at yahoo.com - gryffindor.phan at gmail.com - CoyotesChild at charter.net - trinity31405 at yahoo.com - ebr200 at yahoo.com - jvovk22 at yahoo.com - charismatickid868766 at yahoo.com - Spwysteve at wowway.com - thirtyhyenas1 at yahoo.com - philstar22 at hotmail.com - dejjfan368 at aol.com - kevinemail2000 at yahoo.com - pfsch at gmx.de - frost_indri at yahoo.com - gradstudent792002 at yahoo.com - sirius702003 at yahoo.com - leon_no28 at yahoo.com - mdemeran at hotmail.com - labmystc at yahoo.com - amy79a at gmail.com - seekerginny at yahoo.com - anne_conda at web.de - Hines57 at comcast.net - gwyneth521 at yahoo.com - sirwonkalus at yahoo.com - egastin at earthlink.net - procyonblack at yahoo.co.uk - olly854321 at yahoo.co.uk - Redcandle17 at aol.com - coolone007_30 at yahoo.com - revealme4u at yahoo.com - buckbeak1391 at yahoo.com - skip37m at yahoo.com - elaine_munn at yahoo.co.uk - jaycat at kans.com - i_am_the_weirdo at hotmail.com - spaebrun at yahoo.com - truprince1 at email.com - MnMWilliams at starpower.net - jackcarrie at hotmail.com - britneywbb at yahoo.com - jeopardy18 at comcast.net - bob.oliver at cox.net - clancy011 at aol.com - sj_barton at yahoo.com - jcorbblah at yahoo.com - kevinhodge at hawaii.rr.com - aesob at yahoo.com - greatelderone at yahoo.com - lizaustin1303 at aol.com - ronjdiver at yahoo.com - kobeg03 at msn.com - suzchiles at msn.com - amdorn at hotmail.com - claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com - fabianamm at brturbo.com - jennistern at aol.com - kerberusmon at yahoo.com.mx - hpfan543212345 at yahoo.com - spcsandy at yahoo.com - sibyllthescrewy at yahoo.co.uk - bigmlfan at yahoo.com - k_2324 at yahoo.com.au - squireandknight at yahoo.com - miamibarb at BellSouth.net - caleb at skim.org.nz - weildman at comcast.net - McGregorMax at ec.rr.com - rhinobabies at hotmail.com - nihil8750 at comcast.net - nhuguet at aol.com - cdavies at udel.edu - topaz880 at yahoo.com - slmrn98 at bellsouth.net - girl_next_door704 at yahoo.com - improbable_solution at yahoo.co.uk - roseviolet66 at yahoo.com - 4nerds at eskimo.com - clearlychaotic at yahoo.com - elwing.alcyone at gmail.com - artist_0308 at yahoo.com - kelley.meyer at comcast.net - oiboyz at hotmail.com - daisyofbywater at yahoo.com - leahbrahms at yahoo.com - sacha_vohra at yahoo.ca - girljudy2001 at yahoo.com - raeangelavhs at msn.com - thesheltons1 at yahoo.com - glykonix at yahoo.com - dfrankiswork at netscape.net - thewifenwv at yahoo.com - kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com - jeanico at securenet.net - michi-ted.abe at nifty.com - bob1987dole at yahoo.com - emperors_soul at yahoo.com.sg - paisley_pi at yahoo.com - devika261 at hotmail.com - ekrbdg at msn.com - nepenthales at yahoo.com - mer920 at yahoo.com - templar1112002 at yahoo.com - lindseyfaber at yahoo.com - Stncold223 at hotmail.com - katiebug1233 at yahoo.com - hlwilliams17 at yahoo.com - fienxjox at yahoo.com - ivanneth63 at yahoo.com - anthyroserain at yahoo.com - sunflowerlaw at cox.net - jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl - HxM_fan at hotmail.com - Miffy at hailes.com - debrawaudby at yahoo.co.uk - caiweile at hotmail.com - retrorose28 at comcast.net - dece1799 at uidaho.edu - bearyclare at hotmail.com - watersign21 at yahoo.com - jennydowns at hotmail.com - venkatesh27989 at yahoo.co.in - hokus7 at yahoo.ca - gergely.garami at freemail.hu - HeartAndSoul4815 at ctel.net - loopyzu at psni.us - Ron - gunnhildur68 at simnet.is - gratyvolt at yahoo.fr - siriuslove71 at yahoo.com - eyegortroll at hotmail.com - moneylover_moneylover at yahoo.com - jennagaylene at gmail.com - pks9231993 at yahoo.com - sunflowers1012001 at yahoo.com - handerwyc at yahoo.com - sonjaaiston at yahoo.com - stetchnik at yahoo.com - jwilliams44118 at yahoo.com - carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk - klano at hotmail.com - tweetypie18 at gmail.com - irishprincesscjm at yahoo.com - karen_nagy at yahoo.com - warhound at accessus.net - goalieracer at yahoo.com - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - cgperez217 at yahoo.com - doliesl at yahoo.com - andie1 at earthlink.net - eclipse021342 at yahoo.com - harryingbg at yahoo.com - romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com - mbfilippini at ckwarchitects.com - jennivirides at yahoo.co.uk - ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk - denise at emptymirrorbooks.com - bowlwoman at yahoo.com - ann.nalle at verizon.net - stanleys at sbcglobal.net - risako at nexusanime.com - ktd7 at yahoo.com - a_williams1 at pacific.edu - star__victoria at hotmail.com - jeopardy18 at attbi.com - basher782003 at yahoo.com - elihufalk at yahoo.com - shannyb25 at hotmail.com - witchwriter_no1 at yahoo.com - exautonomous at yahoo.com - jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com - vineet_910 at yahoo.co.in - herteljm at comcast.net - kstewart at austin.rr.com - cruthw at earthlink.net - rockit_esq at msn.com - marygondek at yahoo.com - yodamarie78 at yahoo.com - dolis5657 at yahoo.com - rupertgrintblue at yahoo.com - enderbean01 at yahoo.com - karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk - jody at sonicchocolate.com - melissahyatt at umich.edu - idlerat at yahoo.com - lilyp at superig.com.br - averyhaze at hotmail.com - VelkaECS at aol.com - jadethe2nd at yahoo.com - wurrm01 at attbi.com - wek2404 at yahoo.com - sonorangal at aol.com - popy70it at yahoo.com - silentsipher at yahoo.com - marika_thestral at yahoo.se - gabydiehl at t-online.de - reb123451 at yahoo.com - charlesemoss at yahoo.com - ginny343 at yahoo.com - njcunewbie at yahoo.com - bleckybecs at yahoo.com - donkeynjo at yahoo.com - adhaereovirtuti at sbcglobal.net - tania_schr at hotmail.com - trent623 at msn.com - ssattar5 at yahoo.com - ibchawz at yahoo.com - ancalyme at yahoo.de - slamdancer at gawab.com - bbernard1945 at sbcglobal.net - onlygoofy at yahoo.com - pretenderprofilergirl at yahoo.com - icebat78 at yahoo.es - alishak at spu.edu - dirgess13 at yahoo.com - sewabearbear at yahoo.com - xanniebellx at yahoo.com.au - pam_rosen at yahoo.com - anita_sathe at persistent.co.in - falkelihu at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - maria.elmvang at gmail.com - baseball_07_05 at yahoo.com - elfundeb at comcast.net - christyj2323 at yahoo.com - flutingfrenzy at hotmail.com - rgm at apex.net - nicolau at mat.puc-rio.br - nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com - bldgblocks10 at yahoo.com - lilneona at yahoo.com - elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com - lanibird96 at yahoo.com - stephie1179 at aol.com - bigbonedgal26 at hotmail.com - angie at servit.org - wave_of_the_future at yahoo.com - deatheaterjames at yahoo.co.uk - pinkmoon3662 at yahoo.com - wright1000 at sbcglobal.net - jdarbonne at earthlink.net - cmw652 at yahoo.com - mca at princeton.edu - kaixin90 at yahoo.co.uk - SongBird3411 at aol.com - robkristjansson at hotmail.com - dklopp at ptd.net - nirupama76 at yahoo.com - larryngocnguyen at hotmail.com - radasgat at yahoo.com - dd_ur_great at yahoo.co.uk - jess_podolski at yahoo.com - bc_is_the_place_to_be at yahoo.ca - postoakbluffer at yahoo.com - milspils2004 at yahoo.co.in - muza_1 at yahoo.com - noelleisastar at yahoo.com - siferkaja at email.si - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - flyballcairn at bellsouth.net - gefrodsham at hotmail.com - riti202 at yahoo.co.in - wherr009 at umn.edu - teachnoel at yahoo.com - paul_terzis at yahoo.gr - maddmorgan at adelphia.net - daisy_axford at yahoo.com - requiem at uswest.net - punkieshazam at yahoo.com - david_p at istop.com - cmjohnstone at hotmail.com - jhnbwmn at hotmail.com - txtornado92 at yahoo.com - wehatethatsam at yahoo.co.uk - melodiousmonkey at yahoo.com.au - pedpiedmont at yahoo.com - eh1260 at yahoo.com - isabelwhiteoz at yahoo.com.au - toptopera at yahoo.com.br - moochy4ro at hotmail.com - cjsusice at yahoo.com - sk8sue at hotmail.com - keithrichgirl at yahoo.com - Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com - yingle at alumni.usc.edu - yingsinla at yahoo.com - kathleenjohnson at juno.com - drcarole71 at yahoo.com - unc8401 at yahoo.com - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - nifer819 at yahoo.com - pandora_966 at yahoo.com - monique_antoinette at yahoo.com - chilipepperpalmer at yahoo.com - vcuram1999 at yahoo.com - crt1072 at yahoo.com - matt.brittain at charter.net - bubbles889 at hotmail.com - trmw100 at yahoo.ie - theworldisadeafmachine at yahoo.com - camckenzie at yahoo.com - junglecatgrandma at yahoo.com - lydeeanne at yahoo.co.uk - redcat_tiger at yahoo.com - ivaldoo at yahoo.com - ctab50 at yahoo.com - jprufrock17 at yahoo.com - dorothywillis at charter.net - essorg_nire at yahoo.com - eriphila at yahoo.com - turner_727 at yahoo.com - maxximus787 at yahoo.com - neferiet at yahoo.com - blee_aida at msn.com - just_smile_04 at yahoo.com - rachaelmcadams at yahoo.ca - miss_dougal at yahoo.co.uk - apzdcmsw at yahoo.ca - bowlertara at hotmail.com - abced99 at hotmail.com - meg_twin1 at hotmail.com - m_warren17 at yahoo.com.au - TScheffler at rtlworld.de - sparky-wan at cox.net - jls274 at yahoo.com - myangelsoflife at yahoo.com - tracgeo at nls.net - caesian at yahoo.com - roywking38 at yahoo.com - darcilolley at mchsi.com - incognicat at hotmail.com - cincimaelder at yahoo.com - jessg826 at yahoo.com - ccahallebro at yahoo.co.uk - jelly92784 at yahoo.com - kandbmom at yahoo.com - Roolover93 at comcast.net - conart714 at yahoo.com - ankesh85 at yahoo.com - star_shaped_heart at hotmail.com - lordxn at yahoo.com.au - h_hawks_71 at yahoo.com - kshorto at uark.edu - carodave92 at yahoo.com - msju08 at yahoo.com - hpfan_cindy at yahoo.com - michael.lloyd at cgi.com - koukla_es at yahoo.es - animagikat at yahoo.com - rebelslgb at aol.com - s.grafton at ntlworld.com - bthoro at yahoo.com - zanaboo at aol.com - havelockxf at hotmail.com - mark.scott3113 at ntlworld.com - niyaz006 at gmail.com - bearlym6 at yahoo.com - rowena.lewis82 at gmail.com - chiefsmokey at yahoo.com - poojatarang at yahoo.co.in - OctobersChild48 at aol.com - Draco - lmciver1 at cs.com - amlygo at cox.net - belijako at online.no - p.haider at netzoffice.de - annemehr at yahoo.com - khlauf at fuse.net - mariaalena at purdue.edu - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - constancevigilance at yahoo.com - tabby1096 at yahoo.com - dmthedragon at hotmail.com - l_zinkiewicz at yahoo.com - cristinanne at evilemail.com - offworld_xanatos at yahoo.com - lahela2000 at yahoo.com - scoring_opportunity at yahoo.com - loganlongbottom at yahoo.com - fulgour at yahoo.com.au - scully_med at yahoo.ca - jez_two at yahoo.com - cress11net at yahoo.com - a_schmisseur at yahoo.com - sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com - aural at hot.ee - LadySawall at aol.com - apoe at nmu.edu - weasley_isourking at yahoo.com - clehrenet at yahoo.com - hermioneclone at yahoo.com - nirupamashah at yahoo.co.in - spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com - nova_glitterfreak at yahoo.com - yahoogroups at helux.co.uk - kathrinhoyme at gmx.de - davrusilla at yahoo.com - kohararpo at yahoo.com - brittrossiter at yahoo.com - dracosmyth at yahoo.com - rainnyday at aol.com - starrychica3000 at yahoo.com - rredordead at aol.com - earendil_fr at yahoo.com - ccneppl at yahoo.com - charlot7542 at yahoo.com - sarah__p at hotmail.com - benevolentferretgoddess at yahoo.com - khastiicatz at yahoo.com - chnc1024 at AOL.COM - lisa_wescott at yahoo.com - lazarevkina at yahoo.com - ineskennes at yahoo.co.uk - jdu at mail2.gcnet.net - shoelessgirl at hotmail.com - beatnik24601 at yahoo.com - kelaino_urania at yahoo.com - whereisthing2 at hotmail.com - kellybeth11 at hotmail.com - lisajanebee at yahoo.co.uk - joy_d_writer at mail.ru - dizzyadora at hotmail.com - ExSlytherin at aol.com - kailincj at msn.com - wikki20 at yahoo.com - jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com - Ernie MacMillan - jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com - etoile.lps at wanadoo.fr - tracym255 at aol.com - tlpbupu at hotmail.com - abishag00 at yahoo.com - jysella at hotmail.com - erinellii at yahoo.com - kcox at wooster.edu - mcandrew at bigpond.com - gandalph3 at hotmail.com - elizabethhadzic at hotmail.com - llamadroid at hotmail.com - fhernly at iupui.edu - playerdogyo at yahoo.com - hallisallimalli at yahoo.com - estrilda_wolfegg at yahoo.com - mgrantwich at yahoo.com - radza at stofanet.dk - craigpb at fastmail.fm - pwaldrip at charter.net - tiamik72 at aol.com - minervatonks at yahoo.com - tekayjaye at yahoo.com - mmapwright at aol.com - witchypooh67 at yahoo.com - abarvi at yahoo.com - mommy2maddyrose at aol.com - DandLWilson at peoplepc.com - flavinsrus at yahoo.com - sara_hodsden at sbcglobal.net - celeblezfan at yahoo.com - rnn_hansen at yahoo.com - mz_annethrope at yahoo.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - grookill at yahoo.com - japanesesearcher at yahoo.com - kcrani01 at hotmail.com - lovefromhermione at yahoo.com - quigonginger at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - abbet69 at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - grahadh at yahoo.com - DRTruman02 at cs.com - lin_mcg at yahoo.com - celletiger at yahoo.com - selkie1964 at yahoo.com - tori100186 at yahoo.com - tanja.musar at guest.arnes.si - harparcat at yahoo.co.uk - hpofan2004 at yahoo.com - lierian at carolina.rr.com - kittybat at planet-save.com - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - schumar1999 at yahoo.com - krams at walla.co.il - ajillity at direcway.com - rosabella_rb at yahoo.com - leslie at fanninelectric.com - noon_at_night at yahoo.com - cuimedono at gmail.com - peskipiksi_pesternomii at yahoo.com - sharker469 at yahoo.com - darkangel765x at yahoo.com - murderedbygod at yahoo.co.uk - florenceraynaud at yahoo.fr - tab1669 at elnet.com - timelady_who at yahoo.com.au - dlbal at worldonline.nl - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - jennefer_pizza at muzak.com - Hiro57108 at hotmail.com - jmmears at comcast.net - cburchak at telusplanet.net - nemi51 at yahoo.no - errolowl at yahoo.com - kmg300 at yahoo.com - mail_to_jutika at yahoo.com - vnagata at hotmail.com - kozmoz4 at yahoo.com - impherring13 at yahoo.com - meidbh at yahoo.com - sad1199 at yahoo.com - gherilain13 at yahoo.com - sophiapriskilla at yahoo.com - ajroland at earthlink.net - kenkettet at yahoo.com - kevindy at bellsouth.net - millie at adr.dk - saradelpozo at yahoo.es - chnc1024 at yahoo.com - hickengruendler at yahoo.de - tonisan9 at hotmail.com - Hunta_Girl at hotmail.com - mel_aldred at yahoo.com - john_the_walker82 at yahoo.co.uk - rgbmcl at hotmail.com - hln321 at aol.com - kmcghee3346 at charter.net - anmsmom333 at cox.net - laura72 at sasktel.net - marionstrauss at yahoo.fr - sapphire_sweetie94 at yahoo.com - loony_lizz at yahoo.com - lisdeleo at yahoo.com - neisha_saxena at yahoo.com - pantera784 at sbcglobal.net - claredurina at yahoo.com - laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au - northsouth17 at yahoo.com - hubbada at unisa.ac.za - talhal83 at gmail.com - messinamoore at sbcglobal.net - gliese229b at aol.com - wilhelmtell35 at hotmail.com - Ronin_47 at comcast.net - chieftainette at gmail.com - ancags at yahoo.com - twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com - Neville - stevejjen at earthlink.net - ilexrdh at yahoo.com - hpfans at mamakelsy.net - hannah at starbrightdesigns.net - cul8ralleg8r at yahoo.com - hartsonthemove at yahoo.com - gallo at wpaccs.com - s_ings at yahoo.com - DMCourt11 at cs.com - altered.earth at ntlworld.com - wickedkitty3 at yahoo.com - mhymei at aol.com - hiteshl at vsnl.com - solana_dd at yahoo.com - rbfrey at hotmail.com - ValieV at att.net - jweinert at infionline.net - anneb_in at yahoo.com - eeyore6771 at comcast.net - khinterberg at yahoo.com - slstepek at rocketmail.com - ROWAN6MAYFAIR at AOL.COM - Kate_always2000 at yahoo.com - jahralt21 at yahoo.com - Bakrfam313 at cs.com - darknstormynight at gmail.com - stibbrine at yahoo.com - djrfdh at yahoo.com - jajjmj at quixnet.net - jlmichel at uwm.edu - pandrea100 at hotmail.com - blue_shamrock03 at yahoo.com - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - shadiness at gmail.com - rtb333 at yahoo.com - Emza at lineone.net - molly_weasley_wannabe at yahoo.com - ianpaul2000 at yahoo.com - nosborn80 at yahoo.com - joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com - lalasnake at yahoo.com - chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net - bonoskite99 at yahoo.com - ali at aalr.org.uk - beckysbook1970 at yahoo.com - alisondd at yahoo.com - clinicallydead2003 at yahoo.com - mickey4president76 at yahoo.com - lelvani at gmail.com - gmamudh at yahoo.co.in - kirklander368 at hotmail.com - dani814 at yahoo.com - unicorn67mom at yahoo.com - barrythegirl at hotmail.com - carly_soprano at yahoo.com - rayheuer3 at aol.com - dakers at pontotoc.k12.ms.us - faded_mandarin at yahoo.com - moon_stag at yahoo.com - hpluz at yahoo.com.au - im4bronte at yahoo.com - libbieselden at yahoo.com.au - evelyn_quirky at yahoo.com.au - cnidaria at gmail.com - sean_dunphy at hotmail.com - yahoo at stinsv.com - HPLD711 at aol.com - odean at tiscali.co.uk - ruby_red6669 at yahoo.com - carleyco at earthlink.net - rachaol at yahoo.com - boden_anna at hotmail.com - ogresmommy at yahoo.com - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - chesterschick88 at yahoo.com - clare_e_2000 at yahoo.com - george.fisher at gmx.net - sang_dencre12 at hotmail.com - mary.hoerr at gmail.com - spi00000000 at yahoo.com - sawsan_issa at earthlink.net - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - a4annielauss at msn.com - talkingheadandshoulders at yahoo.com - aprilthe16 at sbcglobal.net - yellowrainjacket at yahoo.com - verosomm at yahoo.com - grodd752 at yahoo.com - ginnywinny75 at hotmail.com - agreensaver at yahoo.com - g2grace at yahoo.com - celine_bigoy at yahoo.fr - sematar at sentex.net - famsle369 at yahoo.com - javalorum at yahoo.ca - belofbree at yahoo.co.uk - leslie.s.bennett at lmco.com - listentomugglecast at hotmail.com - trekalicious at hotmail.com - indiasjones at msn.com - Kakesparents at cox.net - wafikwafikramzy at yahoo.com - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - Other (specify onlist, giving motivation) - eliadedorme at yahoo.fr - iriepuff at yahoo.co.uk - alil2sarcastic at yahoo.com - kamala_2347 at yahoo.com - xmezumiiru at yahoo.com - ferry_wjaya at yahoo.com.sg - pjwagner3 at ameritech.net - castorandpollux2002 at yahoo.com - cindysphinx10 at yahoo.com - Deerhounder at telstra.com - ahsonazmat at gmail.com - LydiiaAdleida at aol.com - tynie19 at yahoo.com - jenny_johnson at heathfarm.freeserve.co.uk - lildrummergirl12005 at yahoo.com - steven1965aaa at yahoo.com - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:46:57 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:46:57 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885217.53.56074.w112@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172215 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: JKR has stated that, in the final chapter of Book 7, two additional characters, whom she did not originally intend to kill, will be dying. So who do you think is toast? (Assuming that JKR has known all along whether Harry will live or die, Harry will not be an option for one "originally unintended to die.") VOTE FOR TWO ONLY. CHOICES AND RESULTS - Ron, 33 votes, 6.78% - Hermione , 7 votes, 1.44% - Neville, 32 votes, 6.57% - Ginny, 14 votes, 2.87% - Luna, 20 votes, 4.11% - Hagrid, 74 votes, 15.20% - McGonagall, 26 votes, 5.34% - Professot Flitwick and/or Sprout, 8 votes, 1.64% - Seamus and/or Dean, 6 votes, 1.23% - Parvati and/or Padma Patil, 1 votes, 0.21% - Grawp, 13 votes, 2.67% - Mad-Eye Moody, 13 votes, 2.67% - Lupin, 33 votes, 6.78% - Tonks, 13 votes, 2.67% - Rufus Scrimgeour, 7 votes, 1.44% - Percy Weasley, 38 votes, 7.80% - Bill and/or Fleur Delacour Weasley, 7 votes, 1.44% - Fred and/or George Weasley, 22 votes, 4.52% - Charlie Weasley, 6 votes, 1.23% - Molly Weasley, 10 votes, 2.05% - Arthur Weasley, 11 votes, 2.26% - Vernon and/or Petunia Dursley, 19 votes, 3.90% - Dudley Dursley, 5 votes, 1.03% - Severus Snape, 55 votes, 11.29% - OTHER (feel free to mention the name onlist!), 14 votes, 2.87% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Ron - Goddess_of_fire2001 at hotmail.com - enlil65 at gmail.com - moosiemlo at gmail.com - bunnyc at optusnet.com.au - goddesse at hotmail.com - naveed_awais at yahoo.com - harryp at stararcher.com - marika_thestral at yahoo.se - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - britneywbb at yahoo.com - ABadgerFan2 at msn.com - m_warren17 at yahoo.com.au - postoakbluffer at yahoo.com - porshia7 at yahoo.co.in - kadhayes4 at yahoo.com - milspils2004 at yahoo.co.in - snoil at attbi.com - dark_ally8 at yahoo.com - managing_mischief at yahoo.com - lwilliams15209 at yahoo.com - petshopboys at adelphia.net - GeorgiannJ at cs.com - marydianne3123 at yahoo.com - aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au - pwaldrip at charter.net - selena_rab at yahoo.com - karen.l.evans at wmich.edu - tmarends at yahoo.com - loopyzu at psni.us - psycodude04 at yahoo.com - ancags at yahoo.com - compton_most_wanted at hotmail.com - roxy70072 at cox.net - Hermione - oppen at mycns.net - harryp at stararcher.com - britneywbb at yahoo.com - kadhayes4 at yahoo.com - milspils2004 at yahoo.co.in - hpidentity at yahoo.com - annemehr at yahoo.com - Neville - jazmyn at pacificpuma.com - rtc151 at yahoo.com - aliasnance at yahoo.com - lisaew54 at yahoo.com - Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com - bgrugin at yahoo.com - tenar_sky at yahoo.it - cheryl2470 at yahoo.com - sunrisebuddha at yahoo.com - dsnylnd55 at aol.com - kali20_02 at yahoo.com - sbarthell2001 at yahoo.com - florentinemaier at hotmail.com - vickik at umich.edu - celizwh at intergate.com - Jen at alveymedia.com - mani_1960 at fibertel.com.ar - luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca - jmh223 at yahoo.com - peripoland at yahoo.co.uk - winkadup at yahoo.com - jabarac at yahoo.com - whimsymoondesigns at yahoo.com - SMacLagan at msn.com - jmaej07 at yahoo.com - trpllatte2002 at yahoo.com - Patrickjd9 at comcast.net - kimenm at hotmail.com - loopyzu at psni.us - applesnivy at yahoo.com - tidblgr72 at yahoo.com - loquastar at yahoo.com - Ginny - manawydan at ntlworld.com - lisaew54 at yahoo.com - grich277080 at aol.com - stevejjen at earthlink.net - yolani_vdw at yahoo.com - naveed_awais at yahoo.com - c_mailavani at yahoo.co.in - djl1bear at yahoo.ca - kjones at telus.net - maestrie at libero.it - sunday_silence99 at yahoo.com - mhersheybar at hotmail.com - euterpsoapin at yahoo.com - roxy70072 at cox.net - Luna - oppen at mycns.net - barefootpuppets at yahoo.com - aliasnance at yahoo.com - shanhut at yahoo.com - delightms94 at yahoo.com - Phantine at yahoo.com - spookedook at yahoo.co.uk - hpfreakazoid at gmail.com - inkling_rg at yahoo.com - chellblanc at aol.com - annie3x20 at aol.com - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - Littlelegz at gmail.com - snapes_witch at yahoo.com - dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com - aida_costa at hotmail.com - djklaugh at comcast.net - lolita_ns at yahoo.com - elfundeb at gmail.com - tidblgr72 at yahoo.com - Hagrid - manawydan at ntlworld.com - kida_jolie at yahoo.com - mferminco at yahoo.com - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - sylviablundell at aol.com - hermy_202 at yahoo.co.in - caaf at hotmail.com - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - emysticaus at yahoo.com - enlil65 at gmail.com - glass_eyes at hotmail.com - jcgochoel at comcast.net - catheyshields at comcast.net - grich277080 at aol.com - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - monya_baker at yahoo.com - mora at vbbn.com - ksd1955 at yahoo.com - sunrisebuddha at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - KJWhiteman at sbcglobal.net - jackcarrie at hotmail.com - jmmears at comcast.net - marika_thestral at yahoo.se - hpfreakazoid at gmail.com - lwalsh at acsalaska.net - sad1199 at yahoo.com - msmerymac at yahoo.com - dsnylnd55 at aol.com - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - SnapesSlytherin at aol.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - jenny_johnson at heathfarm.freeserve.co.uk - cuimedono at gmail.com - m_warren17 at yahoo.com.au - porshia7 at yahoo.co.in - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - ta_hay at hotmail.com - solitary_shadow101 at yahoo.co.uk - Eyemlynn at aol.com - cosmos2688 at yahoo.com - tonks_op at yahoo.com - s_ings at yahoo.com - muellem at bc.edu - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - lwilliams15209 at yahoo.com - Barbara_MBowen at yahoo.com - dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com - loriw1017 at yahoo.com - GeorgiannJ at cs.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - mgrantwich at yahoo.com - trustno142 at verizon.net - ferry_wjaya at yahoo.com.sg - kjones at telus.net - theworldisadeafmachine at yahoo.com - pwaldrip at charter.net - nicolle.snape at gmail.com - maria8162001 at yahoo.com - ithinkhard at gmail.com - mervin180 at yahoo.com - kimenm at hotmail.com - aqua_eyes1999 at yahoo.com - psycodude04 at yahoo.com - chikitsune at gmail.com - caiomhino at gmail.com - JainaDurron at chaoszone.de - gret1908 at yahoo.com - jenny328 at ameritech.net - sfcmac65 at yahoo.com - wsillyman at yahoo.com - celeblezfan at yahoo.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - McGonagall - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - caaf at hotmail.com - moosiemlo at gmail.com - seusilva at uol.com.br - Phantine at yahoo.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - aturnbul at yahoo.com - JenWSU at aol.com - solitary_shadow101 at yahoo.co.uk - amis917 at hotmail.com - djl1bear at yahoo.ca - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - kellymolinari at yahoo.com - ceridwennight at hotmail.com - aida_costa at hotmail.com - whiggrrl at erols.com - aleda at tba.t-com.ne.jp - lunalovegood at shaw.ca - lolita_ns at yahoo.com - gst_bb at yahoo.com.au - dossett at lds.net - Englishlady at gmail.com - caiomhino at gmail.com - miamibarb at BellSouth.net - buoybells at yahoo.com - compton_most_wanted at hotmail.com - Professot Flitwick and/or Sprout - mz_annethrope at yahoo.com - sbsheeley at yahoo.com - triinum at yahoo.com - whiggrrl at erols.com - jmaej07 at yahoo.com - marshsundeen at hotmail.com - karen.l.evans at wmich.edu - chiefsmokey at yahoo.com - Seamus and/or Dean - kathyunited at hotmail.com - cory805 at yahoo.com - tracym255 at aol.com - cass_da_sweet at yahoo.com - kali20_02 at yahoo.com - dossett at lds.net - Parvati and/or Padma Patil - aceworker at yahoo.com - Grawp - dlmca at stny.rr.com - breakfree at xtra.co.nz - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - erikog at one.net - mz_annethrope at yahoo.com - tonks_op at yahoo.com - ferry_wjaya at yahoo.com.sg - jabarac at yahoo.com - ibchawz at yahoo.com - lunalovegood at shaw.ca - chiefsmokey at yahoo.com - cdayr at yahoo.com - rogers77 at earthlink.net - Mad-Eye Moody - mferminco at yahoo.com - cory805 at yahoo.com - cheryl2470 at yahoo.com - tracym255 at aol.com - cass_da_sweet at yahoo.com - mymusical_girls at yahoo.com - cosmos2688 at yahoo.com - hedwigstalons at yahoo.com - kellymolinari at yahoo.com - pixieberry at charter.net - theworldisadeafmachine at yahoo.com - chieftainette at gmail.com - vinkv002 at planet.nl - Lupin - kida_jolie at yahoo.com - dlmca at stny.rr.com - rtc151 at yahoo.com - srhchttrsn at yahoo.com - seusilva at uol.com.br - roglesby at pacbell.net - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - KJWhiteman at sbcglobal.net - handerwyc at yahoo.com - lisabiles at grandecom.net - jmmears at comcast.net - lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk - c_mailavani at yahoo.co.in - chrusokomos at gmail.com - ABadgerFan2 at msn.com - wilhelmtell35 at hotmail.com - radza at stofanet.dk - Eyemlynn at aol.com - quigonginger at yahoo.com - jmh223 at yahoo.com - witherwing at sbcglobal.net - aleda at tba.t-com.ne.jp - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - JenWSU at aol.com - irishshedevil333 at yahoo.com - maestrie at libero.it - nbr1 at comcast.net - Englishlady at gmail.com - xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com - miamibarb at BellSouth.net - buoybells at yahoo.com - felicialso at yahoo.com - ancags at yahoo.com - Tonks - spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com - handerwyc at yahoo.com - lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk - snoil at attbi.com - Littlelegz at gmail.com - quigonginger at yahoo.com - dark_ally8 at yahoo.com - jamie.sommers at yahoo.com - ivaldoo at yahoo.com - born_2b_ur_baby at yahoo.com - xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com - chnc1024 at bellsouth.net - cdayr at yahoo.com - Rufus Scrimgeour - sharana.geo at yahoo.com - spookedook at yahoo.co.uk - annie3x20 at aol.com - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - snapes_witch at yahoo.com - chieftainette at gmail.com - davidm at mpks.net - Percy Weasley - richlauraelaina at sbcglobal.net - barefootpuppets at yahoo.com - kathyunited at hotmail.com - bgrugin at yahoo.com - flowerchild4 at sbcglobal.net - ksd1955 at yahoo.com - clio44a at yahoo.com - rdoliver30 at yahoo.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - lisabiles at grandecom.net - msmerymac at yahoo.com - SnapesSlytherin at aol.com - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - amis917 at hotmail.com - managing_mischief at yahoo.com - mani_1960 at fibertel.com.ar - petshopboys at adelphia.net - loriw1017 at yahoo.com - trustno142 at verizon.net - djklaugh at comcast.net - peripoland at yahoo.co.uk - marydianne3123 at yahoo.com - momryden at yahoo.com - nicolle.snape at gmail.com - SMacLagan at msn.com - dan_dk23 at yahoo.co.in - marshsundeen at hotmail.com - unicorn67mom at yahoo.com - Tgoswife325 at aol.com - tmarends at yahoo.com - maria8162001 at yahoo.com - ithinkhard at gmail.com - davidm at mpks.net - gst_bb at yahoo.com.au - chnc1024 at bellsouth.net - wsillyman at yahoo.com - rogers77 at earthlink.net - loquastar at yahoo.com - Bill and/or Fleur Delacour Weasley - shanhut at yahoo.com - Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com - aceworker at yahoo.com - Jen at alveymedia.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - ivaldoo at yahoo.com - angel_of_damnation at hotmail.co.uk - Fred and/or George Weasley - talisman22457 at yahoo.com - random832 at gmail.com - emysticaus at yahoo.com - catheyshields at comcast.net - milcg at yahoo.com - tenar_sky at yahoo.it - monya_baker at yahoo.com - dsycamore at msn.com - djklh2 at juno.com - chesterschick88 at yahoo.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - progman62 at earthlink.net - mhess66125 at yahoo.com - chellblanc at aol.com - celizwh at intergate.com - s_ings at yahoo.com - ceridwennight at hotmail.com - cassy_ferris at yahoo.com - anaith at gmx.net - pncburton at insightbb.com - joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net - elfundeb at gmail.com - Charlie Weasley - erikog at one.net - tab1669 at elnet.com - lwalsh at acsalaska.net - mikey671000 at yahoo.com - sfcmac65 at yahoo.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - Molly Weasley - bunnyc at optusnet.com.au - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - icebat78 at yahoo.es - cuimedono at gmail.com - catwomanlg_50 at yahoo.com - hpidentity at yahoo.com - annemehr at yahoo.com - witherwing at sbcglobal.net - nbr1 at comcast.net - mhersheybar at hotmail.com - Arthur Weasley - Goddess_of_fire2001 at hotmail.com - glass_eyes at hotmail.com - djklh2 at juno.com - sad1199 at yahoo.com - wilhelmtell35 at hotmail.com - ta_hay at hotmail.com - catwomanlg_50 at yahoo.com - pixieberry at charter.net - Patrickjd9 at comcast.net - JainaDurron at chaoszone.de - msju08 at yahoo.com - Vernon and/or Petunia Dursley - hickengruendler at yahoo.de - jazmyn at pacificpuma.com - delightms94 at yahoo.com - dsycamore at msn.com - pretenderprofilergirl at yahoo.com - psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com - inkling_rg at yahoo.com - Ronin_47 at comcast.net - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - cassy_ferris at yahoo.com - mgrantwich at yahoo.com - momryden at yahoo.com - unicorn67mom at yahoo.com - aqua_eyes1999 at yahoo.com - applesnivy at yahoo.com - vinkv002 at planet.nl - felicialso at yahoo.com - Dudley Dursley - random832 at gmail.com - rdoliver30 at yahoo.com - renaissance_romance at yahoo.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - mervin180 at yahoo.com - Severus Snape - r2r_714 at yahoo.com - hermy_202 at yahoo.co.in - jcgochoel at comcast.net - goddesse at hotmail.com - milcg at yahoo.com - flowerchild4 at sbcglobal.net - roglesby at pacbell.net - stevejjen at earthlink.net - mora at vbbn.com - clio44a at yahoo.com - icebat78 at yahoo.es - angiegudjohnsen at yahoo.co.uk - pretenderprofilergirl at yahoo.com - chesterschick88 at yahoo.com - handerwyc at yahoo.com - jackcarrie at hotmail.com - aturnbul at yahoo.com - tab1669 at elnet.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - mymusical_girls at yahoo.com - progman62 at earthlink.net - chrusokomos at gmail.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - jenny_johnson at heathfarm.freeserve.co.uk - sbsheeley at yahoo.com - postoakbluffer at yahoo.com - sbarthell2001 at yahoo.com - florentinemaier at hotmail.com - vickik at umich.edu - lace_starbolt at yahoo.co.uk - mikey671000 at yahoo.com - peckham at cyberramp.net - triinum at yahoo.com - CTLovell at Verizon.net - Barbara_MBowen at yahoo.com - luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca - winkadup at yahoo.com - aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au - q_02 at hotmail.com - ibchawz at yahoo.com - whimsymoondesigns at yahoo.com - angel_of_damnation at hotmail.co.uk - trpllatte2002 at yahoo.com - born_2b_ur_baby at yahoo.com - irishshedevil333 at yahoo.com - selena_rab at yahoo.com - unicorn67mom at yahoo.com - Tgoswife325 at aol.com - sunday_silence99 at yahoo.com - chikitsune at gmail.com - gret1908 at yahoo.com - jenny328 at ameritech.net - msju08 at yahoo.com - anandamaz at yahoo.co.in - celeblezfan at yahoo.com - OTHER (feel free to mention the name onlist!) - shanhut at yahoo.com - yolani_vdw at yahoo.com - CliffVDY at juno.com - samster202 at yahoo.com - Ronin_47 at comcast.net - remuslupin73 at hotmail.com - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - muellem at bc.edu - peckham at cyberramp.net - CTLovell at Verizon.net - q_02 at hotmail.com - dan_dk23 at yahoo.co.in - euterpsoapin at yahoo.com - anandamaz at yahoo.co.in For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From dwalker696 at aol.com Thu Jul 19 22:44:26 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:44:26 -0000 Subject: Draco scares Borgin with his werewolf bite? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172216 leggrachel: > Ooooh, I like this. The question would be where and when did that > happen? And why? Donna: Oooh I like your counter questions!!! I would guess at the Malfoy Manor over the summer (?), to terrorize Draco and Narcissa into doing what Voldy wants. Voldy is currently furious at Lucius, according to DD, for his neglect of the diary horcrux. Narcissa repeats that Voldy is "doing this" to punish them, to punish Lucius for failing to retrieve the prophecy. Then later we hear from DD that he suspects Lucius may be glad to be in Azkaban, at least he is protected from Voldy's wrath. leggrachel: > Why would either the Malfoy's or Voldemort allow Draco to be > bitten? Donna: I am sure Narcissa would be distraught over Malfoy being bitten....but what if Malfoy didn't tell her? leggrachel: > Wouldn't that be harmful to everyone's interests? It > doesn't serve either the Malfoy's or Voldie to have the Malfoy > heir be a werewolf. Donna: It certainly doesn't serve the Malfoys, but it could serve Voldy's... if Draco is a werewolf he certainly isn't going to be mainstreaming into current wizarding community, it almost guarantees his service to Voldy. Please don't take me as being combative, I am trying to play Devil's advocate, I really want good support to WHY Draco being bitten isn't a good theory. Keep pushing! Donna From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 19 23:01:02 2007 From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:01:02 -0000 Subject: Emotional connections with the characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172217 > Dung: > > Over the weekend the only really strong reaction I had was > > laughing out loud when the twins left Hogwarts. I distinctly > > remember a sensation of shock in the pit of my stomach when I > > read Snape AKing DD the first time, but honestly, *as I'm re- > > reading* I don't react much. The emotional reactions come later > > when I'm thinking about it and discussing things on-list, and > > even then, (and this is really difficult to put into words) > > they're not really real emotions. > > > Jen: > > There are several distinct emotional reactions I remember very > keenly from the moment of reading certain passages, like when my > surprise over the events on the tower was broken by sadness at this > line: "...but there was still no preparation for seeing him here, > spread-eagled, broken: the greatest wizard Harry had ever, or > would ever, meet." The finality of those words moved me. Mike: I remember being quite emotional after both Sirius' and Dumbledore's deaths, that is only natural for anyone that loves these characters as much as we do. I admit to being much more sad for Sirius, him having to spend 12 years in that horrible prison and then having to be on the run from the law for the last three years of his life. I guess that's why I cut Sirius so much slack, I think he had as tough a life as Harry has without any of the accolades. Life sure wasn't fair to Sirius Black. The funny thing is that JKR brought out the biggest emotions from me twice, completely different reactions, with *one* word each time. 1) The second time was in GoF. JKR set me up perfectly. Here's Harry having trouble with his best friend not believing him, the rest of the school shunning him as some kind of usurper of Cedric, and now he's got a secret rendezvous in a not so secret locale later with Sirius. So what the heck does Hagrid want to show him? And now he brings along Madame Maxime, sheesh, he doesn't have time for this. Then after walking around forever, even considering whether this is worth it, he rounds the corner to see: DRAGONS Oh boy, did that one surprise me. And scare me out of my wits for Harry. He's gotta fight *that*. How in the hell does one 14-year-old wizard contend with a dragon. And I knew right off, after Charlie explained the breeds, that Harry was getting the Hungarian Horntail. 2) The first time JKR got me, still gets me to this day. It's almost too painful to try to explain my feelings. It starts when Harry is crouching by that bush and thinking, "Where are you? Dad..." The sadness at what Harry has missed, not knowing his parents; especially knowing how much a 13-year-old boy needs his father and Harry can't have him. But Harry steps up to the plate, and manages to conjure the Patronus that saves his and the others past lives. But when that Stag Patronus returns to Harry's side, instead of simply dissolving away, I knew something special was happening. So when Harry reaches out his hand and whispers: Prongs I knew then that Harry had not used Lupin's "happy memory" to conjure his Patronus. No, Harry had used the *love* for a father he had never known to conjure his essence in the form of his Patronus. And it still saddened me to know that this was the closest Harry would get to his father. That's my list. We'll see if JKR can top those in Deathly Hallows. But she's set the bar awfully high in mine eyes. Mike From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Jul 19 22:49:01 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 19 Jul 2007 22:49:01 -0000 Subject: Poll results for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1184885341.99.97299.w117@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172218 The following HPforGrownups poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Who will be proven to be ESE! by the end of Deathly Hallows? Vote for as many as you like. CHOICES AND RESULTS - Lupin, 15 votes, 11.28% - Snape, 10 votes, 7.52% - McGonagall, 2 votes, 1.50% - Flitwick, 2 votes, 1.50% - Sprout, 1 votes, 0.75% - Slughorn, 5 votes, 3.76% - Tonks, 2 votes, 1.50% - Another Order member (feel free to mention specifically onlist), 18 votes, 13.53% - Harry, 2 votes, 1.50% - Ron, 2 votes, 1.50% - Hermione, 0 votes, 0.00% - Neville, 0 votes, 0.00% - Peeves, 1 votes, 0.75% - Crookshanks, 5 votes, 3.76% - Hagrid, 2 votes, 1.50% - Fudge, 13 votes, 9.77% - Mad-Eye Moody, 2 votes, 1.50% - Luna, 0 votes, 0.00% - Ginny, 3 votes, 2.26% - Arthur, 0 votes, 0.00% - Percy, 13 votes, 9.77% - Fred and/or George, 1 votes, 0.75% - Seamus and/or Dean (or other student -- feel free to mention onlist), 2 votes, 1.50% - Ollivander, 6 votes, 4.51% - Another person not named here (feel free to mention onlist), 26 votes, 19.55% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Lupin - foxmoth at qnet.com - acarter at new.rr.com - roxy70072 at cox.net - lwilliams15209 at yahoo.com - lauralaylin at gmail.com - hexicon at yahoo.com - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - kjones at telus.net - hedwigno2 at yahoo.com - mpjdekker at hotmail.com - kvapost at yahoo.com.au - snapes_witch at yahoo.com - dossett at lds.net - chellblanc at aol.com - Lana.Dorman at Adelphigroup.com - Snape - faithvsion at aol.com - redskin91_a at yahoo.com - darksworld at yahoo.com - peckham at cyberramp.net - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - bfiw2002 at yahoo.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - vmonte at yahoo.com - kamilaa at gmail.com - xxneuman07xx at yahoo.com - McGonagall - porshia7 at yahoo.co.in - mpjdekker at hotmail.com - Flitwick - redskin91_a at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - Sprout - redskin91_a at yahoo.com - Slughorn - redskin91_a at yahoo.com - aggieraggie at ntlworld.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - djklaugh at comcast.net - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - Tonks - juli17 at aol.com - felicialso at yahoo.com - Another Order member (feel free to mention specifically onlist) - tfaucette6387 at charter.net - roxy70072 at cox.net - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - Jen at alveymedia.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - porshia7 at yahoo.co.in - hexicon at yahoo.com - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - ladinechan at hotmail.com - clio44a at yahoo.com - ffred_clegg at yahoo.co.uk - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net - kamilaa at gmail.com - olly at olly86.co.uk - shmantzel at yahoo.com - ppahuja1 at yahoo.com - Harry - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - nkafkafi at yahoo.com - Ron - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - Hermione - Neville - Peeves - zanelupin at yahoo.com - Crookshanks - acarter at new.rr.com - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - redskin91_a at yahoo.com - zanelupin at yahoo.com - karen.eidukas at googlemail.com - Hagrid - babsheck at yahoo.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - Fudge - acarter at new.rr.com - unicornspride at centurytel.net - GeorgiannJ at sbcglobal.net - lwilliams15209 at yahoo.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - babsheck at yahoo.com - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - OctobersChild48 at aol.com - kamilaa at gmail.com - anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com - olly at olly86.co.uk - felicialso at yahoo.com - fluffysamsmom at yahoo.com - Mad-Eye Moody - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - Luna - Ginny - redskin91_a at yahoo.com - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - Arthur - Percy - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - faithvsion at aol.com - Schlobin at aol.com - darksworld at yahoo.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - djklaugh at comcast.net - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - honeykissed246 at yahoo.com - loquastar at yahoo.com - clio44a at yahoo.com - anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com - felicialso at yahoo.com - dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk - Fred and/or George - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - Seamus and/or Dean (or other student -- feel free to mention onlist) - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - anita_hillin at yahoo.com - Ollivander - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - npdolphin1 at yahoo.com - aggieraggie at ntlworld.com - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - clio44a at yahoo.com - wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com - Another person not named here (feel free to mention onlist) - lizzyben04 at yahoo.com - Elvishooked at hotmail.com - faithvsion at aol.com - harryp at stararcher.com - gav_fiji at yahoo.com - desafio6 at gmail.com - MadameSSnape at aol.com - djklaugh at comcast.net - hexicon at yahoo.com - justcarol67 at yahoo.com - nidafatima at yahoo.com - amandafaye_1981 at yahoo.com - jlnbtr at yahoo.com - jelly92784 at yahoo.com - lmkos at earthlink.net - loquastar at yahoo.com - ffred_clegg at yahoo.co.uk - jenni.merrifield at jamm.com - doliesl at yahoo.com - bellemichellem at yahoo.com - marda.strib at yahoo.com - va32h at comcast.net - kamilaa at gmail.com - olly at olly86.co.uk - hickengruendler at yahoo.de - ppahuja1 at yahoo.com For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Thu Jul 19 23:16:37 2007 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:16:37 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: We're Closed! See you Tuesday! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172219 "Harry approached another door at random and pushed. It did not move. 'What's wrong?' said Hermione. 'It's . . . locked . . ." said Harry, throwing his weight at the door, but it didn't budge. 'This is it, then, isn't it?' said Ron excitedly, joining Harry in the attempt to force the door open. 'Bound to be.'" ******************* Yes, the door is locked. Sort of. The HPFGU main list is temporarily *closed* to posting so that everyone can read and digest the new canon! The list will reopen for posting on Tuesday, 24 July at 9:00 p.m. (British Summer Time). In other time zones: Tuesday 24th: Brussels and Much of Western Europe Time - 10 p.m. Eastern Standard Time - 4 p.m. Central Time: 3 p.m. Mountain Time - 2 p.m. Pacific Time - 1 p.m. Wednesday 25th: India - 1.30 a.m. Australia West - 4 a.m. Australia East - 6 a.m. Fiji - 8 a.m. The present spoiler policy will be lifted on the main HPFGU list when it reopens to posting. You can expect *every* post to have DH spoilers, so if you have not read the DH and do not want to read spoilers, DO NOT VISIT THE MAIN HPFGU LIST. SPOILER-FREE ZONE The OT-Chatter list (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPfGU-OTChatter) has been designated as a spoiler-free zone, for the benefit of members of our community who will not have immediate access to DH. Any post to this list containing DH spoilers will be deleted and the poster will be placed on moderated status! Of course, discussion of release-night events and parties, and to announce that you've finished the book and are ready to chat (see below), is welcome on OTC. CHAT ROOM OPEN For those of you that can't wait to begin discussing DH, the HPFGU chat room (http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574) will be open throughout the list closure period. If you enter the chat room and find no one there, we suggest that you post to OT- Chatter inviting others to join you. If you have any questions, contact the list elves at HPforGrownups- owner at yahoogroups.com or contact any one of us. A skeleton crew will be on hand to assist you. HAPPY READING! The HPFGU List Elves From zanelupin at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:00:00 2007 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:00:00 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: List Re-opening Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172220 Greetings from Hexquarters! The the list has now reopened to posting. Before you post, if you haven't looked at our posting rules lately, we strongly recommend that you take a refresher course, as we *will* be enforcing them! The rules are here: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/PostingRules25Mar07.html And for those who are truly in a mad rush to post, here's a handy Posting Rules Cheat Sheet: 1. Observe Posting Limits. We are expecting record numbers of posts in the first few days following DH release. We are asking members to try to limit their posts to five per day. Don't be a list hog. Excessive posting will be considered a violation of list rules, and your post may be deleted. 2. Combining. If you're responding to multiple posts on the same topic, please combine them. If you combine effectively, you won't have a problem with the posting limits. 3. Make a Canon Point. Please don't post unless you have a canon point to add to the discussion (i.e., one that has not already been stated, and please don't post just to reiterate your point). You can use Yahoo's search function, which is adequate to find out whether something has been posted in the last few days. We are a diverse group, and we're not going to agree on everything. 4. One Liners. The HPFGU standard is for members to submit substantive posts; therefore, one-liners are strongly discouraged. Off-topic and "me too" one-liners are not allowed, just as lengthier off-topic and "me too" posts are not allowed. 5. Snipping and Attribution. Please snip long quotes down to the minimum amount necessary so a reader will understand what you're talking about. Make sure you credit quotes to the right poster. 6. No Top-Posting. Remember to put your comments *after* quoted material. 7. Use the right list. Please send introductory or off-topic posts to OTChatter at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter. Send posts involving the HP movies to Movie at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie. Finally, send one-liners and 'me too!' posts to the individual(s) concerned off-list. 8. Check your Email account. It is very important you check the email account associated with your HPFGU membership, even when you are on "webview only." If the elves do not receive replies to emails we send to list members, we will assume the messages aren't being seen and reserve the right to return listees to moderated status or to revoke posting privileges when necessary. Should you find yourself in either situation, please answer this last ditch attempt to get your attention. Happy Posting! The HPfGU List Elves From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 20:01:32 2007 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:01:32 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172221 Ding-dong we now can post Which new book? The Deathly `Los! Ding-dong the posting now may start Wake up you sleepyhead Rub your eyes, get out of bed Wake up it's time you all had read Jo's done what she meant to do We rue ? we rue ? we rue You too, let's open up and rate and make the posts fly Ding Dong, the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low Let them know the posting now may start! ::end of filked spoiler space:: Overall, I loved the seventh book - I loved how fast-moving it was, how Rowling didn't waste time (and create boredom) by explaining the previous 6 books or re-describing the settings and the characters - you really had to have read the rest of the series for Book 7 to make sense. I also loved having one-seventh of the dedication devoted to the fans :) However ... I thought Harry being protected by Lily's sacrifice because it lives on in Voldemort's blood would mean that, when Harry finally killed the Horcrux-less Voldemort, Harry would die as well. Dumbledore tells Harry (in "King's Cross"): "He tethered you to life while he lives," so shouldn't that mean that Harry dies when Voldemort dies? Perhaps I was just overly prepared for Harry to die :) I've never been a big "Harry as a Horcrux" fan - I've always thought that Harry couldn't be as pure as he is if he had a bit of Voldemort inside him. Doesn't Dumbledore tell him in Book 6 that Voldemort underestimates the power of a soul that is complete and pure? And how could Harry look into the Mirror of Erised and see nothing but himself getting the Stone to protect it from Voldemort if a piece of Voldemort was inside him? We've seen how powerful these pieces of Voldemort can be, but perhaps it's different if the Horcrux isn't made intentionally? Harry really wasn't an actual Horcrux, was he? A bit of Voldy's unstable soul went into him, but I don't think that makes him a Horcrux. In Slughorn's memory, when Riddle asks Slughorn how to make a Horcrux, Slughorn tells Riddle "there is a spell - don't ask me, I don't know!" So presumably there's more to making a Horcrux that simply having your soul break off and go into another object/person/thing after you commit murder. Despite this, I thought the self-sacrifice this required of Harry was wonderful. I was having a bit of trouble with the "rightful owner" of the wand concept ? I could see how it worked for Draco, since he actually "took" the elder wand from Dumbledore with a disarming charm, but I was struggling with how it worked for Harry, since he didn't actually take the elder wand from Draco ? he took Draco's own hawthorn wand. It seems as if it would have worked better if Draco had actually taken possession of Dumbledore's wand and fled with it the night Dumbledore died, and then when Voldemort needed a different wand, Draco could have given him the elder wand. But I suppose then we would have lost the whole thread about Voldemort searching for the wand, and Harry choosing Horcruxes over Hallows, and the excuse for Voldemort to kill Snape (the latter being an excellent way of showing how truly merciless Voldemort was). Finishing Voldemort by a backfired AK was great - before the release, I was wondering how Harry was supposed to finish Voldemort off, because I couldn't see how Rowling would let him cast an AK when she's made it clear that murder is the act of supreme evil. But then we see Harry casting the other two Unforgiveable Curses, so I thought that might be getting us ready for an AK at the end. But I'm really glad she didn't have him cast an AK. I loved Molly finishing Bellatrix (especially Molly calling Bellatrix a "bitch" ? are these really books for children?!?), but thought it would have been more fitting for Neville to have killed her since she was the one who tortured his parents into insanity. But Rowling doesn't seem to want to have any of the kids do an AK. If Harry wasn't to be a goner, I thought we'd lose someone really important (like Ron or Hagrid). But perhaps Rowling thinks killing Dumbledore and Snape was enough. And losing Lupin and Tonks, when they had just found happiness with one another and had just had a baby, was tough (presumably Bellatrix killed them to "prune" her family tree?), although it would have been more powerful if we could have seen the deaths happen. I fully expected to be vindicated in my conviction that Snape has always been evil, particularly given how he did nothing to spare the Muggle studies teacher from death, told Voldemort about Harry's correct departure date, took part in the chase to kill Harry after he left Privet Drive and Sectumsempra-d George's ear off (loved the ear jokes!). If it was not covered in spiders, I would take my hat off to all LOLLIPOPS believers (of which I was never one). I felt the loss of both Hedwig and Dobby much more than Mad-Eye or some of the other deaths. I think it's because of how much Harry cared for them. These deaths were also really unexpected ? there has been all of this speculation about who will die, but I don't think anyone predicted the non-humans. I thought the unknown Gryffindor or Ravenclaw Horcrux would be from Gryffindor, and that they would find it in Godric's Hollow. But I suppose having the unknown Horcrux be one of Ravenclaw's makes sense, since Gryffindor's sword needed to be used to destroy them, and therefore they needed one item from all four founders to completely destroy Voldemort's protection. As soon as they discovered the Horcrux was a diadem, I felt sure it was the one Harry had used to mark where he had hidden the HBP's Potions book. So Harry and Voldemort were actually related after all! The book doesn't explicitly state this, but it must be, if both the Potters and the Gaunts are descendants of the Peverells. That surprised me, given how much emphasis was placed on Harry being a true Gryffindor and not being Slytherin's heir in Book 2. But I suppose Rowling would chalk that up to all of the pure-blood families being related at some point in their family trees (and continuing into the present - take Ted Tonks Jr. seeing off cousin Victoire on the Hogwarts Express, whom he apparently is dating). I loved how Neville killed Nagini with Gryffindor's sword, although I thought Harry was going to need to use Parseltongue to finish off the snake. If the only Horcrux Harry wound up destroying was the diary, why couldn't he have more help in tracking down and destroying them? I thought we'd go back to the MOM and find out what all of those rooms meant. What was the point of dragging out the ending of OotP otherwise? Like everyone else, I thought RAB was Sirius' brother, and that Kreacher had spared the locket from the bin, but while most thought the locket was still at Grimmauld Place, I had guessed that the locket had been stolen from Grimmauld Place by Mundungus, so I was glad to have been right on that small point (especially when I was so wrong on so many other guesses!). Having Kreacher be the one to have drunk the potion and have been left on the island to die was completely unexpected. I thought that was brilliant. I didn't think it worked to have Ron open the Chamber of Secrets to get out the basilisk fangs - either you know Parseltongue or you don't - how could he fake it? If that were the case, presumably Dumbledore could have made his way into the Chamber in Book 2. I could have done without the "19 years later" epilogue, especially since the flow kept breaking when I had to pause to puzzle out who was related to whom. I think Rowling probably felt a need to include the epilogue to avoid being pestered for a sequel to explain who everyone winds up with. But I thought the book would have ended better without it. I reached the end of the US edition of DH and realized that I still had no idea what the US cover art meant. It could be the final Harry-Voldy confrontation, but in the picture, Harry is still wearing the locket Horcrux (which had already been destroyed by then), and he doesn't have a wand in his right hand. Moreover, while the sky is kinda red-gold (it's more a sickly shade of orange to me, actually), the rest of the backdrop doesn't look anything like the Great Hall - it's more Roman Colosseum. And what's up with the curtains on either side and the jagged pieces of wood underfoot? There are still thousands of remaining unanswered questions - why were we able to find out Neville's profession, but not Ron, Harry's, Hermione's or Ginny's? After all of the focus on careers in OotP, I thought we'd be told. Presumably none of them are teachers at Hogwarts (as they would have been able to give their love to Neville in person), but that's about all I can discern from the epilogue. I suppose Harry could be an Auror, although he appears not to want to have any more to do with killing off dark wizards after finishing Voldy (who could blame him?). I don't think he is an internationally famous Quidditch player, as presumably everyone would have been rushing up to him on the platform for an autograph, but then, shouldn't they have been rushing up to him for an autograph solely due to the fact that he finished Voldy? Or is that old news 19 years later? But the kids do stare at him from the train windows ... And lots of hints that things JKR said would be significant never came up or were answered - what James and Lily did for a living was supposed to be important; how James got all of the money he passed on to Harry was also supposed to be important; some of the teachers were married, but she couldn't tell us which ones because it would give too much away. Etc. The acknowledgements on JKR's website are great - but why didn't she include them in the 7th book so they could last for all eternity (and be accessible to those without a computer)? Cheers, Phyllis From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:02:59 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:02:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: I DID love DH - General First Observations (LONG) Message-ID: <998624.90234.qm@web52709.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172222 Hey all, Happy Tuesday! Finally, we can post!!! All over. I can't believe it. I finished DH in just about 9 hours, and once it was over, I really felt a bit drained, like I needed to take a deep breath and a nap. This 10 year long ride was over, and I was tired! However, I am seeing quite a lot of people who didn't like the book, or who felt she didn't answer enough of our questions. While I can understand that (there are certainly still things unresolved, and I can't wait to theorize about those later), I DID really LOVE the book. It was appropriately dark and frightening, which it had to be, considering what came before, but the ending was a happy one. I will get into detailed discussion later, as I reread, and ideas begin to form more succinctly, but in general, I really believe DH was the perfect ending to the series. We lost a lot of people, as we knew we had to, considering that the WW was in open warfare. And I sobbed myself silly over all of them. But it was appropriate to the situation. I did not feel the number of deaths were over the top. I did not think they were unnecessary deaths, or that this book was inappropriate for children. (Although I do think children would have a hard time simply following the story.) In terms of consistancy...good god, the woman has written over 4000 pages of one narrative! I think she's generally done a remarkable job of making things fit and preserving a flow to the story. So, one or two things along the way weren't perfect. Doesn't bother me in the least. I particularly loved the ending of this book. The Battle of Hogwarts was a classic battle scene in the tradition of Helm's Deep - and actually, I thought the Battle of Hogwarts was more stirring and exciting. Neville pulling Godric Gryffindor's sword out of the Sorting Hat literally made me drop my book and cry. All I could hear in my head was Dumbledore saying, "Only a true Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the Sorting Hat..." Neville definately ends the series as one of the most well-rounded, brave, and remarkable characters JK created - and certainly in my top 5. He's amazing. Also, the image of Kreacher coming in at the head of a house elf army, shouting to do it for Harry...wow. That was as good as the Rohirrim coming up over the hill in the movie version of Two Towers, or the talking animals rising up in Narnia. I couldn't have loved Kreacher more. I loved his whole turn-around. So unexpected, and so fulfilling. And certainly, while Harry continues to be a flawed hero (which I personally much prefer to a perfect one), his bravery at the end, walking into death, was really staggering, and not at all what I was expecting. And boy, was I WRONG, WRONG, WRONG about Harry not being a Horcrux. I really messed that one up. Huzzah to all of you who saw that coming. I continue to marvel at the way that JK can make these books come to life. She has an incredible gift at description that brings HP to life the way no other book I've ever read has. I can actually see the entire context of the scene, and movement and sound...it truly is like a movie in my head, only more real and more vivid than any movie could be. It really does come to life. (I think that's why I don't like the movies that much. My head is so much better!) And in closing, I KNEW SNAPE WAS GOOD!!! I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT!!!! Yippee! That made me feel great! I know many did not like Snape, or worse, think him a child abuser, but he's one of my absolute favorite characters, and I was so happy to know he was a good guy!! Although his death broke my heart, and I would have loved to see an actual reconciliation scene between him and Harry, I was so proud of Snape, and so vindicated for him. And I loved that one of Harry and Ginny's kids was named after him. That whole thing that Harry says about Snape being one of the bravest men he'd ever known...whew, got me crying again!! I actually am getting choked up now, just thinking about it. I'm sure we have months, if not years, of detailed analyzation ahead, but I just wanted to throw out my first impressions! Which, in a nutshell, is: LOVED IT! Katie, feeling ecstatic and relieved that the Trio made it, very sad about Hedwig, Dobby, Mad-Eye, Lupin, Tonks, Fred, Snape, and even annoying little Colin Creevy...and so, so proud of Neville! (And Percy, though I really still kind of feel he's basically a git) --------------------------------- Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elfundeb at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 20:05:38 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:05:38 -0400 Subject: DH: Epilogue, Unforgivables and Other Quick Thoughts Message-ID: <80f25c3a0707241305t29b58639q61c1177bc00c632a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172223 Short review: I loved it, despite some obvious flaws. Other than a few moments during the tent-camping adventure, I felt that the story had an intensity matched only by the second half of GoF. I was especially pleased at the handling of some of my favorite characters, especially Neville and Ron. I don't have time for a full review, so I've cobbled together a few quick thoughts, plus a quick list of what I got right. THE EPILOGUE On its surface, it is banal, uninformative and reeks of bad fanfic. But I think that misses the point. The function of the epilogue is clearly not to convey the surface information. It sets a mood, and beneath its banal shippiness it tells us a lot. Here's a link to Cheryl Klein's blog (she's with Scholastic): http://chavelaque.blogspot.com/ I think she makes some good points. However, I think the epilogue reveals larger facts about the WW that cannot easily be conveyed otherwise. In some corners there is disappointment because the defeat of Voldemort was not accompanied by changes in the WW. The Statute of Secrecy is still there, the House system remains at Hogwarts, and there is no indication of a new, less corrupt regime in power at the Ministry. JKR must have realized, though, that this was too much to expect three young wizards to accomplish within the boundaries of her story. Their task was to defeat a wizard whose existence pushed any debate of such reforms off the agenda entirely. Harry's defeat of Voldemort has set the stage for changes in the WW, but it will be for the next generation (or perhaps even the one after) to implement. Underneath the surface silliness of the Epilogue, it tells us that this process is happening: (1) Harry is comfortable with the possibility that his son will be sorted into Slytherin, (2) wizards seem to be less isolated from the Muggle world, or else Ron would have magicked a car to Kings Cross and not bothered with getting a muggle driver's license, and (3) barriers will break down further in the next generation of wizards (Ron, in his own way, all but foretold his daughter's marriage to Scorpius Malfoy). And above all, the WW is at peace; this generation's symbolic outcast orphan is fed dinner by loving godparents four nights a week and wins a part-veela girlfriend. So while I don't love the epilogue, it's much more valuable as written than would a catalogue of what all the significant surviving characters are doing for a living these days. UNFORGIVABLES Too many Unforgivables were cast by Harry and co. There may be concepts in Wizarding law of self-defense and heat-of-battle exceptions, but I found this unforgivable simply because JKR made them Unforgivable and used that very point to illustrate how little separated the Death Eaters and the Aurors under Barty Crouch Sr. PERCY AND THE TWINS I have long believed that the books are character-driven, and it is the appeal of her characters that kept so many playing in her world for so long. JKR has a knack for building relationships (I am NOT talking about SHIPs) that are believable. But I don't think she understands what she has done. The Weasley family, for example, has a very believable dynamic, with sufficient dysfunction and enough underlying love to carry the day. However, she seems not to have understood the dynamic she created, and how the Twins' relentless persecution of Percy contributed to the rift. Percy had a lot to apologize for, but JKR hands him all the blame, and then kills off Fred (who I acknowledge, despite my personal dislike of many of their jokes, was the most quirkily brilliant of all the Weasleys), leaving him no opportunity for personal growth. (She didn't give Percy any personal growth either, considering his brief treatment in the epilogue.) THINGS I GOT RIGHT Harrycrux, including the fact that Harry would survive, even though I never got around to posting the magnus opus defense of the theory. DD asked Snape to kill him. Snape was not happy about it. Also, that Snape was not DDM because he liked DD's agenda, but for his own, personal reasons. TEWW EWW (and the desire for personal redemption that fueled his loyalty to DD thereafter) is much more OFH! than DDM!, which I suspect is one reason why many Snapefans are more distraught at the outcome than those who were sure he was ESE! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/142005 And, finally, JKR's interviews are not canon, because Grindelwald was not dead as she had claimed. I think some readers are contemplating going after JKR with pickaxes after repudiating that claim. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/55957 Don't ask me about the deaths. Aside from Snape, everyone whose demise I've ever predicted is still walking this earth. :-) And I got a gazillion other things wrong too. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From smartone56441070 at aol.com Tue Jul 24 20:07:51 2007 From: smartone56441070 at aol.com (smartone564) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:07:51 -0000 Subject: Kreacher and Dobby switched! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172224 I was talking with my girlfriend about DH last night, and she explained to me how Dobby and Kreacher should have reversed their roles. HRH just leave Kreacher to defend himself against the DEs who are likely to show up without so much as a warning. How hard would it have been to call for him, warn him, and then let him return home to defend it? I know they were worried about DEs apparating with him, but how hard could it be for all three of them to overpower the one or two DEs likely to be touching Kreacher right then? It's not like they haven't done it time and time again. Also, Kreacher should've been the one to show up at the Malfoy's and save Harry and co. from there, dying as a fully redeemed character, saving his master as a house elf does. Then in the end, it's fits perfectly for Dobby to be leading the charge of the Hogwarts House elves, since he actually worked there and was familiar with them, etc. I like this ending so much better I think I might just pretend it's the actual ending, even though I cried for Dobby as soon as I saw the knife sticking out of him. Still thought the book was awesome though. Toner From muellem at bc.edu Tue Jul 24 20:08:26 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:08:26 -0000 Subject: My Officially First Deathly Hallows Post!! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172225 Because *IT* is all about Snape - the bravest man Harry ever knew, my first post back is, no surprise here, on Snape's reason. And my *Why, O' Why* questions.. Picking crow's feathers out of my teeth, as despite the fact that Snape was on the *good* side in the end and Harry realized it, the theory that I loathed the most (yes, even more than ESE!Snape or OFH!Snape, heck, even ACIDPOPS) came *true*. LOLLIPOPS - in its full glory, sickly sweet and cloying. To quote the-medium-that-must-not-be-named!Snape, I think I will vomit ;) First things first. At least Snape was for defeating LV. I don't think he is either DDM!Snape or OFH!Snape, but L.I.L.Y.Snape... L.I.L.Y. - stands for "Lily, I Luv Yewwww" yeah, I know, it's not original, but from now on, this is what I will use - not DDM!Snape, but LILY!Snape. Someone needs to fit the words "Creepy Obsession" into LOLLIPOPS, because after 30 years (he did meet her when he was 9), he still pines for her? His patronus is *her* patronus (gagging again - another feather just came up). He spies on her, wants her for all to himself, still calls her Lily Evans after she has married James Potter. Looks into Harry's eyes (oh, so much like Lily's) as he dies. This is *his* noble reason? His ironclad reason for putting his life on the line for decades? The "I Trust Severus Snape with My Life" reason? o_O ok. I still don't like and I still don't think it is valid enough, but hey, it is now canon and that is that. And so is Snape's nickname of Sev - at least it wasn't Sevvie.... And Lily - well, she may be *sainted* Lily, but she is DENSE!Lily in my book - didn't she see his obsession? Didn't she know she was feeding his fantasies? Either she WAS dense or she *loved* having Snape eat out her hand --- hmmm, maybe not so sainted afterall - TEASE!Lily. And my goodness, no one *bothered* to tell Harry that Lily & Snape were BFF (best friends forever) - If I could do a heart symbol, I would insert one.... oh well.....I may have, *could* have, lived with the LOLLIPOPS stuff except for this, this one pathetic scene in the book, that just ripped out my soul - I don't even need a dementor. A little history, if I may: going wayyyyy back to 2002 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/34839 cindysphynx wrote: Speaking for myself, the core of my Ewwwww objection isn't just that I don't care for SHIPping, although that is part of it. The bottom line is that Snape's schoolboy crush on a girl he never had makes Snape insufficiently Tough. It is the sort of thing Hagrid would do. Despite all of the quarrels I have with Snape, I've never said he lacks Toughness. Does he flee when the Dark Mark burns on his arm? No, he sucks it up and deals. Does he flinch at returning to spying? No, he sucks it up and deals. If anything, Snape might even be *too* Tough, which explains his nasty treatment of the students. In the face of all of that Toughness, enter LOLLIPOPS. I'm now supposed to picture Snape shivering in his cold dungeon, with Lily's yellowing yearbook pictures tacked to the walls, the floor littered with crumpled photos of Lily that Snape secretly snapped with a telephoto lense, Lily's wedding photo on the bedside table with Snape's head pasted on James' body, a stack of scribbled and undelivered love letters in the desk drawer, and the ring he never screwed up the courage to give her? Ewwwww! colebiancardi back now: yep, "Too EWW to be TREWW" was in the book - *now I know* that JKR lurks here :) "And next, Snape was kneeling in Sirius's old bedroom. Tears were dripping from the end of his hooked nose as he read the old letter from Lily. The second page carried only a few words: 'could ever have been friends with Gellert Grindelwald. I think her mind's going, personally! Lots of Love, Lily' Snape took the page bearing Lily's signature, and her love, and tucked it inside his robes. Then he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the part from which Lily laughed, throwing the portion showing James and Harry back onto the floor" from DH, US Ed, chapter 33, pages 688 -689 can we say very much like cindy's prophetic prose up above? I've got to admit, I don't know whether to admire the tenacity of his love-lore obsession or laugh at it. I must say my first reaction was EWWWW. Well, at least no one cannot say now that Snape wasn't brave about the whole thing. He was kinda left hanging all by his lonesome in DH's, yet he stuck it thru to the bitter and very nasty end, knowing all of the risks involved. And I guess if you were *once* a DE but renounced that association, your death is still nasty - look at Poor Regulus - alone in the cave, attacked by Inferi and probably became one - what a way to go. I did get *teary* eyed when I read Kreacher's Tale. ;_; Another helping of crow, please, as I was sure Regulus was still alive. Slight, dark, very young Regulus - a seeker, like Harry. I thought that Harry *felt* a quick bond with Regulus, but it was so fleeting. Dying alone in the cave. Doing his part and he couldn't confide in anyone - although, I wonder, *who* did he talk to prior to going to the cave? How did he know what that locket was? Was it Slughorn that he spoke with? Anyway, talk about bravery- Regulus, who knew what the right thing to do was. I would have enjoyed more on him. And it seems that Regulus's reason for betraying LV was the reason that I wanted for Snape... Snape, fanged to death by Nagini - no nice funeral here for him - oh wait, Harry gives his last kid Snape's name as a middle name - oh my, I need to hold onto my boots!! And where is Portrait!Snape? Wasn't he a *headmaster*? Why don't we get to see him? No redeemption for DE's who have seen the light of day - not a very good message. And can I say, what a crappy death scene. Even if you hate Snape, it is lame. Snape - a powerful wizard - gets killed by having a snake dropped on his head????? And he didn't *have * to die - he wasn't the master of the Elder Wand. And don't tell me that Snape didn't take precautions with Nagini around - what, he doesn't drink an anti-venom potion before going into LV's lair? And why did it take Harry so long to think that there was something *off* with Snape? When Snape became Headmaster, LV now has complete access to Sibyll and the prophecy. Why didn't Snape turn over our seer to LV for further info? Why didn't Harry question that? Seems to me, he could have used all the allies he could get. James, Lily, Lupin, Sirius and Dumbledore all get to romp with Harry in the afterlife, but Snape? Nowhere to be seen. Dumbledore doesn't even try to tell Harry that "oh yeah, well, but he is here with us" or "but he has finally found peace in this afterlife". Nothing. Nada. Hey, a thought - maybe Snape isn't dead - afterall, no Portrait!Snape and that wasn't answered in this book...I guess I can still *theorize*!!! Yeah!! Maybe JKR is leaving the saga open - never say never - *it* took Lucas 16 years to start up his Star Wars prequels and umpteen years later, we are getting a 4th installment on Indiana Jones. What the heck was DD's comment to Snape about "sorting too soon" because Snape was brave? Are we to believe that Dumbledore, a champion *against* the whole sorting of the Houses, is stating that anyone *not* in Gryffindor is *not brave*? Was this just a back-handed compliment or a snide comment, because Snape certainly looked taken aback by that comment. I thought DD was *against* the Houses and their stereotypes. And I hope I was not the only one that was shocked that the House thing was still in play 19 years later!!! And the old biases as well.... And Tonks? Why kill her off? Just so we can have *another* child who is orphaned? oh boy, thanks a lot for that. I can understand killing off all of the original cast at Hogwarts, but Tonks? And Fred? Hedwig - a bird, fer crying out loud? I know Harry has to *go* it alone...but please. Overall, take out chapter 33 and I can live with Deathly Hallows. Not my favorite book in the series at all. Not even in the top 4. Harry dying and coming back - well, some may say Christ-like, but other much older religions have had resurrection scenes, so it works for me. Favorite chapters are Kreacher's Tale, King's Cross, The Battle at Hogwarts. LOVED Luna's bedroom. How sweet and touching was that???? And Sibyll throwing her Crystal Balls :) I was disappointed that it was Molly that took out Bellatrix - I was hoping for Neville to have that honor, but at least he killed Nagini - I think I got all the Horcruxes correct - I didn't name Voldy as one :) If I remember correctly, I stated the Horcruxes were 1) the diary 2) the ring 3) the tiara in the RoR where Harry hid the HBP potion book 4) Hufflepuff cup 5) Nagini 6) the locket and 7) Harry. Don't get me started on Dumbledore's manipulations....I will just say this though - it is canon, now, that DD was the only person that could horrify Snape: "If I know him, he will have arranged matters so that when does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of Voldemort." Dumbledore opened his eyes. Snape looked horrified. "You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?" "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?" "Lately, only those whom I could not save," said Snape. He stood up. "You used me." "I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter's son safe. Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter -- " DH (US edition p 687) Sorry I cannot comment much more on the book - it will take me some time to stop saying "Too EWW to be TREWW" and for me to get over it :) I still have so many questions (new and old) that haven't been answered. Hopefully, my other fellow listies here will help me with them... colebiancardi (who is looking for her Pepto *again*!! That crow went down badly and I still have a whole humble pie to eat) postscript: I guess the conversation that DD had with Draco in the HBP hardcover US edition was a FLINT. The one where DD tells Draco "They cannot kill you if you are already dead" stuff.... From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Tue Jul 24 20:07:15 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:07:15 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?The_Prince=92s_Tale?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172226 Since I'm no fan of Wuthering Heights, I'm not sure how I feel about the similarities between Heathcliff (mystious man with a sad childhood, one great tragic love and later he grows bitter and treats others badly) and Snape (whom I have become quite fond of). I so wish his story had taken a different turn, one where he didn't have to die. Because of Snape's great remorse he deserved a chance to finally be able to lead a normal life. His death left me with a feeling of hopelessness (or possibly there is a dementor standing behind me). I had wanted his story to bring hope, to say that even if you are poor, don't look good and make mistakes there is a way out of it. No doubt his mistakes had a horrible outcome, but he also had to pay a high price for them. Snape died before the last battle without even knowing if his efforts (to help Harry survive and conquer Voldemort) had been for nothing or if they actually made a difference. The last word spoken (yelled) to him from a member of the Order was Minerva calling him a coward (before he turned himself into a bat). In my point of view he had deserved to be recogised for who he really was and for all he had done before he died. The knowledge that he would go to history as as a brave and heroic man had probably made him pleased. (Just an assumpion because of his reaction in PoA when Fudge promised him a medal for catching Black.) And I can't believe that Hogwarts (in the Epiloge) kept sorting people into Houses. Not because Voldemort suggested that Slytherin was the only necessary house to keep, but for the same reason that Dumbledore told Snape that sometimes he thought it was too early to sort at the age of 11(DH p. 545), but I wish to add that besides being too early it also prevents Slytherins to choose the good path. The parts of you that are bad will grow worse since people around you are not very good. To me is seems like ending up in Slytherin is like spending time in prison (where serious criminals influence the less serious ones to become even worse) - but before you actually have comitted any crimes. Snapes friendship with Lily - on the other hand - brought out the good in him. I do belive she did the right thing when asking him not to spend time with cruel people, but it must have been difficult to get away from them - since your House is considered your family while at Hogwarts.. About her ending the friendship I don't know what to think. I wish we had learned more about this, from Lily's point of view. Did she end it because he had become ruder in general and was no longer a good friend (hard to believe from how sincere his appolgies seemed to be) or because she actually knew for sure that he disliked muggleborns and wished to join Voldemort? - than she defenitely did the right thing. Did she on the other hand end it because of his unlikable friends (just assuming he was like them), and because of what he called her (but regretted)? In that case I think she did wrong. It was never her job to change him or to save him, but a good friend doesn't turn his/her back to a best friend without leaving an opening (if he changed they would become friends again) unless having a good reason for doing so. I'm really curious what Rowling had in mind when she said that the thougth of Snape being in love was horrible, and that she couldn't see why anyone would like him to be in love with them. Did she mean the grown up bitter man, whose heart belongs to a dead woman? If so, that makes sense. Zero chance that a person like that would make anyone happy. But she can't possibly have meant teenage Snape before he became a Death Eater? All I see is a boy/young man who has been badly treated by muggles, wanting to get away from that, and who really badly wants a good friend, somebody who likes him. Wasn't his love for Lily supposed to be the best part of him??? Or was that his remorse?? (DH p. 545) It also seems to me that he respected Lily and that he was a good friend, who cared about her. Maybe he was a bit jelous, but not in a scary controlling way, and when she reacted against this he seemed to understand that this is not a good thing and stops (DH p. 541). Looking closer to Snape as well as Voldemort and Dumbledore, they all had bad experience of muggles from their childhood, and started to believe that wizards were better. Both Dumbledore and Snape later on understood where these kind of thoughts are taking you, and the loss of somebody they loved that made them wake up and regret what they were doing. Only Voldemort who was incapable of love, never changed his mind. Dumbledore ended up better than Snape. He succeded to keep his past a secret to the public, and he personally was the one to confront Grindewald which I must have helped the healing process considering the guilt he felt for his sister's death. He got the chance to live a full life. He was respected by the public and loved by most of the students. He did many good things which made up for the bad things earlier in his life. Snape on the other hand never lived to see Voldemort die (Lily's true murderer). Even thou he took full responsibility for the part he had played, it was not enough to make him heal. Sooo sad... Marika From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:11:13 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:11:13 -0000 Subject: us cover art, WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172227 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis" wrote: <> >> I reached the end of the US edition of DH and realized that I still > had no idea what the US cover art meant. It could be the final > Harry-Voldy confrontation, but in the picture, Harry is still > wearing the locket Horcrux (which had already been destroyed by > then), and he doesn't have a wand in his right hand. > <> > Cheers, > Phyllis > ***KATIE REPLIES*** I don't understand the whole picture, either, but I do have to point out that I don't think he's wearing the locket. It's the moleskin bag that Hagrid gave him. The one that he had been putting important stuff into throughout the book. As for the rest of that cover...I have no idea. Ususally I go back to the cover after I've read the book going, "OOh, THAT'S what that meant!" Not this time. I was very confused about the cover art. Brits did much better, as they usually do. Cheers, Katie From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 24 20:13:26 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:13:26 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and Purposes ( was: What *Do* You know? Dumblodore Context In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172228 > > > > >Talisman: > > > I just go where the evidence takes me. > > > > Eddie: > > T'man, I'm sure you are a very nice fellow. > > Mike: > I'm sure she'll appreciate that! Eddie: Talisman... sorry for the gender misidentification! > > Eddie: > > what is Dumbledore's motivation? That he's Ever So Evil and > > that he, and not Voldemort is the real villain of the story? I'm > > unconvinced. Entertained by the notion, but unconvinced. Eddie again: And an acknowledgement that Talisman was closer to the mark than I ever expected. Dumbledore was pulling many more strings than I imagined. Eddie From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jul 24 20:13:44 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:13:44 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172229 I am so greatly relieved that Harry made it through. I think my fingernails just about survived to last Saturday! I hope that all members of the IWHTLC will agree with me in declaring the 21st July a public holiday. I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of the Duke of Wellington about Waterloo that it was "a damned close-run" thing. We lost a lot of good people... I wonder whose loss affected you most? From fiziwig at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:14:48 2007 From: fiziwig at yahoo.com (Gary) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:14:48 -0000 Subject: DH: Short - A continuity error? or some other explanation? (chapt 9 spoiler) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172230 This kind of jumped out at me on my first read. Early on, Hermione reveals that she altered her parents' memory and sent them packing to Australia. Later, in chapter nine, (around page 190-200 or so, I don't have the book at hand here at work) they were going to do a memory charm on the two death eaters that went after them in the cafe, and when Ron said he'd never done a memory charm, Hermione claimed that she had also never done a memory charm. So how did she alter her parents' memory without a memory charm? Is this a simple continuity error, or is there some other way of altering memories that she might have used on her parents? Trivial issue, of course, but I found it mildly annoying. Other than that I thought the book was fabulous. --gary From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:17:06 2007 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:17:06 -0000 Subject: The HMS Desire is still afloat Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172231 Reflections on Deathly Hallows. I just had to stop for awhile after Dobby was killed. Harry digging the grave and the inscription, was so heart wrenching. After Fred was killed, which I feared that she might do, because it would be such a cruel thing to leave one twin without the other. Twins are usually very close. After Fred, I didn't think that she would kill any more of those we loved the most. Remus and Tonks was just too, too much for me. I cried and screamed as if it were my own family. I just couldn't take it... and leaving little Teddy an orphan.. God, Rowling is such a sadist. Really she is. I am crying even now. I am so proud of Neville when he was the only remaining head of the DA and refused to torture others. And Blaze who helped all. It was a brilliant book. But so cruel. She did a good job showing the horrors of war. I am glad that she spared Hogwarts, McGongall and Hagrid. Now for my predictions and my ship in Theory bay. I was right. There was a death and resurrection of Harry, or at least a near death experience. As to the "Man-o-War" called the HMS Desire, I think it is still standing tall. "Death Eater Snape is repentant evermore for the Love of Lily". I think I will go over to Theory bay and see it is has sprung any small leaks. But I see its sails still flying from here. ;-) I am still in such a state shock and grief that I just have to take a break from all of this. Thank God, Hogwarts at least goes on. Tonks_op or the faint glimmer that is still her. How COULD that woman kill me off! From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:18:14 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:18:14 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172232 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > I am so greatly relieved that Harry made it through. I think my fingernails just about survived > to last Saturday! I hope that all members of the IWHTLC will agree with me in declaring the > 21st July a public holiday. > > I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of the Duke of Wellington > about Waterloo that it was "a damned close-run" thing. We lost a lot of good people... I > wonder whose loss affected you most? > KATIE REPLIES: It's a tie between Dobby and Hedwig. I knew we would lose wizards...I had never considered the possibility of Hedwig dying. That death actually caused me to drop my book in horror. And I thought, ok, JK, lay it on me. It's the second chapter, for godssake. And the whole scene with Dobby, from Harry pulling the knife out of him, to everyone helping bury him, to the free elf insciption on his grave, tore me up. I was seriously distressed over Dobby. Of course, Fred and Lupin were also rough, but I sort of expected that. Katie From jenniferm at cgtvgames.com Tue Jul 24 20:06:30 2007 From: jenniferm at cgtvgames.com (Jenni Merrifield) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:06:30 -0700 Subject: First Comments on HP:DH Message-ID: <002501c7ce2e$20764db0$ecc25a45@dtv.gfed.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172233 God, I'm so glad the list is back up! The two and a half day wait since I finished the book has been killing me - I want to hear what everyone else has to say! My initial comments are below: 1. SNAPE: a. YES! I *always* knew he was DDM! b. Woah! All those people who said Snape loved Lily were actually RIGHT!?! Who'd a thunk it!? ;-) 2. HARRY: a. YES! I knew Harry wasn't going to die (Although Jo sure had me going up until the "Kings Cross" chapter... :-P) b. I was on the fence about "Harry as a Horcrux" - it was honestly one of the first thoughts I had about it after reading HBP but then I convinced myself that, if he was, he'd have to die, so as he wasn't going to die... Should have stuck with my initial gut instinct. :-P 3. SADDEST MOMENTS: a. Hedwig's death. It's always the innocent ones first. b. Dobby's death. I cried for pages. And the way they all dressed him during the funeral was so sweet. c. Fred's death. It hit me like a punch in the gut. It was also bittersweet for me: I've alwyas held that one of the twins was going to die but none of my friends agreed with me (oh, she'd never kill just ONE of them!). So I was right, but... WHHAAAAAHH! Fred is dead!!!!!! 4. FAVOURITE/MOST MEMORABLE SCENES: a. Dudley telling Harry's he didn't think he was a waste of space and shaking his hand. b. Ginny surprising Harry on his birthday with the snog of his lifetime. c. Hermione giving Ron what for after he rejoined them in the Forest of Dean d. Seeing the war memorial at Godric's Hollow turn into a monument to Harry's family e. Harry crying at his parent's grave f. Nagini erupting out of Bathilda's neck g. Dobby coming to the rescue at the Malfoy Mansion. h. Harry doing in the DE threatening McGonnagal by a Cruciatus Curse and then saying that Bellatrix was right "You really have to mean it." i. Percy Weasley returning to the fold at last. j. Harry, Ron and Hermione turning around and saving Draco and Goyle. (As Ron said, I'd feel sorry for Crabbe, except that he started the fire in the first place) k. Sybil's flying crystal balls of death. YAY for taking out Greyback! (Although, I would have loved to hear Hermione say something along the lines that they were finally being put to a good use.) l. Narcissa betraying Voldemort by saying Harry was dead. (Another shining example of how Voldmort's dismissal of the power of love ultimately led him to his doom) m. Every bit of "The Prince's Tale" n. Harry limply pretending to be dead until just the right moment o. Neville providing that perfect moment by using Godric Gryffindor's sword to slice off Nagini's head! (YES! I'd also love to see Griphook's face when he realizes that the sword has disappeared again) p. Molly Weasley totally "pwning" Bellatrix. (YES, YES!) q. Harry calling Voldemort "Tom Riddle" to his face. r. Voldemort dying from a rebounded Avada Kedavra. You'd think he would have learned by now... ;-) 5. DISAPPOINTMENTS: a. The fact that Umbridge was the ministry worker who took the locket from Mundungus felt a little bit too tidy and contrived. b. Ron speaking Parsletongue and opening the Chamber of Secrets c. Ron and Hermione going to the Chamber of Secrets off screen. Harry totally should have made the connection to Moaning Myrtle's place of residence when he was told they said something about a bathroom! d. Not actually seeing Moaning Myrtle e. Not one Slytherin student stayed behind to fight or even returned during the second wave with the Hogsmead villagers. I really expected to see at least a few who knew that fighting Voldemort was the right thing to do and were willing to choose the right way not the easy way. f. Tonks and Lupin deaths being off stage 6. ISSUES LEFT UNANSWERED: a. We still don't know what happened during the "missing" 24 hours! b. We never got to see behind the locked door at the MoM c. We never got to revisit the veil room at the MoM d. Wasn't someone supposed to learn to cast magic "late in life?" e. Weren't we supposed to learn about the spouses of some of the Hogwarts' Professors? 7. OVERALL: Jo's BEST book. No contest. :-j(enni) ~~~~~ jenni merrifield -- jenniferm at cgtvgames.com CGTV Games -- The Power of Interactive Entertainment ~~~~~ Designing to requirements And walking on water Are easy if both are frozen. ~~~~~ From mindycl at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 20:09:14 2007 From: mindycl at gmail.com (Mindy) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:09:14 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172234 I'm not going to review or comment on the book since there are probably about 1000 posts all coming at the same time about the book, I just have a couple of elementary questions that I hope one of you scholars can help me with. 1) Who DID betray Harry's escape date from Privet Drive to LV? I seem to have missed that. 2) Who was Snape's 'source' to LV? I know it was DD, but LV didn't know that - so who was his 'source'? 3) Hermione managed to get her hands on the stocks of Mad Eye's Polyjuice Potion - how??? Wasn't it on Mad-Eye when he was killed? 4) Was the rest of Mad Eye's body actually ever recovered? 5) Harry used so much relatively simply magic throughout the book to slip from the Death Eaters such as Accio, Expelliarmus, Stupefy, Imperio... I'm surprised none of the Death Eaters ever did that... a simple "accio harry" or disarming him would've helped their cause a lot, I'm surprised they never thought of it - they weren't dumb wizards! 6) I am so confused by Dumbledore's speech during Harry's near-death experience. The entire premise of the prophecy has completely crumbled. If indeed, Harry couldn't die as long as LV was alive because of his blood being in LV, and LV being unable to die as long as Harry was alive because he was a Horcrux, how does that explain "Neither can survive while the other lives" prophecy? 7) The most infuriating plot development for me personally was Snape jumping out the window, instead of sticking around and giving over Harry his memories BEFORE the Great Battle of Hogwarts. Can you imagine, had Harry NOT been in the Shrieking Shack at just the right moment, he never would have gotten access ot those memories and never would have known he was Horcrux and had to die so that LV could die too. Where was Snape's sense of responsibility/loyalty to Dumbledore - why didn the give over the memories BEFORE he jumped out the window? Perhaps he didnt know yet that LV had reached the stage where he wasnt letting go of Nagini? 8) Is anyone else deeply saddened at the deaths of Lupin & Tonks? I just couldnt bear it when that happened. All four marauders are now dead, Snape too, no one of authority left. it's a new generation... 9) The epilogue was very moving, but I am VERY curious what Harry, Ron, Ginny and Hermione's chosen professions ended up being. I guess jK had to leave something open to fanfiction, but oh how I would have loved to get a sneak peak at the two weddings :) Incidentally, what does Molly do with her long empty days since Ginny has started school? Does she have a job that we know of or does she just sit home and prepare dinner for Arthur? I'm sure I'll come up with many more questions as I reread the book, but this is for starters. And I'm sure NO ONE will take the time to answer them as everyone has their own lists of questions and comments, but I'm throwing this post into the mix. Thank you!!! Mindy From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Jul 24 20:21:08 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:21:08 -0000 Subject: A Request for J K Rowling Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172235 Dear JKR: Thank you for a most wonderfully entertaining romp through your magical imagination! I assume you have been lurking in this group for some years now. Possibly, you have also thrown out a red herring (or well-concealed hint) as a participant in the group from time to time. Now that your opus is completed, I request that you show yourself, either as a new participant (if you want to keep your previous lurking presence secret,) or by unveiling yourself. The first reason is that this is a community which, above all, loves and respects what you have done, honors you greatly, and would like to join you in the Common Room, surround you with the appreciation of friends, press butterbeer into your hands, and generally let you know how much you are liked. Please come and take your bows. The second reason is that these who honor you would welcome your participation in our discussions. So many questions were well-answered in DH that it would be next to impossible to list them all, yet many questions remain unanswered. Since you are not planning to write more in the general Harry Potter vein, perhaps you would be willing to share with us what you had thought about various issues, or even join with us in speculating about answers to questions you had not addressed. Now that all the cats are out of the bag (and scampering into the woods, except for the one that just crawled into my lap,) why not join us openly, and participate in the warmth of discussion (yes, and even argument) with good friends from around the world? Whether you do or do not, please know that you and your ideas and stories are deeply appreciated. Vivamus From susanawhite123 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:21:13 2007 From: susanawhite123 at yahoo.com (Sue White) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <650861.43940.qm@web33114.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172237 Why did JKR ruin this book and perhaps series for me with the trite epilogue? I quite literally laughed out loud as I read it, it was unbelievable: the children's names, the treatment of grown-up Draco etc... Am I alone? ____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 20:25:55 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:25:55 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172238 I once said you couldn't have a good Snape and a good book 7, it turns out I was wrong. I also said if JKR can figure out a way to do it then she's an even better writer than I thought she was, it turns out I was right, she really is a better writer than I thought she was. But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of the I love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading the book you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? If JKR had been writing in Shakespeare's day we'd still be reading it, and if Shakespeare were writing in our day he'd be a billionaire too. I was also wrong about Harry dying, he didn't die. I said I thought his death would make a better story, I might have been right about that, but probably I was not. Right after Harry saw Snape's last memories I felt absolutely positively 100% certain Harry would die (Harry certainly felt so), but now I was no longer certain I wanted it to happen. I can tell you the exact instant I felt that way, page 687 near the bottom of the page I read "From the tip of his [Snape's] wand burst the silver doe". I wasn't expecting that, and I couldn't even finish reading the rest of the sentence, I had to put the book down stand up and walk away for a while. She's going to do it I thought, she's really going to do it, JKR is going to murder Harry Potter! For years I'd been saying that's exactly what she should do, but now when I actually saw JKR with a gun pointed at Harry's head just a moment before she's going to pull the trigger, well , all I can say is it took me some time to work up the courage to continue reading. I'm curious, what would I would have done if the book ended at the bottom of page 704 and the very last sentence in the book was "He saw the mouth move and a flash of green light, and everything was gone". If JKR wanted to be really diabolical she could have included 60 blank pages after that so I'd feel the thickness of those pages when I hold the book and they would give me a false sense of security; I'd figure there must be more to it than that, but when I turn the page all I see is: "THE END". I wonder if she was tempted. One thing about the book does puzzle me, why did JKR invent Percy? It seems to me an evil Weasley would be more interesting, we already have enough good Weasleys. When Percy apologized I expected to see a grand betrayal, but no, it turns out his apology was sincere. If Percy is going to do that then what is the point of the man? But that's a minor criticism, it's a magnificent book! There may be debate if this is the best book in the series (I happen to think it is) but there can be no debate that it's the best written. >From day 1 JKR has been a master of plot, but in some of the early books you'd see inelegant sentences (he said furiously), but not in this book. I recall an interview where JKR said she thought she was a better writer now than when she wrote the early books, so when she finished the last book she may rewrite them, not change the plot just improve the language. She may have been kidding, but I rather hope she was not. Eggplant From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Tue Jul 24 20:21:37 2007 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:21:37 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A65F51.3040308@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 172239 Geoff Bannister a ?crit : > I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of > the Duke of Wellington about Waterloo that it was "a damned close- > run" thing. We lost a lot of good people... I wonder whose loss > affected you most? Lupin and Tonks, definitely. Fred was kind of "expected," when we see him joking with Percy, it clearly was a now-someone's-gonna-be-out-pretty-soon-moment, but Lupin and Tonks, that was so unexpected, we don't even know how they died, they just are killed, just like that. That's what got me really heartbroken Vincent From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jul 24 20:30:42 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:30:42 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172240 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: > > > > I am so greatly relieved that Harry made it through. I think my > fingernails just about survived > > to last Saturday! I hope that all members of the IWHTLC will agree > with me in declaring the > > 21st July a public holiday. > > > > I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of > the Duke of Wellington > > about Waterloo that it was "a damned close-run" thing. We lost a > lot of good people... I > > wonder whose loss affected you most? KATIE: > It's a tie between Dobby and Hedwig. I knew we would lose > wizards...I had never considered the possibility of Hedwig dying. > That death actually caused me to drop my book in horror. And I > thought, ok, JK, lay it on me. It's the second chapter, for > godssake. And the whole scene with Dobby, from Harry pulling the > knife out of him, to everyone helping bury him, to the free elf > insciption on his grave, tore me up. I was seriously distressed over > Dobby. Of course, Fred and Lupin were also rough, but I sort of > expected that. Katie Geoff: It's an amazing coincidence that your reply is the first to my question. I nearly gave my own view in my last post and, like you, I was trying to choose between Hedwig and Dobby. Hedwig's death really did hit me - after I read the sentence twice for it to sink in. She has been so much of a support to Harry in her own way that there is a great gap which he obviously feels from time to time. I get the same feeling even if I only walk my dogs and one of them is missing; the whole balance changes. From mbraeutigam at gmx.net Tue Jul 24 20:15:24 2007 From: mbraeutigam at gmx.net (Martin Brutigam) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:15:24 +0200 Subject: DH (spoiler) - The Epilogue Message-ID: <008201c7ce2f$5f40de60$15b2a8c0@miles> No: HPFGUIDX 172241 Well, first of all - I liked this final book, I think it is a good answer to the most questions and an adequate finale for a great series of books. But, really, this Epilogue - in my opinion it's one of the weakest chapters in the entire HP narration, and to have it on the very last pages hurts a bit. Maybe my expectations were too high? Possible, but I don't think so. I didn't expect pages of explanations, political revolutions, cleanup in the Ministry. But I expected a little bit more than sheer sweetness, at least some shades of ... violet in the pink picture, if you understand what I mean. Harry finding his private luck after saving the world - ok. But after so much blood in the final book, I don't think it's a good move to put not a single piece of loss, of grief, or any kind of shadow into the Epilogue. Miles From ekrdg at verizon.net Tue Jul 24 20:29:20 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:29:20 -0400 Subject: My thoughts on DH Message-ID: <002001c7ce31$5210caa0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 172242 Wow, what an emotional book. It was SO dark, right from the beginning. The whole book was very dark and brutal... I mean, I knew Voldemort was one bad dude but he seriously had no conscience, he was evil. I found myself crying and laughing, becoming tense as the characters faced obstacles. On more than one occasion I thought, "How much MORE does Harry have to lose ?????". Hedwig, his wand, Ron walking out.... it just seemed at some points to be too much for him (and me). There were things that happened that surprised me, not only literary points but my reaction to them. I never thought I'd find myself having some liking for anything Dudley did or said. It seems that he, the spoiled pampered brat, had more decency than either of his parents. And Snape.... I understood him SO much better after this ! How about Kreacher !?!? He actually became likeable. I found out that what Dumbledore and Hermione said was true, that he was the product of the wizards around him. When Harry began to treat him differently, he became different. It was great to see all the lines of prejudice, etc. fall, especially at the end when there were no "house" tables, just everyone sitting with everyone. I cried, no, I bawled like a baby when Dobby died. When Harry made the "Here Lies Dobby, A Free Elf", I cried even more having to close the book, eventually recompose myself and then return to reading. The ships, I loved them... she did them exactly as I would have liked, if not better. A very poignant moment was Harry and Ginny's son, Albus Severus. Loved the line, "You are named for two headmasters, one of which was in Slytherin and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew". (or something to that affect) Wow.... that was a lot for Harry to say. King's Cross...., the walk into the forest, etc.... just so sad and at that point I was SURE that Harry was going to die. I could hardly read for all the tears. It was just too much. It was like watching someone you loved, die. All in all I loved the book. In the first book Harry and Hermione are having a conversation and Hermione says, "You are a great wizard Harry" and he replies only to have her reply back.... I'm sure you all know the part.."Me ? Books ! And cleverness ! There are more important thigns-friendship and bravery...". I think that really sums up a lot about the series, the love and sacrifice for a friend or loved one. Great book.... truly great writing the way she gave us so much information on each page and I loved how she tied in bits of the previous books by mentioning things like.... "Sleeping in the same tent that we slept in during the QWC", when Harry went back to the cupboard under the stairs and recalled that, etc. It was just great writing.... I loved it....! Kimberly "Harry Potter, the boy who lived" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 24 20:33:57 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:33:57 -0000 Subject: us cover art, WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172243 > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis" > wrote: > > <> > >> I reached the end of the US edition of DH and realized that I still > > had no idea what the US cover art meant. It could be the final > > Harry-Voldy confrontation, but in the picture, Harry is still > > wearing the locket Horcrux (which had already been destroyed by > > then), and he doesn't have a wand in his right hand. > > > <> > > Cheers, > > Phyllis > > > ***KATIE REPLIES*** > > I don't understand the whole picture, either, but I do have to point > out that I don't think he's wearing the locket. It's the moleskin bag > that Hagrid gave him. The one that he had been putting important stuff > into throughout the book. As for the rest of that cover...I have no > idea. Ususally I go back to the cover after I've read the book > going, "OOh, THAT'S what that meant!" Not this time. I was very > confused about the cover art. Brits did much better, as they usually > do. Cheers, Katie > Anne Squires now: I definitely think it's the confrontation in the Great Hall. I think it's when Harry "saw the Elder Wand fly high against the the sunrise." Voldemort's wand has just flown out of his hand and he's is about to die. The only thing is ---Harry should have Draco's wand in one of his hands. But, GrandPre has gotten the wand wrong on the cover before. On the cover's of both OotP and HBP she has harry holding a wand in his left hand. Anne Squires Anne Squires From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:35:00 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:35:00 -0000 Subject: The (Hated) Epilogue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172244 I'm seeing a theme here... No, I didn't love the epilogue, either. It was trite and lite and didn't fit with what we know of the series, the characters, or JKR's writing. I felt like she had written it a long time ago (which she did actually do, right?) and then felt she couldn't, or shouldn't, alter it. However, she really should have. I thought DH was a fantastic book, best of the series. It was dark, morbid, scary, heart-breaking, redemptive, exciting...just fantastic. And then along came the epilogue...it just did not work. Don't get me wrong - I wanted an epilogue. Desperately. I really wanted to know what happened. But I wanted it to be sooner than 19 years later, first of all. That was too far. And, I wanted it to be true to the series. It just was off. Too Disney and cute and perfect. All that said, I did love seeing Hermione and Ron together. I was never a huge fan of Harry/Ginny, so that was just ok. I also loved the comment Harry made about Snape being one of the bravest men he had ever known. That made me cry. I also enjoyed hearing that Neville was the Herbology prof, and that Hagrid was still at Hogwarts. But aside from those things, I didn't love it. It was a snapshot, really, not an epilogue. However, after writing over 4000 beautiful, remarkable, classic pages of wonder and magic, I'm willing to allow JK a little slack and a crappy epilogue. ;) KATIE From joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 20:38:18 2007 From: joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net (Joe) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:38:18 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: <46A65F51.3040308@free.fr> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172245 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Vincent Maston wrote: > Lupin and Tonks, definitely. > Fred was kind of "expected," when we see him joking with Percy, it > clearly was a now-someone's-gonna-be-out-pretty-soon-moment, but Lupin > and Tonks, that was so unexpected, we don't even know how they died, > they just are killed, just like that. > > That's what got me really heartbroken > > Vincent > :Joe I didn't expect Fred to die just because he was joking with Percy, but when Tonks asked where Lupin was and we were told he was last seen dueling Dolohov, she goes off running to help and then a little later we find Dolohov alive and well. I kind of suspected at least Lupin did not survive. From jmestacio at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:41:32 2007 From: jmestacio at yahoo.com (-jme-) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:41:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: <46A65F51.3040308@free.fr> Message-ID: <368138.90084.qm@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172246 Geoff Bannister a ?crit : > I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of > the Duke of Wellington about Waterloo that it was "a damned close- > run" thing. We lost a lot of good people... I wonder whose loss > affected you most? Vincent said: Lupin and Tonks, definitely. Fred was kind of "expected," when we see him joking with Percy, it clearly was a now-someone's-gonna-be-out-pretty-soon-moment, but Lupin and Tonks, that was so unexpected, we don't even know how they died, they just are killed, just like that. That's what got me really heartbroken argentumangela says: Dobby's death was the one that opened the waterworks for me. I couldn't believe what happened to him. His death was symbolic of the extent of how everyone was affected by Voldy's propaganda. It was such an innocent life wasted. And totally unexpected. "Fairytales are are more than real. Not because they tell us that dragons exist but because they tell us that they can be defeated." [GK Chesterton] From melissajhf at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:38:53 2007 From: melissajhf at yahoo.com (Melissa Fairel) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <598051.55967.qm@web50807.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172247 Geoff Bannister wrote: I am so greatly relieved that Harry made it through. I think my fingernails just about survived to last Saturday! I hope that all members of the IWHTLC will agree with me in declaring the 21st July a public holiday. I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of the Duke of Wellington about Waterloo that it was "a damned close-run" thing. We lost a lot of good people... I wonder whose loss affected you most? Melissa F wrote: I cried for pages over Dobby. The respect that all around gave to him was heartbreaking. But I think that the death of Snape, though I expected it, affected me the most. I *needed* some kind of reconciliation between he and Harry. I think I would have coped better if Snape had called Harry ... Harry. Something to show that he was looking at Harry as someone other than his father -- who Snape understandably didn't like too much. Just my opinion... From mundungus42 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:44:24 2007 From: mundungus42 at yahoo.com (Right Honorable) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:44:24 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172248 I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to fake Parseltongue well enough to access the Chamber of Secrets Admittedly, he did earlier show skill impersonating Wormtail's voice well enough to fool the Death Eaters at Malfoy Manor, but Parseltongue has been billed as such a rare talent that it rang false for me. Seems to me a well-placed Reductor Curse would have accomplished much the same thing without fudging. Cheers, Libby From princessaurora at cox.net Tue Jul 24 20:37:49 2007 From: princessaurora at cox.net (princessauror27) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:37:49 -0000 Subject: DH (spoiler) - The Epilogue In-Reply-To: <008201c7ce2f$5f40de60$15b2a8c0@miles> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172249 > Miles wrote: > > But, really, this Epilogue - in my opinion it's one of the weakest chapters in the entire HP narration, and to have it on the very last pages hurts a bit. > > Maybe my expectations were too high? Possible, but I don't think so. I > didn't expect pages of explanations, political revolutions, cleanup in the Ministry. But I expected a little bit more than sheer sweetness, at least some shades of ... violet in the pink picture, if you understand what I mean. > > Harry finding his private luck after saving the world - ok. But after so > much blood in the final book, I don't think it's a good move to put not a single piece of loss, of grief, or any kind of shadow into the Epilogue. princessauror27: For a while I thought so too, but then I realized that she had taken Harry's story full circle. The first book is about his going to Hogwarts and is written in a slightly childish style. This chapter shows Harry, Ron, and Draco's sons going off to school just as their fathers did in the first book. The hope is that they can create a better world than the one their parents had. I loved it after I read it with that idea in mind. From seusilva at uol.com.br Tue Jul 24 20:33:42 2007 From: seusilva at uol.com.br (james black potter) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:33:42 -0300 Subject: Answers and Questions Message-ID: <20070724203348.0185131B8@socom1.uol.com.br> No: HPFGUIDX 172250 Greetings all. Thirteen Answers and Questions for you. A. He put a spell on his undergarments! Q. You-Know-Who can fly? A. Before her death, the Deathly Hallows. Q. What does Dumbledore saw at the Mirror of Erised? Ariana? A. Grindelwald always liked a laugh. Q. Is there any relation between Ariana and the Aryan race? A. Duh. That is the epitome of Gryffindor for you. This guy was always a fake. Q. Ron doing the parseltongue? A. Godric owned Griphook. That, and the goblin lost any right over the sword when he betrayed the trio. Q. How did Neville got Gryffindor?s Sword out of the hat? A. He was master of Death. Q. How strong was Harry?s sac? A. She was under stress. Q. Did Mrs. Weasley set a good example by swearing and killing before her children? A. Taking a marked man for godfather. Expeliarmus. Q. What was Lupin wisest moment in this book? A. ?Poor Severus? / ?He was one of the bravest men ? Q. Is Severus really dead? A. Goyle under polyjuice. Q. Who is Draco?s wife? A. It runs in the family Q. Scorpius? What a bad taste with names! A. ASP. Q. Is any of Harry?s sons a parseltongue? A. I am about to die. Here lies a free-elf. Do you want me to do it now, or would like some time to compose an epitaph. Voldemort, aaahhh Q. Any last words? james black potter PS: dear house-elf, feel free (wheee) to correct any grammar mistakes. From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 20:43:59 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:43:59 -0000 Subject: Never again Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172251 So, it's over. My feelings right now are, that I will probably never open and read a Potter-book again. I will read reviews and will read discussions and fanfics with different takes on the end - but the books are packed away and I can't see myself ever reading them again. DH did not conclude the series for me - no way. Too many things left unanswered - and realising I'll probably never have these answers is terrible. Snape's death was so cruel. I had rather seen Harry die than Severus. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:45:33 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:45:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry Message-ID: <771932.76330.qm@web50409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172252 Where to begin? I disliked the book. I felt let down after several years of, admittedly, rather high expectations for the final installment. It had a satisfactory outcome, but no more than that. The way that outcome was reached was somewhat predictable after the first two chapters of the novel. The insanely high expectations of some fans would be practically impossible to have met. One thing that I would say regarding Snape is that he was certainly noble in the way he turned out. I had actually always quite liked him and was not too surprised that his death went largely unheralded. His characterisation, as many of us agree, was supremely well done, there is a little more below on him. Prior to book 7 and some time between books 5 and 6 I had begun to write up a few little theories and comments here and there around what is now a vast and multiplying Harry Potter fandom. While they were largely done for amusement's sake and at times for information, I actually got a few things correct or near enough. It seems the minutiae were ultimately of some import, as I had commented they would be. There was a dragon at Gringotts bank for instance, Dittany played a role, not quite in the way I had predicted it would but quite close, Stan Shunpike, depite we readers being led to believe that he was an innocent patsy in book 6, was a Death Eater, notwithstanding Harry's rationalisation of the blank look on his face when Harry saw him, and a few other little bits and pieces. I also got several things spectacularly wrong, and I'm sure we all did. The worst of these was my thought that Grindelwald would not play a part, oops. The thing is, I had written that there would be something that was basically the opposite of a Horcrux and indeed there was. The mechanics of that were different from how I'd seen it, but nevertheless it was there and many people had scoffed at the very idea. Dumbledore's back story I did like, it made a great deal of sense. He could quite easily have mentioned that Horcruxes are not too difficult to destroy, as they ultimately proved. That information seemed to me to have been withheld for no especially good reason before its revelation from the book Hermione had summoned. My interpretation of the Slytherin business is that while they may be a little vilified still that vilification os far less at the end than it had been at the beginning of the series. Although it wasn't spelled out as such, that was Horace Slughorn who returned to the fray with some others in tow. Does that not suggest to you that Slytherins and the other three houses can eventually reside in harmony? My view is that message is quite clear and the road to healing is well on its way. Years and years of mistrust do not diappear overnight. Just think of the situation in Europe post World War II to get the idea. There is till today, even over 60 years after that terrible war ended , continued mistrust, a mistrust between nations that has lessened over time while never entirely disappearing. Molly's defeat of Bellatrix was a stand out moment for me. It's one of those moments in the series that makes me appreciate that there's always good and bad parts, bits we each like and bits we each hate. *Points of Dissatisfaction* Harry used the Imperius Curse twice and succeeded in using the Cruciatus Curse. Why? As there is an opposite to a Horcrux, could there not have been an opposite spell for these two without actually having Harry break the law? When one is fighting fire then it is acceptable to use fire would be one rationalisation to this, but I'm sorry it does not meet the case for me. Harry is supposed to be the shining beacon for the wizarding world, he should not have stooped to the level of those whom he opposed. There was no need at all for Lupin or Tonks to die. That their son's story is in some way supposed to mirror Harry's is taken by me as the message we are to glean from their deaths. It wasn't necessary, it was rather gratuitous. I suspect we may find out soon that the werewolf and the metamorphmagus were the two characters who were not originally slated to die. With the way Snape nauseatingly turned out to have never got a life, I find it unlikely that he was originally intended to survive. The character who was meant to die but received a reprieve may well have been Hagrid. I hadn't ever expected him to die and never gave much credence to what I call the alchemy death theories. I wrote an alchemy based theory here at the group a while ago that actually turned out much nearer to being what happened and what can be extrapolated to have happened post Tom Riddle's defeat and pre the platform 9 3/4 epilogue than the usual death based ones. In that regard I must extend thanks to Montavilla47 for prompting me to finally put it out there. For what it's worth it was not because I liked Lupin or Tonks especially that I thought their deaths were a little gratutious but rather for the sake of their child. The world of the perpetual orphans about sums it up. On that level, and as a parent myself, I found it rather depressing. All the characters turned out very much as could have been expected from a surface reading of the first six books, and yes, that includes Severus Snape. The only reason I was reluctant to cast Snape in the role of loving Lily was that it made me feel sick to contemplate it. It was his love for Lily that saved Harry as far as I am concerned. Voldemort had agreed to spare Lily and by not doing so he effectively achieved his own first downfall. Contracts in the wizarding world appear to do that to you, much as they would come back to bite you in the real world if you don't stick to them. Another thing about which a reaction would be welcomed was the ludicrousness of the whole sword in the lake moment. Why not just leave it in an easily accessible position? Dissatisfied really doesn't fit the bill after the length of the wait and here I was believing that satisfaction would be guaranteed. A forlorn hope as it turned out, IMO. There was no evil Lupin, no evil McGonagall, no further traitors in either the Order or amongst the Death Eaters. This was all to be expected. Harry had a task to fulfil and he did so, there was no need to make it harder than it already was, and it was certainly hard. Certain other things that we could plausibly have expected to get some resolution of, and which had been anticipated by many from various interview snippets of JKR, were left unresolved. That she may patch this up in future interviews is likely. Where, for instance, was the person who displayed magical tendencies later in life? What did the Potters do for a living? Why did Dumbledore not tell Harry how a Horcrux could be destoyed? This one's easy enough to give an explanation for, Dumbledore was expecting Harry to use the Deathly Hallows. Just as well Hermione was on the ball and summoned Dumbledore's books. Maybe he thought she would do so. There are others too, however I do not propose to list them, they may get resolved eventually, as I say. My biggest complaint I save until last: - To quote Ronald Weasley in an earlier work by JKR: "How thick can you get?". How thick indeed. Lord Voldemort has been shown to be rather less intelligent than an amoeba. He never realised that Harry was seeing what he did. Nary a thought was given to the possibility that he should not under any circumstances dwell on his Horcruxes, and yet he did, allowing Harry to know where they were. Far too convenient a plot device and eminently unsatisfactory to this reader. Why, when he had apparently invested some time in blocking the link between himself and Mr. Potter was that link reopened? Couldn't Ms. Rowling have allowed the trio to figure out the locations of the Horcruxes in another way, thus cutting down on the listlessness of their otherwise aimless search? Lord Voldemort spent the greater part of the novel chasing around after the Elder Wand. All well and good but had he not thought to check his Horcruxes after he knew full well that the Diary one had been destroyed? The way that was explained was highly unsatisfactory and again went to show that Voldemort was singularly lacking in common sense. His further idiocy, that we are to just swallow, and the one that really got me, was the Diadem hidden in the Room of Requirement. How could Voldemort possibly honestly believe that a room chock full of the detritus of many many years had only ever been discovered by him? Just how did he imagine all the other junk got there, and did he never stop to think that others had preceded him in finding the room with the strong probability that future students would also not find it? That is unbelievable and even with the suspension of disbelief that goes with this kind of novel I feel not insulted but aggrieved that the readership is asked to simply accept Voldemort's arrogance as the explanation. *Overall* In many ways my reaction to the end of the series was the same as it has been to all except one other well known series. It ended I thought with a whimper rather than with a bang and I doubt if I'm in that small a minority in this opinion. Having never in my life, with one exception, read any Harry Potter fan fiction now is not the time to start. I never read any James Bond books not by Ian Fleming, I wouldn't contemplate reading anything else not by Arthur Conan Doyle about Sherlock Holmes. I did read The Last Sherlock Holmes Story by Michael Dibdin and enjoyed it. He was a fantastic writer in his own right so I made that one exception. Good luck to you if you are either a fan fiction writer or reader. My involvement with the fandom may continue up to a point, I do have my children to read the stories to in due course. They will, no doubt, enjoy them and I will also, up to a point, enjoy reading to them. We all invested a good deal of time in the story, but finally I must say that while I was disappointed I can see that the story satisfies. I am satisified because it is all over. Even though it did not meet the expectations I personally held it did gratify, if that makes any sense to you. Goddlefrood, going back behind the scenes where he belongs ;-) ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mail/winter07.html From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Tue Jul 24 20:29:05 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:29:05 -0000 Subject: VMonte's Brilliant Insight - In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172253 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Actually, it was while I was responding about the Dumbledore cave > scene (from the other day) that the thought occurred to me that > perhaps Dumbledore understands Snape because of his checkered past. > Maybe Voldemort's relationship with Snape is similar to what > Grindelwald's relationship with Dumbledore was. Well, before I go on > a tangent I'll stop there. I would just like to compliment vmonte, she got it spot on. From joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 20:44:55 2007 From: joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net (Joe) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:44:55 -0000 Subject: The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172254 I agree that the Epilogue was al little too Saccharine sweet, but I think JKR intended it more for the younger readers to provide the same quality as "and they lived happily ever after" does in fairy tales. Remember not all readers of the HP books are adults as we are. Joe From jeanico2000 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:51:24 2007 From: jeanico2000 at yahoo.com (jeanico2000) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:51:24 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172255 While the DH epilogue seems to be a lively source for debate, I just wanted to say that, to me, is was like coming full circle. This book is amazing terrific and action packed and dark and really quite adult... and then the epilogue is there and brings back all the innocent charm and wonder that we discovered in the first books with the start of term train rides back to Hogwarts. Maybe this is what JK had in mind? it certainly worked for me! Nicole (Who's just so darn happy that Harry didn't die!) From clio44a at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 20:55:01 2007 From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:55:01 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172256 Finally, finally some serious discussion about DH. *clio bounces up and down in her chair* Right. I'm still digesting DH, but this, trivial as it is, is right now my most burning question: In DH 'The prince's tale' we learn Snape's patronus is the doe. In 'A flaw in the plan' Harry tells Voldemort that Snape has the same patronus as Lily Potter. Odd. How does Harry know? Am I overlooking something? I can't shake the feeling that there was a conversation about this edited from the book. (BTW, I am reading the British edtion, since the German translation won't come out before October) Someone please give me a hint. Clio From mark_anders01 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 24 20:52:43 2007 From: mark_anders01 at yahoo.co.uk (mark_anders01) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:52:43 -0000 Subject: snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172257 Could somebody actually tell what the Order tangibly gained from Snape being so close to Voldemort for all those years? He risked and lost so much but I cannot recall one specific piece of information that he was able to give to the Order. Incidentally, loved the book especially Neville making the final difference with the horcruxes as he had done with the house cup back in book 1 Mark From leahstill at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 20:56:27 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:56:27 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: <650861.43940.qm@web33114.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172258 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sue White wrote: > > Why did JKR ruin this book and perhaps series for me > with the trite epilogue? > > I quite literally laughed out loud as I read it, it > was unbelievable: the children's names, the treatment > of grown-up Draco etc... > > Am I alone? Leah: No, I agree for one. I found DH a very moving book, with lots of ideas to ponder on, finishing with those emotionally charged final chapters, and then....what read like a bad piece of fanfic. We knew Ron and Hermione, Harry and Ginny had survived and would be together, we didn't need all the children stuff, we needed some answers to questions. First the obvious questions: what were the trio doing, was Harry an Auror, was Hermione using her talents, how was Gred coping without Forge, what happened to Luna, was McGonagall headmistress,was Hagrid ok, I could go on. And some bigger questions- was Snape's bravery recognised, what has happened to the Ministry of Magic, what has happened to the non-human magical creatures, especially house-elves? The thing that really upset me about the epilogue though was that the house system was still there, and Albus Severus didn't want to be put into Slytherin. This, after all the Sorting Hat comments, after what Dumbledore said about sorting too soon, nothing seemed to have been done, after Snape's death and Slughorn fighting for Harry. Harry's few words about Snape didn't cut it for me. I know worlds can't be made perfect straightaway but there seemed to be no attempt at reform. We also had to guess at an important plot element. Will Harry in fact die a natural death? Will his wand be taken from him or will the power of the Elder Wand be destroyed. I would have liked a Harry death bed scene in old age, knowing he is returning peacefully to King's Cross, and reflecting back on his life. I need to re-read the book, having done a speed read, but my feeling was it was one of the best of the series, with the epilogue a disastrous tag-on. I think JKR's editor did her no favours by not doing something about it, as trite is a kindness. It annoys me to think about this negative aspect when there were so many wonderful and positive things in the book. Leah _____________________________________________________________________ _______________Ready for the edge of your seat? > Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. > http://tv.yahoo.com/ > From joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 20:58:52 2007 From: joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net (Joe) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:58:52 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172259 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" wrote: > > While the DH epilogue seems to be a lively source for debate, I just > wanted to say that, to me, is was like coming full circle. This book > is amazing terrific and action packed and dark and really quite > adult... and then the epilogue is there and brings back all the > innocent charm and wonder that we discovered in the first books with > the start of term train rides back to Hogwarts. Maybe this is what JK > had in mind? it certainly worked for me! > Nicole (Who's just so darn happy that Harry didn't die!) > :Joe Until Harry Potter and the Death Stick, book 8: Harry, now an adult with three children, is pulled out of retirement due to a sudden upsurge of dark magic and needs to retrieve the Elder Wand for one more adventure. Arrives in bookstores in early 2008. ;-) From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 24 20:59:48 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:59:48 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172260 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Right Honorable" wrote: > > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to fake Parseltongue > > Libby > Hello Libby! That jumped out at me when I read it, and I found the whole section a surprisingly abrupt episode. I mean, Ron 'copied' Harry? Parseltongue is a strange collection of throat-gargly sounds which mean nothing to most wizards, so how on earth could he have managed all the right hacking noises after hearing Harry just once? He could have said something rude or meaningless, or ended up making himself cough a lot! And he and Hermione just disappeared for a few pages in all the tension and prelude to chaos, and then reappeared with a basilisk fang or two. At the very least, that was worth a half chapter or even a whole one, so that Ron and Hermione's relationship could have been shown to develop more. I didn't feel there was the slightest girlfriend/boyfriend thing going on, and the moment when they do kiss seemed to be thrown in as a convenient place for them to do the obligatory. That made me feel quite empty about their situation, and it seemed rushed. Considering there were seven books, that could have been done far sweeter. Sandra. x to all. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 20:58:53 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:58:53 -0000 Subject: DH: Epilogue, Unforgivables and Other Quick Thoughts. In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0707241305t29b58639q61c1177bc00c632a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172261 elfundeb wrote: > Too many Unforgivables were cast by Harry and co. I profoundly disagree, I think it shows JKR at her full brilliance. For the first time in his life Harry was able to cast a full power no nonsense over the top Cruciatus Curse. Why? Because he enjoyed it. Does this mean Harry has become a bit corrupted? Yes, but no human being, not anything made of flesh and blood could go through what Harry has and not become a bit corrupted. Harry is still a VERY good person, but he's no longer a innocent eleven year old boy getting on the Hogwarts Express for the first time, he's a slightly cynical battle scared veteran who's seen things no man should ever see. Eggplant From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:00:20 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:00:20 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <771932.76330.qm@web50409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172262 > >>Goddlefrood: > > Although it wasn't spelled out as such, that was > Horace Slughorn who returned to the fray with some > others in tow. Does that not suggest to you that > Slytherins and the other three houses can eventually > reside in harmony? My view is that message is quite > clear and the road to healing is well on its way. > Betsy Hp: Wishful thinking I'm afraid. No healing for the WW. Where Anne Frank was able to look at the world around her and think, "I know in my heart that people are good" (or words to that effect), JKR apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know in my heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half of them are okay, and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably good." It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates in a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. Yeah. I'm pretty much done with the series. Betsy Hp From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Tue Jul 24 21:00:48 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:00:48 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172263 I loved it. It's been nineteen years for Merlin's sake - of course they've gotten on with their lives! Besides I enjoy feeling smug about being right on the pairings. From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:05:47 2007 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:05:47 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172264 Mindy: <<1) Who DID betray Harry's escape date from Privet Drive to LV? I seem to have missed that.>> I am happy to take the time to answer this one, which is actually the only one of your questions I have a ready answer to. When Harry views the thoughts Snape leaves him on his deathbed, DD tells Snape to betray the escape date, for as to not do so would have blown Snape's cover. DD also tells Snape to plant the idea (in, IIRC, Mundungus' head) of polyjuicing Harry to make it more difficult for the DEs to figure out which one of the seven was the real Harry. Cheers, Phyllis From ekrdg at verizon.net Tue Jul 24 21:03:30 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:03:30 -0400 Subject: Why I liked the Epilogue Message-ID: <00ad01c7ce36$178ab2b0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 172265 With all the talk about hating the epilogue, I just wanted to chime in as liking it. For me, it ended what was an extremely dark, emotional book, on a lighter note. Yes, I would have liked to have known what ever happened to Hermione's parents ??? The Dursleys ? I think what makes it stand out as such plain, Disney-like fiction is the stark, contrasting difference to the last books. All of the angst is gone.... the epilogue shows what I wanted for Harry, an uneventful, normal life. That, in contrast to what we've witnessed for him is glaringly different. It, by comparison, makes the epilogue look lacking. Again, I like it.... (even though yes, I would have liked more info about other characters). Kimberly (for whom Deathly Hallows is by FAR her favorite book of the series even after only 1 read) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Tue Jul 24 21:05:40 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:05:40 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: DH: Right and Wrong Message-ID: <11863738.1185311140994.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172266 Here are the major things I got right and wrong (note that I am admitting stuff I got right and wrong WHILE reading the book, as well). A) My first post when I rejoined this list a few months back was my own expression of LOLLIPOPS. I count that as about 60% right, as I did not get how far back it went, or how much of a friend Lily was to Snape (and, therefore, how MUCH of a betrayal calling her a "Mudblood" was). B) Did anybody else, the second the doe Patronus appeared, say to themselves, "Snape!"? I did, and, for the life of me, I'm not entirely sure why it seemed so obvious to me. C) Snape's running away cinched it for me, though. Whatever else he is, Snape was no coward. D) My frequently repeated explanation of why Snape killed DD was dead on. But I'm still only giving myself a 95% for that, because I didn't figure out WHY DD kept his reason for trusting Snape a secret. But I was right in saying that he was DDM, but NOT a good guy. E) Deathly Hallows. Did ANYBODY get that right? F) The resurrection stone. I figured (wrongly) that because Sirius went through the Veil body and all, he was the one person the stone could truly bring back to life. G) Harry being a Horcrux. Well, I got that wrong, but at least it was for the right reason; my contention was that it could not have been on purpose or an accident, and JKR cleverly made it neither. H) Kind of cheating, but I knew that only the Morty piece in Harry had died. Only cheating in that I've seen it done before. However, I had no clue as to the fact that the gleam in DD's eyes at the end of GOF was due to the fact that Morty's method of re-embodiment ensured that Harry would survive. Oh, and I've seen the requirement for selfless sacrifice being the only way to avoid that sacrifice done before, but I had missed it this time. I) I listened too much to the ESE!Lupin stuff going on in this group, and suspected him of switching sides a couple of times. Also, Molly's hostility in the beginning was sufficiently strong that I suspected an impostor there, too. A few questions: 1) Re Ted: Does anybody else think that there was some premarital sex going on? And was he going to Hogwarts? Isn't he a little old? And who raised him? 2) Well, Harry is loaded (he was already wealthy with the Potter money, but now he has the Black fortune, not to mention his interest in George's joke company). But what's Ron doing for a living? My guess is that Hermione is the big earner in THAT family. 3) Does anybody know who the person who didn't use magic before who used it late in life was? Bart From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 21:07:42 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:07:42 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172267 Eggplant wrote: > I once said you couldn't have a good Snape and a good book 7, it > turns out I was wrong. I also said if JKR can figure out a way to > do it then she's an even better writer than I thought she was, it > turns out I was right, she really is a better writer than I > thought she was. > > But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of > the I love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading > the book you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? SSSusan: It's true confessions time, Eggplant, clearly. YES, I did! I actually felt very confident -- I mean, *very* confident! -- of my DDM!Snape position all along. I would listen to other arguments, I would read posts, but I always had a little inner smirk going, and a silent thought to myself, "I'm not budging; I think I've got this one nailed." (So I was very, very happy to find out I was right.) BUT. In the early parts of DH, after the scene at Malfoy Manor and after I looked back to confirm it had indeed been Snape who'd provided the 'four days before his birthday, not the night before' information, I had my first BIG moment of doubt about my position as a DDM!Snaper. (Not a Snape lover, mind you, but a full-fledged DDM! Snaper.) I actually put the book down, thought back... hard... to HBP and to things which various list members here have said (Nora, Alla, Neri, etc.)... and asked myself, "Can I look back at all that I took in HBP as support for my position and rework it to make it fit OFH! Snape or even ESE!Snape? Can I have been wrong?" I didn't actually sit down & write out all the Yeses and Nos, but I had, for truly the very first time, grave doubt about my position. Once I saw the silver doe patronus, I *hoped* that Snape was behind it and that all would be well, but I needed the ending to be certain. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who hadn't intended to post for awhile, but found all of Eggplant's thoughts quite moving From leahstill at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:07:59 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:07:59 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172268 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "clio44a" wrote: > > Finally, finally some serious discussion about DH. *clio bounces up > and down in her chair* > > Right. I'm still digesting DH, but this, trivial as it is, is right > now my most burning question: > In DH 'The prince's tale' we learn Snape's patronus is the doe. In 'A > flaw in the plan' Harry tells Voldemort that Snape has the same > patronus as Lily Potter. > Odd. How does Harry know? Am I overlooking something? I can't shake > the feeling that there was a conversation about this edited from the > book. (BTW, I am reading the British edtion, since the German > translation won't come out before October) > Someone please give me a hint. > > Clio Leah: I think Harry extrapolates the information from Snape's memories. At one point, Dumbledore asks Snape if he has come to feel some tenderness for Harry, and Snape responds by producing the doe patronus; Dumbledore says something like "Still her after all these years?" It is clear from the context of the memory scenes that the doe in some way represents Lily. Since Lily isn't of course a doe, and hasn't a name which means deer or doe,and was a feisty rather than a doe-like girl, then the obvious conclusion, I think, for Harry to draw is that the doe must be her patronus, which Snape has adopted. This also makes sense in that James' animagus figure (and perhaps his patronus) is the stag. Leah (wondering if Lily always had a doe patronus or whether her patronus changed when she met James, in which case poor Snape would have changed his too) From csh at stanfordalumni.org Tue Jul 24 21:05:04 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:05:04 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172269 I have mixed feelings about the title of the book. On the one hand, it is, IMHO, the central and ultimate theme of the seven books. On the other hand, it detracts /distracts from the Horcrux quest, but (going in circles now) maybe that's the point. The biggest problem I have with the Deathly Hallows theme is that it seems that Dumbledore never intended Harry to garner all three objects and become the Master of Death: as Harry states quite clearly, Dumbledore intended to die as the final owner of the Elder Wand, and it was only by accident that Harry (via Draco) becomes its owner. Yet he wills the Resurrection Stone to Harry and the "The Tales of Beedle the Bard" to Hermione. Could Dumbledore have changed his will while slumping on the Lightning Struck Tower? Could Dumbledore have known that Voldemort would pursue the Elder Wand and was trying to give Harry more knowledge about it and its relationship to the other two objects? Would knowledge of the Deathly Hallows help Harry in his search for the Horcruxes? Chuck Han From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 24 21:07:51 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:07:51 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <771932.76330.qm@web50409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172270 Goddlefrood wrote: > > > My biggest complaint I save until last: - > > To quote Ronald Weasley in an earlier work by JKR: > "How thick can you get?". How thick indeed. Lord > Voldemort has been shown to be rather less intelligent > than an amoeba. He never realised that Harry was > seeing what he did. Nary a thought was given to the > possibility that he should not under any circumstances > dwell on his Horcruxes, and yet he did, allowing Harry > to know where they were. Far too convenient a plot > device and eminently unsatisfactory to this reader. > Why, when he had apparently invested some time in > blocking the link between himself and Mr. Potter was > that link reopened? Couldn't Ms. Rowling have allowed > the trio to figure out the locations of the Horcruxes > in another way, thus cutting down on the listlessness > of their otherwise aimless search? > Goddlefrood, going back behind the scenes where he > belongs ;-) Anne Squires: I have to disagree with the idea that Voldemort showed Harry where the Horcruxes were. HSH figured out the locket in GP without any help from LV. Harry figured out that the cup was in the Lestrange vault after their encounter with Bellatrix. Harry had thought from the very, very beginning that a Horcrux was at Hogwarts. Hermione was the one who insisted that he was wrong. The vision fron LV did show Harry Hogwarts; but I maintain that Harry already knew this. Anyway, Harry figured out that it was in the ROR. DD told Harry about Nagini so Harry didn't need LV for this information either. Anne From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 24 21:01:23 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:01:23 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172271 Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? Eddie From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 24 21:13:58 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:13:58 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172272 > Betsy Hp: > Wishful thinking I'm afraid. No healing for the WW. Where Anne > Frank was able to look at the world around her and think, "I know in > my heart that people are good" (or words to that effect), JKR > apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know in my > heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half of them > are okay, and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates in > a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. Yeah. I'm pretty > much done with the series. Magpie: Yeah, I was surprised when people felt there was any better unity between the other Houses and Slytherin...as far as I can tell Slytherin seemed a lot worse than they had that first day Harry went to Hogwarts. Then they just seemed unsavory and I assumed it was his imagination. Their behavior in the battle hardly seemed to give anyone a reason to trust them more. All the Slytherins, to me, came across as essentially selfish and incapable of the kinds of choices Gryffindors could make--I wouldn't trust them. Snape was a Death Eater with a convenient obsession with Lily Potter, the Malfoys had the survival ability of cockroaches without any common sense about what was actually good for them. Regulus could be read as the one noble one, but frankly he seemed like he was working on his own private obsession and revenge as well. I guess Slughorn was the best--unsurprisingly given this is the guy who greeted Harry with "don't hold my house against me." What redemption those three had seemed strictly personal, and they still all seemed to be working at a lower level. I've been going back to JKR's interview about Slytherin and why the don't get rid of either the students or the house. I'd never read it before, but she was true to her word there. They're the bad part of the school, there to be accepted as bad. Oh well. I feel a bit like I just bumped my head on the ceiling unexpectedly. But crow's not bad when you get used to it--I may still not be able to enjoy the reading other people have had about the series all along, I fully admit that it was the reading the author probably was going for. The stuff I thought said otherwise turned out to just be plot points. -m From morpheo00924 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:03:08 2007 From: morpheo00924 at yahoo.com (luis padilla) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:03:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: epilogue Message-ID: <321673.10752.qm@web57309.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172273 spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler Luis: Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart Express? I mean, that scene was 19 years after Voldemort's death and Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so he should be 19 years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the train at that moment. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 24 21:14:17 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:14:17 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172274 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joe" wrote: > > Until Harry Potter and the Death Stick, book 8: Harry, now an adult with three children, is pulled out of retirement due to a sudden upsurge of dark magic and needs to retrieve the Elder Wand for one more adventure. Arrives in bookstores in early 2008. ;-) Hello Joe, My thoughts exactly! When I first read it (I've read the book twice now) I thought it was an okay way to end it all, and bring us back to the innocent wonder of the magical school through the next generation's eyes and so on, but now I see it as "Son Of Potter - The Malfoy Brat Raises Voldermort" and off we go again, but with new main characters who can be better or worse than their parents. After the second read through, the epilogue doesn't sit very easily in so far as it just seems rushed, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were desperate executives at Bloomsbury and various movie companies who were screaming "Give us a safety net! Give us anything! We need easy money!" over her shoulder all the time she was writing the book - and of course, why would JKR want to walk away from being a global phenomenon? Her next books, with new characters in a new world with new problems, probably won't catch on in the same way and rely on her name to leap off bookshelves. Or maybe I'm being cynical, and it really is just a randomly chosen year when the Potter, Weasley and Malfoy kids are going off to school..... Sandra x. From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:14:31 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:14:31 -0000 Subject: DH: I missed something. Who learned magic late in life? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172275 I missed something. Who learned magic late in life? The nearest I can think of is Voldemort learned there's more to magic than he thought, or perhaps because Harry understood it? Julie From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:04:04 2007 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (P. Alexis Nguyen) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:04:04 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172276 Phyllis: > I've never been a big "Harry as a Horcrux" fan - I've always thought > that Harry couldn't be as pure as he is if he had a bit of Voldemort > inside him. Doesn't Dumbledore tell him in Book 6 that Voldemort > underestimates the power of a soul that is complete and pure? And > how could Harry look into the Mirror of Erised and see nothing but > himself getting the Stone to protect it from Voldemort if a piece of > Voldemort was inside him? We've seen how powerful these pieces of > Voldemort can be, but perhaps it's different if the Horcrux isn't > made intentionally? Harry really wasn't an actual Horcrux, was he? > A bit of Voldy's unstable soul went into him, but I don't think that > makes him a Horcrux. In Slughorn's memory, when Riddle asks > Slughorn how to make a Horcrux, Slughorn tells Riddle "there is a > spell - don't ask me, I don't know!" So presumably there's more to > making a Horcrux that simply having your soul break off and go into > another object/person/thing after you commit murder. Despite this, > I thought the self-sacrifice this required of Harry was wonderful. Ali: I'm in agreement here, and I think, for us, it comes down to a matter of semantics, sadly enough. Like you, I can accept that a portion of Voldemort's soul latched itself, somehow, onto Harry, but as Horcrux-making was supposedly an evil art and one that requires a bit of research to learn how to make one, an "accidental Horcrux" seems immensely odd. Again, though, I guess it's just semantics since, whatever we choose to call it, the mechanics are the same, and it all comes down to a piece of Voldie's soul attached to Harry. Phyllis: > I was having a bit of trouble with the "rightful owner" of the wand > concept ? I could see how it worked for Draco, since he > actually "took" the elder wand from Dumbledore with a disarming > charm, but I was struggling with how it worked for Harry, since he > didn't actually take the elder wand from Draco ? he took Draco's own > hawthorn wand. <> Ali: Yup. I found this part particularly odd as well. When the wand thing was first explained, I thought that it was necessary that the wand itself was taken away, not merely that the owner was defeated, but then, I also supposed that, due to the elder wand having a history of evil, one has to kill the former owner in order to obtain the wand. Oh well. I was wrong with the latter; why not the former? :) Phyllis: > If Harry wasn't to be a goner, I thought we'd lose someone really > important (like Ron or Hagrid). But perhaps Rowling thinks killing > Dumbledore and Snape was enough. And losing Lupin and Tonks, when > they had just found happiness with one another and had just had a > baby, was tough (presumably Bellatrix killed them to "prune" her > family tree?), although it would have been more powerful if we could > have seen the deaths happen. Ali: Again, I agree. I was expecting the Trio to live but thought someone quite close to them, such as Hagrid, would die. Instead, a bunch of the other characters were killed instead, and the emotional impact on me, and I know I'm in the very small minority, was not large. We didn't get to see too many of the emotional deaths, and frankly, only the twins' terrifying moment kept itself in my brains and only because George lost an ear earlier. I felt like killing Lupin AND Tonks was unnecessary, especially them having just had little Ted, and I think the only reason I feel that way is because, not having seen any portion of their death, the emotional impact was lost on me and makes me annoyed that, by killing off Lupin, JKR has gotten rid of Lupin's chance to truly live happily, without terror, and has also also rid Harry of the final chance to, after the war when he does have time to think about such things, ask after his mother and father. Phyllis: > I fully expected to be vindicated in my conviction that Snape has > always been evil, particularly given how he did nothing to spare the > Muggle studies teacher from death, told Voldemort about Harry's > correct departure date, took part in the chase to kill Harry after > he left Privet Drive and Sectumsempra-d George's ear off (loved the > ear jokes!). If it was not covered in spiders, I would take my hat > off to all LOLLIPOPS believers (of which I was never one). Ali: I think I might well get some strong contentions on this opinion, but that's just how it is. JKR has yet proven to me that Snape isn't evil. In fact, while I always thought Snape wasn't good, I never even thought Snape was evil *until* this book. Let me explain that one before I get buried under the flames. Before DH, Snape was a man who stood for something. He did what he wanted and didn't worry about what others thought. He wasn't nice, but his methods had reason. True, his teaching Neville was less than desirable, but I've had teachers who've yelled and thought that served as motivation. Snape just wasn't evil; he was just awful and mean - he exemplifies Sirius' remark that the world isn't divided between good guys and Death Eaters. In DH, he was a guy who always went after the dark arts, wanted to be a Death Eater from very early on; he was someone who chose that over his friend Lily. (And don't even get me started on how much I dislike Snape-Lily.) In the end, I feel like JKR wanted me to believe that "Snape turned good for the love of a woman," but what I felt was that this man decide to *switch sides* for his own purposes. He didn't turn good; he bargained with Voldemort to save Lily first. Had it worked out that Lily was saved, I doubt that Snape would've worked for Dumbledore. Working for good didn't make him any less evil. Pah. (Yes, start sending the flames my way. I accept that my view is entirely unpopular.) Phyllis: > I didn't think it worked to have Ron open the Chamber of Secrets to > get out the basilisk fangs - either you know Parseltongue or you > don't - how could he fake it? If that were the case, presumably > Dumbledore could have made his way into the Chamber in Book 2. Ali: The last battle was filled with these little irksome points, at least for me. Ron faking Parseltongue. Percy joining the battle at the last moment and there being one giant family reunion. The fire in the Room of Requirement being exactly what was necessary to destroy the diadem. All tiny things that, sadly, meant that I didn't enjoy the book as much as I could've. Phyllis: > I could have done without the "19 years later" epilogue, especially > since the flow kept breaking when I had to pause to puzzle out who > was related to whom. I think Rowling probably felt a need to include > the epilogue to avoid being pestered for a sequel to explain who > everyone winds up with. But I thought the book would have ended > better without it. Ali: I think it's a matter of taste. I generally hate "happily ever after, tie everything up with a bow" endings, so it only follows that I would find the epilogue cloying. For people who do enjoy that sort of ending, it probably was nice knowing what the next generation of witches & wizards might be like. I think the book would've been much stronger without the epilogue; some others probably thought it was enjoyable and necessary. That's all I've got at the moment since I'm still at work and an overly long email would not be good. :) ~Ali [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 24 21:14:44 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:14:44 -0000 Subject: Loved it! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172277 Well, OK, TigerPatronus, I got almost all my predictions wrong - so what else is new? Definitely spoilers here! Beware spoilers! Spoilers ahead! I loved the way JKR did SnapeStory - StalkerSnape from childhood - to me that made James' and Sirius' dislike of him so very understandable, and yet, Snape's upbringing was toxic. Dumbledore's backstory - again, perfect. Makes him into a believable character for me; he was just too good otherwise. Hedwig killed at the beginning - OMG! warning - bumpy ride ahead! Yes, Ron's sudden ability to impersonate Parseltongue was lame. The Taboo on Voldemort's name, I thought, was a good move - neither side could explain why, or why not say his name - here's the reason! I got a bit confused about Tonks' father - I thought he was the one to do magic late in life, but he was a Muggle-born, not a squb or Muggle, I've been told. So who was it? I'm on my second reading now. Snape's dying scene - loved it. But has he died? Ah, well, plenty of fanfic will say no. ScarredNeville ROCKS! We've been waiting for Neville to come into his own for the whole series (well, I have), and here he is. Seems a bit of a let-down for him to be teaching Herbology. And we never heard anymore about the Mimbulus Mimbletonia - I was sure it was going to crop up somewhere at the end... As I was sure that the Department of Mysteries, the giants, Hagrid being the Keeper of Keys and many other things were giong to play a part in the defeat of Voldemort. Only thing is, which of the new generation will be the next Grindelwald/Voldemort? Someone on Sectus said (sorry, I can't remember who) that Riddle, Snape, Harry and now Teddy were the Lost Boys of Hogwarts. 'Nuff from me now, except to say: Many, many thanks to J.K.Rowling for letting us play in her world. AmanitaMuscaria From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:15:00 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:15:00 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <771932.76330.qm@web50409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172278 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Goddlefrood wrote: > > Where to begin? I disliked the book. I felt let down > after several years of, admittedly, rather high > expectations for the final installment. It had a > satisfactory outcome, but no more than that. The way > that outcome was reached was somewhat predictable > after the first two chapters of the novel. > <<>> > All the characters turned out very much as could have > been expected from a surface reading of the first six > books, and yes, that includes Severus Snape. >SNIPPAGE>>> > Dissatisfied really doesn't fit the bill after the > length of the wait and here I was believing that > satisfaction would be guaranteed. A forlorn hope as it > turned out, IMO. > > There was no evil Lupin, no evil McGonagall, no > further traitors in either the Order or amongst the > Death Eaters. This was all to be expected. Harry had a > task to fulfil and he did so, there was no need to > make it harder than it already was, and it was > certainly hard. >>>>SNIPPAGE>>> Goddlefrood KATIE REPLIES: I hear a lot of disappointment with certain things left unresolved, or certain characters not having a twist! at the end. Well, I have to say, none of that was canon. We all like to theorize, and we all like to read a lot into the books because we love them, but there is NOTHING in canon to suggest and ESE!McGonagall, or some of our other more outlandish theories. DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape DID spring from canon, as JKR left it very purposefully open to interpretation. Other than than, we were on our own. I did not expect anything out of this book, except for the series to end, and to end true to itself. DH definitely did that, for me. I loved the book. I thought it was moving, complex, more than a little heartwrenching, and in the end, very true to the story and the characters. I was incredibly pleased with it. (Except the epilogue, but that's another post...) That's my 5 for today, so see ya'll tomorrow!! KATIE, still lovin' HP and not disappointed in the least! From caleksandrova at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:16:13 2007 From: caleksandrova at gmail.com (Karina Aleksandrova) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:16:13 -0000 Subject: Parseltongue and Ron WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172279 Phyllis wrote: > I didn't think it worked to have Ron open the Chamber of Secrets to > get out the basilisk fangs - either you know Parseltongue or you > don't - how could he fake it? If that were the case, presumably > Dumbledore could have made his way into the Chamber in Book 2. Karina: I loved that bit, actually. I've been suspecting that Parseltongue is learnable since Dumbledore didn't ask Harry for translation of the Morfin's memory wherein he and Voldemort spoke exclusively in Parseltongue. It was a very significant dialogue too, not like the Parseltongue in Bob Ogden's memory. (And I think it's been said about Dumbledore that he knows many languages, and in particular Mermish in Book 4.) It doesn't detract from the Harry's kind of "innate" ability to speak Parseltongue without having to learn it, but I do like that others can learn it by listening to someone speaking it. It's nice to find out these kind of details Karina From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 24 21:19:07 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:19:07 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chuck.han" wrote: > The biggest problem I have with the Deathly Hallows theme is that it > seems that Dumbledore never intended Harry to garner all three objects > and become the Master of Death: as Harry states quite clearly, > Dumbledore intended to die as the final owner of the Elder Wand, and > it was only by accident that Harry (via Draco) becomes its owner. Yet > he wills the Resurrection Stone to Harry and the "The Tales of Beedle > the Bard" to Hermione. Could Dumbledore have changed his will while > slumping on the Lightning Struck Tower? Could Dumbledore have known > that Voldemort would pursue the Elder Wand and was trying to give > Harry more knowledge about it and its relationship to the other two > objects? Would knowledge of the Deathly Hallows help Harry in his > search for the Horcruxes? va32h here: You don't need all three of the Hallows in order for any one of them to work. Dumbledore left Harry the Resurrection Stone, in hopes that he would use it to summon up the courage to walk to his death. Dumbledore left Hermione the book, so she could explain to Harry what the stone was - but Dumbledore expected all this to take some time, so that Harry wouldn't use the stone prematurely and unwisely (as Dumbledore did himself). I am not certain if Dumbledore knew Voldemort would pursue the wand or not...there's a lot of confusing, conflicting stuff about the wand. At one point, Dumbledore says he intends to die willingly, thus ending the power of the wand, and at another point he says he intended Snape to get the wand...maybe he meant get it and get rid of it (Snape certainly doesn't use it). This is one of many areas that I think were very sloppily edited. I fear that the publishers' rush to time the book release with the latest movie resulted in a messy narrative. va32h From ekrdg at verizon.net Tue Jul 24 21:18:07 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:18:07 -0400 Subject: Teddy at King's Cross References: <321673.10752.qm@web57309.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00d601c7ce38$227d0ea0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 172281 spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler Luis: Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart Express? I mean, that scene was 19 years after Voldemort's death and Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so he should be 19 years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the train at that moment. Recent Activity a.. 609New Members b.. 3New Links Visit Your Group SPONSORED LINKS a.. Harry potter half-blood prince b.. Half-blood prince c.. Harry potter d.. Harry potter birthday party e.. Harry potter collectible Yahoo! News Kevin Sites Get coverage of world crises. Yahoo! TV Want the scoop? Check out today's news and gossip. Yahoo! Groups Moderator Central An online resource for moderators. . Kimberly here: Yes, that's been the question from a lot of people. In the book, it just says, "Guess who I saw......Teddy, he's back there, etc.". It doesn't necessarily say he was boarding the train. In fact, it says that when asked what he was doing..... pg. 756, "-and he said he'd come to see her off! And thenhe told me to go away." So yes, he was too old and he was only there to see her off. Kimberly [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From clio44a at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:21:17 2007 From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:21:17 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172282 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mindy" wrote: > > > 6) I am so confused by Dumbledore's speech during Harry's near-death > experience. The entire premise of the prophecy has completely > crumbled. If indeed, Harry couldn't die as long as LV was alive > because of his blood being in LV, and LV being unable to die as long > as Harry was alive because he was a Horcrux, how does that > explain "Neither can survive while the other lives" prophecy? > Like Mindy I am confused about the prophecy and the actual defeat of Voldemort. So I would like to expand above question a bit. What happened to 'the power the dark Lord knows not'? Does Harry defeat L.V. with something unique in any way? Discounting Snape's twisted love to Lily here, of course. Can it be true that he has the upper hand in the end only, because through pure chance he holds the wand (Draco's) that happended in a very questionable way to defeat the Elder Wand? Clio, rather confused From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Tue Jul 24 21:21:42 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:21:42 -0000 Subject: epilogue In-Reply-To: <321673.10752.qm@web57309.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172283 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, luis padilla wrote: > > spoiler > > > spoiler > > > spoiler > > > spoiler > > > spoiler > > Luis: > Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart Express? I mean, that scene was 19 years after Voldemort's death and Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so he should be 19 years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the train at that moment. Maybe he was seeing Victoire off? From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 24 21:23:33 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:23:33 -0000 Subject: epilogue In-Reply-To: <321673.10752.qm@web57309.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, luis padilla wrote: > Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart Express? I mean, that scene was 19 years after Voldemort's death and Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so he should be 19 years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the train at that moment. va32h: He isn't going to school. James says he is there seeing Victoire off to school. Teddy would be 19, Victoire is obviously Bill and Fleur's daughter, most likely born within a year or two of the destruction of Voldemort (henced the name meaning "Victory") which would make her 17- 18 and off to her 7th year. Teddy is just saying goodbye. From dougsamu at golden.net Tue Jul 24 21:24:55 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:24:55 -0400 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <2EA1C945-F9DE-4EDB-BDD0-865B25F92E4C@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172285 doug: If anyone knows of Comicbookworm and Storyteller... I don't remember which of you was so persecuted about the idea of that spare bit of soul seeking a warm body at Godric's Hollow, but boy doesn't it feel good to be right? Something in retrospect that is very obvious is that the whole story cycle is character driven, not technologically driven. This should have been a big clue that our ideas about soul bowling balls driving the Avada Kadavra were highly questionable. Ron, in one section, and Rowlings description in another though did affirm that Magic is a Mental... Mind, not soul, body or blood. So though I didn't, I think state that conclusion here at CoS, I did move to a Mind based source of Magic. Anyway, my very best wishes to you all. ___ __ From mundungus42 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:13:29 2007 From: mundungus42 at yahoo.com (Right Honorable) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:13:29 -0000 Subject: Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172286 rowena_grunnionffitch wrote, >Besides I enjoy feeling smug about being right on the pairings. I do find myself wondering who Draco married. If we're doing an all-out warm fuzzy fest, it ought to be Luna. And of course, the pitter-patter of Giant feet. Of course, there is nothing to indicate that Hermione and Ron are not amicably divorced. Of course, by the same token, there's nothing to indicate that Bill left Fleur for a Sphinx because Victoire turned out to be full Veela. ;) The epilogue wasn't my favorite chapter, but at least there's plenty of room to play between the lines. Cheers! Libby From twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:24:10 2007 From: twirliewirlie85 at yahoo.com (Jo) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:24:10 -0000 Subject: epilogue In-Reply-To: <321673.10752.qm@web57309.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172287 luis padilla No: HPFGUIDX 172288 In a message dated 7/24/2007 5:18:55 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, morpheo00924 at yahoo.com writes: spoiler spoiler spoiler Luis: >Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart Express? I mean, that scene >was 19 years after Voldemort's death and Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so >he should be 19 years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the train at >that moment. We weren't told that he was on the train, we were told that he was kissing a girl. Perhaps he was simply seeing her off. Neil ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:18:18 2007 From: andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com (andy_mycrib_1987) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:18:18 -0000 Subject: epilogue In-Reply-To: <321673.10752.qm@web57309.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172289 Luis: > Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart > Express? I mean, that scene was 19 years after Voldemort's death and > Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so he should be 19 > years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the > train at that moment. Hmm you're right. However we don't know that he was actually going to school. He might have been there just to see the others off. Andy_mycrib From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Tue Jul 24 21:28:49 2007 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:28:49 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172290 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eddie" wrote: > > Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > Eddie > I wondered if it was Sybil Trelawny. She was magical, but didn't seem to be able to consciously control it (those sherry bottles that she had to hide by using a magical object). But in the Battle of Hogwarts she's using her wand to throw crystal balls through the air. Pip!Squeak From andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:19:01 2007 From: andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com (andy_mycrib_1987) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:19:01 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172291 > Eddie wrote: > > Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? Nobody, I don't think. Was someone supposed to? andy_mycrib_1987 From pswann at kc.rr.com Tue Jul 24 21:19:39 2007 From: pswann at kc.rr.com (pswannkcrrcom) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:19:39 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172292 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > I wonder whose loss affected you most? pswann For me...Hedwig. This loss was totally unexpected and devastating. I mourn the people we lost but they had a choice about fighting. Hedwig was an innocent--just taking care of Harry. From bridgetteakabiit at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:14:16 2007 From: bridgetteakabiit at yahoo.com (bridgetteakabiit) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:14:16 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172293 Clio > In DH 'The prince's tale' we learn Snape's patronus is the doe. In 'A > flaw in the plan' Harry tells Voldemort that Snape has the same > patronus as Lily Potter. > Odd. How does Harry know? Am I overlooking something? I can't shake > the feeling that there was a conversation about this edited from the > book. When I first read the section about the doe, I immediately thought of Lily. Since James' was a Stag, it made sense to me that Lily's, his wife, would be the female equivalent. Maybe that's where the idea came from. My pressing question is: what was so important about Lily's eyes? I thought there was supposed to be some big huge important thing about how Harry had Lily's eyes. Dumbledore points out Harry's eyes to Snape, but I couldn't get anything more out of it, except maybe that's what encouraged Snape to help protect Harry? I was totally shocked that Harry was a Horcrux, even though it made sense. The whole "limbo" section where he was talking to Dumbledore completely threw me off, and I don't think it was really explained where they were, how they got there, or why Dumbledore was there too. I feel the book spent too much time describing them running and hiding, and should have spent more time explaining! Bridgette From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 24 21:29:51 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:29:51 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172294 > Ali: > I think I might well get some strong contentions on this opinion, but that's > just how it is. JKR has yet proven to me that Snape isn't evil. In fact, > while I always thought Snape wasn't good, I never even thought Snape was > evil *until* this book. Let me explain that one before I get buried under > the flames. > > Before DH, Snape was a man who stood for something. He did what he wanted > and didn't worry about what others thought. He wasn't nice, but his methods > had reason. True, his teaching Neville was less than desirable, but I've > had teachers who've yelled and thought that served as motivation. Snape > just wasn't evil; he was just awful and mean - he exemplifies Sirius' remark > that the world isn't divided between good guys and Death Eaters. In DH, he > was a guy who always went after the dark arts, wanted to be a Death Eater > from very early on; he was someone who chose that over his friend > Lily. (And don't even get me started on how much I dislike Snape- Lily.) In > the end, I feel like JKR wanted me to believe that "Snape turned good for > the love of a woman," but what I felt was that this man decide to *switch > sides* for his own purposes. He didn't turn good; he bargained with > Voldemort to save Lily first. Had it worked out that Lily was saved, I > doubt that Snape would've worked for Dumbledore. Working for good didn't > make him any less evil. Pah. (Yes, start sending the flames my way. I > accept that my view is entirely unpopular.) Magpie: No flames from me. If you want support, that's what I got out of it too. A very small redemption, one that leaves me looking back on Snape's behavior throughout the books and finding him a lot less of a character than I thought he was. And I thought Snape *was* good. I never doubted for a second he was DDM. I had argued with Dana that being a double agent doesn't mean you can't also have had a true epiphany and become a different person. I still believe that's possible, but her description of Snape was the correct one. And I must add I find Harry's naming his son after this guy frankly bizarre. It's strange enough naming him after Dumbledore given the weirdness there. But naming your kid after the guy who treated you badly all your life because he hated you and got your parents killed with less than total regret, because it turned out he protected your life as part of his obsessive love of your mother the whole time? Yeah, that's...creepy. I also found Luna and her father creepy. I basically ended this book glad to leave the world behind the way I found it, which is where I seemed to be leaving it. -m From cassandralee1120 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:26:55 2007 From: cassandralee1120 at yahoo.com (Cassandra Lee) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:26:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <786036.53412.qm@web53811.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172295 Eddie: Who came into magic late in life? Did I miss it? ~~~~~~~~ I think that it was Ted Tonks. Wasn't he a muggle? Or was he just muggle-born? I would have to pull book 5 off the shelf and see. But I think that it was him, because he's the one that mended Harry after the bike crash. Cassandra Lee From entangledhere at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:31:58 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: My DH Review Message-ID: <23667.91157.qm@web51404.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172296 Hello all! I don't post often, due to time constraints, but I always read. Now I want to hear if anyone agrees with me about this bizarre final book. Here's my review: http://www.fanfiction.net/s/3288453/35/Harry_Potter_and_the_Progeny_of_the_PureBlood Cheers! *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 joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 21:30:44 2007 From: joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net (Joe) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:30:44 -0000 Subject: epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172297 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "andy_mycrib_1987" wrote: > > Luis: > > Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart > > Express? I mean, that scene was 19 years after Voldemort's death and > > Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so he should be 19 > > years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the > > train at that moment. > > > Hmm you're right. However we don't know that he was actually going to > school. He might have been there just to see the others off. > > Andy_mycrib > I thought about his being 19, too, and when he was snogging Victorie, I figurd he was there to say goodbye to her. From aida_costa at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:10:04 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:10:04 -0000 Subject: What about Minerva? And Snape as a big softie? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172298 I agree with what's already been said but must add this: Why was Minerva given such little page space?? I would have liked to see a proper epilogue in which Harry speaks to Minerva in the Headmaster's/Headmistress' office in front of Dumbledore's and Snape's portraits. (And where's Snape's portrait???) Minerva was Harry's Head of House and a very important figure throughout the series - I wonder if she was one of the people that got a reprive? That would make sense to me because it seems JKR didn't know what to do about a proper ending. Conversely, Remus' and Tonks' deaths seem very tacked-on, to me. I didn't mind the sappy shippiness of the 'Nineteen Years Later' pseudo-epilogue (it *IS* a children's book!), but prior to that chapter I would have liked a proper epilogue. Just narration even, no dialogue required. What about the funerals? What about restoring the Ministry? What about Harry telling the Order members about the pensieve scene? Anyway, 'Snape as Heathcliffe' is a little puke-inducing because I think Heathcliffe had no redeemable characteristics at all, but at least Snape is a big softie underneath it all. However, his death was so cold and unfeeling. Couldn't he at least have had a scene trying to defend himself??? As for Snape's love for Lily seeming creepy and obsessive - I think she wrote him as being wracked with guilt for getting her killed. How could that ever leave anyone's mind?? Even Dumbledore was wracked with guilt over Ariana and Harry was wracked with guilt over Sirius! Ultimately, I take the theme of the series to be 'Love conquers all'. Love will redeem people and love is what's most important. Aida From csh at stanfordalumni.org Tue Jul 24 21:27:25 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:27:25 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172299 > va32h wrote: > You don't need all three of the Hallows in order for any one of them to > work. Right, but you need all three to become the Master of Death. And while Harry (unknowingly) becomes the Master of Death and then finally rejects the subsequent immortality, it would have been a tighter story if Dumbledore had cleared the path for Harry to become the Master of Death as the ultimate weapon to defeat Voldemort, but Harry rejects it BEFORE defeating Voldemort. Yes, Harry can only become the true Master of Death by his choice to sacrifice himself, but, again, the story would have been stronger if he willingly sacrificed himself while thinking that was also a rejection of becoming the Master of Death (not knowing, of course, that it was the only path to becoming the Master of Death). Chuck Han From andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:22:09 2007 From: andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com (andy_mycrib_1987) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:22:09 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172300 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chuck.han" wrote: > > The biggest problem I have with the Deathly Hallows theme is that it > seems that Dumbledore never intended Harry to garner all three > objects and become the Master of Death: as Harry states quite > clearly, Dumbledore intended to die as the final owner of the Elder > Wand, and it was only by accident that Harry (via Draco) becomes its > owner. Yet he wills the Resurrection Stone to Harry and the "The > Tales of Beedle the Bard" to Hermione. Could Dumbledore have > changed his will while slumping on the Lightning Struck Tower? > Could Dumbledore have known > that Voldemort would pursue the Elder Wand and was trying to give > Harry more knowledge about it and its relationship to the other two > objects? Would knowledge of the Deathly Hallows help Harry in his > search for the Horcruxes? andy_mycrib_1987: Well Dumbledore did give Harry two of the Deathly Hallow items. He gave him the Invisibility Cloak during his 1st year at Hogwarts and he gave him the Resurrection Stone in this book. As for the Elder Wand, the only way that Harry could have gotten it from Dumbledore was if Harry defeated Dumbledore (and we all know that was never going to happen). Perhaps Dumbledore knew that if Draco was the one to disarm him (even if Snape killed him since that death was pre-planned), then Draco would be master of the Elder Wand instead of Snape. I have no idea how he thought this would help Harry get the Elder Wand, but I'm just thinking off the top of my head here lol. From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Tue Jul 24 21:30:16 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:30:16 -0000 Subject: Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172301 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Right Honorable" wrote: > > rowena_grunnionffitch wrote, > >Besides I enjoy feeling smug about being right on the pairings. > > I do find myself wondering who Draco married. If we're doing an > all-out warm fuzzy fest, it ought to be Luna. And of course, the > pitter-patter of Giant feet. Of course, there is nothing to indicate > that Hermione and Ron are not amicably divorced. Of course, by the > same token, there's nothing to indicate that Bill left Fleur for a > Sphinx because Victoire turned out to be full Veela. ;) > Now you're just being difficult. :D Besides I want Luna to marry Neville. Poor Draco will probably get stuck with Pansy, she's just had her eye on him since first year. Personally I agree with Bilbo Baggins 'and they all lived happily ever after' is an excellent ending! From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 24 21:29:35 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:29:35 -0000 Subject: snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172302 "mark_anders01" wrote: > > Could somebody actually tell what the Order tangibly gained from Snape > being so close to Voldemort for all those years? He risked and lost so > much but I cannot recall one specific piece of information that he was > able to give to the Order. > > Incidentally, loved the book especially Neville making the final > difference with the horcruxes as he had done with the house cup back in > book 1 > > Mark > Anne Squires: In OotP DD was able to use Snape to plant the idea that LV go after the prophecy at the DOM. The prophecy was bait the get LV to reveal himself to the WW. In HBP Snape revealed the whole plot by LV to have Draco Malfoy kill DD. In DH by making LV think that Snape was still his right hand man by revealing when Harry would leave no. 4 PD this ensured that Snape would be placed at Hogwarts where he could mitigate the worst of the Carrows being there. (Remember, Ginny, Nevile, and Luna had a detention with Hagrid instead of with the cruciatus curse.) Snape could also be in place to communicate with DD's portrait. Snape rescued the sword and gave it to Harry. If he hadn't been at Hogwarts he wouldn't have been able to do this. From andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:36:15 2007 From: andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com (andy_mycrib_1987) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:36:15 -0000 Subject: Harry's Parseltongue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172303 I got the impression after reading "Deathly Hallows" as well as "Chamber of Secrets" that Harry could only speak Parseltongue because he had a bit of Voldemort inside him. Since he destroyed that part, then would it be logical to assume that he can no longer speak Parseltongue? I'm just speculating here, but what do you think? and_mycrib_1987 From kirsten at kirstenmunson.com Tue Jul 24 21:20:07 2007 From: kirsten at kirstenmunson.com (klmtapir) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:20:07 -0000 Subject: epilogue In-Reply-To: <321673.10752.qm@web57309.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172304 > Luis: > Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart Express? I mean, that scene was 19 years after Voldemort's death and Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so he should be 19 years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the train at that moment. He wasn't getting on the train -- lil' James said that "he'd come to see [Victoire] off!" So Victoire is still at Hogwarts, but Teddy is apparently all finished up. And a cradle-robber. klmtapir From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 24 21:42:40 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:42:40 -0000 Subject: epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172305 > > > Luis: > > Is it just me or Lupin's son should'nt have been at the Hogwart Express? I mean, that scene > was 19 years after Voldemort's death and Lupin's son was already born at that moment, so > he should be 19 years old in the epilogue, therefore having no business been at the train at > that moment. > > He wasn't getting on the train -- lil' James said that "he'd come to see [Victoire] off!" So > Victoire is still at Hogwarts, but Teddy is apparently all finished up. And a cradle-robber. > > klmtapir > Anne Squires; A cradle robber? Come on, a nineteen yr old with a seventeen yr old isn't a cradle robber. From prep0strus at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:42:00 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:42:00 -0000 Subject: Confused about wand rules (plus Lee rocks!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172306 Thought the book was good, aside from the slow camping period, but I am confused about some of the new rules regarding wands. So, a wand (specifically the elder wand) can change mastery if you a) slice the owner's throat while they're sleeping, or b) defeat the owner in battle, even if you defeat them with a simple expelliarmus spell and they're not even using the wand? That's what I get from draco getting control of the wand from dumbledore, and then harry getting it from draco. But the part I have a difficult time with is... why didn't voldemorte gain control when he 'killed' harry? I think that was as much a defeat as draco gave dumbledore and harry gave draco, if not more. And I'm also confused about the parts of harry and voldemorte which were in each other, and who would die at what point... but I imagine that will be discussed a lot. (But, if dumbledore's plan had gone appropriately, and Snape was the elder wand's master... would harry have died in that final battle, with voldemorte living? cause that don't seem right) I also didn't like Dumbledore knowing to give ron his gift - i do think it shows a lack of faith in ron, plus an unnatural ability to see into the future. plus, i hated that whole plot point (we've been over the jealousy and lack of faith in all the previous books) and i think the book would've been stronger and tighter without it. Finally, YEAH LEE JORDAN!!!! Man, I called it... I was so bitter he wasn't in book 6, I said everywhere how i felt he should have a radio show that spoke the truth the ministry didn't want the world to know, and i'm sure that's not unique, so i'm sure jkr came up with it herself... except she didn't - she totally stole it from me, and i'm awesome! :) ok. more than enough for now. thanks for anybody's help with the wand rules confusion. From andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:34:54 2007 From: andy_mycrib_1987 at yahoo.com (andy_mycrib_1987) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:34:54 -0000 Subject: Parseltongue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172307 I got the impression after reading this book (as well as after reading "Chamber of Secrets") that the only reason why Harry could speak Parseltongue was because he had a little bit of Voldemort inside him, literally. Since he destroyed that part of himself, then wouldn't it make sense that he no longer has this ability? I'm just speculating here, but I want to know what you all think? From joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 21:45:39 2007 From: joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net (Joe) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:45:39 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: <786036.53412.qm@web53811.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172308 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Cassandra Lee wrote: > > Eddie: > Who came into magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > > ~~~~~~~~ > I think that it was Ted Tonks. Wasn't he a muggle? Or was he just muggle-born? I would have to pull book 5 off the shelf and see. But I think that it was him, because he's the one that mended Harry after the bike crash. > > Cassandra Lee > I thought he was muggle, too, but when he started doing magic I had to look it up and it said he was muggle-born. Joe From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:31:53 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:31:53 +0800 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A66FC9.7060701@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172309 Hi, folks. Well, it's over. Really over. It was a good ride, but the final secrets have been told, the final page turned. Personally, I felt that, in terms of character and plot development, while the series started out strong, it peaked in HP5; HP6 and 7 were marred by too many missed opportunities, and the whole series by a couple of nagging irritants, and one near deal-breaker. I'll have to agree with another reviewer that JKR's strength lay in the characters she created and their relationships. If I had to pick a favorite character, my vote would have to go to the entire Weasley family; Harry and his willful stubborness managed to annoy me just once too often. As to HP7 specifically, I didn't find the whole Deathly Hallows storyline worked particularly well. I understand what JKR was trying to do, but in the end, I just didn't feel it integrated well into the overall narrative. As to Snape, I really was hoping he would turn out good, just to teach Harry a lesson about the complexities of adults; unfortunately, I think JKR shot herself in the proverbial foot in HP6 (more on that later), and failed to satisfactorily extract herself from her dilemma. So first, those two nagging irritants: Creaky Prose ------ ----- While JKR has an incontrovertible gift for story-telling, unfortunately, too often her creaky prose distracted. I won't say it was always distracting, by there were certainly times I found myself cringing at a bit of over-wordiness, or an awkwardly cast sentence. Perhaps my training as an English educator biases me, but I certainly enjoy clever wordplay and a well-turned phrase. Reading HP was like taking a long, exciting journey over occasionally bumpy roads; just when things start getting really hectic, a sudden jolt and a jar would distract my attention from the story. This was particularly apparent while reading the climatic battle in HP7; rather than being able to fully enjoy the story, a part of me was distracted by the unpolished prose. No Magic for the Magical -- ----- --- --- ------- Do you wish to look? For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe; though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem also to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy. The above words, from The Lord of the Rings, were spoken by Galadriel, queen of the immortal Elves, to Samwise in response to his desire to see elf-magic. The thing that kept nagging me throughout the HP series was simply this: the magical do not believe in magic. That is, the magical would no more view their gifts as magic than a sighted person would call his ability to perceive objects at great distances, or communicate without words wizardry, whatever a blind man might believe. Magical, wizardry, witchcraft -- these may be labels applied to the magical by others, but not labels the magical would ever take to themselves. Like Galadriel, we would be puzzled at most, bemused at best, by a blind man's views of our extra sense. And just as, in the sighted world we do not send our children to schools of sight and seeing, so in the magical world there would be no schools of witchcraft and wizardry. Sight to the sighted may be fundamental to nearly everything we do, and fundamentally shape our perceptions of the universe; but we do not take classes to learn how to see. What bothered me most about this was the missed opportunity. It's simply apparent to me that, just as our gift of sight presents us with a fundamentally different view, and understanding, of the world around us than those who lack sight (don't believe me? Try describing the night sky to someone who has no concept of light), so those with magical giftings would find the universe a fundamentally different kind of place than those of us without. I would have enjoyed some explorations of those differences, in terms both metaphysical and psychological. As CS Lewis in Out of the Silent Planet, or Zenna Henderson in her stories of The People, JKR had the opportunity here to show us something of ourselves, to explore our humanity by taking us outside ourselves to reveal how we might have been. Lewis' race of un-Fallen beings shines a light on our Fallenness; Henderson People, communities of magically endowed extra-terrerstrials attempting to exist in a society that fears and misunderstands them, show us a bit of the darker side of our humanity. I found Henderson's explorations of the psychology and communities of The People fascinating. I would have loved to have seen some of that in HP, as well. And for those who might argue that this was, after all, a children's series, I would note that a) JKR herself denied she was writing children's books; and b) I first encountered, and fell in love with, Henderson's People when I was eleven or twelve years old. While I wasn't old enough at the time to understand what it was that made the People so compelling, they were, and remain decades after I last read the stories, unforgettable. And, finally, the near deal-breaker: Moral Inconsistency ----- ------------- But I thought they were bad? My 11-year-old actually asked me this as we read HP7 together, and I had no answer except to say I thought JKR was wrong. He was referring to the Unforgivable Curses. From Wikipedia: "The Unforgivable Curses ... are so named because their use is ... forbidden and literally unforgivable in the Wizarding World. Use of any of these spells on any human being can carry a life-sentence in the magical wizard's prison of Azkaban." The thing is, I had had more than one discussion with my son previously about what made the Unforgivables unforgivable, and why a good person could not use them. Then came the end of HP6, when Snape uses the Avadra Kedavra to kill Dumbledore, and Harry attempts to use the same on Snape. At the time, I explained to my son that Harry, caught up in his grief and his anger, made a mistake, as even good people sometimes do. But for Snape no redemption was possible. Cold, calculated, premeditated, his use of the Curse had put him beyond all possibility of salvation. That is, if unforgivable had any meaning at all. Which, apparently, it does not. From Wikipedia again: "However, in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the Unforgivable Curses are used liberally by good characters, ranging from Professor McGonagall with the Imperius Curse, to Harry effectively using the Cruciatus Curse. He also uses the Imperius curse on several goblins." And, apparently, at least one good character uses the Avadra Kedavra, though JKR doesn't call it by name. That the good guys started liberally throwing around the Unforgivables is bad enough. But JKR compounds the moral issue here in the way in which they do so without reluctance or hesitation, without so much as a hint of moral compunction. When Harry Imperiuses the goblins at Hermione's almost casual suggestion, no less -- he might have been casting a Hot Air Charm for all the reticence he exhibited. For all intents and purposes, in HP7 JKR just seems to ignore the moral component of at least two of the Unforgivables, and, both in Mrs. Weasley's dispatching of Bellatrix, and the way she attempts to extract Snape from his moral predicament, apparently the Avadra Kedavra as well. As you can guess, I do NOT think the fact that Dumbledore arranged the whole thing excuses what remains, to my mind, an act of murder. All of which, in light of the moral discussions I had had with my son, left me feeling a bit (well, more than a bit) betrayed. CJE Culver, Taiwan From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 24 21:46:34 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:46:34 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172310 First Ali: In the end, I feel like JKR wanted me to believe that "Snape turned good for the love of a woman," but what I felt was that this man decide to *switch sides* for his own purposes. He didn't turn good; he bargained with Voldemort to save Lily first. Had it worked out that Lily was saved, I doubt that Snape would've worked for Dumbledore. Working for good didn't make him any less evil. Pah. (Yes, start sending the flames my way. I accept that my view is entirely unpopular.) Then Magpie: > No flames from me. If you want support, that's what I got out of it > too. A very small redemption, one that leaves me looking back on > Snape's behavior throughout the books and finding him a lot less of > a character than I thought he was. And I thought Snape *was* good. I > never doubted for a second he was DDM. I had argued with Dana that > being a double agent doesn't mean you can't also have had a true > epiphany and become a different person. I still believe that's > possible, but her description of Snape was the correct one. > > And I must add I find Harry's naming his son after this guy frankly > bizarre. It's strange enough naming him after Dumbledore given the > weirdness there. But naming your kid after the guy who treated you > badly all your life because he hated you and got your parents killed > with less than total regret, because it turned out he protected your > life as part of his obsessive love of your mother the whole time? > Yeah, that's...creepy. Now va32h (me): Agree with you both, it is the thing that made me not just disappointed but ANGRY at the book. This was our big redemption? Snape the Stalker? Snape who would have cheerfully watched the Longbottoms be slaughtered, because after all, he never had the hots for Alice? No nonsense about atonement or remorse, no realization that it is morally wrong to kill people, Snape is just mad at Voldemort for killing the wrong person. There were no redeemed villians in this story - none! The Malfoys acted for themselves, sure Narcissa lied to Voldemort - because she wanted to save her son, not because she realized "hey this Death Eater thing is sadistic and wrong." No, more like "he this Death Eater thing isn't working out so well for us, personally." Regulus Black is the closest we get to a Death Eater with a change of heart, and even then we have to fill in a lot of the blanks ourselves. Going just on the text, Regulus is another willing Death Eater who is just terribly sentimental about his elf. So in the end, the good guys are really, really good, and the bad guys are really, really bad. And why did we need 7 books for this revelation? I will say that I have more or less calmed down, and am able to find redeemable qualities in the book (even if there are none for many of the characters). va32h From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:46:53 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:46:53 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prince=92s_Tale?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172311 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marika_thestral" wrote: About her ending the friendship I don't know what to think. I wish we had learned more about this, from Lily's point of view. Did she end it because he had become ruder in general and was no longer a good friend (hard to believe from how sincere his appolgies seemed to be) or because she actually knew for sure that he disliked muggleborns and wished to join Voldemort? - than she defenitely did the right thing. Did she on the other hand end it because of his unlikable friends (just assuming he was like them), and because of what he called her (but regretted)? In that case I think she did wrong. It was never her job to change him or to save him, but a good friend doesn't turn his/her back to a best friend without leaving an opening (if he changed they would become friends again) unless having a good reason for doing so. Lisa: I've always had my doubts about Lily being sooooo good and "everyone" loving her. From what we've been shown, I think that, even though Lily didn't like those Snape hung around while they were at Hogwarts, she valued his friendship as the one who introduced her to her magical abilities and told her what to expect at Hogwarts. And now, from this new information we've seen on Snape, I feel that he was very much like Sirius -- which is why they hated each other so much, obviously -- born into a family that was involved in the Dark Arts, yet clearly didn't feel as they did, at least as far as Muggle- borns went, or he'd've avoided Lily like the plague. Instead, he was happy to find someone like himself. Sirius was fortunate to land in Gryffindor and make the strong friendships he did; Snape (sorted too early, perhaps, per Dumbledore) landed in Slytherin, with no real choice but to make friends with those in his House-Family. Harry ASKED the Sorting Hat not to put him in Gryffindor -- likely, all Snape had heard was that it was the "best" option. Can you imagine being a Slytherin but hanging out with Gryffindors? He'd've been subject to the same (or worse) treatment than he received from the Marauders. Clearly, Snape was mortified at James' treatment of him in front of Lily -- and then having everyone see his humiliation at having a "girl" stand up for him and not being able to help himself was more than he could bear, and he lashed out at Lily. What's that old song: You always hurt the ones you love? Granted, he called her a horrible name -- but if she REALLY felt that he felt that way, she would've severed ;0) their friendship long before that incident. So, Lily was not a forgiving person -- she didn't even give him a true chance to explain or beg forgiveness. What a friend. From rkelley at blazingisp.net Tue Jul 24 21:41:29 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Ricky & LeAnn) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:41:29 -0500 Subject: The perfect ending of my favorite book Message-ID: <007e01c7ce3b$664b6d40$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> No: HPFGUIDX 172312 Yep, I love, love, loved it! It was so fast-paced and exciting that I couldn't put it down until I finished. I got a few predictions right - DD wasn't always St. Dumbledore, but I really bombed a few, too - okay, so Trevor the toad wasn't a transfigured human. (Although, it's still possible, you know...) I have a few nitpicking criticisms like most everyone else. IMO she left too many dangling threads (What happened to Umbridge? Did the dementors get her, or is she living on forever, creating havoc for all good wizards and their children? What were James and Lily's occupations? Why is Peeves only controllable by a ghost who committed murder/suicide? What kind of horn was in the Lovegood house? Did Harry become an auror? Is Teddy a werewolf? Where is George Weasley? Did Hagrid and Olympe make beautiful mini-giants together?) The epilogue should have either been much richer in detail or left to imagination completely. We should have known one of the twins was toast - Monday morning quarterbacking now tells me it was foreshadowed way back in book 4 with "Kill the spare". For me the best thing (since I'm a Christian) was the way I could see the Christ story in the ending. In my thoughts, who else could Jo have been thinking of when she gave us a hero who never killed, offered aid even to his enemies, and willingly allowed himself to walk to certain death in order to save the world by his sacrifice? And then when he returned, because of that sacrifice those who followed him were protected - not from physical pain and death, but from spiritual evil. This additional thought may bring wailing and gnashing of teeth, but I even saw a touch of John the Baptist baptizing Jesus when Harry dove into the lake and Ron brought him back up. Maybe it's a stretch but I now equate Ron with John, and Potter with carpenter, which was the vocation of Jesus, as well as reminding me of the Christian saying, "He is the potter, we are the clay." My daughter tells me I'm crazy and I'm just reading what I want to into the book, but it is what it is to each of us. I know many of you will disagree with my belief, and that's fine, but please accept this grandmother's right to her own views. Know that it makes my heart sing to have what is, for me, the perfect ending. May you all find joy and strength in these books as I have, whatever they say to each of you personally. Thanks, Jo, for letting me ride the Hogwarts Express with you. It was one heck of a ride! Anders From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:47:05 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:47:05 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter as a "Classic" Series Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172314 Hello all, Well, I think I only posted 4 times before now, so hopefully, the List Elves won't get me! I hear some people saying they'll never read the series again and some other such nonsense. Why? Would be my question. Now that I know HRH makes it through, I can't wait to read them ALL over again, and share them with my children and my grandchildren... These are classic books, on the level of LotR and Narnia. At least to me. This is a classic story, and she stuck to the appropriate happy ending. I saw someone else had quoted Bilbo on this point, and I agree. Of course the book wasn't perfect. No book is. But she has brought magic back into my life, and made me remember the best of myself at moments when that seemed unlikely, and these books hold a lot more whimsy AND profundity than most adult novels I can think of. It's a classic, no doubt, that will be read for generations. At least in my family! Cheers, Katie From ekrdg at verizon.net Tue Jul 24 21:46:54 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:46:54 -0400 Subject: The reprieved person... Message-ID: <01aa01c7ce3c$27b3c180$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 172315 was Mr. Weasley. TLC has a link to an interview with JKR in which she states this. Also, she WILL write a HP encyclopedia !!!!!!!!! :-) Kimberly "Don't bother me, I'm reading..." 7/21/07 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:48:55 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:48:55 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172316 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" wrote: > > I wondered if it was Sybil Trelawny. She was magical, but didn't seem > to be able to consciously control it (those sherry bottles that she had > to hide by using a magical object). But in the Battle of Hogwarts she's > using her wand to throw crystal balls through the air. Lisa: No, Trelawney used magic to mend or clear away a cup and saucer that Neville broke earlier in the series. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:51:26 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:51:26 -0000 Subject: DH: Epilogue, Unforgivables and Other Quick Thoughts In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0707241305t29b58639q61c1177bc00c632a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172318 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, elfundeb wrote: > > In some corners there is disappointment because the defeat of Voldemort was > not accompanied by changes in the WW. The Statute of Secrecy is still > there, the House system remains at Hogwarts Lisa: I think the Houses balance each other out well. I would've liked to have seen Dumbledore's comment to Snape come to fruition and have the sorting come later in their school career -- perhaps in their 4th year, giving the 1st-3rd years some time to become comfortable in their new surroundings and allowing them to form friendships that would continue after sorting? elfundeb: > Too many Unforgivables were cast by Harry and co. There may be concepts in > Wizarding law of self-defense and heat-of-battle exceptions, but I found > this unforgivable simply because JKR made them Unforgivable and used that > very point to illustrate how little separated the Death Eaters and the > Aurors under Barty Crouch Sr. Lisa: Weren't we told that during the last war, the bans were lifted on Unforgiveable Curses in order to effectively fight against the Death Eaters? elfundeb: Snape > was not DDM because he liked DD's agenda, but for his own, personal > reasons. TEWW EWW (and the desire for personal redemption that fueled his > loyalty to DD thereafter) is much more OFH! than DDM!, which I suspect is > one reason why many Snapefans are more distraught at the outcome than those > who were sure he was ESE! Lisa: Personally, I never cared "why" he was on the right side, I just knew that he was! From Englishlady at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:20:47 2007 From: Englishlady at gmail.com (Aryn Culbertson) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:20:47 -0000 Subject: Opinion: Hey everyone else is submitting one!! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172319 Thought I would de-lurk for this one. I have yet to receive my UK copies, but I just had to read one anyway. DH was a very good ending, long reading, but Brilliant. Ms. J.K. Rowling must have enormous pressure to complete this story line in such a way that she was comfortable with, and her public would be comfortable. This could NOT have been easy. The only issue that really stood out for me, was definitely the Epilogue. It did seem rather odd to "jump" ahead 19 years, but then again I did NOT write the story. It would have been more interesting to me to learn more about some of the other characters also, but alas such as life. Tis really a sad thing, the end of an Era. So Ms. Rowling, please allow this fellow English/Scots Lass to say, humbly, "Thank You from the bottom of her heart and soul" for a wonderfully Brilliant adventure of the past 10 years. Sincerely (Cheeres!!) L. Aryn From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:44:37 2007 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:44:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: my take on the deathly hallows (may contain spoilers) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <295820.10224.qm@web39503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172320 after reading the book and taking some time to think on it (with help re: re-reading parts) here is what i feel on the book: i liked the book, maybe not LOVED the book but i liked it. i do have parts i liked and parts i didn't what i liked: - Dumbledore's past. cool, awsome--couldn't have guessed JK would have come up with that and i felt it worked. - felt vindicated that it was LILY that had snape working for good. - felt vindicated that it was LILLY and her magic abilities that soured petunia against the wizarding world. - liked the fact that molly kicked belatrix's butt - was glad lupin and tonks got married and had a son. parts i didn't like: - the fact a number of deaths were rushed (ie; remus/tonks and moody) - the fact the dursleys were not mentioned again as a family unit after the first chapter and it was not discussed as to if they ever returned to their lives and did harry REALLY never see them again... - the fact that nothing was mentioned of what the potters did (seeing as it HAD been stressed that what they did for a living was important) and maybe a hint of how they defied lord V. - and the epilouge i had wanted an epilouge but more along the lines of a 'dear reader' or something of a narrtive where a line or two was devoted to each characture saying what happened/where they went and what happened to the wizarding world in gen. and giving the reader a sense that life got on after lordV died. well that is my 2 cents worth laurie ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 From smickey1223 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:45:17 2007 From: smickey1223 at yahoo.com (smickey1223) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:45:17 -0000 Subject: Occulmency Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172321 I wonder if Snape was deliberate in his failure to teach Harry Occulmency knowing it might serve a greater purpose to have a clear connection between the two. Perhaps this is just wishful thinking on my part but the increased connectivity certainly seemed to give Harry (and wizard kind) the upper hand. Any thoughts on this idea? smickey1223 From kirsten at kirstenmunson.com Tue Jul 24 21:10:46 2007 From: kirsten at kirstenmunson.com (klmtapir) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:10:46 -0000 Subject: Two big questions about DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172323 First, I can answer one question: Goddlefrood wrote: Another thing about which a reaction would be welcomed was the ludicrousness of the whole sword in the lake moment. Why not just leave it in an easily accessible position? klmtapir: Dumbledore told Snape (in The Prince's Tale) that "the sword must be taken under conditions of need and valor". So he couldn't just leave it on the ground for Harry to find. My main question, and I really hope I've missed something, because it seems like a big one to me: How did Dumbledore win the duel against Grindelwald? Grindelwald had the Elder Wand - - the wand that could never be beaten in a duel. I guess Grindelwald could have been using a different wand, but that seems unlikely, since he wanted the wand for world domination and all that. And my second question, which has no canon answer, but I'll put it out there anyway: How can Harry be sure the powers of the Elder Wand will die with him? Apparently, all anyone needs to do is disarm him, whether or not the Wand is in his possession at the time, and ownership of the Wand will be passed on. Seems a little sloppy to me. On the whole, I loved the book, and was amazed at the number of tiny details that were seamlessly tied in to the series. Reading DH was so difficult.... how can I sit and enjoy a book if I never want it to end? JKR has worked some real magic -- I can't put my finger on what exactly it is about the HP series that is so compelling, but I thank her for it. - klmtapir From joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 21:54:06 2007 From: joemurphyus at sbcglobal.net (Joe) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:54:06 -0000 Subject: Confused about wand rules (plus Lee rocks!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: > > Thought the book was good, aside from the slow camping period, but I > am confused about some of the new rules regarding wands. > > So, a wand (specifically the elder wand) can change mastery if you a) > slice the owner's throat while they're sleeping, or b) defeat the > owner in battle, even if you defeat them with a simple expelliarmus > spell and they're not even using the wand? That's what I get from > draco getting control of the wand from dumbledore, and then harry > getting it from draco. But the part I have a difficult time with > is... why didn't voldemorte gain control when he 'killed' harry? I > think that was as much a defeat as draco gave dumbledore and harry > gave draco, if not more. > The whole getting control of the wand by disarming someone of a differnt wand bugged me, too, and I was thinking right after Harry decided to re-bury the Elder Wand with DD that if Harry is walking down Diagon Alley one day with his own wand in his hand and someone uses Expelliarmus on him (saying "Just joking, mate.", they can then go to Hogwards and pull the Elder Wand from DD's cold dead hands and be its master because he had disarmed Harry? Of course if someone wanted to do a bit of fan fic about that where the thief went on a killing spree and Harry was called to stop him...hmm, maybe I'l do that. ;-) Joe From cottell at dublin.ie Tue Jul 24 21:53:32 2007 From: cottell at dublin.ie (muscatel1988) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:53:32 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172325 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" > Wishful thinking I'm afraid. No healing for the WW. Where Anne > Frank was able to look at the world around her and think, "I know in > my heart that people are good" (or words to that effect), JKR > apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know in my > heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half of them > are okay, and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates in > a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. Yeah. I'm pretty > much done with the series. I'm not sure that I would go quite as far as that, but your post reminds me of a lot of things that I've been thinking recently. Specifically, I thought during HBP that JKR had blown the moral arc. So much of what had gone before had been predicated on Dumbledore's "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." That was, at the time, the supreme moral lesson of the books, and Harry was the embodiment, the intended embodiment, of that lesson. Then we reached Tom Riddle's back story, and choice was at every turn undermined: he was, in his creator's words, a sociopath. His ancestry and the circumstances of his birth were what had made him what he was, and, crucially, we were shown no point where he made the choice. Since all he is is what we were shown, for the moral lesson to hold water after that we needed to read that choice. JKR chose not to provide it, and in doing so, dealt a terrible blow to what she had herself claimed to be doing. I'm not saying that an author has to be morally consistent - I'm saying that if we are led to expect it, we have have a right to do so: we don't mind Jeffrey Archer's lack of a moral framework, but we would be right to object if George Eliot dismissed hers. So we came to DH, and we find the White Hats casting Unforgivables with ease. They were shocking in GoF because they were palpably and instinctively evil. Harry's attempt at one at the end of OotP underscored the point - it is not in our hero's nature to hate enough. Two books on, and it now is. (There is also a technical problem - spells are not simply knowing what you want to do and waving your wand. Ron's failure to turn Scabbers yellow and his difficulty with Wingardium Leviosa, and much of the Potions book storyline, tell us that spells must be learnt. How then can Harry, and the others, cast the Unforgivables by desire alone, never having learnt them?) "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." That sentence is, for me, the judgement on Dumbledore. His overarching choice was to raise Harry as a pig for slaughter. Snape recoils at the idea; it is hard not to. So I think my unease during HBP was warranted. There is no coherent moral universe here, and I was led to believe there was. There was one motif that appeared first just after Harry's sorting, though, and it was wonderfully maintained. 'It happened very suddenly. The hook-nosed teacher looked past Quirrell's turban straight into Harry's eyes - '(PS (UK, 94), which blew past me not once but twice, and it ends with "Look...at...me" (DH (UK, 528). And we remember Snape trying fruitlessly to teach Harry Occlumency, forced to stare into those eyes for hour after hour, and reading in them only dislike. That's good, that's very good. Poor Snape. That said, it's been a helluva ride, and I enjoyed most of it hugely. Thanks, Jo. And from this poster, who's only posted here a couple of times before, but lurked often, thank you to all of you. You've made me think and you've made me laugh. From prep0strus at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:53:51 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:53:51 -0000 Subject: What about Minerva? And Snape as a big softie? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172326 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Aida Costa" wrote: > > > As for Snape's love for Lily seeming creepy and obsessive - I think > she wrote him as being wracked with guilt for getting her killed. How > could that ever leave anyone's mind?? I dunno. If Snape WASN'T obsessed with Lily, he never even would've joined the Order. He would've kept on being evil. I know we're supposed to see redemption in Snape... but he's still just a bitter little man who was only saved from complete evil by becoming obsessed with one good person. Does Harry's son really deserve his name just because Snape turned out only to be a big obsessive jerk, but not evil? And I don't think he was even that useful at the end. It was nice to get some exposition and backstory, but... i dunno. I thought he was placed to do something useful, not just place info on to harry at the right time. And Minerva didn't get much time, but I enjoyed the time she did have in this book. She ends the series one of my favorite characters. I wouldn't've minded seeing her shove it to Umbridge somehow. Not nearly enough sticking it to Umbridge in my opinion. From tonyaminton at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:51:47 2007 From: tonyaminton at gmail.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:51:47 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: References: <786036.53412.qm@web53811.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172327 > > Eddie: > > Who came into magic late in life? Did I miss it? > Tonya: Personally I think it is Neville who came in to magic later in life. Remember how his family didn't think he was magical enough to get into Hogwarts?? Remember how he was always melting cauldrons?? Then around the DA time he started doing really well. My thoughts, Tonya > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From spaebrun at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:53:29 2007 From: spaebrun at yahoo.com (spaebrun) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:53:29 -0000 Subject: Snape, mostly (was:Re: My Officially First Deathly Hallows Post!!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172328 "colebiancardi" wrote: > LOLLIPOPS - in its full > glory, sickly sweet and cloying. To quote > the-medium-that-must-not-be-named!Snape, I think I will vomit ;) Reed: Well, I was always firmly in the Snape-is-not-evil camp and I am okay with Snape-loves-Lily in principle and expected it, but nevertheless I must say, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you say about Chapter 33. It was *awful* - not in the idea, but in the way to present it. First of all, it was way too long. The kid scenes were much too drawn out and gave little necessary information (the whole Petunia thing has no purpose in Snapes memories, in my opinion. It should better have been addressed at the beginning, before the Dursleys leave). After that it seemed that JKR tried to address every plot element where Snape appeared evil and to really rub in how unfortunte and pitiable he was. And how GOOD! Even George's ear was just an *accident*. Pleeease! It was all so into your face that I cringed the whole chapter. I guess part of it is the pensieve trap: By having a device like the pensieve, JKR had the opportunity to elaborate endlessly on Snape's backstory (because you life flashes by when you die, right, nicely ordered, featuring the most sappy scenes concerning your lost love...). Apart form that, Harry's reactions were very feeble, too. Neither did his hate for Snape flare up before he witnessed him being killed, nor was there a proper reaction when Harry found out that he had been wrong about Snape all along. Such a *waste*! "colebiancardi" wrote: > And > can I say, what a crappy death scene. Even if you hate Snape, it is > lame. Snape - a powerful wizard - gets killed by having a snake > dropped on his head????? And he didn't *have * to die - he wasn't > the master of the Elder Wand. And don't tell me that Snape didn't > take precautions with Nagini around - what, he doesn't drink an > anti-venom potion before going into LV's lair? Reed: I didn't mind this part so much, actually. It shows once again Voldemorts absolute coldness and that Snape didn't have to die is precisely the bitter part about it. And he didn't die from the venom, he died from the bite that ripped open his neck. "colebiancardi" wrote: > What the heck was DD's comment to Snape about "sorting too soon" > because Snape was brave? Are we to believe that Dumbledore, a > champion *against* the whole sorting of the Houses, is stating that > anyone *not* in Gryffindor is *not brave*? Was this just a > back-handed compliment or a snide comment, because Snape certainly > looked taken aback by that comment. I thought DD was *against* the > Houses and their stereotypes. And I hope I was not the only one that > was shocked that the House thing was still in play 19 years later!!! > And the old biases as well.... Reed: You weren't. It bugged me a lot, too. Why weren't there Slytherin students hinding in the Room of Requirement? Why weren't there at least *a few* Slytherins who helped defending the school? Slughorn stayed, didn't he? Why not show that there are decent Slytherins in the young generation, too? Really the only 'good Slytherin' we learn about in this book was Snape and then this remark to him - it really implied that he should have been a Gryffindor. So we learn that all decent people are Gryffindors at heart, or what? I was really disappointed that the whole sorting thing was never really questioned. Book 5 talks so much about uniting the houses, and what do we get? 3 houses against Slytherin. Bad message. *sigh* Reed, who's mostly lurking, but was so put out by Chapter 33 that she had to post. ;-) From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Tue Jul 24 21:53:50 2007 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:53:50 -0000 Subject: Snape's Redemption WAS Re: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172329 > Magpie: > No flames from me. If you want support, that's what I got out of it > too. A very small redemption, one that leaves me looking back on > Snape's behavior throughout the books and finding him a lot less of > a character than I thought he was. And I thought Snape *was* good. I > never doubted for a second he was DDM. I had argued with Dana that > being a double agent doesn't mean you can't also have had a true > epiphany and become a different person. I still believe that's > possible, but her description of Snape was the correct one. > Pip!Squeak: The Prince's Tale Chapter does show Snape's moral redemption; it shows it happening slowly, year by year. At the beginning of Snape's going over to Dumbledore he's doing it to save Lily. He doesn't care if James and Harry get killed. It's certainly not an instant epiphany on Lily's death. He agrees to protect Harry reluctantly, because Lily would have wanted it. When the kid turns up he doesn't even like him. And Harry certainly doesn't like Snape! And Lily is dead. He can get nothing, *nothing* out of this except the satisfaction of doing something that the girl he loved would have wanted. He won't get praise from Dumbledore, he won't find himself Harry's loved godfather with Harry as a surrogate son, he is going to get offed by Voldemort if LV ever finds out. So for reasons that are originally obsessive love (there are also hints in the chapter that he is bitterly remorseful that he got Lily killed), he starts to do something where (unlike when asking LV or DD to save Lily) he can't expect the slightest reward in this life. By the end of the Chapter, sixteen? years later, he's described as looking horrified at Dumbledore's plan to use Harry as sacrificial victim. He says he no longer allows people to die if he *can* save them. And later on we find that his cutting off George's ear was accidental, he was trying to save Lupin. Oh, and when he kills Dumbledore, his expression is 'revulsion and hatred' - for what he's got to do? So the redemption is there. His attitude at Lily's death is one thing, by the time of his own death, his attitude has changed, grown, developed. He's no longer someone who doesn't care about collateral damage, for a start. Pip!Squeak From briandav at melbpc.org.au Tue Jul 24 21:33:41 2007 From: briandav at melbpc.org.au (Brian Richard Davis) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:33:41 +1000 Subject: The Sword Of Griffendor Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070725060723.0200fb38@melbpc.org.au> No: HPFGUIDX 172330 OK, we picked up the book at 9:10am. We started reading it at 9:30am at McDonalds. My daughter finished it at 11:10am the next day and I finished it at 6:30pm. The one thing I had trouble with is how did Neville Longbottem get the Sword of Godric Gryffindor out of the sorting hat when he stood in front of Lord Voldemort to kill the snake? As Griphook had the sword after the battle of Gringotts and there did not seem any way in the story for the sword to get back to the school. My daughter thinks it is because the sorting hat is some sort of gateway, to fetch the sword from wherever it is, to wherever it is required, as happened in the Chamber of Secrets. Brian From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:00:29 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:00:29 -0000 Subject: The return to normalcy (Was: The (Hated) Epilogue) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172331 Katie wrote: > > No, I didn't love the epilogue, either. It was trite and lite and > didn't fit with what we know of the series, the characters, or JKR's > writing. I felt like she had written it a long time ago (which she > did actually do, right?) and then felt she couldn't, or shouldn't, > alter it. > > > All that said, I did love seeing Hermione and Ron together. I was > never a huge fan of Harry/Ginny, so that was just ok. I also loved > the comment Harry made about Snape being one of the bravest men he > had ever known. That made me cry. I also enjoyed hearing that > Neville was the Herbology prof, and that Hagrid was still at > Hogwarts. But aside from those things, I didn't love it. It was a > snapshot, really, not an epilogue. > Carol responds: I think we were all expecting the epilogue to be a wrap-up telling us what happened to all the survivors. But I think it served a different purpose, establishing a new normalcy for a new generation, who with luck might actually befriend the Malfoy boy, or at least tolerate him, instead of starting out as enemies like James immediately assuming that Severus is scum because he wants to be in Slytherin or Harry desperately wanting to be placed anywhere other than Slytherin because of Draco Malfoy. So even though we still have sorting into houses, at least the rivalry may be more tolerant this time around. Primarily, though, the epilogue makes it clear that Harry can now live rather than survive, he can be "just Harry," as he's wanted to be from the moment he found he was famous. (He can live with his fame now; his younger son doesn't even know that his father is "really famous.") We see Harry and Ginny and Ron and Hermione as proud parents (the names Hugo and Rose seems to come out of nowhere, but the boy's name starts with his mother's first initial and the girl's with her father's). The orphaned Teddy Lupin, Harry's godson (presumably raised by poor bereaved Andromeda and a consolation to her) is about to find happiness with Bill and Fleur's daughter Victoire (can't imagine them having sons). "Give Neville my love" shows that the Potter family is very close to the Herbology teacher (we all knew he'd get that job). As a whole, the epilogue is JKR's way of establishing, without really needing to say so in that last sentence, that all is well. But even if I hated the rest of the epilogue, which I don't, it contains my favorite lines in the whole book, which I can't even think about, let alone read and type, without crying: "'Albus Severus,' Harry said quietly . . . . 'You were named for two headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin, and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew'" (DH Am. ed. 758). Thank you for speaking those words, Harry. Thank you for writing them, JKR. Carol, wondering if readers would like the epilogue better if they hadn't been expecting it to be a summary of who's doing what and who's married to whom From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:01:50 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:01:50 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172332 Okay, rambling and squealing and crows eating ?V lots of it. But I think it is normal for the first post, lol. So, without further adieu let??s start. I loved the book. I loved the book so very much, even though she incorporated so many things I did not think will come true. But the way she did made me so emotionally satisfied. Bravo, JKR. For me it was always Harry??s journey first and foremost. I felt his pain, I cheered for his triumphs, I am immensely happy that she kept the focus on Harry and his close friends SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ?V Harry lives, he lives, he lives, he lives, he lives. I cannot be more pleased, really and truly. I also cannot be more pleased that JKR rewarded Harry for all his suffering with something I always thought he wanted most in the world ?V a family and that she showed it to us. In short I cannot be more pleased with the epilogue. Yeah, it was overly sentimental, but to contrast so much pain, it seemed to fit very well to me. Oh, yes, crow eating obviously. YUM. Crow number one is obviously DD! M Snape. No, I was not **shocked**, the fact that I always kept in mind that possibility that I did not want to come true and did not think will come true, may come true nevertheless helped a lot ?? But of course I was wrong that the plan to kill Dumbledore did not exist. Oh well. But oh my goodness this woman is such a great writer. See, I read the epilogue first and when I read Harry naming the child Albus Severus, I of course realized that Snape is DD!M, hahah, so I thought I will be forced to give Snape his dues as DD!M Snape, as somebody who rejected Voldemort??s values, etc. Heee, what did I see instead? I saw a creep greedily watching a girl and never letting this obsession go. I am guessing that JKR meant to show that Snape truly loved Lily, but that is not what I took from the book. Oh, oh and even though Dumbledore turned out to be more manipulative than I ever thought he will be ( another crow for me, but smaller size), I was so very pleased that he did not turn out to be nearly as manipulative as some predictions. Dumbledore had nothing to do with telling Snape to go and give prophecy to Voldemort, didn??t he? And he did not possess Trelawney or anything to that effect. I was incredibly happy about that. And I was so happy to see Snape coming to DD and not giving a **** about the lives of James and innocent baby he just sold out. Pathetic creep indeed. You disgust me Snape in Dumbledore??s words. Oh, oh and Snape **bargained** with Dumbledore for Lily??s life, no less. I hope the author of **TOO EWWW TO BE TRUEEEEE** would stand up and take a round of applauds from me. Bravo. So, I am fascinated how JKR presented DD!M Snape with the Dumbledore asking him to kill him, which I was so very **sure** would not happen and still left me plenty of room to be disgusted by Snape and like Dumbledore. I mean, I felt sooo bad for Dumbledore throughout the book, I cried when he is telling Harry at the end ?V I crave your pardon and I always knew that you are a better man. I say poor Dumbledore indeed. Hmm, what other crows I should eat? Oh Prank of course, I thought it would be important and we are due further revelations and it so was not. Another crow would be that I was sure that Hagrid will die. But JKR just had to let live Harry??s father figure that I liked the least. I guess what matters is whom she likes the best, heehhe. The scariest part of the book for me is probably Ministry registering Muggle borns. That gave me such strong real life vibes of Nazis persecuting Jews, oh my goodness. I could not help it. I cried. That also reminds me to give Nora a round of applauds for her ??WW as fascist world???? essay. Right on that was ?? Heeee, well, I want to pat myself on the back for guessing correctly something as well. JKR does not seem to have much love for Slytherin house in general, does not she? I mean, she shows us a couple good Slytherins ( if one can call Snape good) from older generation, but when all houses are preparing to fight Hogwarts, Pantsy ( please I hope somebody killed her) is ready to sell Harry out and the others are you know, leaving. That tells me nothing of JKR RL values, really, just as the fact that she did not specifically punish Snape tells me that she is a child abuse supporter, lol. It just tells me that she from the beginning designated House Slytherin as the house of evil ideology and maybe some people can make a break from it but not all? Harry, Harry, Harry. I have to count ways how many times I was so proud of him throughout the book. And I am sure I will do it many times, but his ??does it hurt to die?? just got to me and I was crying again when I read it. She wrote that part so believably to me ?V how scared he was and still trying to be brave. And his chat with Dumbledore was probably my other very favorite Harry moment in the book. Love, love, love. Oh, oh Remus Lupin is not evil and had never been evil, he just poor, depressed, heroic and now dead man. YAHOOOOOOOO. And there was **no traitor** in the order, like at all. YAY. I cried for him and Tonks and I loved that JKR just showed them fallen already. I think the main point she was going for with the deaths is that during the war most deaths are not spectacularly heroic, they are just senseless and make you ask why and get no answers. Sob. Heeee, to get to Snape for a second, I guess his death makes my point as well that she wanted to show suddenness and senselessness, but at the same time I cannot help but smile at the delightful irony JKR brought there ?V potion master dies from poison with no chance to get an antidote or anything like that. As I said, I still hate the character, probably more than before, but I also cannot help but be happy as to the end JKR brought for him. Oh, oh and no recognition except from Harry, that noble soul. I applaud Harry. He is a very forgiving man indeed. I wanted confrontation between Snape and Harry so badly, but now I cannot help but think that JKR??s way is so much better. She would not let Snape taunt Harry ?V haha, I am Dumbledore??s man, (or is he?) who loved your mother, Harry just learns it all afterwards. Since it also now seems that Lily was all that Snape wanted all his life, I am happy imagining that in the afterlife Snape will be watching Lily in James?? arms for eternity. I think that is a great justice, personally. I was a little afraid that I will start crying even when I read about Snape??s death, but I found it just funny. There is so much I want to say and will say and say and say later on. But I just want to mention one more thing. Aberworth Dumbledore rocks my world. He so does. First he handles himself so well against DE, he saves the Trio and he to me voiced all concerns that I had with Dumbledore, lol. And Harry defending Dumbledore. Snif. Cave is so much more sad for me now. And Dumbledore did not **fake** anything in the cave, he was reliving true horrors of his past. So, yeah I am amazed how JKR made me like the character so fast. Alla From clio44a at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 21:57:12 2007 From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:57:12 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172333 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bridgetteakabiit" wrote: > > Clio > > In DH 'The prince's tale' we learn Snape's patronus is the doe. In 'A > > flaw in the plan' Harry tells Voldemort that Snape has the same > > patronus as Lily Potter. > > Odd. How does Harry know? >SNIP< > My pressing question is: what was so important about Lily's eyes? I > thought there was supposed to be some big huge important thing about > how Harry had Lily's eyes. Dumbledore points out Harry's eyes to > Snape, but I couldn't get anything more out of it, except maybe that's > what encouraged Snape to help protect Harry? > >SNIP< > > I feel the book spent too much time describing them running and > hiding, and should have spent more time explaining! > > Bridgette > I wholeheartedly agree with your last sentence Bridgette. On Harry's eyes: I thought it was not Lily's eyes themselves that were important, but the fact, that Harry has inherited them. That throught all the James facade of Harry still a bit of Lily shines through. So Lily's eyes are the constant reminder for Snape that Harry is Lily's son, no matter how much he looks like James. It is like having tatooed 'my mother was Lily Evans' on his forehead. BTW, I found it one of the most touching scenes in DH, that Snape's dying request is for Harry to look at him. He virtually dies looking into Lily's eyes. (Talk of obsessive love!) Twisted, but really sweet. On the doe: Of course it is obvious, that a doe as the stag's mate symbolizes Lily. But does that necessarily mean that Lily had a doe patronus? And btw what would that teach us after 30 years of feminism, if Lily Potter defined herself over being the docile mate of someone cool? And where does say about Snape's mindframe, if his patronus flashes at him: Not yours! Clio, who loved the book, but hated the epilogue. Rosie (LoftR, anyone?) and Scorpius? Give me a break! From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:05:43 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:05:43 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prince=92s_Tale?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172334 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > Clearly, Snape was mortified at James' treatment of him in front of > Lily -- and then having everyone see his humiliation at having > a "girl" stand up for him and not being able to help himself was more > than he could bear, and he lashed out at Lily. What's that old song: > You always hurt the ones you love? Granted, he called her a horrible > name -- but if she REALLY felt that he felt that way, she would've > severed ;0) their friendship long before that incident. So, Lily was > not a forgiving person -- she didn't even give him a true chance to > explain or beg forgiveness. What a friend. > Leslie41: First I want to state that I'm a Snape fan. Knew he was DDM. And he's the character out of the books that I most admire. After DH I admire him even more. But Lily did the right thing. It's not just that one word that one time. She'd been warning Snape about his friends for years. She could have forgiven the word if Snape made a clear choice not to align himself with Malfoy, Caxley, et al. But these proto-Death Eaters are bad news. The DEs are akin to Nazis. And Lily, in that environment, is akin to a Jew. It's clear that Snape did not listen to her at all when she spoke against them. Finally, she realizes that Snape's use of the word is indicative of a much larger problem: that he has chosen a different path. She exercises tough love and cuts herself off from him. She cannot continue to be friends with someone that would ally themselves with a group that has such antipathy towards her and her family. Had Snape repented, severed ties, and asked for forgiveness again, I have no doubt she would have welcomed his friendship. But he does not. He makes his choice. And lives, and dies with it. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 21:58:50 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:58:50 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172335 "AmanitaMuscaria" wrote: > Yes, Ron's sudden ability to impersonate > Parseltongue was lame. I don't find it lame at all, not even a little! Yes Ron couldn't discuss the subtleties of Ludwig Wittgenstein's philosophy in Parseltongue as Harry could, but he did know one word of the language, just one word, "open"; he knew that word because he heard a very good friend of his say it. I mean, would it stretch your mental capacities to the breaking point to learn ONE word of Chinese? Couldn't you manage one word? Eggplant From carodave92 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:08:57 2007 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:08:57 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172336 While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle initial of F... From smickey1223 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:04:38 2007 From: smickey1223 at yahoo.com (smickey1223) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:04:38 -0000 Subject: The Sword Of Griffendor In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070725060723.0200fb38@melbpc.org.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172337 >> Brian: >> The one thing I had trouble with is how did Neville Longbottem get the Sword of Godric Gryffindor out of the sorting hat when he stood in front of Lord Voldemort to kill the snake? >> >> My daughter thinks it is because the sorting hat is some sort of gateway, to fetch the sword from wherever it is, to wherever it is required, as happened in the Chamber of Secrets. << Brian I believe your daughter is correct. The Hat will give the sword to any true Griffendore who is in need of it. Smickey1223 From labyrinths_of_coral_caves at yahoo.de Tue Jul 24 21:53:36 2007 From: labyrinths_of_coral_caves at yahoo.de (Gwenhwyfar) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:53:36 -0000 Subject: Who's that creature?!? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172338 Good day to you all... Okay I have rushed to the end too quickly and soon and so on. But I think somehow I did not read carefully. But what is that FREAKING creature when Harry meets Dumbledore at the King's Cross? Gwenhwyfar From tifflblack at earthlink.net Tue Jul 24 22:10:26 2007 From: tifflblack at earthlink.net (tiffany black) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:10:26 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DH: Short - A continuity error? or some other explanation? (chapt 9 spoiler) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000a01c7ce3f$70f2a480$6401a8c0@TIFFANY> No: HPFGUIDX 172339 spoiler) Gary says: This kind of jumped out at me on my first read. Early on, Hermione reveals that she altered her parents' memory and sent them packing to Australia. Later, in chapter nine, (around page 190-200 or so, I don't have the book at hand here at work) they were going to do a memory charm on the two death eaters that went after them in the cafe, and when Ron said he'd never done a memory charm, Hermione claimed that she had also never done a memory charm. So how did she alter her parents' memory without a memory charm? Is this a simple continuity error, or is there some other way of altering memories that she might have used on her parents? Trivial issue, of course, but I found it mildly annoying. Other than that I thought the book was fabulous. --gary Tiffany: Could she have done a confundus charm on her folks? 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 __________ NOD32 2374 (20070703) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com From mike_wiltse at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:09:18 2007 From: mike_wiltse at yahoo.com (mike_wiltse) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:09:18 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172340 Ali: I felt like killing Lupin AND Tonks was unnecessary, Mike: Lupin was worried about his son growing up under the shadow of his fathers curse. Instead he grew up the son of heroes who died in the final battle against Voldemort. I think she was trying to make his life easier, and kill off a couple more important people at the same time. From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:13:33 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:13:33 -0000 Subject: Who's that creature?!? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172341 How about the soul piece of LV that is no longer inside Harry? ---- --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Gwenhwyfar" wrote: > > Good day to you all... > Okay I have rushed to the end too quickly and soon and so on. But I > think somehow I did not read carefully. But what is that FREAKING > creature when Harry meets Dumbledore at the King's Cross? > > Gwenhwyfar > From doliesl at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:14:28 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape is still Evil? [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) Message-ID: <434749.32139.qm@web82208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172342 Ali: I think I might well get some strong contentions on this opinion, but that's just how it is. JKR has yet proven to me that Snape isn't evil. In fact, while I always thought Snape wasn't good, I never even thought Snape was evil *until* this book. Let me explain that one before I get buried under the flames. Before DH, Snape was a man who stood for something. He did what he wanted and didn't worry about what others thought. He wasn't nice, but his methods had reason. True, his teaching Neville was less than desirable, but I've had teachers who've yelled and thought that served as motivation. Snape just wasn't evil; he was just awful and mean - he exemplifies Sirius' remark that the world isn't divided between good guys and Death Eaters. In DH, he was a guy who always went after the dark arts, wanted to be a Death Eater from very early on; he was someone who chose that over his friend Lily. (And don't even get me started on how much I dislike Snape-Lily.) In the end, I feel like JKR wanted me to believe that "Snape turned good for the love of a woman," but what I felt was that this man decide to *switch sides* for his own purposes. He didn't turn good; he bargained with Voldemort to save Lily first. Had it worked out that Lily was saved, I doubt that Snape would've worked for Dumbledore. Working for good didn't make him any less evil. Pah. (Yes, start sending the flames my way. I accept that my view is entirely unpopular.) D: Your view would be unpopular because you brush off entirely comes after in canon, everything what Dumbledore's backstory brought about and the themes running in the series, and how causally you throw the word 'evil' around. Lily being target was Snape's final wake up call. Kind of like when Draco found himself unable to kill Dumbledore, there's a 'line' some people are unable to cross. Snape realized the dark reality and even though he already begged Voldemort for sparing Lily, his conscience still led him to seek out Dumbledore. He didn't ask for anything in return, except he'd "do anything". When the Sirius/Peter's switching plan fail, Snape wanted to die, but Dumbledore pull him around and use his to do good (to protect Harry, to spy) instead of having Snape self-destructed or consumed by vengence. How "evil" is a man who feel remorse and willing to work the rest of his life for atonement? The "Snape is EVIL" people tend to ignore what comes after - the memories showed us a Snape who grow from having Lily's death as a side-switching wake up call and guilt/love as motivation, to an agent who ultimately worked for the great good. I've heard all these 'for his own purposes only', 'selfish' readings on Snape. But let me ask you what would Snape gain for personal purpose by saving all those people they mention while undercover? What would he gain by trying to save Lupin? Dumbledore specified him not to do anything that will give him away during the ambush, yet he chose to save Lupin on his own...he had no fondness for Lupin nor it's related Lily in any way. He just did it naturally because it was the right thing, not for gloat nor gratitude. When Dumbledore was cursed by the ring, Snape was genuinely angry. He felt the same revulsion and hatred as Harry when being asked to kill Dumbledore. Again all these are unrelated to Lily nor any of his 'personal purpose." You're ignoring these 'saving people, doing the right thing' part of Snape. And ultimately, everything Snape's risk for, he gain nothing...Lily's not coming back. Other than working out Dumbledore's plan to aid Harry in defeating Voldemort. That being his life goal and reason to live. He gained no friend nor gratitude from neither side as a spy. Dumbledore was his sole confidant. He's being scorn by the same side he worked for, but he endured it all. He isn't afraid of death. That is 'evil' in your eye? I'd just say you're determine to see what you want to see. At least I agree with JKR, and Harry, that Snape is the bravest man. D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Tue Jul 24 22:13:09 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:13:09 -0000 Subject: Who's that creature?!? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172343 > Gwenhwyfar wrote: >But I > think somehow I did not read carefully. But what is that FREAKING > creature when Harry meets Dumbledore at the King's Cross? colebiancardi: I thought that was the bit of Voldy's soul left in Harry. That is the best I can do...if that wasn't it, you got me hanging on what it was. From mike_wiltse at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:00:56 2007 From: mike_wiltse at yahoo.com (mike_wiltse) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:00:56 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172344 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis" wrote: > However ... I thought Harry being protected by Lily's sacrifice > because it lives on in Voldemort's blood would mean that, when Harry > finally killed the Horcrux-less Voldemort, Harry would die as well. > Dumbledore tells Harry (in "King's Cross"): "He tethered you to life > while he lives," so shouldn't that mean that Harry dies when > Voldemort dies? Perhaps I was just overly prepared for Harry to > die :) mike_witse: The part of Voldemort in Harry was killed when he tried to kill Harry. The reason he had to stand there and not fight back was so that Voldemort would kill the part that was himself in Harry. > Harry really wasn't an actual Horcrux, was he? I think he was, it was just made differntly. > I loved Molly finishing Bellatrix (especially Molly calling > Bellatrix a "bitch" ? are these really books for children?!?) The book really seemed (to me) to be written with people Harry's age in mind, and I don't know of a 17 year old that would be surprised by the language. > If Harry wasn't to be a goner, I thought we'd lose someone really > important (like Ron or Hagrid). But perhaps Rowling thinks killing > Dumbledore and Snape was enough. And losing Lupin and Tonks, when > they had just found happiness with one another and had just had a > baby, was tough (presumably Bellatrix killed them to "prune" her > family tree?), although it would have been more powerful if we could > have seen the deaths happen. I thought that myself > I fully expected to be vindicated in my conviction that Snape has > always been evil I never doubted him, it seemed to obvious that he was in love with Lily. I didnt understand everything but I didnt really doubt him. >If the only Horcrux Harry wound up destroying was the > diary, why couldn't he have more help in tracking down and > destroying them? This is just an unsubstantiated guess. Dumbledore wanted to give Harry as much time as he could to find them all. If it became public knowledge that Voldemort used Horecux, he would have heard about it sooner and made steps to further hide, or even try to make more (no matter how dangerous that might be) > I could have done without the "19 years later" epilogue, especially Since there wont be another book, I am really glad it was written. Its too bad she wont write more, the whole family tree is a bit confusing but it looks like it turned out ok. > There are still thousands of remaining unanswered questions - why > were we able to find out Neville's profession, but not Ron, Harry's, > Hermione's or Ginny's? I think she did that on purpose. mike_wiltse From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Jul 24 22:07:45 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:07:45 -0000 Subject: Snape's Redemption WAS Re: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172345 > > Pip!Squeak: > The Prince's Tale Chapter does show Snape's moral redemption; it > shows it happening slowly, year by year. Hickengruendler: I agree with this. IMO, the crucial moment in the Pensieve chapter, regarding Snape's character, was when he told Phineas Nigellus not to call Hermione a Mudblood. Because this did show a change of heart. It started solely with his wish, to keep Lily safe, no matter what happened to everyone else. But it changed into more, and into a Snape, whose principals at least somewhat changed. From prep0strus at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:14:51 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:14:51 -0000 Subject: Who's that creature?!? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Gwenhwyfar" wrote: > > Good day to you all... > Okay I have rushed to the end too quickly and soon and so on. But I > think somehow I did not read carefully. But what is that FREAKING > creature when Harry meets Dumbledore at the King's Cross? > > Gwenhwyfar > Pretty sure that was the bit of Voldemorte's soul that was in Harry. Not sure why it didn't return to life when Harry did, or how much soul was in Voldy then (was it split into 8 parts?) But I think that sad little thing was a bit of the Dark Lord. From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:17:39 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who came to magic late in life? Message-ID: <804694.73329.qm@web80510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172347 A few of us stressed many times on this list that person is Merope. For some reason that seems to be so hard to believe for a lot people and I still don't understand why. It just seems so obvious to me when JKR mention that prior the release of HBP in the interview she's referring to Merope. Just please, I hope no one is wasting time asking her that again in the upcoming live chat...that'll be such a wasted question which could have been other more interseting question. It's MEROPE, people just accept that and leave it at that! Jo ----- Original Message ---- From: bluesqueak To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 2:28:49 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who came to magic late in life? --- In HPforGrownups@ yahoogroups. com, "Eddie" wrote: > > Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > Eddie > I wondered if it was Sybil Trelawny. She was magical, but didn't seem to be able to consciously control it (those sherry bottles that she had to hide by using a magical object). But in the Battle of Hogwarts she's using her wand to throw crystal balls through the air. Pip!Squeak [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kathealy at eircom.net Tue Jul 24 22:14:54 2007 From: kathealy at eircom.net (putoriusmustela) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:14:54 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172348 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle > initial of F... > As I read the names of Harry's/Ginny's kids in the Epilogue I just assumed that Fred had already been taken by Ron and Hermione. Then I was shocked to read about young Hugo. I was sure Fred would get a namesake too! putoriusmustela From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 24 22:18:22 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:18:22 -0000 Subject: us cover art, WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172349 > Anne Squires: > The only thing is ---Harry should have Draco's wand in one of > his hands. Eddie: But that would have given too much of the ending away, I think: Harry with a wand and Voldemort not? Surely we would have known Harry would win and Voldemort not. Eddie From kirsten at kirstenmunson.com Tue Jul 24 22:11:02 2007 From: kirsten at kirstenmunson.com (klmtapir) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:11:02 -0000 Subject: Snape, mostly (was:Re: My Officially First Deathly Hallows Post!!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172350 > Reed: > First of all, it was way too long. The kid scenes were much too > drawn out and gave little necessary information (the whole Petunia > thing has no purpose in Snapes memories, in my opinion. It should > better have been addressed at the beginning, before the Dursleys > leave). I think that was mainly put in as a callback to (I believe) OoTP -- I don't have the book with me, but I'm pretty sure Petunia says she heard about the Dementors when she overheard Lily talking to "that awful boy". We were meant to assume, like Harry did, that the awful boy was James, but many suspected that it was actually Snape. Good call. klmtapir, previously: >> Victoire is still at Hogwarts, but Teddy is apparently all finished >> up. And a cradle-robber. >Anne Squires; > >A cradle robber? Come on, a nineteen yr old with a seventeen yr old >isn't a cradle robber. Sorry, I forgot the seventeen smileys and LMAOs and ROFLs and LOLs that would have indicated that I was kidding. :^) :^) klmtapir From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 24 22:17:26 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:17:26 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172351 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle > initial of F... > va32h here: Surely the honor of naming a child for Fred should fall to his twin, George, first. For all we know, Bill, Charlie, and George all have sons with first or middle names of Fred. Fred has many brothers to honor him, whereas Harry has no siblings who can pass on the family names, and surely Snape has virtually no one, save Harry, who truly appreciates what he did with his life. It isn't Harry's responsibility to make sure that everyone who died in the wizarding war is remembered in his mere three children, or else they would all have names like: Albus Severus Alastair Dobby Fred Remus or Lily Hedwig Nymphadora Lavendar - and that would just be silly. va32h From cottell at dublin.ie Tue Jul 24 22:23:47 2007 From: cottell at dublin.ie (muscatel1988) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:23:47 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172352 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > Personally I think it is Neville who came in to magic later in life. > Remember how his family didn't think he was magical enough to get into > Hogwarts?? Remember how he was always melting cauldrons?? Then around the > DA time he started doing really well. I don't think it could be Neville: "In my books, magic almost always shows itself in a person before age 11; however, there is a character who does manage in desperate circumstances to do magic quite late in life, but that is very rare in the world I am writing about." http://www.accio- quote.org/articles/1999/0399-barnesandnoble.html That also rules out another possible candidate, Ariana, as well, since she was only six (and the circumstances weren't desperate). The only other possibility that I can think of is Merope, who certainly does her most disastrous magic later, but I don't think there's any solid evidence other than her father's rantings that she is a squib. I think it was a character, or character development, that was dropped. We know that at least one other was dropped - Mafalda (Weasley?) was supposed to be in GoF, but didn't make it in the end. (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm? id=3), so not everything that was in play in 1999 made it all the way. I think this is one thing we'll find out in later interviews - it's a common question on the www. I was looking forward to it too, though. From mercia at ireland.com Tue Jul 24 22:25:48 2007 From: mercia at ireland.com (meglet2) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:25:48 -0000 Subject: DH comments and questions. Spoilers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172353 Coming out of long lurkdom to join the reaction to DH. As some have said where to start? I found it a good read, fast paced apart from some of the of the wandering hither and yon on the camping trips, but mostly exciting and full of action. Much more full of action thatn some of the others. But ultimately I find myself, on the first reading anyway, felling rather let down and disappointed and certainly full of questions. I so agree that the emotional investment in some of the deaths just wasn't there. I loved Lupin in POA and I barely registered his death, perhaps as someone said because we don't see it happen. I didn't even feel much when Fred copped it. Dobby's death was far more devestating and better written. The end was so fast and furious, as I suppose a battle would be, that on first reading it was hard to take quite what was going on let alone get emotional over it. I know I hated OOTP on first reading however so perhaps on other readings I will find the final chapters more moving. But there are still so many questions, so many things that have been unresolved and what appear to be flaws and mistakes in the text that it almost feels like something rushed out and cobbled together despite the fact its been two years since HBP. Just to pick some at random. Does anybody understand the prophecy even yet. I still find its meaning fluid. Surely it is not so much neither can live while the other survives as neither can die while the other surivives? Why does Harry think his self sacrifical death will end it all since he doesn't know he is a horcrux, knows when he walks to the forest that Nagini is still alive and all his death will achieve will be to rid Voldemort of an opponent? What happened to V's legilimency and 'no-one can lie to Lord Voldemort, he always knows.' I can accept Snape as a brilliant Occlumens, but Narcissa! In a moment of panic and terror! Lying to Lord Voldemort about the most crucial thing of all, that Harry is not dead. How did the sword get back in the Sorting Hat? Hadn't it been grabbed by Griphook the last time we saw it in the vault of Gringotts? Has she made a mistake over Snape receiving instruction about feeding the change of plan to Voldemort? He is conversing with D's portrait in the Headmaster's office at Hogwart's persumably in late July but he doesn't retrun to Hogwart's as Headmaster until September. I can't imagine McGonagal who at this point believes he has killed D accepting him back without being forced to do so by the Ministry. Also he tells Vol he has the information from 'the source we spoke of.' We know by the end this is D's portrait, but he won't have told V that. So what did he tell Vol was the source? The Order think they have another traitor and for half the book she seems to be setting you up to find one of the 'friends' revealed as a traitor. Remarks like Lupin's pointed 'James would have thought it the height of dishonour to suspect a friend of betrayal' seem to point to big revelation of another betrayer in this generation just as Wormtail had been in the previous one but it never came. And what happened to Lupin? Was he really turned that sour by his expereiences as an outcast. He seemed so different that I thought maybe Dudly wasn't the only won with a new personality blown into him. I also for half the book found myself wondering if ESE Lupin, a theory I have resisted for years, could be proved right after all. I thought HBP was setting up some big denounment with Snape and Harry and was disappointed it never came. I also hoped to see more with both Lupin and Snape. All the Snape stuff I found unsatisfactory which is sad because I think she has created a wonderfully interesting and complex character and he deserved more. I agree he remains a nasty man working for the good and that is a fascintating concept but just for unrequited love for Lilly doesn't seem a strong enough basis for that. Like many I found the epilogue trite and despite appearing to show happy ever afters, still leaving so much unresolved. What careers did they follow? (Did they ever go back and do their NEWTS? I can't imagine Hermione being satisfied with an incomplet education.) Why did Harry never find out more about his parents? Where did James' money come from? Why were all Harry's grandparents dead before his first birthday. James and Lily were only 21. James' parents were alive and well when they were giving Sirius refuge five years previously. What happened to them? OK they might have been killed off by Vol in the first war, but what happened to Lily and Petunia's parents. They can't have been that old either. Yet Petunia is one year old Harry's only living relative. And the questions could go on but this is long enough. I think, despite enjoying the book, I agree with the 'could do better' line of comment. But perhaps it will improve on further readings. Mercia From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:26:40 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:26:40 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Heee, what did I see instead? I saw a creep greedily watching a > girl and never letting this obsession go. I am guessing that JKR > meant to show that Snape truly loved Lily, but that is not what I > took from the book. Leslie41: I think your "guess" about JKR is right--that's exactly what we're supposed to see. Snape truly loved Lily. And that "creep" is a boy of about ten himself. Not some 35-year-old man in a raincoat. Alla: > And I was so happy to see Snape coming to DD and not giving a **** > about the lives of James and innocent baby he just sold out. > Pathetic creep indeed. You disgust me Snape in Dumbledore??s words. Leslie41: Yes, of course...and at that point he is pathetic and disgusting. He evolves out of that, and spends the next twenty years of his life making up for his past ill deeds. Alla: > So, I am fascinated how JKR presented DD!M Snape with the > Dumbledore asking him to kill him, which I was so very **sure** > would not happen and still left me plenty of room to be disgusted > by Snape and like Dumbledore. Leslie41: I don't think I could agree. There's not anything remotely disgusting about Snape making and keeping his promise to kill Dumbledore. Alla: > Heeee, to get to Snape for a second, I guess his death makes my > point as well that she wanted to show suddenness and senselessness, > but at the same time I cannot help but smile at the delightful > irony JKR brought there ?V potion master dies from poison with no > chance to get an antidote or anything like that. Leslie41: That may indeed be an irony, though I would guess Rowling finds it less than "delightful". It's clear from the book that she intends for us to admire Snape just as much as Dumbledore. Perhaps more. Alla: > I wanted confrontation between Snape and Harry so badly, but now I > cannot help but think that JKR??s way is so much better. She would > not let Snape taunt Harry ?V haha, I am Dumbledore??s man, (or is > he?) who loved your mother, Harry just learns it all afterwards. Leslie41: Why should there be a confrontation now? What is needed is understanding. Of course she would not let Snape taunt Harry, because Snape's taunts of Harry usually had a point to them. They were usually used to educate him. And when those taunts failed (as with Harry's occlumency lessons), it's Harry that is seen to be at fault, not Snape. Alla: > Since it also now seems that Lily was all that Snape wanted all his > life, I am happy imagining that in the afterlife Snape will be > watching Lily in James?? arms for eternity. Leslie41: Somehow I don't think this is so. Snape made his mistakes, but he paid for them a thousand times over. If Lily and Snape were to meet again (and there's no reason to suspect they won't, since such things seem to happen in the Wizard afterlife), how do you think she would treat the man who was her beloved childhood friend, the man who saved her son's life, again and again, when his own father, her husband, failed? Snape is dead, but my guess is he has at last what he has been looking for for twenty long years. Lily's forgiveness. And Lily's friendship and her love. From sierra_slammer at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:15:06 2007 From: sierra_slammer at yahoo.com (sierra_slammer) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:15:06 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172355 >"carodave92" wrote: > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle > initial of F... > Maybe some one of Ron's older brothers had a son prior to Ron or Harry and named him Fred. sierra_slammer From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue Jul 24 20:47:01 2007 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:47:01 +1000 Subject: Nothing earthshattering - just my initial impressions Message-ID: <20159B528DC3436282B73A0CE6F0E214@ShaunPC> No: HPFGUIDX 172356 The first thing I need to say is that JKR made me cry. Not until the very end, but she did it. 'Albus Severus,' Harry said quietly, so that nobody but Ginny could hear, and she was tactful enough to pretend to be waving to Rose, who was now on the train, 'you were named for two Headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew. I wanted to believe in Snape, as I read the books. And I wanted Harry to be able to do the same. Another great moment for me is similar - as somebody who must in all honesty say he was probably a lot like Percy as a kid. 'I was a fool!' Percy roared, so loudly that Lupin nearly dropped his photograph, 'I was an idiot, I was a pompous prat, I was a -' 'Ministry-loving, family-disowning, power-hungry moron' said Fred. Percy swallowed. 'Yes, I was!' 'Well, you can't say fairer than that,' said Fred, holding out his hand to Percy. I wanted to see Percy come back to his family - and, to me, I also loved to see Fred in that moment. The Weasley twins. Quick to anger. Quick to forgive. I was also to see in the epilogue, Draco standing with his children on the platform - obviously not a friend to Harry and the others, but still able to acknowledge them, as they seem to acknowledge him. I was a victim of very severe bullying as a child, and I had to deal with kids every bit as nasty as Draco... and no child should be condemned for the crimes of their childhood. I could never be friends with those who harmed me - but I hope they came out the right way. And Neville... Neville proved to me that if the prophecy had fallen to him, he could have done it. I doubted him for nearly five books, until he revealed a strength I could not imagine at the end of Order of the Phoenix. And he showed that strength was real, when he did what only a true Gryffindor could do, and drew that sword. Other great moments - Harry, reflecting on Hogwarts as a home, seeing a school as a place like that is something I can relate to, sad as it may seem to some. And, another powerful moment. No! The scream was the more terrible because he had never expected or dreamed that Professor McGonagall could make such a sound. I love moment where something seems to give Harry back a semblence of family - and hearing his Head of House - the person most responsible for his welfare while at school, react with such grief to his death is such a moment. That's it for now. 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 justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:24:45 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:24:45 -0000 Subject: Never again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172357 -Inge wrote: > > So, it's over. > > My feelings right now are, that I will probably never open and read a Potter-book again. > > Snape's death was so cruel. I had rather seen Harry die than Severus. Carol responds: Yes, Snape's death was cruel, but it wasn't meaningless, and it probably could not have been done any other way. (And I think the very shock of it and the reason behind it prompted Harry to look at those memories in a way that Snape in his normal state could never have done.) I'm going to repost something I posted at Hog's Head in hopes of providing comfort to Snape fans who are feeling bereaved and devastated. (I've made slight, unacknowledged alterations to the original post.) Poor Snape! What I liked (though I was never a Lily/Snape shipper) was the Doe Patronus as (apparently) Dumbledore's "ironclad reason" for trusting Snape. I liked the way Snape used it and that whole Ron/Harry reconciliation scene (more or less engineered by Snape). I liked that Severus didn't earn the nickname Snivellus; James and Sirius gave it to him for no reason except his desire to be in Slytherin like his mother--or so I assume. Snape's death was truly horrible, and evidently upsetting to a lot of Snape fans including me; I'm sure the neighbors must have hear my anugished sobs. (I *hate* Nagini and am so glad that Neville killed her so valiantly.) But I don't think the storyline could have been resolved in any other way. (And at least he wasn't fed to the snake!) Obviously, Snape and Harry duelling again would be pointless as we already show that Harry isn't Snape's match, not to mention that Snape is DDM. . . . And if Snape had succeeded in convincing Voldemort to him go to the boy, as he kept begging to do, Harry would never have listened to him. Snape *had* to give him the information about the soul bit in his scar and let Harry know that he had to sacrifice himself--thank goodness for the Hallows, which poor Severus didn't know about), and in order for Harry to believe him, Snape had to let him know the rest of his story, at least the parts that involved Lily, which could only be done through the Pensieve. I liked that they had a last moment to look into each other's eyes, which, again, could not have happened if Snape had been AK'd. Snape's death scene (though I hated it) really shows the cruelty and indifference of LV, who's willing to murder the man he wrongly thinks is his most loyal follower. I liked having Harry vindicate Snape in front of so many people. I loved having him name his second son Albus Severus (though it ought to have been the other way around) and tell little Albus how brave Snape was (and that Slytherin isn't all bad). But for those who can't get past Snape's horrible death, I suggest thinking about his terrible life, especially the last year posing as a loyal Death Eater, unable to save Charity Burbage or tell anyone that he was still Dumbledore's man, and consider the picture we've glimpsed of death as the next great journey. Voldemort, with his mangled soul, has to spend eternity as a whimpering misshapen fetus wrapped in dirty rags. Dumbledore, in contrast, has his blackened hand healed and the twinkle in his eye restored. Snape's soul will not be damaged because he's not committing murder: he's fulfilling Dumbledore's last request, to die with dignity on his own terms (foreshadowed by Krum's losing the QWC on his own terms, I wonder?). Snape is now beyond pain and suffering and lies and having to witness the deaths of helpless people whom he cannot save and to whose plight he has to feign indifference. JKR believes in the immortality of the soul, and if we believe in her story, we have to believe in her afterlife, too (at least within the context of the books; I don't mean in the RW, where we're free to hold our own views and accept or reject the concept of an afterlife). Carol, who hated the way Snape had to die, but believes that his death was not in vain, nor is death the end of everything in JKR's world From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 24 21:44:58 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:44:58 -0600 Subject: First impressions References: Message-ID: <009f01c7ce3b$e26ff990$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172358 The epilogue was too shallow. The kids we grew up with, sure we knew they would all have kids, but that's not whom we wanted to know about, really. We wanted to know the bigger picture- how the Wizarding world had changed, what kind of jobs they ended up having. I wanted to see the larger picture- redemption and change and rebuilding. You can tell that was the chapter that was written all those many years ago, and frankly, I would have rather Rowling tossed it out and wrote a new one in her mature writing style that fit the rest of this book, and with the expectations of all the fans in mind. The scenes I loved: - The teacher's revenge- Trelawney throwing Crystal Balls and Sprout with the Mandrakes (two things I hope they keep in for the medium which shall not be named, just because they were such great visual images) - Harry's admonitions to Ron and Hermione to "break it up" because there was a war going on. - Kreacher beating up Mungdungus with a sauce pan. - Neville's brilliance with the Room of Requirement, and his later courage with Nagini - Molly's great line to Bellatrix. It was wonderful to see her go off on someone other than her own children. Scenes I hated: - The death of Hegwig just cut to my soul. One, because she was so innocent, and two, because I knew if Rowling could kill off her, she could kill off anyone. From that moment in my mind, no character was safe, and it frightened me. I thought for sure Hagrid was dead, and later, Hermione. Even at the scene with Molly, I thought she would get off her one kill and then herself be slain. I knew Lupin would die, yet I never expected Tonks too, considering the recent birth of their son. - The naming of Albus Severus- after the two best headmasters- and Severus, the bravest man he had ever known? PLEASE! I just find that passage really hard to believe, like there are obvious things missing that should have helped us to see that Snape was something other than this love-sick teenager who never moved on from his first crush (but never had the balls to change one iota about his life to go get her!) and who couldn't see Harry for anything other than James whom he hated. We have to accept that this man didn't grow up, yet was this wonderful sacrificer that Albus put his full trust in??? It's just really a leap to me to see how Snape goes from this awful git who abuses Harry at every moment to someone that Harry is drooling over with respect. Rowling must think that those of us who were not Snape-Lilly shippers would just hit our heads on a rock and get amnesia over everything bad we've ever read about Snape. There is a transition missing there. He was a terrible headmaster. Snape's memories, handed to Harry with his last breath, were not enough. I could not forgive him, let alone worship the man enough to name a son of mine after him. - Ron is just able to pick up a word of Parceltongue all on his own? It doesn't make sence- the Chamber was only supposed to open for the "heir", and it was piece of the "Harry is a horcrux" theory, because while a part of LV's soul was part of Harry, the Chamber would recognize that part. If was just Parceltongue, then surely Dumbledore or Crouch Sr with their gift of languages would have found it in Book 2, especially since Dumbledore actively searched for it. Shelley From ekrdg at verizon.net Tue Jul 24 22:29:02 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:29:02 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who's that creature?!? References: Message-ID: <01f801c7ce42$0a73c0b0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 172359 > Gwenhwyfar wrote: >But I > think somehow I did not read carefully. But what is that FREAKING > creature when Harry meets Dumbledore at the King's Cross? colebiancardi: I thought that was the bit of Voldy's soul left in Harry. That is the best I can do...if that wasn't it, you got me hanging on what it was. Kimberly here: I thought it was actually LV's soul, or what was left of it. It's what was left over, the maimed part of his soul where as Harry's was whole and "unscathed" (pg. 706), even WITHOUT glasses. His soul was unmarred, Voldemort's was clearly in bad shape. They both appear at King's Cross and then return to consciousness. My take on the scene, Kimberly From sherriola at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:33:33 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:33:33 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46a67e3e.02098c0a.40ac.1144@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172360 Alla: Oh, yes, crow eating obviously. YUM. Crow number one is obviously DDM Snape. No, I was not **shocked**, the fact that I always kept in mind that possibility that I did not want to come true and did not think will come true, may come true nevertheless helped a lot Sherry: I have a new Snape acronym, because, at least from my reading of the book, DDM doesn't exactly fit. I would say, Snape was LPM lily Potter's Man! Or if people think he wouldn't like her married name, LEM Snape will do. Alla: But of course I was wrong that the plan to kill Dumbledore did not exist. Oh well. Sherry: I'm still very uncomfortable with the idea of the plan, highly displeased with the Puppet master Dumbledore and Snape for following along. I ended up having more respect for Snape with his comments about Harry being a pig to the slaughter, not because it meant Snape really cared one way or the other about Harry, but because someone stood up to Dumbledore, for a few minutes anyway. The Plan does redeem Snape or Dumbledore for me, though I did find Snape's death truly horrible and nearly had to go throw up at how gruesome it was and Voldemort's cold indifference. However, I would not consider Snape to be the bravest man I ever knew, as obsessive love, revenge on Voldemort seemed to be Snape's motives, not a true change of heart about Voldemort's actions. I didn't mind the epilogue except that Harry named his son for the two men who did most to screw up his life! Sherry From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:32:19 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:32:19 -0000 Subject: DH:What about all the comments JKR made about what we would/wouldn't find out? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172361 "In my books, magic almost always shows itself in a person before age 11; however, there is a character who does manage in desperate circumstances to do magic quite late in life, but that is very rare in the world I am writing about." I'm not seeing this as being Neville. To me this would be someone who has never performed magic before? Next question: Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses? JKR: Good question - yes, a few of them, but that information is sort of restricted - you'll find out why.. I missed that one, did anyone see that one? WHERE was Crookshanks???? Did Hermione send him off to Australia too? Amy: What did Dudley see when he faced the Dementors in book five? JK Rowling replies -> Ah, good question. You'll find out! Didn't see that one either. I think there are lots of these unanswered questions where we were told we'd find out, and we didn't. Unless, I missed them all. But then, if I didn't, what are the answers? What are questions you found in interviews which JKR didn't answer? Julie From harryp at stararcher.com Tue Jul 24 22:35:15 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:35:15 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172362 > Sandra: > Ron 'copied' Harry? Parseltongue is a strange collection of > throat-gargly sounds which mean nothing to most wizards, so > how on earth could he have managed all the right hacking > noises after hearing Harry just once? Eddie: Twice. Once in COS and again when Harry opened the locket. And who else in the Wizarding World besides Ron (and Harry and Voldemort) ever heard somebody speak "Open" in Parsletongue more than once? Eddie, who can't keep up with all the posts that are appearing faster than the treasure in the LeStrange's vault. From denisewcr at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:24:16 2007 From: denisewcr at yahoo.com (Denise Leblanc) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry/new member In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070724222416.35344.qmail@web54112.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172363 Hi I just joined 2 days ago hoping to discuss the book as my son in the beginning of the book, work is getting in the way. I loved the book but was upset at Hedwig and Dobby. I feel Harry lost so much and to lose the one thing that helped him out while at the Dursleys was heart breaking. I have some parrots and felt his pain, to just think of losing any of mine would hurt. Snape was a surprise but I felt he was good all along. A coworker feels he new he would die in the end and wanted to due to the loss of Lily. I wish he could have said something to Harry before he passed. What about the eyes no explanation but she still mentions them! Who used magic late in life? I think she killed of to many she is a little fixated on death! Plus she didn't go into enough of life after the war. Did Neville's parents ever get better? Jobs? Did Harry go to live in the house left to him or rebuild his parent's house? So many more. Denise From graynavarre at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:30:44 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <847452.85071.qm@web30109.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172364 carodave: > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their > > children after Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to > > Snape...what about FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? > > Not even a middle initial of F... putoriusmustela: > As I read the names of Harry's/Ginny's kids in the > Epilogue I just assumed that Fred had already been taken by Ron and > Hermione. Then I was shocked to read about young Hugo. I was sure > Fred would get a namesake too! This my first reply, however, I thought that George would be the one to name his son (if he has one) after his twin. Barbara From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 22:40:39 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:40:39 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172365 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle > initial of F... Siriusly Snapey Susan: And what about *Sirius*?? No James Sirius to go along with Albus Severus?? Perhaps Harry & Ginny are awaiting son #3, who will be Sirius Remus Potter. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who actually thought the names were a little bit too much From psych12 at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:30:51 2007 From: psych12 at gmail.com (leggrachel) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:30:51 -0000 Subject: Occulmency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172366 > smickey1223: > I wonder if Snape was deliberate in his failure to teach Harry > Occulmency knowing it might serve a greater purpose to have a > clear connection between the two. Perhaps this is just wishful > thinking on my part but the increased connectivity certainly > seemed to give Harry (and wizard kind) the upper hand. > > Any thoughts on this idea? leggrachel: It did kind of seem like Harry was using the connection better in the 7th book. Near the end, he was able to warn everyone that Voldie was coming, or how near he was. I was wondering about the last line for Snape. He wants Harry to look at him. Do you think he was attempting to communicate through Legilimens, or did he want to see "Lily's eyes" before he died? Personally, I didn't think that Snape came off as too soft. Tortured and a bit obsessed, yes. But going through everything to be a double spy took a lot of will power. I just wish he had tried to defend himself first. From irenetsui at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:35:36 2007 From: irenetsui at yahoo.com (irenetsui) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:35:36 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172368 > "carodave92" wrote > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle > initial of F... > I thought it could be possible that one of Ron's elder brothers might have a son named Fred already. I am pretty sure if George had a son, his name would be Fred. Irene From redwooddawn at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:31:05 2007 From: redwooddawn at hotmail.com (redwooddawn) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:31:05 -0000 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal In-Reply-To: <46A66FC9.7060701@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172369 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lee Kaiwen wrote: > > Hi, folks. > > Well, it's over. Really over. It was a good ride, but the final secrets > have been told, the final page turned. > > Personally, I felt that, in terms of character and plot development, > while the series started out strong, it peaked in HP5; HP6 and 7 were > marred by too many missed opportunities, and the whole series by a > couple of nagging irritants, and one near deal-breaker. >> No Magic for the Magical > -- ----- --- --- ------- > The thing that kept nagging me throughout the HP series was simply this: > the magical do not believe in magic. That is, the magical would no more > view their gifts as "magic" than a sighted person would call his ability > to perceive objects at great distances, or communicate without words > "wizardry", whatever a blind man might believe. "Magical", "wizardry", > "witchcraft" -- these may be labels applied to the magical by others, > but not labels the magical would ever take to themselves. Like > Galadriel, we would be puzzled at most, bemused at best, by a blind > man's views of our extra sense. And just as, in the sighted world we do > not send our children to schools of "sight and seeing", so in the > magical world there would be no schools of "witchcraft and wizardry". > Sight to the sighted may be fundamental to nearly everything we do, and > fundamentally shape our perceptions of the universe; but we do not take > classes to learn how to see. > > What bothered me most about this was the missed opportunity. It's simply > apparent to me that, just as our gift of sight presents us with a > fundamentally different view, and understanding, of the world around us > than those who lack sight (don't believe me? Try describing the night > sky to someone who has no concept of light), so those with magical > giftings would find the universe a fundamentally different kind of place > than those of us without. I would have enjoyed some explorations of > those differences, in terms both metaphysical and psychological. As CS > Lewis in Out of the Silent Planet, or Zenna Henderson in her stories of > The People, JKR had the opportunity here to show us something of > ourselves, to explore our humanity by taking us outside ourselves to > reveal how we might have been. Lewis' race of un-Fallen beings shines a > light on our Fallenness; Henderson People, communities of "magically > endowed" extra-terrerstrials attempting to exist in a society that fears > and misunderstands them, show us a bit of the darker side of our humanity. > And, finally, the near deal-breaker: > > Moral Inconsistency > ----- ------------- > > "But I thought they were bad?" > > My 11-year-old actually asked me this as we read HP7 together, and I had > no answer except to say I thought JKR was wrong. > > He was referring to the Unforgivable Curses. From Wikipedia: > > "The Unforgivable Curses ... are so named because their use is ... > forbidden and literally unforgivable in the Wizarding World. Use of any > of these spells on any human being can carry a life-sentence in the > magical wizard's prison of Azkaban." > > The thing is, I had had more than one discussion with my son previously > about what made the Unforgivables unforgivable, and why a good person > could not use them. Then came the end of HP6, when Snape uses the Avadra > Kedavra to kill Dumbledore, and Harry attempts to use the same on Snape. > At the time, I explained to my son that Harry, caught up in his grief > and his anger, made a mistake, as even good people sometimes do. But for > Snape no redemption was possible. Cold, calculated, premeditated, his > use of the Curse had put him beyond all possibility of salvation. That > is, if "unforgivable" had any meaning at all. > > Which, apparently, it does not. From Wikipedia again: > > "However, in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the Unforgivable > Curses are used liberally by good characters, ranging from Professor > McGonagall with the Imperius Curse, to Harry effectively using the > Cruciatus Curse. He also uses the Imperius curse on several goblins." > > And, apparently, at least one good character uses the Avadra Kedavra, > though JKR doesn't call it by name. > > That the good guys started "liberally" throwing around the Unforgivables > is bad enough. But JKR compounds the moral issue here in the way in > which they do so ? without reluctance or hesitation, without so much as > a hint of moral compunction. When Harry Imperiuses the goblins ? at > Hermione's almost casual suggestion, no less -- he might have been > casting a Hot Air Charm for all the reticence he exhibited. > In regards to the not seeing magic as being magical, I've gotten the impression that for the wizarding world, magic is technology. Arthur Weasley's fascination with muggle technology has sort of reflected this throughout the series, and even the auror's marveling at Mr. Dursley's ability to drive in book 7 reconnected with that concept. I loved in book 5, when Arthur was in St. Mungoes, that a point was made between muggle doctors and wizard healers, and yet it was the muggle technology of stitches that actually helped Arthur heal. So magic is more of an everyday tool that makes life easier (much like muggle technolgy) rather than a mystery. Although I would say that for both the wizarding world and our muggle world, everyone takes technology for granted. And, IMHO, the way Dark Magic harnesses and inverts the nature of any given resource is very similar to the way our science harnesses nature to create things like atomic bombs or nuclear power. The Department of Mysteries seems to be the place where the wizarding community marvels, studies and contemplates what is truly magical, not in "magic," but in life, and the things they study in the DoM are the universal mysteries that all humans share (love, time, death, thought). I was disappointed that we did not return to the DoM one last time, I really wanted some revelation from the Love Room, but I guess it was wise for Rowling to not create answers for that which cannot be answered (merely experienced). In regards to Unforgivable Curses, I agree that it was upsetting to see the good guys use them so freely in the end. There were plenty of character comments in the last few books about how disarming isn't good enough against the enemies, so I don't know if that was meant to help us support the use of Unforgivable Curses or not. This last story line wound up having such a Christian theme going, I don't know if Harry's ultimate use of Expellariamus (sp?) was a morality statement in general, or more directed towards his strength of character. What Hermione did to her parents' memory to protect them bothered me a lot too, and then later when she said she didn't know how to do a memory spell, the confusion of that statement bothered me as well. Perhaps it is a case of having to touch base with the dark side of anything in order to conquer it. redwooddawn From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 22:28:29 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:28:29 -0000 Subject: Dudley (Re: Who came to magic late in life?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172370 Eddie: Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? Also, weren't we supposed to find out what Dudley saw during the early dementor scene in OoP? Joan of Anarchy From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:42:44 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:42:44 -0000 Subject: Importance of Occlumency Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172371 Wondering just why Dumbledore found it so important that Harry learn occlumency and thereby closing his mind to LV. Had it not been for Harry's mind-connection with LV, he would never have seen LV's thoughts of where the Horcruxes were hidden and would probably not have found them in time.... Or? From muellem at bc.edu Tue Jul 24 22:48:41 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:48:41 -0000 Subject: What about FRED AND Snape acronym In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172372 >Sherry wrote: >I have a new Snape acronym, because, at least from my reading of the book, >DDM doesn't exactly fit. I would say, Snape was > >LPM > >lily Potter's Man! > >or if people think he wouldn't like her married name, LEM Snape will do. colebiancardi: heee...I like mine better LILY!Snape Lily, I Luv YEWWWW >Siriusly Snapey Susan: >And what about *Sirius*?? No James Sirius to go along with Albus >Severus?? >Perhaps Harry & Ginny are awaiting son #3, who will be Sirius Remus >Potter. colebiancardi: what about poor Regulus? Unless the House-Elves starting naming their kids after him. Who mourns for Regulus? sigh..... agreeing that the names are way much too much From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Jul 24 22:50:39 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:50:39 -0000 Subject: DH:What about all the comments JKR made about what we would/wouldn't find out? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172373 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jastrangfeld" wrote: > > "In my books, magic almost always shows itself in a person before age > 11; however, there is a character who does manage in desperate > circumstances to do magic quite late in life, but that is very rare in > the world I am writing about." > I'm not seeing this as being Neville. To me this would be someone who > has never performed magic before? > > Next question: > Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses? > JKR: Good question - yes, a few of them, but that information is sort > of restricted - you'll find out why.. > > I missed that one, did anyone see that one? > > WHERE was Crookshanks???? Did Hermione send him off to Australia too? > > Amy: What did Dudley see when he faced the Dementors in book five? > JK Rowling replies -> Ah, good question. You'll find out! > > Didn't see that one either. > > > I think there are lots of these unanswered questions where we were > told we'd find out, and we didn't. Unless, I missed them all. But > then, if I didn't, what are the answers? What are questions you found > in interviews which JKR didn't answer? > > Julie > Hickengruendler: Some of them are several years old. She probably decided to cut it or she changed it. She freely admitted, that she made some minor changes, for example cutting Dean Thomas' subplot or the Weasley cousin, so some of these are probably among those cases. Crookshanks did appear in the book, though. He was in the Burrow at the beginning. And the character doing magic late in life could be either Merope or Ariana, though neither fits 100%, sinc eboth seem rather to have surpressed their magic, instead of not having any. From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:50:50 2007 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:50:50 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape should have been in Gryffindor. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172374 I think Snape turned out to be one of my favorite characters of the book. And this is from a guy who hated Snape before DH. Let me explain why: First: He was Dumbledore's Man. He agreed to trust in DD's plan so much that he killed DD (who was the only man that really showed kindness in Snape's whole life). Imagine the fortitude and strength it would take to kill probably the closest person to a friend you have had in your life, simply because your friend told you it was necessary for the "Greater Good." Notice also that there was never an Unbreakable Vow between Snape and DD. DD trusted Snape so much that he did not need an unbreakable vow to be secure in the knowledge that after DD was gone, Snape would carry on and protect Harry. The only proof DD ever had was the Doe patronus. Which is really the best proof anyone could give. Second: He was a Double Agent. Can you imagine the courage it took to overcome your fear and lie to Voldemort all the time? One slip, and you are dead. You get no second chances, you don't get to say you are sorry. You die, plain and simple. DD was right, they should have waited to sort Snape into another house because he seems to have shown more courage than most Gryffindors in all of cannon. Snape was surrounded by the enemy day in and day out, constantly watched and envied by the other Death Eater's because of his close affiliation with Voldemort. And the entire time, he was DD's man. I really don't think many other wizards could have done this as well as Snape did. Additionally, while he was Headmaster, Snape was helping Harry much in the same way DD did while he was alive. Snape gave Harry a helping hand from a far. He tried to make Harry earn the Sword of Gryffindor just like DD would have (per DD's instruction of course). I would argue he gave Harry more help in DH than the Order. He found a way to give Harry the best weapon to destroy Horcruxes even though Harry despised Snape. Without Snape's help, some of the Horcruxes could not have been destroyed. Third: In all of the books proceeding DH, I cannot think of a single instance in canon in which Snape did anything for someone else out of love. He was presented as a brooding, long haired, git who was cruel for cruelness' sake. And up until the chapter titled "The Prince's Tale" I thought he deserved exactly what he got. The irony of the head of Slytherin house being eaten by a snake made me all warm and fuzzy on the inside because I wanted nothing short of Snape's death in DH. "The Prince's Tale" truly revealed the complexity of the character of Snape. Everything he did in cannon, he did out of love. His love for Lily gave him the courage to be DD's man. His love of Lily gave him the courage to face Voldemort everyday. True his love of Lily made him hate Harry (the personification of James in Snape's eyes); but he still protected the boy he hated. He never believed in blood status (he was in love with a muggle born his whole life). Snape even loved until his final breath. His last words of "Look at me" offer all the proof we need to see the depth of his love. His last wish on earth was to see the green eyes of the woman he loved, and upon seeing them, he went onto the next great adventure. Finally, imagine performing evil acts, not because you are evil, but because you have to pretend you are evil. Think of how hard that must have been? Inside all you have is unrequited love of a murdered woman, the guilt that you helped cause her death, and you have to act against your nature because to do anything else would mean your death. The complexity of Snape's character makes me rethink everything bad I ever said about him. Snape showed guts, grit, determination, and love even though we didn't even know it until one of the last chapters of the last book. Snape should be loved for his love, not despised for his inability to get over his hatred of James. Just my thoughts on the Man. John From donald42 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:46:06 2007 From: donald42 at hotmail.com (Donald E. Gosselin) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:46:06 -0000 Subject: The return to normalcy (Was: The (Hated) Epilogue) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172375 Hi, I was kinda hoping that in the epilogue, there might have been some clue as to what Harry did after all that was over. Okay he had a family, but what does a famous Hogwarts do for a profession? Donald From random832 at fastmail.us Tue Jul 24 22:51:30 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:51:30 -0400 Subject: Bragging Rights answer key, chekhov's guns, spoiler report, etc In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A68272.70805@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 172376 BRAGGING RIGHTS ANSWER KEY TK Kenyon/TigerPatronus wrote the questions, JK Rowling wrote the answers: > 1. Will Harry die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? No. (extra credit for predicting he dies and comes back to life) > 2. Will Voldemort die and stay dead at the end of HPDH? Yes. > 3. Excluding Harry and Voldemort, who will be the most prominent > character to die and stay dead? Severus Snape. > 4. From HBP (p125, American Hardcover), in the shop while the trio > were listening with Extendable Ears, what did Draco show Borgin that > scared him? Not Revealed. > 5. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will return as a > student (answer yes or no for each): > a. Harry? > b. Draco? > c. Hermione? > d. Luna? > e. Ron? > f. Neville? > g. Ginny? b, d, f, g. > 6. Which will be the most prominent couple to marry in DH, if any? Lupin and Tonks. > 7. Who will be the unusual person who performs magic for the first > time "very late in life?" Not in book 7. Was Merope Gaunt in book 6 (did anyone have this? I haven't looked at all the entries.) > 8. Assuming Hogwarts reopens as a school, who will be the: > a. Head Boy? > b. Head Girl? Unknown > c. DADA Instructor? Amycus Carrow. (Partial credit for anyone who said 'a death eater', perhaps?) > d. Potions Master or Mistress? I don't believe this was revealed either. > e. Headmaster or -mistress? Severus Snape. > 9. Where do Snape's ultimate loyalties lie? With Dumbleore. (extra credit for anyone who manages to work a LOLLIPOPS reference into their answer) > 10. Identify the seven Horcruxes. (If you think there are more or > less than seven, write "n/a" or add extra letters as necessary. > Horcruxes in previous books and previously inactivated Horcruxes > must be identified for full credit. If you think one of the soul > pieces is in Voldemort so there are six external Horcruxes plus the > bit still in him, then write "In Voldemort" for one of the answers.) a. In Voldemort b. Cup of Hufflepuff c. Diadem of Ravenclaw (Unknown artifact of Ravenclaw present at Hogwarts should be worth full credit) d. Diary e. Nagini f. Harry (or Harry's Scar, this was unclear - I'd argue full credit for either) g. Ring (extra credit if "One of the Deathly Hallows" is given in another answer) h. Locket of Slytherin > In case Hogwarts does not reopen, or in case we do not have > sufficient information to answer #5 and #8 above, these two > alternate questions will used in place of #5 and #8, above. If #5 > and #8 are sufficiently answered in DH, the alternate questions will > be used as tiebreakers. > > Alternate 1. What are Snape's patronus and boggert? Patronus: Doe. Partial credit for those who said it was Lily. Boggart: Not revealed. > Alternate 2. What is behind the locked door at the Department of > Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic? Not revealed. In total: 4, 7, three parts of 8, one part of Alternate 1, and Alternate 2 were all not revealed, leaving insufficient data for complete scoring. SPOILER REPORT There were copies of the real epilogue and chapter list. The first few paragraphs [that were revealed on-list a while back] were real. Another page that circulated separately showing Snape's death was real. The long list of deaths and page numbers that was spammed various places was accurate. I've heard that both real and fake copies of the entire book were available on online file sharing sites. A page that I recall seeing but cannot find now, purportedly showing the involvement of the two-way mirror and having the intriguing line "He already had my mother's blood?" was fake. The "Gabriel hacker" plot summary was fake. http://www.zendurl.com/hallows/ (Bellatrix kills Ron, etc) is fake. CHEKHOV'S GUNS This section is on things that we noticed left unanswered, whether they answered or not, etc. First, here's the ones from the original list by Joan of Anarchy. - Lily's/Harry's eyes Nothing on this so far as far as I know - Lily -- & charms, & potions, & Snape, & Petunia I think there may still be more to petunia, More on that further down. - Dudley's reaction to dementers I think this was touched on, as to him having matured some. - Dumbledore's gleam of triumph We see a lot of Dumbledore's past that I don't think any of us anticipated - *That Night* at Godric's Hollow a. Flying motorbike b. Who else was there? c. Why was Lily offered the choice/chance to live? d. What actually happened?? We actually get to witness this whole scene. I don't recall that 'c' was answered - It's made clear that he gave her several warnings, so there's definitely something there that's not shown - James & Lily thrice defied Voldemort -- how/what? I don't think this was revealed. - Hermione & Ancient Runes It seems to be mentioned once while they're packing, did it ever come into play after that? - Squeaky stair at #4 Privet Drive Ah. Here's where I think that Petunia's full story hasn't yet been told. I think that her first letter from Dumbledore was the start of a long correspondence, and that is possibly part of why she objected so strenuously to Snape having seen it. The stair is, of course, where she keeps the letters. - Petunia: "that awful boy" Snape. - Petunia -- how much does she know? I don't think this has been fully revealed - Invisivibility Cloak - when/why was it bequeathed? I, for one, didn't expect this to become such a major plot point, yet it was. - Pettigrew -- silver hand, life debt Nothing. We don't even get anything else on life debts generally - Gryffindor's Sword Again, central to the plot, though not a Horcrux - Neville -- memory, toad, herbology I think the memory thing turned out to be a bust long ago. It might be interesting to find there's a reason for it, but it didn't become important to the plot - Ollivander Well, we certainly know why he scarpered, at any rate! - Sirius' two-way mirror Nothing, and I, for one, was VERY disappointed, because the night before I'd read a fake spoiler that seemed to indicate this was the case - Veil of death Nothing further - well, we do know that Sirius passed on to the afterlife to be reunited with Lily and James, so that's something - Snape's allegiance As if there was ever any doubt. *grin* - Locket/horcruxes I believe all _eight_ pieces of Voldemort's soul are now accounted for at this point. - Molly Weasley's greatest fear (dead Weasleys) "NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!" - nuff said. - Pensieves Played a role, at least. I'm not sure anything unanswered about them got answered, though. - Occlumency & legilimency Not so much. - SPEW/equality in the WW Kreacher = Awesome. However, I don't think we saw anything long-term. It's not even clear that the anti-muggleborn stuff ever got repealed - Hermione's E in DADA Nothing. Next section of the list is from 'ronnie'... - Florean Fortesque Nothing yet. - DD's visions drinking the potion. I think that what we've learned about his past might go towards explaining this, but I'd have to reread HBP to be sure. - how exactly did DD die? Avada Kedavra, but he was dying from the ring. As many of us knew all along. The potion, evidently, played no role. - DD's tale concerning Slytherin's ring The ring was, again, central to the plot. We do learn that his injury was due to being fool enough to put it on, rather than just destroying it. - Snape's parantage. I don't think this turned out to be significant - reason for Longbottoms being tormented. Nothing - well, we know the reason by default - no grand conspiracies were revealed. - Snape/Narciss/Unbreakable Vow Again, we find this was all DD's plan all along > 33. Weasley's flying car Nothing > 34. Room of Love at MoM Nothing. We don't even really find out what was in this room. > 35. Giants, including Grawp Well, they were in the final battle. > 36. Werewolves, including Fenrir Grayback and Lupin I don't remember any big showdown between them, but by then it was late in the morning, did I miss anything > 37. Goblins I'll save my thoughts on "goblin culture" for another post. > 38. How did somebody get into the vault at Gringott's? Well, we find out one possible way - Polyjuice and Imperius. > 39. Dragons, including Norbert the Ridgeback Norberta, you mean. Here's Kimberly's list... > 40. Droobles Gum wrappers from Alice Longbottom ! JKR explained there was no significance to these beyond a mother wanting to give something to her child. Lots of fanfic authors have encoded secret messages, etc, in them, though. > 41. What was Dumbledore thinking/feeling during the Cave scene ? Again, we know a lot about dumbledore's past now, probably that > 42. How did Merope get Tom Riddle to stay with her for that brief period ? Love potion or Imperius Curse ? I thought we knew it was a love potion? > 43. Does Snape love ANYone ? Who ? Lily, of course. > 44. Krum !! He's got a bit part in this one, starting them on the path of investigating Lovegood at least. > 45. Will Pettigrew repay his life debt by turning against LV and helping Harry ? Nope. > 46. Just how mad IS LV at Lucius for the foul up at the ministry and now Draco's failure to kill DD himself ? This one's answered early on. And, now for Robin > Robin: > 47. Who will be using magic late in life: Dudley? Petunia? Mrs Figg? > Filch? It was Merope, as far as anyone can tell. > 48. Why all the cat references? Who was Mrs Norris? I don't think anything ever came of this beyond Crookshanks' importance to book 3. > 49. Is Snape an animagus spider? Unknown. > 50. What were Harry's parents jobs/professions? Do we find out? I can't recall, and I did double check the letter to Sirius > 51. Why did Film 5 include Kreacher when he wasn't needed for the > plot? Because he gets a lot bigger part in book 7, obviously > 52. Does RAB = Regulus Black Yes > 53. Was Kreacher the second creature (but not a wizard) that helped > RAB get the locket out of the cave? Yes > 54. What happened in the missing 24 hours in Chapter 1 book 1? Nothing revealed. > 55. Why did Harry;s scar hurt when he was so close to Voldy in Books > 1-5, but not in Book 6? This was revealed in book 5 - Voldemort using Occlumency to shut off the connection > 56. Is Harry a Horcrux? Yes > 57. Why was Harry "in" the snake in Book 5 when Mr. Weasley is > attacked? Harry and the snake are both Horcruxes, perhaps, or Voldemort was possessing the snake. I don't think it's revealed explicitly. > 58. Who else was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters were illed? Nobody > 59. How are Horcruxes made? Destroyed? We don't get to see how the spell itself works, but basilisk venom is apparently the best way to destroy them, and the sword of gryffindor has it. > 60. What are the 12 uses of Dragon's blood? Not revealed And, now, Janelle: > 61. What are Switching Spells? What are what, now? > 62. Will the Hogwarts houses unite? All but Slytherin. Missed an opportunity there, especially with Draco being redeemed > 63. SHIPS Answered, sadly. From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:57:20 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:57:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: UN answered Questions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <368438.80887.qm@web55704.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172377 Ok, all those things that were "supposed" to be so important that JKR couldn't answer yet turned out to be NOTHING to do with the story??? Is anyone else annoyed??? 12 uses of dragons blood (I spent the whole book waiting for it to make an appearance!) Dudley's "dementor memories" The locked room in the DoM Lily's Eyes Magic "very late in life" Lily and James's jobs I know there are more, but I can't think of them at the moment.... I also was annoyed by the "Epilogue" I too felt that it was WAY too late. Why 19 years??And Teddy would have left Hogwarts 3 years prior, so why was he on the train?? Not to mention, they speak of him possibly "moving in" Erm... Harry was his Godfather, wouldn't that have meant that it were up to Harry to raise him after Tonks and Lupin died? But anyway, I could write for hours on that. I just think the Epilogue would have done better if it took place at Christmas, a wedding, or the birth of a baby. Where the whole Weasley family could have been in attendance, and could have given a more complete picture of what happened to everyone else. Chancie~who really liked DH, dispite the epilogue and unanswered questions --------------------------------- Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From doliesl at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:55:44 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:55:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape, mostly (was:Re: My Officially First Deathly Hallows Post!!) Message-ID: <49525.80311.qm@web82214.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172378 Reed: D: Because even being so 'in your face' some people still miss it, they still think Snape is evil who had no moral inside and can't tell right from wrong. The George's ear's accident was one of the many important example of Snape changed from that 'only care for Lily nor others' man to the noble man who risk everything to do the right thing, to save people, NOT for personal purpose. That scene is there for a reason. I love LOVE LOVE Snape ever more after Book 7! He's truly the best character of the series! I feel so vindicated for sticking with Snape all along. It was so sweet Harry named his son (THE one who looks most like him with Lily's eyes~) after Snape, as if Snape reincarnated as Harry's son. And the "THE bravest man he's ever known" was practically the little 'bouya' of the whole seemingly too sweet/pointlessly mundane epilogue. I knew it, it IS all about Snape in the end. :DDDD D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:58:46 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:58:46 -0000 Subject: snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172379 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mark_anders01" wrote: > > Could somebody actually tell what the Order tangibly gained from Snape being so close to Voldemort for all those years? He risked and lost so much but I cannot recall one specific piece of information that he was able to give to the Order. > Carol responds: In OoP, we see him about to give a report supplemented or illustrated by a dozen rolls of parchment. His report is both highly anticipated and well-received. (half the Order surrounds him, talking excitedly, as he leaves). The rolls of parchent are top secret, and Bill quickly evanescoes them. We're limited by Harry's pov and by JKR's desire to keep Snape's motives and loyalties mysterious for as long as possible. However, since the book is largely about the conspiracy to keep Voldemort focused on the Prophecy orb (and at the same time, keep Harry ignorant of it), it seems to me almost certain that Snape has somehow copied the building plans that Voldemort is using in his plan to break into the (highly mysterious) Department of Mysteries. I'm quite sure that the Unspeakables don't just leave such documents lying around. Maybe LV or Lucius Malfoy obtained them from the Imperiused Bode and Snape found and magically duplicated them--at great personal risk. At any rate, it's clear that he does provide the Order with important information, and since part of that information is the plan of a building, it makes sense to me that it would be the plan of the Department of Mysteries and, specifically, the Hall of Prophecy. Beyond that, given the limitations that JKR imposes on us and her desire to make him seem sinister, it's impossible to know what other information he provided. That he did so, and that the Order members know it and are (with the exception of Sirius Black) grateful seems clear from their reactions in that early chapter of OoP. During the school year, we see him reporting to Dumbledore personally on a number of occasions without necessarily knowing what it's about. I'm guessing that the instances when he actually risks his life to obtain information occur mostly during the summer or Christmas holidays from the end of GoF to the Christmas holiday in HBP. The rest of the time he's at Hogwarts, ostensibly spying on Dumbledore. And we see him risking his life again in DH by providing information provided by his source (Dumbledore's portrait? Mundungus?) but omitting the key point. It seems likely that he reports back to Dumbledore (or in DH, Dumbledore's portrait) with a summary of each DE meeting or encounter with Voldemort. He certainly told Dumbledore (and only Dumbledore) about LV's plan to have Draco try to murder DD (and his expectation that Draco would fail). Carol, glad to have real canon discussion among the reactions to DH From sherriola at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 22:50:59 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:50:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46a68255.01538c0a.616a.1e37@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172380 Leslie41: Why should there be a confrontation now? What is needed is understanding. Of course she would not let Snape taunt Harry, because Snape's taunts of Harry usually had a point to them. They were usually used to educate him. And when those taunts failed (as with Harry's occlumency lessons), it's Harry that is seen to be at fault, not Snape. Sherry: That's not quite true in the case of occlumency. It is precisely Harry's emotions that help him block Voldemort in DH. I've only read the book once, so I can't quote which chapter or even paraphrase the section, but I commented to my friend reading the book with me, that Snape's so-called advice to Harry to close his mind, or not to wear his emotions on his sleeve was exactly the wrong advice for Harry. Doing it, trying even to do it Snape's way doesn't work. That doesn't make either Snape's or Harry's way wrong, but if Snape had bothered ever to get to know who Harry truly was, instead of hating him for being James and lily's son, he could have actually helped him learn. Sherry From felicialso at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:53:25 2007 From: felicialso at yahoo.com (Felicia Soechting) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:53:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Who's that creature?!? Message-ID: <733282.42531.qm@web33003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172381 that was Voldemorts soul. Remember at the end of the book when Potter talks to Voldemort about remorse, he says ......"Think, and try for some remorse, Riddle"...........Riddle says..."What is this?"......................"It's your last chance," said Harry, "it's all you've got left....I've seen what you'll be otherwise....Be a man...try...Try for some remorse....." page 741 Felicia --------------------------------- Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com Tue Jul 24 22:59:54 2007 From: cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com (clairvoyant812) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:59:54 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter as a "Classic" Series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172382 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Well, I think I only posted 4 times before now, so hopefully, the > List Elves won't get me! > > I hear some people saying they'll never read the series again and > some other such nonsense. Why? Would be my question. Now that I know > HRH makes it through, I can't wait to read them ALL over again, and > share them with my children and my grandchildren... > > These are classic books, on the level of LotR and Narnia. At least > to me. This is a classic story, and she stuck to the appropriate > happy ending. I saw someone else had quoted Bilbo on this point, and > I agree. > > Of course the book wasn't perfect. No book is. But she has brought > magic back into my life, and made me remember the best of myself at > moments when that seemed unlikely, and these books hold a lot more > whimsy AND profundity than most adult novels I can think of. > > It's a classic, no doubt, that will be read for generations. At > least in my family! Cheers, Katie > Claire: Katie, I completely agree with you. They are classics, and the fact they are, perhaps, flawed does not detract from that at all, not for me at least. They are full of magic and not just the kind where you wave a wand or speak a spell to make things happen. They're magic because they transport the reader out of her mundane, Muggle life into an emotional realm that makes things possible. They entertain, instruct, touch each one of us in different ways. And they have brought a disparate group of people together, adults, discussing passionately a group of "children's" books. If that's not magic, I don't know what is. From darksworld at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:02:04 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:02:04 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172383 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pswannkcrrcom" wrote: > For me...Hedwig. This loss was totally unexpected and devastating. I > mourn the people we lost but they had a choice about fighting. Hedwig > was an innocent--just taking care of Harry. > Charles: I might never forgive JKR for killing off Hedwig. There wasn't any real point to it. It was just a matter of convenience for her. I can see her right now, sitting down to write, thinking, "What'll I do about that damn owl?" I had watched the interview where she said the book was going to be a bloodbath, and I expected deaths. Mad-Eye, Remus, Fred, untold numbers of muggles and muggle-borns. But Hedwig's death served no other purpose than the disposal of an inconvenience to the story. That being said, the death that really got to me emotionally was Dobby. You can ask my wife, I was TORN UP! I always get emotionally involved in a story, but that scene is where I had the most emotional involvement in the book. By the time we got to the final battle, I was fairly numb to the deaths. A little twinge, and I moved on. Charles, still upset about Dobby. From caleksandrova at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:05:42 2007 From: caleksandrova at gmail.com (Karina Aleksandrova) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:05:42 -0000 Subject: DH: Short - A continuity error? or some other explanation? (chapt 9 spoiler) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172384 Gary wrote: > > This kind of jumped out at me on my first read. > > Early on, Hermione reveals that she altered her parents' memory and > sent them packing to Australia. Later, in chapter nine, (around page > 190-200 or so, I don't have the book at hand here at work) they were > going to do a memory charm on the two death eaters that went after > them in the cafe, and when Ron said he'd never done a memory charm, > Hermione claimed that she had also never done a memory charm. So how > did she alter her parents' memory without a memory charm? Is this a > simple continuity error, or is there some other way of altering > memories that she might have used on her parents? > > Trivial issue, of course, but I found it mildly annoying. > > Other than that I thought the book was fabulous. > > --gary > I noticed this too, and I didn't like it either. I've seen some people explaining it away, saying that Hermione could have Confunded her parents, rather than Obliviated. Hermione only modified the memories, not completely wiped them, and she said that she can lift the enchantment, whereas from what we???ve seen of Obliviate (Lockhart???s example, in particular) it???s permanent. There were several other examples of Confundus spell in this book (Ron modifying his examiner's memory to pass the driving test; Snape making Mundungus believe he came up with the decoy!Potters plan), so it could be it... I still think that Rowling should have used different wording to make clear which spell is used if it was Confundus. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:06:04 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:06:04 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: <46a68255.01538c0a.616a.1e37@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172385 > Sherry: That doesn't make either Snape's or Harry's way > wrong, but if Snape had bothered ever to get to know who Harry truly was, > instead of hating him for being James and lily's son, he could have actually > helped him learn. Alla: Oh he wanted **Lily's son** to live all right, but we hear him loud and clear whne he responds to DD IMO,that still after all these years he does not give a d*mn about Harry as a person and him wanting Lily son to live is for me perfectly in line with his obsession over Lily and anything that looks like her. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:06:06 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:06:06 -0000 Subject: Give it up for the Man of The Hour: Severus Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172386 Nice to have the list opened again... I've been dying to talk to someone about the book. *chin* *chin* Let's make a toast to the man of the moment, our very own Potions Master, the James Bond of our era, Severus "Snivellus" Snape!! Siriously (yes, that is how I spell it ;) ), How many of you had a huge smile on your faces when we realized that Snape was on teh good side? Didn't tears literally burst out of your eyes when he casted the Patronus Doe in DD's office? I know I did, I'd always been a Severus fan, I wasn't convinced he was a good guy, but still I loved him. Now I'm torn, I don't know any longer which Potterverse 'bad guy''s the one for me. I am torn between Sirius and Severus. Luckily I have a big enough heart for both of them. I think that chapter (The Prince's Tale) was probably the best chapter (or a close second) in the entire series. Dumbledore always said that love was the most powerful power... and did Snape showed it or what?!? He put himself through all sorts of dangers all in the name of love... The bravest man indeed. I've read in The Leaky Lounge (from The Leaky Cauldron) that some people are taking Severus' last words (look...at...me) as his last attempt to look into Lily's eyes, actually I believe he was asking Harry to see him as what he was, to take those memories and realize all he'd done to protect him. That he didn't hate him (I don't think he ever did), that he simply wanted the best for him. Juli - Sad & Happy for book seventh From cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com Tue Jul 24 23:09:56 2007 From: cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com (clairvoyant812) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:09:56 -0000 Subject: Favorite Moment Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172387 I have to say this is my favorite book of the series. I read the book in terror all the way through, as the body count grew and I was sure the end would be quite different from what it turned out to be. The epilogue allowed me to relax and finally enjoy myself. My favorite moment in the book - Molly dueling Bellatrix and becoming Molly Triumphant. So we know where Ginny inherited her ability. From ttyler9 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 22:55:43 2007 From: ttyler9 at yahoo.com (Theriot Tyler) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:55:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: short takes from a former lurker Message-ID: <850010.10189.qm@web63704.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172388 Some thoughts after reading DH... + I am disappointed of Dumbledore in a way, I know in the end he understood and all, but I always saw him as a source of safety and solace. I do see him as more human, though. + Snape does not deserve to be shot, as I thought he deserved to be LOVED and I am sad because he did not even get that and a little angry because he did not have the noble death he deserved. + I really enjoyed it but felt a little lost at times, it was a little far from the "mood" seen in the other books (not the character mood, but the beneral mood or atmosphere of the books). + I greatly missed Sirius. + I did not really like Molly killing Bellatrix, IMNSHO Neville had to do that. At least Augusta, for cryin out loud. + What's behind the veil then? + And behind the closed door? + And the person who "managed to perform magic left in life"? + Irma Pince = Eileen Prince? + Snape's headmaster portrait - not mentioned and I would have liked to see it. Is he really dead? + Fawkes? + Aim your darts at me, but I'd have liked to see "Hagger" as headmaster. + Epilogue was a little too cheesy for me taste. + I did like the happy ending though. + Unimportant as he is, I wanted to see Nottsie (Theodore Nott) again. + And I would have liked Nottsie to sort of lead the "Enough Death Eating, Slytherins!" rebellion. After all his father was injured fighting for the DEs, he was old and is probably dead by now (injured at the end of OOTP). And his mother's death is prolly DE-related as well. JKR mentioned that he does not feel the need to join any gangs, but that does not mean he would not make a good leader. + I wanted a Snape-Harry talk. Snivelly could have given a second chance to see Harry in a different way and actually express it. The development of a possible relationship and eventually a friendship would have been great but rather uncomfortable, and I think Severus had to die. But a moment of truth, please... + I expected a more magnificent post-Voldy life for Harry but at least he got to be happy. + I MISS SIRIUS. + I'll miss Lupin. + Hagrid seems by far a greater source of goodness than Dumbledore really was. + Kingsley for minister! This one was excellent. + I really liked the analogy of the three abandoned kids who find a home at Hogwarts (Tom, Severus & Harry) because one of them was the one who chose hatred, the second tried both and decided on love, and the third gave it all for love and was even ready to sacrifice his own life. + Some might argue that Snape was not "good" but "Lilyfied", because he switched to the "good" side because of what happened, and if Lily had been a Death Eater, Severus would have gladly followed her to the bad side. Well, yes, but then he would still be following love and doing it all for love. I think a person whose "engine" is unselfish love cannot really be called "bad". + Poor Voldy... + Chapter 33 was absolutely special. I know his love was obsessive and whatnot, but unlike Voldemort, Severus was able to care for someone and choose love. May the Prince and all the dead rest in peace in our minds. - Terry ____________________________________________________________________________________ Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:12:04 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:12:04 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172389 > Alla: > > Oh he wanted **Lily's son** to live all right, but we hear him loud > and clear whne he responds to DD IMO,that still after all these years > he does not give a d*mn about Harry as a person and him wanting Lily > son to live is for me perfectly in line with his obsession over Lily > and anything that looks like her. No, he doesn't give a damn about Harry as a person. Still, he does the right thing. That's Snape all over. And he doesn't just do it for Lily's sake. Because Snape has changed. Fred loses an ear because Snape saves Lupin, for example, whom he cares less for than Harry. Snape regrets having to witness the deaths of people (such as Charity) that he, because of his circumstances as a double agent) cannot save. Can you give him credit for something, just one thing, without tearing him down and impugning his reasons for doing it? The man did help to save the world, after all. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:12:27 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:12:27 -0000 Subject: Evil is a stronfg worsd (was: Snape is still Evil?) In-Reply-To: <434749.32139.qm@web82208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172390 "doliesl at ..." wrote: Ali Wrote > JKR has yet proven to me that Snape isn't evil. I am a charter member of the I hate Snape club, I don't believe you could find anybody senior to me. After reading book 7 I conclude that Snape was a total SOB, but was he evil? Well, you're unlikely to find a more unpleasant person than Snape but as Hermione said evil is a strong word. Snape was brilliant, powerful, and outrageously brave, a classic literary hero; in other words Snape was a complete bastard. You just can't just sum up Snape's life with a few dozen words, he's far far too complex for that, he's both the devil and the angel, the hero and the villain. and I don't think I'm smart enough to figure out which of the two aspect of his personality is in the ascendancy, and that is why Snape the literary character belongs to the ages. Eggplant From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:13:30 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) Message-ID: <752033.85478.qm@web80502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172391 Magpie: No flames from me. If you want support, that's what I got out of it too. A very small redemption, one that leaves me looking back on Snape's behavior throughout the books and finding him a lot less of a character than I thought he was. And I thought Snape *was* good. I never doubted for a second he was DDM. I had argued with Dana that being a double agent doesn't mean you can't also have had a true epiphany and become a different person. I still believe that's possible, but her description of Snape was the correct one. I'm surprsied at Ali and your one note reading of Snape. Just because we found out Lily being the *initial* motivation for Snape doesn't mean he never evolve or not care for anything else beside Lily later on. And it certainly shouldn't flatten of his character in the previous books, as least not the way I see it. In fact the pensieve flashback clearly shows us Snape does things that has nothing to do with Lily and that he does believe in doing the right thing. Such as his attempt at saving Lupin. his anger and frustration toward Dumbledore fatal injuired by the ring, his geninue hatred feeling for having to kill Dumbledore, him telling Phineas never using the word "mudblood", his lament on "people he couldn't save"...etc etc.. I see him doing these beyond selfish reasons/love for lily. Dumbledore knows Snape DOES care for Harry deep inside his heart, even if it's in a "tought love" sort of way. That's why he teased him about it, even knowing Snape would not admit it. All in all, I think JKR intentionally to keep Snape mysterious for readers' interpretation. Haters (ex: Alla) can still hate him and read everything he does as "disgusting/selfish/evil" whatever, while for me his actions clearly shows that he's a courageous tragic hero. Magpie: And I must add I find Harry's naming his son after this guy frankly bizarre. It's strange enough naming him after Dumbledore given the weirdness there. But naming your kid after the guy who treated you badly all your life because he hated you and got your parents killed with less than total regret, because it turned out he protected your life as part of his obsessive love of your mother the whole time? Yeah, that's...creepy. I have to disagree and I don't find it creepy at all. I agree with JKR and Harry's view of Snape being a courageous man. And I like how it shows Harry has to deal with recognize that during those 19 years. Jo From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue Jul 24 23:14:03 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:14:03 -0000 Subject: Huge thank you to the List Elves Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172392 I just wanted to thank all the List Elves who put themselves 'in harm's way' to ensure spoilers did not appear prior to the release of DH. I know you are all as obsessed with the Harry Potter series as I am (my wife and I haven't stopped talking about it) and I prey that your enjoyment of the final book was not spoiled by anything that you may have seen!! Whilst I was still queueing for the book at 1am, the fellow in front of me started reading the last few pages of DH, and I thought if he says anything I will not be responsible for my actions. I'm sure the same fear ran through you every time you had to check a post. Thanks again. As for the book, I couldn't imagine it would be that good. I could never understand why DD was so agitated in HBP when trying to explain the importance of facing LV with his head held high. And yet it WAS the most important lesson for Harry. I always worried that if it was 'just love' that would defeat LV it would be a little hokey. But it was love in all it forms - from DD's/Hagrid's/Lily's incredibly unselfish love to Snape's/even Narcissa's very selfish love. And JKR still managed to shock me with unexpected occurrences. I found LV's murder of Snape as surprising as anything in the series. The man truly was evil! And I was also surprised that DD had not totally confided in Snape! But I will finish with one question - Just how did LV retrieve his wand from Godric's hollow? Brothergib - who selfishly read the book alone, despite his sons pleas to read it aloud! From cottell at dublin.ie Tue Jul 24 23:15:35 2007 From: cottell at dublin.ie (muscatel1988) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:15:35 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172393 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" wrote: > Annemehr: > I see no contradiction there. Surely, Voldemort's every choice did > indeed *show* he was a sociopath (or, psychopath, I think JKR > actually said -- I know there's a difference, but I'm no expert). You're right - she did say "psychopath". Oops. (http://www.accio- quote.org/articles/2006/0801-radiocityreading1.html) Though I'm not sure that "sociopath" isn't a better term - they tend to be able to function much better in society, and to be charming and plausible, much as we saw the young Tom Riddle behaving in HBP. My point was really that he seems to be presented as solely the product of awful nature and horrible nurture. Snape, on the other hand, with a rather similar background, was able to love, and then to show remorse. From kamilaa at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:16:48 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:16:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172394 While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle initial of F... And what about *Sirius*?? No James Sirius to go along with Albus Severus?? Perhaps Harry & Ginny are awaiting son #3, who will be Sirius Remus Potter. I was put off by that too. Well, okay, first I was put off (and out, and over the top, and lots of other omgtoomuchplzstopnow type emotions) by the Great Roll Call of the Dead that Ginny and Harry seem to have indulged themselves in. But then, once the 'I can NOT believe I'm reading this tripe" wore off and I had a moment to think, I too wondered where in the world poor Fred's namesake was. I think that's what I hated most about the epilogue: to see such a short snapshot of only the Trio's offspring. I didn't give a fig about them, and I still don't. I wanted to know if Harry is an Auror; I want to know if Hermione really did effect change in the lives of House Elves; I want to know if George had the heart to keep on with the joke shop, and if he did, did Percy just show up one day and start filing things away, and then came back a day or so later, just to make sure the sellers he'd contacted the first day were keeping to their bargain, and after that came back again, to ensure all the shipments came in alright, and so, after a month or so just became part of the place, or did George have to go on alone. *sniff* I wanted to know these sorts of things - I really could care less what they named their offspring. Kamil -->who thinks the book is a much better read with the last chapter safely consigned to the rubbish bin From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:13:21 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:13:21 -0000 Subject: Why Snape is my hero, an analysis of "The Prince's Tale" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172395 zgirnius: I absolutely LOVED this book. I am still feeling a bit too emotional about it to reread it, but I am looking forward to doing so in the near future, and then the series. I was so pleased that, as I expected, the Trio and Ginny made it out alive and (relatively) unscathed. I loved Molly the dowdy, comic relief housewife, having her day. I sobbed for the death of that annoying waste of space, Dobby, when he died and was buried by Harry. I was pleasantly surprised by the revelation of Dumbledore's dark past. And loved the Kreacher subplot. More than anything, I absolutely cannot get over Snape, his life, death, and especially every last, lovely bit of "The Prince's Tale". And find myself puzzled over the disappointment of many of my fellow DDM!Snape believers with his treatment in the book, what I saw in the book was everything I had hoped, and more. It is true that Snape did not have an epiphany when he realized Lily was in danger. I ADORE Rowling for writing it that way! It is so much more realistic, to me. And yet, in my opinion, he died one of the true heroes of the tale. I look at the progression of memories Snape gives to Harry starting with the first one with Dumbledore, and I see the beginning and continuation of a process. Snape went from the young DE with the one grace note of his love for his erstwhile best friend, to a person who merited Dumbledore's trust and Harry's naming of his son. That first conversation, in which he admits already having gone to Voldemort, is the first step in the process. If he has already gone to Voldemort, why is he there? It appears Voldemort did at least consider granting the request, since he did ask Lily to step aside. Snape must know that Dumbledore will protect not just Lily, and her family, even though he is quite honest that he could not care less. Further, his demeanor and his own words both reveal that he considers it possible that Dumbledore will simply kill him. Finally, even when Dumbledore makes it quite clear that of course he will protect the Potters, he agress that he will of "Anything" Dumbledore asks to obtain that protection. "Anything", so that Lily could live and be protected, together with her husband and son. "True love" involves care for the well-being of the beloved, and Snape exhibits it here. If she *and her family* remain safe, there is nothing in it for him except the warm and fuzzy feeling that she is alive and happy. It would, of course, be better if he cared also about Harry and James and random nameless victims of the Death Eaters, but this is why I consider it a first step, not the end. "Anything" translates, at this point in time, to becoming Dumbledore's spy after this conversation, I presume. This based on Dumbledore's Pensieve testimony. Next we have a scene shortly after the Potters are killed. Dumbledore confides to Snape that Voldemort will be coming back, and Snape agrees to take on the task of helping Dumbledore protect Harry when Voldemort does return. He does this because he feels remorse for his role in Lily's death. How this is construed as an evil motivation, eludes me. Again, it would be *better* if he was equally sorry about James (but, frankly, that would strain credulity for me). We move into the scenes that overlap the series timeline. The clincher, for me, is the conversation following the argument in the Forest. Dumbledore reveals his plan, and Snape is first horrified that it involves the death of Harry. While my reading of this scene, that Snape actually *does* care that Harry will die may seem overly sentimental to some, it is my opinion that Dumbledore in that scene shares my view. He asks Snape if it is possible he has come to care for Harry, and Snape denies it angrily, shooting off the Doe Patronus as `evidence' (it ain't, just because he has come to care for Harry as a person does not mean his Patronus should change, Harry's is consistently a stag for James. All it means is that he loves Lily still). Why would Dumbledore get all teary eyed over his convenient obsession with a long-dead woman? Or his true love for same, since it is hardly news to Dumbledore at this point? I don't think that is it, I think he knows Snape is denying it because it is his nature to `hide the best' of himself, not `wear his heart on his sleeve', etc. Also, why does Snape bother to show any more of the memories that we see to Harry after the explanation of why Harry must die? The obvious answer seems to me to be that it is because he wants to be vindicated in Harry's eyes, something that could only matter to him if he cared what Harry thought of him. There is no reason Harry needs to know that George's ear getting cut off was an accident, resulting from Snape's attempt to protect *Remus Lupin*, of all people! But Harry would care, of course. That memory shows a huge change in Snape from the moment of his `return' over Lily's danger. Lupin is not important to the plan. Lupin is a man Snape has previously accused of complicity in an attempt to murder him. If Snape had done nothing, Dumbledore's portrait would never know, noone would ever know, except Snape himself. The action carries the risk of exposure, if a fellow DE were to observe and understand it. So why does he do it?! I see only one answer, because it has become a natural action to him. As he tells Dumbledore, the only people he has watched die recently, are those he could not save; and Lupin was one he thought he could save, so he made the attempt. (I love the irony that Lupin is the one who goes on about Snape's cruel use of Sectumsempra after that incident!) Then we have the memory discussing getting the sword to Harry, in which Phineas, reporting on Hermione, refers to her as the Mudblood. And Snape calls him on it. The two huge things we could have held against Snape at the start of his redemption, his lack of care for anyone except Lily and himself, and his allegiance to the pureblood ideology, are both shown to be gone. And he is shown to be taking risks to help people for whom he has no love. He dies a very fitting death for a spy, in the shadows, not out in battle ? keeping hidden his allegiance (and thus the fact that he is not and never was, the master of the Elder Wand), and providing Harry with vital intelligence as he dies. His final words, "Look at me!" have in my view, a double meaning. The obvious meaning several posters have described as creepy. But how is Snape's wish to see Lily's eyes as he knows he is dying any different from Harry's use of the Resurrection Stone to give himself courage as *he* goes to his death? The other meaning is an injunction to Harry to look at him, and see him as he really is. Which Harry does when he looks at Snape's memories. It would have made little psychological sense for Harry to spend much time processing this data right after seeing it, since together with the story of Snape's fall and redemption he got the news that he himself must die within the hour, a matter which naturally absorbed his full attention. (On the other hand, as I was a sobbing weepy mess too teary eyed to read for several minutes, I did). But his final evaluation, at a later time, I deem to have been similar to mine. Nothing else explains his choice to give his younger son, the one who inherited his grandmother's green eyes, the middle name "Severus". --zgirnius, who is convinced that Rowling `howled' after finishing "The Prince's Tale"; something I believe we have in common. From chaomath at hitthenail.com Tue Jul 24 23:20:17 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:20:17 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172396 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > I actually felt very confident -- I mean, *very* confident! -- of my > DDM!Snape position all along. I would listen to other arguments, I > would read posts, but I always had a little inner smirk going, and a > silent thought to myself, "I'm not budging; I think I've got this > one nailed." (So I was very, very happy to find out I was right.) > > BUT. > > In the early parts of DH, after the scene at Malfoy Manor and after > I looked back to confirm it had indeed been Snape who'd provided > the 'four days before his birthday, not the night before' > information, I had my first BIG moment of doubt about my position as > a DDM!Snaper. (Not a Snape lover, mind you, but a full-fledged DDM! > Snaper.) I had exactly the same reaction. I had to force myself to stop reading several times (otherwise I'd have burned through it in less than a day), and after this scene, when I was weeding the garden, I thought to myself: "Ambiguous!Snape has left the building." I wasn't too sure how I felt about that, but I've learned that I don't enjoy work like JKR's if I analyze it too much before I've finished the book. So I pressed on, and happily was rewarded at the end. Well, I was happy to be right, but it was pretty boring to have it all done in exposition. Yeah, I know it was a flashback, but it was like exposition to me. Too much of JKR "telling" instead of "showing." But that's a common fault with her writing. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue Jul 24 23:23:16 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:23:16 -0000 Subject: Evil is a stronfg worsd (was: Snape is still Evil?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172397 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "doliesl@" wrote: > > Ali Wrote > > > JKR has yet proven to me that Snape isn't evil. > > I am a charter member of the I hate Snape club, I don't believe you > could find anybody senior to me. After reading book 7 I conclude that > Snape was a total SOB, but was he evil? Well, you're unlikely to find > a more unpleasant person than Snape but as Hermione said evil is a > strong word. Snape was brilliant, powerful, and outrageously brave, a > classic literary hero; in other words Snape was a complete bastard. > > You just can't just sum up Snape's life with a few dozen words, he's > far far too complex for that, he's both the devil and the angel, the > hero and the villain. and I don't think I'm smart enough to figure out > which of the two aspect of his personality is in the ascendancy, and > that is why Snape the literary character belongs to the ages. > > Eggplant > Brothergib: Snape's role is to prove that love (no matter what form it comes in) is more powerful than evil. Was Snape rotten to the core? Absolutely! Would he have remained a Death Eater and killed many wizards/witches in LV's name if it weren't for Lily? More than likely. But he did love Lily. And that love overcame all the evil tendencies within him. I'm sure he hated most of the wizards/witches (children or adults) he had to deal with at Hogwarts. He probably didn't even like DD a great deal. But after he had been the reason for Lily's death he hated himself more than anyone (with the exception of LV). In the end, he showed great remorse for what he had done, and he did everything he could to make up for his betrayal of Lily. He was a brave nasty piece of work, who fell in love and ultimately had a hand in saving the entire wizarding world. And finally - I would not have named my son after Snape once I had learned the truth. I still would have hated him. But that just shows why Harry will always be the better man! Brothergib From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:25:58 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:25:58 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172398 Leslie41: > No, he doesn't give a damn about Harry as a person. Still, he does the > right thing. That's Snape all over. And he doesn't just do it for > Lily's sake. Because Snape has changed. Fred loses an ear because > Snape saves Lupin, for example, whom he cares less for than Harry. > Snape regrets having to witness the deaths of people (such as Charity) > that he, because of his circumstances as a double agent) cannot save. > > Can you give him credit for something, just one thing, without tearing > him down and impugning his reasons for doing it? > > The man did help to save the world, after all. > Alla: I give him a credit for doing a right thing for the sake of Lily, NOT for the sake of saving the world, but that is surely more than I wanted to give him credit for, Anything else? I am also forced to credit him for some change over the years, I guess, but I have lot of doubt that he would ever come to the right side if Voldemort would have agreed to spare Lily. He bargained with Voldemort first. The words "you disgust me" summed it up for me quite well. He could care less if husband and baby of the woman he gave to Voldemort will survive. Credit for that? Harry is a noble and forgiving soul indeed. But as I said, him saving Lupin and telling Phinneas not to call Hermione mudblood ( thanks Zara for that page by the way) do point to me that Snape changed **over the years**. It is surely a progress from calling every person of Lily's birth mudblood if you ask me. Alla. From valerie at calithwain.com Tue Jul 24 23:16:46 2007 From: valerie at calithwain.com (Valerie Frankel) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:16:46 -0000 Subject: DH:What about all the comments JKR made about what we would/wouldn't find out? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172399 > Julie: > "In my books, magic almost always shows itself in a person > before age 11; however, there is a character who does manage > in desperate circumstances to do magic quite late in life, but > that is very rare in the world I am writing about." > I'm not seeing this as being Neville. To me this would be > someone who has never performed magic before? > Next question: > Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses? > JKR: Good question - yes, a few of them, but that information > is sort of restricted - you'll find out why.. > I missed that one, did anyone see that one? > WHERE was Crookshanks???? Did Hermione send him off to > Australia too? For a character doing magic late in life, some people on chatrooms have fingered Stan Shupike who may, according to circumstantial evidence, be a squib. Others noticed Ted Tonks, who heals Harry but started as a muggle. THe spouse question may just be the entire Snape and has he been in love answer. Crookshanks? Very good question. THough I think it would be sweet if she sent him to Australia to keep him safe and have him watch her parents. The bottom line, I'm sure is that JKR plans to put in this stuff, and some, like SNape's patronus, makes it, and some doesn't. We fans read all this very very closely. Valerie Frankel Author of Henry Potty and the Pet Rock: An Unauthorized Harry Potter Parody From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:29:48 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:29:48 -0000 Subject: Why Snape is my hero, an analysis of "The Prince's Tale" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172400 Zgirnius: > He dies a very fitting death for a spy, in the shadows, not out in > battle ? keeping hidden his allegiance (and thus the fact that he is > not and never was, the master of the Elder Wand), and providing Harry > with vital intelligence as he dies. His final words, "Look at me!" > have in my view, a double meaning. The obvious meaning several > posters have described as creepy. But how is Snape's wish to see > Lily's eyes as he knows he is dying any different from Harry's use of > the Resurrection Stone to give himself courage as *he* goes to his > death? The other meaning is an injunction to Harry to look at him, > and see him as he really is. Which Harry does when he looks at > Snape's memories. Alla: Zara, I loved your analysis all over again. Disagreed with a lot of it, but loved. Just wanted to say that this bit I indeed did not find that creepy , heheh, because it indeed reminded me of Harry wanting to see his loved ones before dead. >> --zgirnius, who is convinced that Rowling `howled' after > finishing "The Prince's Tale"; something I believe we have in common. > Alla: I am so hoping JKR would qualify in the chat, but I am hoping that JKR was crying over Harry agonising over his death chapter. :) We shall see. From bamf505 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:32:48 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <952234.45631.qm@web31511.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172401 --- Eddie wrote: > Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > Eddie > > > bamf: Trelawny, I think. We'd never seen her do any magic, and any proper witch or wizard would have simply repaired any broken tea cups. Instead, she sweeps them up and throws them out. bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 24 23:33:12 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:33:12 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172402 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kamil wrote: I too wondered where in the world poor Fred's namesake was. I think that's what I hated most about the epilogue: to see such a short snapshot of only the Trio's offspring. I didn't give a fig about them, and I still don't. I wanted to know if Harry is an Auror; I want to know if Hermione really did effect change in the lives of House Elves; I want to know if George had the heart to keep on with the joke shop, and if he did, did Percy just show up one day and start filing things away, and then came back a day or so later, just to make sure the sellers he'd contacted the first day were keeping to their bargain, and after that came back again, to ensure all the shipments came in alright, and so, after a month or so just became part of the place, or did George have to go on alone. *sniff* I wanted to know these sorts of things - I really could care less what they named their offspring. va32h: But that is the BEAUTY of a vague epilogue. You can have all the things you want for your ending (your idea that Percy would gradually become a partner in the joke shop is entirely fitting), and some other reader can have all the things they want in their ending. I will never understand the obsessive need some readers have (not singling anyone out) to have each and every question, no matter how minute, answered in full by the author. As soon as JKR shared her characters with us, they became OUR characters too. Make whatever future you want for them. Who cares what JKR would have done - she didn't, you can. As for Fred - I will say it again, surely GEORGE was much closer to Fred than Harry or even Ron. If anyone would name a son after Fred it would be his twin. va32h From chaomath at hitthenail.com Tue Jul 24 23:33:39 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:33:39 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape, mostly (was:Re: My Officially First Deathly Hallows Post!!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <65EBBFD7-6960-4554-8A87-0CA8FF36506A@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172403 On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:53 PM, spaebrun wrote: > > Really the only 'good Slytherin' we learn about in this book was Snape > and then this remark to him - it really implied that he should have > been a Gryffindor. So we learn that all decent people are Gryffindors > at heart, or what? > > I was really disappointed that the whole sorting thing was never > really questioned. Book 5 talks so much about uniting the houses, and > what do we get? 3 houses against Slytherin. Bad message. *sigh* Not only a bad message, but inconsistent within the themes of the series. That really bugged me. I had always expected some sort of final scene where we learn that Hogwarts is no longer divided, that it's gone back to how it was in the beginning, and Salazar Slytherin is redeemed. Perhaps with the Hogwarts banner -- four quadrants, each devoted to one house -- to symbolize a final unity? Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:34:41 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:34:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book Message-ID: <202554.14444.qm@web80515.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172404 > Alla: > > Oh he wanted **Lily's son** to live all right, but we hear him loud > and clear whne he responds to DD IMO,that still after all these years > he does not give a d*mn about Harry as a person and him wanting Lily > son to live is for me perfectly in line with his obsession over Lily > and anything that looks like her. leslie: No, he doesn't give a damn about Harry as a person. Still, he does the right thing. That's Snape all over. And he doesn't just do it for Lily's sake. Because Snape has changed. Fred loses an ear because Snape saves Lupin, for example, whom he cares less for than Harry. Snape regrets having to witness the deaths of people (such as Charity) that he, because of his circumstances as a double agent) cannot save. Can you give him credit for something, just one thing, without tearing him down and impugning his reasons for doing it? The man did help to save the world, after all. me: Leslie, EXACTLY! And Snape doesn't care for fame/recognitions/order of merlins or whatever superficial things that haters used to always bashed Snape for either. In fact, Snape does the right thing and risk his life knowing he gets NOTHING in return, and when i say nothing I really mean NOTHING. And he doesn't mind that as that's his choice for atonement. Not only that, he is distrusted by both sides in the war (order memebers don't really trust him nor the DE), he's able to confide only in Dumbledore. The real price he paid was not dying, but in living a lonely and painful life. I like what someone said: being good is hard enough; how much harder it must be to be good, when everyone around you assumes you are evil. And I still think Snape does care about Harry as a person in a certain degree, otherwise Dumbledore wouldn't tease him about it. Joan From AllieS426 at aol.com Tue Jul 24 23:35:12 2007 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:35:12 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172405 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis" wrote: > When Harry views > the thoughts Snape leaves him on his deathbed, DD tells Snape to > betray the escape date, for as to not do so would have blown Snape's > cover. DD also tells Snape to plant the idea (in, IIRC, Mundungus' > head) of polyjuicing Harry to make it more difficult for the DEs to > figure out which one of the seven was the real Harry. > Allie now: But how did Portrait Dumbledore even **KNOW** the escape date? He was dead months before Harry's 17th birthday, and I doubt the Order had planned which particular Saturday they were going to take Harry so far in advance. From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:36:51 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:36:51 -0000 Subject: (SPOILERS!!!) Finished on Sunday morning... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172406 Hi all! well, I was reading a few posts and since I couldn't really relpy to everything so I just wanna say what I thought. DDM!Snape- well, not exactly. It was more like: Dumbledore's Emotional Punching Bag (DEPB)!Snape. Poor fella. He really had a hard time in these books. And it looks like DD didn't make it really easy for him most of the time, either. DD- kind of a joer at tiems, huh? And what a nutty past! Awe... to see Ariana in the Mirror of Erised. (tears goe here...) Poor, poor Dobby. Totally caught me off guard. Ok, I really thought Hargrid was a gonner. I KNEW HP was a gonner!... but come back? well, only because someone else said that the series is a long and drawn out Christ analogy... so he had to be resurrected. But I say it's well done. Don't the Malfoys make you feel bad for them? "Umm... Narcissa, dearest... I think we screwed up." "Yes, Lucius. I certainly think we have." (That's my own internal scene between Momma and Pappa Malfoy). And can I just say how delighted I was to finally see Harry figure out that the one thing Voldemort would get upset by is to be taunted! And Harry taunts him. Lovely ending duel, btw... at the begining Harry is told that his sheild charm is like a "signature" spell for him and that's how the DE's knew which one was the real Harry (And why didn't someone say somehting before they all left Privet Drive? Jerks). So, there's Voldemort doing hit "classic" spell: AK and he's destroyed by Harry's classic spell... LOL.. loved it. In a way she made Voldemort a toal moron. LOL... Well, all speculation asside, I ahve to say that it's not my very favorite but it is my faorite ending to a series. Really well done. From doliesl at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:37:32 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:37:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Epilogue: What about FRED??? Message-ID: <558510.33229.qm@web82205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172407 While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle initial of F... And what about *Sirius*?? No James Sirius to go along with Albus Severus?? Perhaps Harry & Ginny are awaiting son #3, who will be Sirius Remus Potter. D: James's middle name wasn't poignant enough for JKR to bring up given how the epilogue was written. So I'd say it's non-matter. I'd say it's hard to see Ginny popping out another kid 11 years later. I was put off by that too. Well, okay, first I was put off (and out, and over the top, and lots of other omgtoomuchplzstopnow type emotions) by the Great Roll Call of the Dead that Ginny and Harry seem D: Funny how the supposedly "equal" Ginny has NO say in naming the kids after HER family. Maybe it's "James Arthur Potter" and "Lily Molly Potter" (this sounds cute). But none beats "Albus Severus," I love the meaning behind it and how it's JKR's ultimate nod to her two most favorite characters (come on it's so obvious where her love really lies ;D). Did anyone read the news that JKR will be writing an Encyclopedia? Maybe many "where are they now? what job do they do?" answers will be there. Maybe she deliberately didn't mention any of these in the epilogue so you'd have to buy the encyclopedia to find out! XD Seriously, JKR seems to have a 'never trust establishment' thing going on and how useless ministry/aurors were in the story, it's a little weird that many people guess Harry would be an auror. For me, I'd like to know what Luna's been up to the most. D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bamf505 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:39:05 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Who's that creature?!? In-Reply-To: <733282.42531.qm@web33003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <797700.90548.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172408 --- Felicia Soechting wrote: > that was Voldemorts soul. Remember at the end of the > book when Potter talks to Voldemort about remorse, > he says ......"Think, and try for some remorse, > Riddle"...........Riddle says..."What is > this?"......................"It's your last chance," > said Harry, "it's all you've got left....I've seen > what you'll be otherwise....Be a man...try...Try for > some remorse....." page 741 > > Felicia > bamf: It's also WHY Harry survived the AK. Voldie killed the piece of his soul that was in Harry, instead of Harry, IMHO. bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ From andica62 at aol.com Tue Jul 24 23:19:02 2007 From: andica62 at aol.com (jytuarte) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:19:02 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172409 Phyllis: > But I suppose Rowling > would chalk that up to all of the pure-blood families being related > at some point in their family trees (and continuing into the > present - take Ted Tonks Jr. seeing off cousin Victoire on the > Hogwarts Express, whom he apparently is dating). > And lots of hints that things JKR said would be significant never > came up or were answered - what James and Lily did for a living was > supposed to be important; how James got all of the money he passed > on to Harry was also supposed to be important; some of the teachers > were married, but she couldn't tell us which ones because it would > give too much away. Etc. I also thought about previous mentions re: the significance of what James and Lily did for a living and how they acquired their wealth, and consequently was a little disappointed when that wasn't covered. One small point, I got the impression that Victoire was cousin to Harry/Ginny's and Ron/Hermione's kids through the Weasleys, i.e. Bill's and Fleur's daughter, not cousin to Teddy (he was not a blood relation of the Weasley's - just Harry's godson). I could obviously be wrong (I just based my assumption on the French name), but at least my interpretation wouldn't have cousins "snogging". Thanks for all the insights, Phyl.is! jytuarte From moosiemlo at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:24:28 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:24:28 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707241624p742bdb86h50af3e1d6171332e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172410 Eggplant: But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of > the I love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading > the book you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? Lynda: Absolutely not. JKR had said that Snape was a redemptive character. Therefore, he had to be working on the side of good. Or JKR was lying when she said that. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From verosomm at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:25:16 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:25:16 -0000 Subject: Kreacher and Dobby switched! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172411 > Toner: > HRH just leave Kreacher to defend himself against the DEs who > are likely to show up without so much as a warning. How hard > would it have been to call for him, warn him, and then let him > return home to defend it? I know they were worried about DEs > apparating with him, but how hard could it be for all three of > them to overpower the one or two DEs likely to be touching > Kreacher right then? Veronica: But Kreacher DID work at Hogwarts... for almost a year, since the beginning of HBP, and when Harry ordered him to, so he wouldn't be free to go tell Bella and Cissy everything he could ever remember about the order, and again, presumably, all school year once he figured out on Sept. 2 when a DE came into the house that HRH weren't coming back. And I felt that Harry and Hermione, anyway, felt plenty of remorse at having to leave Kreacher and not be able to warn him... I think, too, the fact that he managed to escape the cave after drinking the potion proved he'd probably be able to get away, esp. if he's got Death Eaters who at some point have to leave him to get food; Harry being his master he could easily control every morsel in the house... Also, if HRH HAD summoned him to come and the Death Eaters came with him, the DE's could have summoned VD right away as well. Remember that even though Harry can order Kreacher to apparate to him, he may not be able to do it immediately and they would not have been 100% prepared to fight off the DE's and possibly Voldy. And I REALLY liked that it was Dobby that came to the Malfoys; as their prior servant... to me, this fit perfectly that he was the one to come help the trio and co. there; and everything came full-circle from 5 years prior: Harry set him free via Lucius Malfoy and Dobby set Harry free regardless of LM and co. Veronica From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 24 23:42:25 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:42:25 -0000 Subject: Bragging Rights answer key, chekhov's guns, spoiler report, etc In-Reply-To: <46A68272.70805@fastmail.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172412 Random832 wrote: > > BRAGGING RIGHTS ANSWER KEY > > TK Kenyon/TigerPatronus wrote the questions, JK Rowling wrote the answers: > > - *That Night* at Godric's Hollow > a. Flying motorbike > b. Who else was there? > c. Why was Lily offered the choice/chance to live? > d. What actually happened?? > We actually get to witness this whole scene. I don't recall that 'c' was > answered - It's made clear that he gave her several warnings, so there's > definitely something there that's not shown > Anne Squires: I could be wrong, but I thought LV told her "to stand aside" because Snape had asked him to spare her. > - Hermione & Ancient Runes > It seems to be mentioned once while they're packing, did it ever come > into play after that? Anne Squires: The children's book Hermione got in DD's will was written in ancient runes. The symbol for the Deathly Hallows was not a rune. It was important that Hermione realize this, imho. Thus, they knew it (the DH symbol)was a mystery from DD that needed to be solved. > > - Squeaky stair at #4 Privet Drive > Ah. Here's where I think that Petunia's full story hasn't yet been told. > I think that her first letter from Dumbledore was the start of a long > correspondence, and that is possibly part of why she objected so > strenuously to Snape having seen it. The stair is, of course, where she > keeps the letters. Anne Squires: I like your reading of the stair. > > - Sirius' two-way mirror > Nothing, and I, for one, was VERY disappointed, because the night before > I'd read a fake spoiler that seemed to indicate this was the case. Anne Squires: I'm not sure what the question about the mirror is/was? But, the mirror was very important. It's partner was with Aborforth. Without the mirror Harry wouldn't have been able to have gotten help at Malfoy Manor. The mirror enabled the trio to be saved in Hogsmeade and find Aborforth. > > - SPEW/equality in the WW > Kreacher = Awesome. However, I don't think we saw anything long-term. > It's not even clear that the anti-muggleborn stuff ever got repealed > Anne Squires: In the epilogue Hermione seems perfectly happy. She doesn't seem to be suffering at all under any anti-muggleborn legislation. Also, Ron makes some kind of comment to his son along the lines that Grandpa Weasley would want him to date a muggleborn. Sounds like muggleborns are accepted and equal under under the law. Just my reading of this scene. > > 49. Is Snape an animagus spider? > Unknown. Anne Squires: Snape is a bat animagus. It's at the end of the Sacking of Severus Snape chapter. > > > 50. What were Harry's parents jobs/professions? > Do we find out? I can't recall, and I did double check the letter to Sirius Anne Squires: I don't think we are told their professions. I guess it's not important plot wise; but, I'm just really curious. From entangledhere at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:45:01 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Dudley (Re: Who came to magic late in life?) Message-ID: <857232.27847.qm@web51410.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172413 THIS IS A GREAT QUESTION!!! The woman left us hanging on many subjects. Why did it take Hagrid 24 hours to get Harry to the Dursleys? Huh, huh? And why does the killing curse leave no mark, yet Harry has one? If a Horcrux going in makes a mark, wouldn't Nagini have a little lightning bolt on her head too? I am so infuriated and disappointed that I just don't know what to do with myself. I wasn't expecting this. I was expecting a thorough ending, full of revelations and emotional twists and turns. Instead, I got glorified fanfiction. I am... distraught. *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 aceworker at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:47:06 2007 From: aceworker at yahoo.com (career advisor) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:47:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DH: Epilogue, Unforgivables and Other Quick Thoughts. Message-ID: <381159.74161.qm@web30209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172414 Aslo the bit of soul i nside harry is refered to by Dumbledore on page 687 as being parasitic, which means over time Voldy;s soul bit is taken over harry, harry is becoming more and more evil which is why he can cost Crucio and Imperio now! DA Jones --------------------------------- Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From goonie8803 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:44:42 2007 From: goonie8803 at yahoo.com (goonie8803) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:44:42 -0000 Subject: Importance of Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172415 Elvishooked: Wondering just why Dumbledore found it so important that Harry learn occlumency and thereby closing his mind to LV. Goonie8803: I wondered the same thing, and this is what I came up with: Maybe because DD knew LV would eventually find out the connection was there, and use it to lure Harry to the Dept of Mysteries to save Sirius (who, of course, wasn't there yet), and therefore find the prophecy and take it, because LV couldn't get it himself, and no one else could get it for him. And in DH, all the other people he really cared about were either with him, dead, or else in a place protected from LV and the Death Eaters. But I also wondered: Why would LV re-open the connection, when he closed it for so long after the Dept of Mysteries battle? You'd think he'd want to keep it closed so Harry couldn't know where the Horcruxes were. He must have known it was only a matter of time before Harry learned about them and set out to destory them. After all, he heard the last part of the prophecy: Neither can live while the other survives (or something like that). He knew Harry wasn't just going to sit around and wait for LV to come after him--he was going to look for a way to kill him first. But then, maybe LV re-opened it so that Harry WOULD come, and LV figured they'd meet up along the way. Thoughts? From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Jul 24 23:47:32 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:47:32 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172416 > Alla: > > > > I give him a credit for doing a right thing for the sake of Lily, > NOT for the sake of saving the world, but that is surely more than I > wanted to give him credit for, Anything else? > > I am also forced to credit him for some change over the > years, I guess, but I have lot of doubt that he would ever come to > the right side if Voldemort would have agreed to spare Lily. > > > > He bargained with Voldemort first. The words "you disgust me" summed > it up for me quite well. Hickengruendler: But Voldemort did agree to spare Lily. "Step aside you silly girl." Snape went to Dumbledore nonetheless, probably because he didn't trust Voldemort (understandably so). So, yes, in the beginning Snape's motivations were entirely selfish. There's just that one Muggleborn, he always made an exception for, and he did this time as well. Sure it is disgusting, how less he cared about Harry (or for that matter, the Longbottom family). But it did grow into more, over the years. And since you weren't the only one, who read the epilogue first, (I did as well *g*), I have to say, that I felt incredibily sorry for him in the first chapter, where the Muggle studies teacher got killed. His deaths cene I found very good, really. Mostly because it wasn't the big sacrific emost people seem to have expected. And quite aside from Snape, and because I don't want to waste too many posts for today, I have to say that I loved Neville. My goodness, wa she awesome. From mariabronte at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:47:29 2007 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:47:29 -0000 Subject: It is finished... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172417 "The last enemy that shall be defeated is death" 1 Corinthians 15:26 I will be quite honest and admit that after reading Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince I was seriously concerned about how Rowling was going to get herself out of the very tight corner she was placed in from a narrative point of view. Nevertheless, I hoped that the conclusion of Harry's adventures would vindicate her many fans' ongoing faith in her work. My belief in her abilities a storyteller has been more than justified by the seventh and final installment in the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. I found it a very satisfying conclusion on many levels. It's clear that the series as a whole was always intended to encompass eternal issues; love, sacrifice, life, death, redemption, the path such redemption may take for different people, and the cost of choosing what is right over what is easy. Deathly Hallows is very preoccupied with death; or I should say more precisely, the defeat of death---Voldemort, Dumbledore and Harry have all wrestled with this issue in different ways. The story in Deathly Hallows begins, in a way reminiscent of The Last Battle, The High King or Silver on the Tree with a sense of doom. The Dark is rising and it is up to Harry and his friends, both in the DA and The Order of the Phoenix, to turn it back. Harry, after initially going into hiding with the Weasley family and Hermione, hatches plans to find the rest of the Horcruxes, since he knows this is the final step he must take before Voldemort can be defeated once and for all. The journey will, however, be a long and winding one, and Harry, Ron, and Hermione must overcome many obstacles before their quest is successfully accomplished. It is impossible for me to review Rowling's concluding story without particularly noting my admiration for the supremely satisfying development, over the series as a whole, of the character whom I consider in many ways to be the most interesting and complex to be created in recent fantasy fiction; Severus Snape. Not only do we discover the truth about his loyalties, but the d?nouement Rowling provides satisfies her arc of narrative development on several levels; Snape is not a death eater, but neither does he emerge in the end as an `unlikely hero', though his courage is now firmly established and unquestionable. It is a wonderful irony to discover that in a sense, Dumbledore has betrayed Snape (if only for the greater good) since this puts the two men on an equal footing in a way the reader could not have known. Both need to forgive and be forgiven, which is after all the basis for lasting human relationships. There is no question in my mind, now that the series is complete, that Rowling will ultimately take her place with other much loved fantasy fiction writers such as Susan Cooper, Lloyd Alexander and C.S. Lewis. Any universe that a writer creates will inevitably be a product of the time, place and culture in which they grew up. Rowling's series, like other classic stories, moves beyond a particular time, place, or culture, and thus has the potential to stand the test of time. From andica62 at aol.com Tue Jul 24 23:27:32 2007 From: andica62 at aol.com (jytuarte) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:27:32 -0000 Subject: I DID love DH - General First Observations (LONG) In-Reply-To: <998624.90234.qm@web52709.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172418 > Katie: > Neville pulling Godric Gryffindor's sword out of the Sorting Hat > literally made me drop my book and cry. All I could hear in my > head was Dumbledore saying, "Only a true Gryffindor could have > pulled that out of the Sorting Hat..." Neville definately ends > the series as one of the most well-rounded, brave, and remarkable > characters JK created - and certainly in my top 5. He's amazing. I wholeheartedly agree with you about Neville. I've always loved him, even back when he tried to stop Harry, Ron and Hermione from going out at night, but especially at the Department of Mysteries. I love how his grandmother was too tough to capture and was so proud of Neville (makes me well up now just thinking about it). And a really cool part about Neville's progress was that Harry was an integral part of it, steadily increasing his confidence through the DADA training, Dumbledore's Army, and their friendship. Great stuff, I love it, sometimes seems like the loyalty, bravery and friendships between the kids makes me cry more than the tragedies. But who am I kidding, they both do! jytuarte From denisewcr at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:30:48 2007 From: denisewcr at yahoo.com (Denise Leblanc) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hegwig In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <658617.97514.qm@web54106.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172419 Hedwig in my mind had to die. This showed they had the right Potter. With there being 7 the owl dying was the only way the rest were fake. But I was still sad. Denise From blackcat93 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 24 23:31:19 2007 From: blackcat93 at sbcglobal.net (Sarah) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:31:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <446628.46462.qm@web81812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172420 Sandra: > Hello Libby! That jumped out at me when I read it, and I found the > whole section a surprisingly abrupt episode. I mean, Ron > 'copied' Harry? Parseltongue is a strange collection of > throat-gargly sounds which mean nothing to most wizards, so > how on earth could he have managed all the right hacking > noises after hearing Harry just once? He could have said > something rude or meaningless, or ended up making himself > cough a lot! And he and Hermione just disappeared for a few > pages in all the tension and prelude to chaos, and then > reappeared with a basilisk fang or two. I thought that Ron temporarily gained the ability to speak Parseltongue from being possessed by the locket Horcrux when he destroyed it. On another topic, I think Ron and Hermione had to be away somewhere so Harry could face Evil all by himself. Making Harry confront danger alone with no backup was a climactic and important part of his growth as a character. Sarah, whose first ever HPFGU post ironically is about the last book From bamf505 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:52:04 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:52:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: About Potterwatch Message-ID: <382739.43115.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172421 So, my curiosity is to why all the members of the radio show Potterwatch had 'R' code names? River, Royal, Romulus, and Rapier/Rodent. I also thought it was odd that Ron, who had listened to the show previously, was finally figuring out who was who on the show. It really seemed like a light bulb was going on over his head as he listened to it... bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting From YasminOaks at aol.com Tue Jul 24 23:47:52 2007 From: YasminOaks at aol.com (YasminOaks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:47:52 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Snape is my hero, an analysis of "The Prince's Ta... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172422 Yes Snape has always been my hero too. He has always been my favorite character in the whole series. I thought it was so sad when he asked Harry to "Look at me", so he could see his eyes as he passed on. Oh I just bawled then. It was so touching and really hurt to think of how much he loved Lily and needed to see "her eyes" as he was leaving this world. I always knew he was a good guy. I know he had his faults, but as the books show that so much of his traits were all "man made". He was not accepted and even picked on and teased brutally by so many, especially the Marauders. He was rejected by Lily whom he loved more than life itself. Although they started out as friends, she seemed to push him away too much in my opinion. He was accepted by the ones who were on their way to becoming Death Eaters. He craved acceptance as every human does. He was almost taught from life to be defensive and offensive to keep from being hurt by others. Of course this is my biased opinion, please keep in mind. After reading this book I just was left feeling so badly that Lily had fallen in love with Snape. His love for her never faltered. I think she would have been so happy with him. In my opinion he would have been a much better choice than James. Of course then there never would have been Harry. But still if she had given Snape a real chance and some love I believe he would have followed her lead and never have become a Death Eater. Without Snape maybe Voldemort would never have gained so much power. Yes I did mention before that I am biased, right? :) Snape has just always been my favorite character. I had really been hoping that he would survive. I had my hopes that he was the one that had been given a reprieve. Now I wonder who that person was. I am thinking maybe Draco? As for my opinion on the book. Well I have mixed feelings. I love it. I hate it. I love so much about it. I love how Dudley grew to like and appreciate Harry. That made me feel so good inside. I love how Kreacher came around with some love and kindness. That left me feeling so happy. I was thrilled when Percy came back. But the deaths. Why Fred?????? I can't get over that. My daughter has been wearing black since Sunday for him. He made us laugh. We needed him to live. Dobby, Hedwig, Lupin, Tonks, Colin-- all so beloved to us. Not to mention Moody. I loved so much in the book, but I cried so hard so many times as well. I am re-reading it now, but not sure if I am really ready to read it again and feel all of that emotion. I will be honest and that I was actually in mourning the first 2 days after finishing it. I am feeling much more myself today, but I still cry easily. Sincerely, Cathy ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherriola at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:54:59 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:54:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Snape is my hero, an analysis of "The Prince's Tale" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46a69154.2a528c0a.2a92.5c95@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172423 Zgirnius Then we have the memory discussing getting the sword to Harry, in which Phineas, reporting on Hermione, refers to her as the Mudblood. And Snape calls him on it. The two huge things we could have held against Snape at the start of his redemption, his lack of care for anyone except Lily and himself, and his allegiance to the pureblood ideology, are both shown to be gone. And he is shown to be taking risks to help people for whom he has no love. Sherry: It's well known I have no love for Snape, but this moment, when we see him tell Phineas not to call Hermione a Mudblood was one of the greatest moments in all Snape moments for me. Yes, I think you're right, that Snape did have a progression into realizing his old pure blood ideology was wrong. I'll never forgive him for murdering Dumbledore--not being a fan of the plan and disliking both DD and Snape for it--but I definitely agree that this moment was one of the shining moments. Who knows, on a second read, I could end up coming to believe that in the end, Snape was another victim of Dumbledore. Zgirnius His final words, "Look at me!" have in my view, a double meaning. The obvious meaning several posters have described as creepy. But how is Snape's wish to see Lily's eyes as he knows he is dying any different from Harry's use of the Resurrection Stone to give himself courage as *he* goes to his death? Sherry: I actually didn't find it creepy that his last wish was to see lily's eyes. I found that poignant. After all, he had done all of this for her. It seemed understandable to me that he would want to see those eyes as he died. Even I was moved at Snape's death, and shocked and sickened. I had expected him to die, but that was a terrible way for it to happen. Sherry From miles at martinbraeutigam.de Tue Jul 24 23:53:26 2007 From: miles at martinbraeutigam.de (Miles) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:53:26 +0200 Subject: Dumbledore lying to Snape about Harry's final task Message-ID: <011b01c7ce4d$d482e420$15b2a8c0@miles> No: HPFGUIDX 172424 "So the boy... the boy must die?" asked Snape, quite calmly. "And Voldemort himself must do it, Severus. That is essential." Another long silence. Then Snape said, "I thought... all these years ... that we were protecting him for her. For Lily." "We have protected him because he has been essential to teach him, to raise him, to let him try his strenght," said Dumbledore. (...) "You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?" "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?" Dumbledore does not tell Snape the real plan. He tells him that Harry really has to die, and that he had planned this for years. As we learn later, Dumbledore expected Harry to survive Voldemorts Killing Curse. Why didn't he trust Snape to know the truth? First of all, it WAS necessary that Harry thought there was no other way. That made him face Voldemort wandless - otherwise there might have been a real fight, and he could have been hit by a curse from any DE, with fatal consequences. Only an AK from Voldemort himself would do the trick. But why not tell Snape? Several answers: a) It was necessary for the plot. Snape giving Harry the information the way he did, there would have been no way to change it for the pensieve. Not a good answer, there were different ways for JKR to tell the story. b) Dumbledore expected that Snape would have to give Harry the final instructions via the pensieve. That's possible, but Dumbledore was not a Seer. To foresee that kind of circumstances would stretch DD's abilities a bit, so I don't like the answer. c) Dumbledore didn't trust Snape's feelings towards Harry. I think this answer could be part of the truth. Dumbledore heard many complaints about Harry from Snape over the years, so he might have considered the story about Harry being just a tool (not a human being) to be more comfortable for Snape to hear. Dumbledore himself pretended not to care about the boy, so Snape could join him. d) Dumbledore wanted to see Snape's reaction. This answer can be combined with c). Obviously Snape did *not* like treating Harry as a mere tool. He saw him as Lily's son, the son she died protecting, so he felt responsible to protect him himself. Even implying c) and d) as possible reasons for Dumbledore, I'm not comfortable with Dumbledore not trusting Snape here. By the way - in his last moment Snape wanted to see Lily in Harry, not James as always before - that's why he asked Harry to look into his eyes. Miles From medusafrost at aol.com Tue Jul 24 23:46:14 2007 From: medusafrost at aol.com (Bobbi) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:46:14 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172425 > Charles wrote: > > But Hedwig's death served no other > purpose than the disposal of an inconvenience to the story. > > > Charles, still upset about Dobby. Bobbi: >From a complete lurker(me)....and likely to become one again. I was totally crushed when Hedwig died. I cried and cried, but from a weird sort of standpoint I could understand it. If we look at the name thing and see Hedwig as a symbol for St. Hedwig, the patron St. of orphan children, then her 'death' could be seen as one of the turning points where Harry becomes a man rather then a child. Please don't throw stones or sharp objects. I'm going back to the dungeon now. Bobbi From bamf505 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:56:09 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:56:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Favorite Moment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <875393.54351.qm@web31511.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172426 --- clairvoyant812 wrote: > I have to say this is my favorite book of the > series. I read the book > in terror all the way through, as the body count > grew and I was sure > the end would be quite different from what it turned > out to be. The > epilogue allowed me to relax and finally enjoy > myself. > > My favorite moment in the book - Molly dueling > Bellatrix and becoming > Molly Triumphant. So we know where Ginny inherited > her ability. > > bamf: Minerva telling Filch to get Peeves. "yes, Peeves, you old fool, Peeves! Haven't you been complaining about him for a quarter of a century?" And also, Neville telling the others about his Gran. I think there was finally mutual pride on the part of those two. :D bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC From casmir2012 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 24 23:57:06 2007 From: casmir2012 at yahoo.com (casmir2012) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:57:06 -0000 Subject: Snape, Lupin, Tonks, Luna, Dean, Unanswered Questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172427 I liked the book, and it has many faults. There were so many good parts, funny parts, endearing parts, and exciting parts. Please excuse me for dwelling on the negative a bit more than the positive at the end of this post. I have read in posts that people are hoping for a Neville/Luna thing, but a friend of mine said that Luna and Dean were holding hands at one point in the book. I never verified it; but I believe her. I wonder if Lupin and Tonks death wasn't just some twisted way for them to find happiness together. It seemed Lupin really allowed his social status to control their relationship. He was constricted, severely reserved. Now that they are dead, there can be a full expression of their love; and their child is their legacy, their memory left on earth. (Lupins death also follows the SCAR theory :) Snape: It seemed to me that Lily was the embodiment of purity, kindness, lovliness, gentleness, and love for Snape. I can't help but wonder if his view of her, the one that is able to feed him for almost 2 decades, wasn't built more on an infatuation...an ideal or dream. She was the physical manisfestation of his fantasy...so how much of the real her did he really see or know? His abusive backgroud would pschologically set him up for such a consuming delusion. And illusions are as sweet and comforting as we make them. They knew each other for about 3 or 4 years when all that Hogwarts stuff went down, but it was limited contact being that they were in different houses, plus they were like 12 then 13. How much of an intimate relationship could they have formed in reality? (But as DD says, just 'cause it's in your head don't mean it ain't real.) So, in short, Snape is a man of extreme dilligence and endurance. He caught hold of a beautiful dream and never let it go. Harry's eyes would help him, in death, go back to his dream where he'll stay for eternity. Look....at....me. Very moving. Here is a list of stuff I thought would, or should, be answered and wasn't: What ever happend to the Dursley's? Hermione's parents? DD relationship to Pomfrey the personal lives of hogwart teachers the ford angula the phoenix a description of what happens to everyone down the road no closure on george, his business and life w/o fred how tonks and lupin's child grew up What Harry, Ron and Hermione do for a living tender moments with Ginny -it makes the relationship seem fake the book went on 300-400 pages about their camping trip of starvation for 9 months, but skimmed thru important deaths in one line. Malfoys??? what happened to them in society, everyone knew who they were now. Umbridges comeuppance? how is the ministry ran now? anti segregation laws? more tolerance? I am hoping the movie will answer a few questions, but it probably won't. maybe JKR will address these things on her site. find out what Dudley saw/experienced while being attacked by the dementors. Who used magic late in life? There's more, but I'm getting a headache. Here is a link to a great article about an HP encyclopedia being created. I am sure most of these left out facts will be explained in it. The article has other fun facts like Mr. Weasley having supposed to have died in book 5, and Lupins death was not originally planned. There is more, too. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19935372/ (if it doesn't work, just google "potter encyclopedia" and click on msnbc site.) By the way, you can't get me to believe that Hermione and Ron spent 9 months living together in a tent and never once slipped into a room together, using the "muffliato" spell on the door so that harry wouldn't hear them. :) From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:57:56 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:57:56 -0000 Subject: Various replies regarding espcially Snape. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172428 Alla wrote: Hmm, what other crows I should eat? Oh Prank of course, I thought it would be important and we are due further revelations and it so was not. Valky replies: Oh I wouldn't say that Alla. When I was rereading The Prince's Tale I noticed something a little remarkable about the prank. Did you notice? It happened BEFORE the worst memory scene!! That day Sirius and James taunted Snape in the schoolyard and Lily gave James a serve and a half of what he deserved, all along, James had already saved Severus's life?! I don't know about you but that puts a whole new twist on the scene for me, a strange twist, I don't even understand it because it barely makes any sense except that it shows James good side was present even while he bullied Snape so ruthlessly, the rest is hard to understand. Maybe it was James himself who was the jealous one, Lily, clearly, to my mind loved Snape right back in the preceeding scene, she is blushing at his compliments and pleading with him to avoid evil for her sake, could that be the one reason that tips the balance from James simply disagreeing with Snapes ideology over into the cruel mercilessness in the Pensieve Scene. > Jo wrote: > > In fact the pensieve flashback clearly shows us Snape does things that has nothing to do with Lily and that he does believe in doing the right thing. Such as his attempt at saving Lupin. his anger and frustration toward Dumbledore fatal injuired by the ring, his geninue hatred feeling for having to kill Dumbledore, him telling Phineas never using the word "mudblood", his lament on "people he couldn't save"...etc etc.. I see him doing these beyond selfish reasons/love for lily. > > Dumbledore knows Snape DOES care for Harry deep inside his heart, even if it's in a "tought love" sort of way. That's why he teased him about it, even knowing Snape would not admit it. > > Valky now: I'm agreeing with you here, Jo. Even though Snape kept the best of himself hidden all those years it grew buds in those final few years with Harry. The singularly definitive moment that proves it beyond doubt, he saved Remus Lupin's life at enormous risk to his own, REMUS Lupin.. his years-old enemy who was about to be Ak'ed, Snape stopped it, willfully risking is neck to do so, to me THAT's HUGE! when Snape later rips Lily out of the picture with Harry and James it was a joke in light of that heroic feat in he early chapters and it made me giggle, I could only see it as Snape trying to convince himself that he hadn't evolved feelings beyond his precious relationship with Lily, but to my mind he was just in denial, that man would not have saved the life of a werewolf who was his long time enemy, he would not have had a second thought over an insult directed at the best friend of James's Potter son, Hermione, who he thought of as an intolerable know-it-all anyway, or protect Neville and Luna from the Carrows knowing that nobody would ever see how much he risked for lives that seemed so insignificant. No, Snapes heart turned out bigger than even he could admit to himself, his redemption was conclusive enough for me. He discovered the best of himself and finally ran with it in his last days. Carol wrote: Voldemort, with his mangled soul, has to spend eternity as a whimpering misshapen fetus wrapped in dirty rags. Dumbledore, in contrast, has his blackened hand healed and the twinkle in his eye restored. Snape's soul will not be damaged because he's not committing murder: he's fulfilling Dumbledore's last request, to die with dignity on his own terms (foreshadowed by Krum's losing the QWC on his own terms, I wonder?). Snape is now beyond pain and suffering and lies and having to witness the deaths of helpless people whom he cannot save and to whose plight he has to feign indifference. JKR believes in the immortality of the soul, and if we believe in her story, we have to believe in her afterlife, too (at least within the context of the books; I don't mean in the RW, where we're free to hold our own views and accept or reject the concept of an afterlife). Valky now: I'm going to simply me too this Carol. I like the way you said this and it reflects my own thoughts quite well. Valky From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:00:49 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:49 -0000 Subject: DH:Harry/Lily's Eyes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172429 SPOILER SPOILER Ok, so I had to explain this to my husband too, and I see a couple people asked or complained this wasn't explained. Every time Snape looked at Harry - he saw Lily. DH p678 (all references US version) "Her son lives. He has her eyes, precisely her eyes. You remember the shape and color of Lily Evan's eyes, I am sure?" "DON'T" bellowed Snape. "Gone...dead..." "Is this remorse, Severus?" "I wish..I wish I were dead..." "And what use would that be to anyone?" said Dumbledore coldly. "If you loved Lily Evans, if you truely loved her, then your way forward is clear." .... DH p687 - Snape reveals with his patronous that he still Loves Lily. ... DH p658 "Look...at...me..." he whispered. The green eyes found the black, but after a second, something in the depths of the dark pari seemed to vanish, leaving them fixed, blank, and empty. Yes, Snape did it all for Lily, and every time he had to remember why he was doing what he was doing, he could find Lily's eyes in Harry. And on his death bed, he wasn't looking at Harry's eyes, he was looking at Lily's eyes. Julie From jellocat at comcast.net Tue Jul 24 23:15:16 2007 From: jellocat at comcast.net (Jellocat) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:15:16 -0400 Subject: Question about casualties and JKR on Today Show (Spoilers) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172430 JKR said in an interview with the Today Show that the person she changed her mind on killing was Arthur Weasley (he was supposed to die in Book 5...) but she didn't say who the two people that she killed who weren't supposed to die are. Any ideas? I was also thinking the reason she killed off Remus and Tonks was perhaps to make another moral statement on staying with your kids and maybe that's why we got FamilyGuyHarry in the epilog. With so many auror families having been destroyed - Potters, Longbottoms, Lupins, etc. perhaps he realized the auror life wasn't what he really wanted afterall? Jo will be on the Today Show and said that she will write an encyclopedia and will include what the characters did: "The encyclopedia would include back stories of characters she has already written but had to cut for the sake of narrative arc (?I've said before that Dean Thomas had a much more interesting history than ever appeared in the books?), as well as details about the characters who survive ?Deathly Hallows,? characters who continue to live on in Rowling?s mind in a clearly defined magical world. Hogwarts, for example, has a new headmaster (?McGonagall was really getting on a bit?), and Rowling said she can see Harry going back to give the "odd talk" on Defense Against the Dark Arts. That class, by the way, is now led by a permanent professor since Voldemort?s death broke the jinx which didn?t allow a teacher to remain in the position for more than a year." The rest is here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19935372/\ Jellocat [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From percafluvia at gmx.net Wed Jul 25 00:01:39 2007 From: percafluvia at gmx.net (laperchette) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:01:39 -0000 Subject: The character given the reprieve and the chapter Rowling was weeping over Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172431 Because so many of you are wondering and speculating: (via tlc: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/19935372/) The reprieve was: Mr. Weasley (in book five), a bit disapointing... And she cried over the parents and Lupin and Sirius get together... (My bets were: Hermione and crying over the Prince's tale) laperchette From casmir2012 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:00:56 2007 From: casmir2012 at yahoo.com (casmir2012) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:56 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter Encyclopedia coming! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172432 Here is a link to a great article about an HP encyclopedia being created. It has other fun facts like Mr. Weasley having supposed to have died in book 5, and Lupin's death was not originally planned. There is more, too. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19935372/ (if it doesn't work, just google "potter encyclopedia" and click on msnbc site.) Maybe this will answer some of those cliff hangers she's left us with. From casmir2012 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:10:39 2007 From: casmir2012 at yahoo.com (casmir2012) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:10:39 -0000 Subject: DH:Harry/Lily's Eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172433 > Every time Snape looked at Harry - he saw Lily. I think this too. I believe this explains his "unfriendly" behavior toward Harry, for every time he looked at Harry, he had 2 deep pains surging....seeing the eyes of the woman he needed, and the face of the man who not only abused him, but also got this woman. Severus was a broken man all around, though. Some have stated that if Lilly had given him a chance maybe things would have been different. I say she did. He did not change his ways or his bad influencing friends (we're talking dark, not age appropriate misbehaviors). Lilly was smart for not hooking up with him. She did what so many girls can't seem to do...avoid the bad boys, and make them conform to behaviors that are acceptable. From famoustish at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:05:59 2007 From: famoustish at yahoo.com (famoustish) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:05:59 -0000 Subject: Did I miss something? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172434 Am I crazy or was there no real explination about why it was so important that Harry had Lilly's eyes? I know it was even referenced that Albus alone of Harry's children had her eyes. I still don't see why it was so important. If I have missed this fact, please point me in the right direction. I listened to the book on audio and I am sure I checked out a few times during listening. Thanks, Tish PS> on the whole, I LOVED the book. I was also disappointed with the Epilogue. I would have liked to know about their professions and what happened to the rest of the Weasley family. From aida_costa at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 23:56:29 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:56:29 -0000 Subject: Ted Tonks was always muggle-born - WAS: Re: DH:What about all the comments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172435 > Valerie Frankel wrote: Others noticed Ted Tonks, who heals Harry but started as a muggle. Aida: I thought that was odd too, but I looked it up: page 50 in OOTP, Raincoast Canadian Edition: 'My dad's Muggle-born and he's a right old slob. I suppose it varies, just like it does with wizards?' (Tonks to Harry, at the Dursley's) Aida From cassandralee1120 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:07:54 2007 From: cassandralee1120 at yahoo.com (Cassandra Lee) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:07:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape's Worst Memory Message-ID: <474437.3250.qm@web53806.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172436 I think in light of the chapter "A Prince's Tale" that Snape's worst memory was actually him calling Lily a "mudblood" and not the Marauders tormenting him. What do you guys think? He even told one of the portriats not to say the word. Cassandra Lee From dwalker696 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 00:10:54 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:10:54 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172437 Mindy asked: > > 1) Who DID betray Harry's escape date from Privet Drive to LV? I seem to have missed that. Donna replies: That would be Snape. Or rather, Snape actually SAVING Harry's escape from Privet Drive. Remember, DD told Snape he would have to relay the date info to Voldy to remain credible. We know that Snape planted the idea in Mundungus to use the 7 Potters, and it seems possible he could have even implanted the date change info or at least extracted it at an earlier date. I would rather believe that Snape was extracting info, not that anyone (as was insinuated about Hagrid) let it slip or intentionally betrayed Harry. Of course, Harry says "I don't think anyone in this room would ever sell me to Voldemort", but notice that Dung is not in the room. Mindy asked: > > 2) Who was Snape's 'source' to LV? I know it was DD, but LV didn't > > know that - so who was his 'source'? Donna replies: I am going to guess Mundungus - not that Mundungas was a willing source, but Snape was obviously meeting with him (to implant info on DD's orders) so it would make a good alibi to give Voldy. Plus, a "source" doesn't necesarily mean a willing source. He could tell Voldy he was EXTRACTING info from Dung, not Dung BRINGING him info. An occlumens like Snape wouldn't need someone working for him, he would just need a weak mind to read, and Dung certainly had no power over Snape's mind control. Mindy asked: > >> > 3) Hermione managed to get her hands on the stocks of Mad Eye's > > Polyjuice Potion - how??? Wasn't it on Mad-Eye when he was killed? Donna replies: Hermione says she was "smuggling Mad-Eye's whole stock of Polyjuice potion right under Ron's mum's nose". I don't think Mad-Eye took his entire stock with him to Privet Drive, just enough to give the 7 Potters. This quote to me sounds like Mad-Eye had his stock at the Burrow, and Hermione was able to nick it without Molly noticing. Mindy asks: > > 6) I am so confused by Dumbledore's speech during Harry's near- > >death experience. The entire premise of the prophecy has completely > > crumbled. If indeed, Harry couldn't die as long as LV was alive > > because of his blood being in LV, and LV being unable to die as > >long as Harry was alive because he was a Horcrux, how does that > > explain "Neither can survive while the other lives" prophecy? Donna exclaims: These are all such good discussion topics! OK, the actual prophecy was "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives" JKR has always said the exact wording and interpretation is very specific (if not tricky). "Either must die at the hand of the other" - rather, "BOTH must die at the hand of the other" - and they did! This came true!! Voldemort "killed" Harry first, as we see in the hovering between death and life scene (which reminded me a great deal of the short story "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge") in King's Cross Station. Harry isn't dead unless he chooses to give up right there, DD tells him, or he can go back into the world, living. He goes back, so now he has "died", (or at least had a 'near death exp') so now it's Voldemort's turn to die. The prophecy meant that BOTH had to die before the Dark Lord could be vanquished. OK now the second part. "neither can live while the other survives". Voldy "killing" Harry took care of the (accidental) horcrux in Harry, so now Harry is horcrux free, the connection there is GONE. Voldy has nothing left in Harry to keep himself alive. But Harry did not die along with that horcrux because his protection from Lily was still throbbing in Voldy's veins. DD says "Remember what he did, in his ignorance, in his greed and his cruelty...he took your blood and rebuilt his living body with it! Your blood in his veins, Harry, Lily's protection inside both of you! He tethered you to life while he still lives!" My understanding of this is Voldy would be keeping Harry alive as long as he, Voldy, is alive - Lily's protection FOR HARRY still existed bc Voldy was still alive. But that protection only works one way, in one direction - it is not like the shared Dragon heart in the same named movie with Dennis Quaid, where killing one kills both. Lily's protection was for her SON, not her son's would-be- murderer. But as long as that murderer was keeping that protection, that charm alive, Harry would live. Even if the murderer was killed, who cares, the original protection is still alive in its original host (Harry), it only works one way. Ooo I am so glad there is still so much to talk about after the book! I am glad it doesn't all wrap up neat and pretty and perfect, I am glad there is still more to discuss, more questions unanswered to speculate on. Donna From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:15:35 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:15:35 -0000 Subject: Did I miss something? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172438 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "famoustish" wrote: > > Am I crazy or was there no real explination about why it was so > important that Harry had Lilly's eyes? I know it was even referenced > that Albus alone of Harry's children had her eyes. I still don't see > why it was so important. > > If I have missed this fact, please point me in the right direction. I > listened to the book on audio and I am sure I checked out a few times > during listening. > > Thanks, > Tish > > PS> on the whole, I LOVED the book. I was also disappointed with the > Epilogue. I would have liked to know about their professions and what > happened to the rest of the Weasley family. > That Albus had her eyes was even more important than what I wrote a bit ago. Here's a child named after Severus . . . and he has Lily's eyes :) SOooooo sweet! Julie From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:16:33 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:16:33 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172439 I'm glad Snape turns out to be (sort of) good, but he still comes across as mighty creepy in the end. He was willing to sacrifice Harry and James so Lily could live (and presumably come back to him.) He saved Harry for Lily's sake, but didn't love her enough to actually be KIND to her son. And why, for heaven's sake, couldn't he take a bath and wash his hair? He's not the bravest man Harry has ever known, not by a long shot. He's an obsessive stalker who never moved past his teenage crush and has spent twenty years doing good behind the scenes while torturing students and being incredibly unpleasant. From aida_costa at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:15:55 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:15:55 -0000 Subject: Did I miss something? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172440 > famoustish wrote: > Am I crazy or was there no real explination about why it was so > important that Harry had Lilly's eyes? It's a way for Snape to see Lily's son, not James Potter's son, whenever he looks at Harry. Aida From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:22:23 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:22:23 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172441 I'm operating under the assumption that Fred/Frederica is the name of George's first child or has been reserved for the birth of said child or that James's middle name is Frederick. I think it was suitable for them to name their children after their loved ones. From muellem at bc.edu Wed Jul 25 00:21:49 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:21:49 -0000 Subject: Bragging Rights answer key, chekhov's guns, spoiler report, etc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172442 > > > 49. Is Snape an animagus spider? > > Unknown. > Anne Squires: > Snape is a bat animagus. It's at the end of the Sacking of Severus > Snape chapter. > colebiancardi: Or is it? I thought it was his animagus, but then McGonagall says: "No, he is not dead," said McGonagall bitterly. "Unlike Dumbledore, he ws still carrying his want...and he seems to have learned a few tricks from his master" With a tingle of horror, Harry saw in the distance a huge, batlike shape flying through the darkness toward the perimeter wall. US ed, p 599 colebiancardi back again: McGonagall is an animagus, so why would she state that Snape *learned* a few tricks from his master, Voldemort? I think this was a different type of spell and that Snape is not an animagus at all From kamilaa at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:25:55 2007 From: kamilaa at gmail.com (Kamil) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:25:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Snape is my hero, an analysis of "The Prince's Tale" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172443 , who is convinced that Rowling `howled' after finishing "The Prince's Tale"; something I believe we have in common. I am so hoping JKR would qualify in the chat, but I am hoping that JKR was crying over Harry agonising over his death chapter. :) We shall see. You're right, Alla, she confirmed that in her talk with Meridith Viera of the Today Show. Quote as follows: ------------------ But nothing in the entire process of the series was more difficult than writing the scene when Harry, accompanied by his deceased lost loved ones ? including his parents James and Lily and his godfather Sirius ? walks into the forest with the intent of sacrificing his life in the name of defeating Voldemort, Rowling said, adding it is her favorite passage in all seven books. "I didn't cry as I was writing (that chapter), but when I finished writing, I had enormous explosion of emotion and I cried and cried and cried," Rowling said. http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/19935372/ ------------------ I'm glad to know I have that in common with Jo - I howled a bit myself (enough to trouble the cats =) and I too think it may end up one of my favorite moments in the series. Harry was so brave as he walked off to his death and the way she wrote him noticing things like the beats of his heart (how many are left?) and the forest surrounding him and then his dead come to him and GAH. No words. Many tears. Kamil *sniff* From psych12 at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:16:58 2007 From: psych12 at gmail.com (leggrachel) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:16:58 -0000 Subject: Importance of Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172444 Elvishooked: > Wondering just why Dumbledore found it so important that Harry > learn occlumency and thereby closing his mind to LV. Goonie8803: > I wondered the same thing, and this is what I came up with: Maybe > because DD knew LV would eventually find out the connection was > there, and use it to lure Harry to the Dept of Mysteries to save > Sirius (who, of course, wasn't there yet), and therefore find the > prophecy and take it, because LV couldn't get it himself, and no > one else could get it for him. And in DH, all the other people he really cared about were > either with him, dead, or else in a place protected from LV and the > Death Eaters. > But I also wondered: Why would LV re-open the connection, when he > closed it for so long after the Dept of Mysteries battle? You'd > think he'd want to keep it closed so Harry couldn't know where the > Horcruxes were. Leggrachel: I don't think that LV purposely opened the connection. I think he was cracking around the edges. Every time that Harry got flashes of what was happening, LV was really angry, so it was *his* control that was slipping. As for why, the whole fiasco with Sirius and the DoM is why. LV was able to plant images in Harry's mind, and Harry couldn't tell the difference between the real visions and the fake ones. Not to mention, I think there was always the danger of LV being able to, even briefly, see what Harry was doing. I don't think LV could have stayed in Harry's mind for long, since that would have been painful (as seen in the end of OoP). Leggrachel From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:33:56 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:33:56 -0000 Subject: About Potterwatch In-Reply-To: <382739.43115.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172445 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Metylda wrote: > > So, my curiosity is to why all the members of the > radio show Potterwatch had 'R' code names? River, > Royal, Romulus, and Rapier/Rodent. > > I also thought it was odd that Ron, who had listened > to the show previously, was finally figuring out who > was who on the show. It really seemed like a light > bulb was going on over his head as he listened to > it... > > bamf > Valky: Hmm good questions. Perhaps they were going through the alphabet with different letters each broadcast as extra security for the participants. Wizards are not known for their logic, so strange as it seems it may have been a practical security measure in their estimation. It would also explain why Ron was guessing who was who even though he had listened before. From aida_costa at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:31:34 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:31:34 -0000 Subject: Bragging Rights answer key, chekhov's guns, spoiler report, etc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172446 >colebiancardi back again: > McGonagall is an animagus, so why would she state that Snape *learned* > a few tricks from his master, Voldemort? I think the 'trick' he learned from Voldie was how to fly w/out a broom - remember the Order members were horrified that he could fly when the 7 Harry's were being chased? Aida From celizwh at intergate.com Wed Jul 25 00:33:24 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:33:24 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: <650861.43940.qm@web33114.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172447 Sue White wrote: > Why did JKR ruin this book and perhaps series > for me with the trite epilogue? > I quite literally laughed out loud as I read it, > it was unbelievable: the children's names, the > treatment of grown-up Draco etc... > Am I alone? houyhnhnm: I thought the epilogue was Rowling at her most Austenesque. Here is what the late critic Mark Schorer had to say about the ending of _Pride and Prejudice_: >>The movement of these individual human beings exists, of course, within a larger movement, that of the whole world about them. Not everything in that world is happy at the end. The Bennets are left with their entailed estate. Mrs. Bennet, like the life force, will persist as foolishly as ever . . . The gaunt spector of Lady Catherine has not been laid . . . Pride and predjudice have not departed from the world. And Jane Austen need not have feared: hers is a moral relativism, and the world is not intolerably bright by any means. Still, it is brighter.<< Similarly, not everything in the Wiazarding World is happy at the end. The sorting goes on. The rivalry between the houses goes on. Gryffindors and Slytherins still dislike and mistrust one another. Draco and Harry nod curtly to each other, but they are not friends. No doubt, the house elves are still enslaved. The Ministry of Magic is as undemocratic as ever. Other magical beings are not recognized as equals by wizards, despite Grawp and the last minute aid of the Centaurs. Still, that world is brighter. Voldemort is gone. A new Dark Lord has not yet arisen. Harry's scar has not pained him for nineteen years. All is well (for the time being.) From nawyecka at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:35:48 2007 From: nawyecka at yahoo.com (Larry) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:35:48 -0000 Subject: Importance of Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172448 > Wondering just why Dumbledore found it so important that Harry learn > occlumency and thereby closing his mind to LV. > Had it not been for Harry's mind-connection with LV, he would never > have seen LV's thoughts of where the Horcruxes were hidden and would > probably not have found them in time.... > Or? It occurs to me that the purpose of Occlumency was not to eliminate the connection, but to enable Harry to control it. So he could use it, extracting what he needed, and then closing the connection at will. Which is precisely what ended up happening in DH. From frithar at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:31:10 2007 From: frithar at yahoo.com (Laura Lindsay) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:31:10 -0000 Subject: inconsistency? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172449 Still catching up on all posts-- forgive if this is a repeat, but how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? LL From sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:36:37 2007 From: sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com (Sofrina Hinton) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:36:37 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: <446628.46462.qm@web81812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172450 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > > Sandra: > > > Hello Libby! That jumped out at me when I read it, and I found the > > whole section a surprisingly abrupt episode. I mean, Ron > > 'copied' Harry? Parseltongue is a strange collection of > > throat-gargly sounds which mean nothing to most wizards, so > > how on earth could he have managed all the right hacking > > noises after hearing Harry just once? He could have said > > something rude or meaningless, or ended up making himself > > cough a lot! And he and Hermione just disappeared for a few > > pages in all the tension and prelude to chaos, and then > > reappeared with a basilisk fang or two. > > > I thought that Ron temporarily gained the ability to speak Parseltongue from being possessed by the locket Horcrux when he destroyed it. > On another topic, I think Ron and Hermione had to be away somewhere so Harry could face Evil all by himself. Making Harry confront danger alone with no backup was a climactic and important part of his growth as a character. > > Sarah, whose first ever HPFGU post ironically is about the last book > Ron only had to say one word: Open. That's all Harry said to the locket. And the text says he had to try it a bunch of times to get right. That isn't hard to pick up. I was in Paris and caught "desole" (I'm sorry) from a shop clerk, which I was mispronouncing as 'day-so-lay.' On your other topic: facing the final task alone is archetypal to hero stories. In almost every book Harry has done so. It was only when he was truly in over his head, and the story grew to encompass the onset of war that Harry battles with a squad (to equal the enemy's numbers) and/or Dumbledore rescues him. SS - Only Harry can go forward past the final test to face Quirrell/ Voldemort COS - The cavern collapses blocking Ron out, so only Harry can go forward to save Ginny and face Tom Riddle/Basilisk POA - Here's where things become bigger than Harry, he needs Hermione to go back in time and Buckbeak to save Sirius, but only Harry can face down the Dementors GOF - Diggory is killed leaving Harry to face the Voldemort/DE's alone, the wand ghosts aid him in escaping OOTP - Harry brings his posse which is lucky because there are too many Death Eaters, overmatched the Order rescues them, but Harry goes on to challenge Bellatrix alone, Dumbledore arrives to save Harry from LV against whom he has no chance. Here, Harry faces the truth of his destiny alone. HBP - Dumbledore neutralizes Harry so he can face his own final test alone, Harry attempts to take down Snape, but is again outmatched. He resolves to quit school and take up the quest to destroy Voldemort alone. DH - Harry is aided in all things, since the situation involves all of Britain, except the final act of dying. There's nothing anyone can do for him on that journey. There is a line in "The Epic Hero" by Dean A. Miller: "Often enough the plot's calculus demands that a quest companion...fall or fail, leaving the central hero to take a final test alone..." From Schlobin at aol.com Wed Jul 25 00:27:35 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:27:35 -0000 Subject: my incoherent rambles on DH - MAJOR SPOILERS Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172451 Hello everyone, I thought the book was stupendous, extraordinary and amazing. JKR is a genius. It was definitely my favorite book. On behalf of my family and myself, I want to thank JKR for her incredible gift to the world! s p o i l e r s p a c e Voldemort was certainly revealed -- there is no romanticizing THIS bad guy -- from the first chapter (I worry about kids seeing Movie 7 based on the first chapter)-- we see his total lack of humanity, his viciousness, his disgusting cruelty.... JKR's genius -- I was amazed that JKR could make me feel so sorry for Lucius, Narcissa and Draco right in the first chapter. (I didn't really feel sorry for Draco in the HPB). I did NOT feel sorry for Dudley despite his overtures to Harry......(will we ever find out what his worst memory was?) I thought Kreacher's total reversal was a little difficult to believe - but it was fun. Dumbledore certainly dominated this book, despite his demise....he was present in one form or another every step of the way. JKR's genius -- to show us that not only does the wisest, most powerful and beneficient character make mistakes, but he is guilty to wrongdoing in his past. I LOVED the opportunity to see more of Aberforth Dumbledore (will we ever find out what exactly were the inappropriate charms?) I was terrified throughout most of the book - who WOULD die? (Could have done without Hedwig dying...SOMEONE could have sent her to a safe place independently - why did she have to travel with Harry?) I cried at several spots, including Fred's death... I LOVED Neville's transformation (it takes a true Gryffindor to pull THAT out of the hat)....and felt that one of the morals of the book is that no great resistance movement can succeed based on one person.... There were SO many people without whom Lord Voldemort would have not perished. I wish we had seen Hermione's struggle to destroy the Horcrux....Ron's struggle was a very powerful vignette. Again, and again, JKR shows us courage at its finest. Are we to assume Emmeline Vance, Amelia Bones and Florean Fortescue ARE really dead? (I would have liked the epilogue expanded). Why didn't Dobby show up when Harry's parents, Sirius and Remus did? Do house elves go to a different afterlife? Who was the character JKR reprieved? (my bet is on Hagrid) Are there other pagans on this list? Although there have been comparisons between Jesus and Harry's "death" and resurrection....my thought when I was reading was that Harry was making the royal sacrifice...and it seemed particularly pagan to me, since we believe that is the consent to sacrifice one's self for others, not the blood letting, that releases and confers power. What was Harry's son James' middle name (Sirius?) What was Harry's daughter Lily's middle name? SNAPE!!!!!!! Wow, what a character. I am truly relieved. I am so happy that Albus Dumbledore was right to trust him. I never believed the theory that he was in love with Lily so hats off to those ofyou who did. When Petunia said re the dementors "I heard that horrible boy telling HER about them."......we of COURSE assumed it was James.... I wish that Professor Snape had lived long enough to talk with Harry or even to receive the Order of Merlin First Class, which might have meant something to him. I loved the Battle of Hogwarts......complete with McGonagall animating the statues, and the desks, and Trelawney throwing crystal balls, and the charge of the house elves, and the return of Slughorn.... I loved Harry reacting to Carrow spitting at McGonagall.....very cool... I'm glad that Percy came around in time to say goodbye to his brother. And hurray for Molly Weasley (another powerful woman who is too often underestimated)... The book was packed with love and sacrifice and courage, and still had time for some humor. Having spent the first four years of my kids life showing every single solitary person I could make sit still pictures of my children, I LOVED Remus showing pictures of Teddy in the middle of a battle....(I assume Teddy was brought up by Andromeda since we also lost his grandfather). Susan McGee (if you'd like to join a low volume list Harry Potter for Grownups Over 40, email me at SusanGSMcGee at aol.com) From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:41:27 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:41:27 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172452 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bookworm857158367" wrote: > > I'm glad Snape turns out to be (sort of) good, but he still comes > across as mighty creepy in the end. He was willing to sacrifice > Harry and James so Lily could live (and presumably come back to > him.) Leslie41: Oh, I don't think he necessarily thought Lily would come back to him. It's obvious they haven't spoken for years. But his love for her isn't conditional on whether or not she comes back to him. He wants her to live. Bookworm: > He saved Harry for Lily's sake, but didn't love her enough to > actually be KIND to her son. Leslie41: Yes, that's true, but remember that he saw Potter in Harry, not Lily. He only sees Lily in Harry as he dies. Bookworm: > And why, for heaven's sake, couldn't he take a bath and wash his > hair? Leslie41: As a child, it's obvious that he was not taught proper hygiene. As an adult, my guess is he was depressed, and didn't give a crap how he looked. Bookworm: > He's not the bravest man Harry has ever known, not by a long shot. Leslie41: Harry thinks so. Bookworm: > He's an obsessive stalker who never moved past his teenage crush > and has spent twenty years doing good behind the scenes while > torturing students and being incredibly unpleasant. Leslie41: It seems to me now that the route some Snape haters are taking is to turn him into Stalker!Snape, or underestimate his feelings for Lily as a "crush". This, to me, undermines the whole series, not just Snape. Snape's not a stalker. When he meets Lily he's a child, a lonely, unhappy child, excited that he's noticed someone that seems to have something in common with him. More excited, no doubt, that she's a pretty girl. He's not some old man in a raincoat. He's effing *ten*, and so is she. And he and Lily develop a friendship. They become best friends, in fact. It's not a "crush". No one carries a "crush" from 17 to 37. Snape loves her. As a woman, yes, but first and foremost as a friend. His love for her, his anguish at losing her, and his redemption, are all dependent on the fact that his emotions are real and true, as true as James' for Lily, or Sirius' for James, or Hermione's for Harry. From greendayisawesome at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:47:37 2007 From: greendayisawesome at yahoo.com (greendayisawesome) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:47:37 -0000 Subject: Poor Fred :( Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172453 I think of all the twists and turns in HPatDH, the loss of Fred was the thing that shocked me the most. The Weasley twins were my two favorite characters in the series. I guess I just don't understand, why Fred? If another Weasley had to meet their maker, why not Bill or Charlie? Or Percy, he is annoying. Why couldn't she kill one of them? I just needed to get that off my chest! Sally From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:52:07 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:52:07 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172454 > Leslie41: > Snape's not a stalker. When he meets Lily he's a child, a lonely, > unhappy child, excited that he's noticed someone that seems to have > something in common with him. More excited, no doubt, that she's a > pretty girl. He's not some old man in a raincoat. He's effing *ten*, > and so is she. Alla: True, he is ten and he is not a stalker at that time, but we already hear the word watches **greedily**, that gives me stalkering vibe. Leslie41: > And he and Lily develop a friendship. They become best friends, in > fact. It's not a "crush". No one carries a "crush" from 17 to 37. > Snape loves her. As a woman, yes, but first and foremost as a > friend. Alla: And he searches Sirius' room and tears apart a letter that was **not** adressed to him and cries over and takes it with him AND he tears apart the photograph. It reminds me when police comes to search the room and sees many photographs of the woman or man stalker wanted. NOT the same but same vibe to me. > His love for her, his anguish at losing her, and his redemption, are > all dependent on the fact that his emotions are real and true, as > true as James' for Lily, or Sirius' for James, or Hermione's for > Harry. > Alla: You are likely to be correct, but I most definitely see lots of ambiguity in those emotions. They can be read differently and I read them that way. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 00:52:44 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:52:44 -0000 Subject: inconsistency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172455 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Laura Lindsay" wrote: > > Still catching up on all posts-- forgive if this is a repeat, > but how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had > an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point > was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? > > LL > Yep you're right, but I don't think there can be any question that if anyone could figure out a way *around* an unbeatable wand it would be Dumbledore. I figure he didn't try to beat the wand at all and cleverly figured a way to bypass the wand and overcome Grindelwald himself by some means during the battle. This would make Dumbledore the Master of the wand and it would be useless to Gr beyond that point. I would like to see that legendary duel, I wonder if JKR will write it into her encyclopaedia. Valky From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:53:53 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:53:53 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172456 Ali wrote: > I felt like killing Lupin AND Tonks was unnecessary, > Mike replied: > Lupin was worried about his son growing up under the shadow of his fathers curse. Instead he grew up the son of heroes who died in the final battle against Voldemort. I think she was trying to make his life easier, and kill off a couple more important people at the same time. > Carol responds: Hi, Mike. Nice response. But also, notice how haggard Lupin is at the beginning of the book, how reluctant he was to Marry Tonks, how he almost deserts his pregnant wife to follow HRH. (No wonder Snape thought Tonks's Patronus looked weak if that's the Lupin he represented.) He knew, I think, exactly what would happen when he married Tonks. Voldemort would send his Death Eaters, and especially the Bellatrix. Bellatrix was already trying to kill Tonks in the MoM because her mother had "disgraced" the family by marrying a Muggle-born. Now the "brat" (tonks) had brought even greater shame on her family (Bellatrix's view, of course) by marrying a werewolf. Voldemort jokes cruelly about Draco babysitting the "cubs"; Bellatrix is determined to "trim her family tree." Their deaths are foreshadowed from the beginning. Lupin redeems himself by going back to Tonks, reporting briefly to Bill et al. that the baby is a boy and a Metamorphmagus and that they're appointing Harry godfather--no ceremony required, apparently). More foreshadowing: Lupin is anticipating the need for a godfather as James and Lily did before him. Poor Andromeda loses her husband, her daughter, and her daughter's new husband, but little Teddy, in contrast to Harry, has a loving grandmother and a godfather (and he seems to spend a lot of time at the Potters as he grows older). At the end, we glimpse a seemingly well-adjusted young man (with turquoise hair, IIRC) who seems to have found love with the presumably beautiful Victoire--1/8 Veela. How could she not be?) I don't think, with all that worked into the plot, that Remus and Tonks were the two unplanned deaths, as I had originally supposed. (Wonder who they were? Maybe fred took his father's place as the Weasley who died?) At any rate, with no cure for lycanthropy and no wolfsbane potion available from the Ministry even before it fell to the DEs, Lupin was suffering greatly. Until and unless the Ministry (presumably in chaos immediately after the defeat of Voldemort) instituted measures to make wolfsbane potion available to all werewolfs, he'd be in the same predicament, and with Umbridge still in the Ministry (I doubt that her connection to the Death Eater Selwyn is well-known), she might still be there for some time. Little Teddy would have grown up possibly fearing his father's terrible monthly transformations. After his experience at Hogwarts, Lupin is probably terrified of hurting either him or Tonks. I'm not saying that Lupin, much less Tonks, if better off dead, only that Lupin's life could not have been a happy one until and unless the Ministry offered him the help he needed. (Of course, if Snape had survived and been recognized for his remarkable courage, Snape could have made the potion, but that didn't happen.) At any rate, Lupin and Tonks seem to have died peacefully (I noted the similarity of their expressions to that of Dumbledore, or at least DD's portrait). Death, JKR told us before, is the next great adventure. It is not the worst possible fate--unless you're Voldemort, doomed for all eternity to be a repulsive fetal form that no one will touch. Their child grows up loved and happy--with heroic parents who are fondly remembered by their fellow members and HRH. (Harry, too, had heroic parents but didn't know it till he was eleven.) Teddy will hear fond anecdotes about his parents from many people. It is sad that all of the Marauders and their contemporary and rival and foil, Severus Snape, had to die. But, clearly, their story has closed and it's time for Harry's generation, and Albus Severus's after him, to do a better job. Carol, noting that people dissatisfied with the epilogue should go to JK Rowling live chat and post their questions, some of which will be answered July 30 http://livechat.bloomsbury.com/index.php From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:55:10 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:55:10 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172457 Well, well, well... where to begin? First of all, to keep from saying IMO about two hundred times, everything below is IMO: I have to say, I quite enjoyed Deathly Hallows. It was certainly much better than the last two books, and despite becoming quite weak in spots, it moved things along to a very interesting set of conclusions. I don't want to go through the whole book, but just hitting some issues: SNAPE: I have to say that JKR managed to avoid seeming to approve of Snape's abusive ways quite elegantly. Her "epitome of goodness" turned out to be no such, and he turned out not to approve of Snape very much. To include what I posted in another forum, I think it is going to be important to acknowledge as time goes along that Dumbledore and Snape had a very difficult and complicated relationship. Snape was loyal to Dumbledore, he seems to have respected Dumbledore and wanted his trust and approval. He seems, over time, to have adopted at least some of Dumbledore's values. But in the end he was, after all, driven by his own ends and needs. He wanted a way to escape the crushing emotional burden placed on him by his unrequited love for Lily and her death. By working to keep Harry alive and defeat Voldemort he at least aimed in that direction. But he did not love or respect or value Harry for the boy's own sake, as he makes clear. Nor did he love Dumbledore like a father or regard him as an avatar of goodness who could lead him to moral redemption. Dumbledore for his part respected Snape and developed compassion and pity for him. But he also felt disapproval, disappointment, and outright disgust for many of Snape's choices and attitudes and practices, and is expressing those feelings in rather harsh terms right up until late in HBP. When push came to shove, each served a purpose for the other. Each had to endure much they would have preferred not to put up with out of the other. Snape had to endure Dumbledore's secrecy, demands, and criticism. Dumbledore had to endure Snape's bitterness, petulance, and bad attitude and behavior toward Harry. Each got something they desired. Dumbledore got a loyal and effective double agent, Snape a way to bring down Voldemort and expiate his inner turmoil. Each came to respect the other. But the basis of their relationship was business. The "business" aspect of their relationship explains a great deal, particularly with regard to Dumbledore's attitude and action. Snape was, at the end of the day, a servant. He was not a beloved disciple, nor did Dumbledore have feelings of paternal love for him as he did for Harry. When Dumbledore was forced to set Snape against Harry in the scales of love and value, Snape came out at a distinct disadvantage. All of this being summed up in Dumbledore's final words on the subject (paraphrasing wildly): "Poor Severus, the plan didn't work out well for him. Oh well, too bad. Now, let me get back to telling you what a wonderful person you are, Harry!" I know many people don't like it, but that is how I see this layered and complicated relationship. I don't see Snape as a faithful apostle struggling for some general moral redemption because of what's right. I don't see Dumbledore as a kindly mentor who regards Snape as a substitute son. In the end many readers love Snape. I don't think Dumbledore does. And thus, when it is necessary to defeat Voldemort, and as importantly to save the young man he DOES love, he sends Snape to his death. I think he acts regretfully, he acts with pity, but if anybody has to die to defeat the Dark Lord, he would much rather it be Snape than Harry. And I think that, in truth, is where justice lies, as well as irony. That it was Snape, rather than Harry, who was most clearly being set up as a pig for slaughter was ... delicious. Harry of course forgives Snape to the point of naming a child for him, in part (see below). But by that point Harry is plainly a Christ-figure, and a Resurrected Savior is expected to do all sorts of remarkable acts of divine goodness and mercy. THE DURSLEYS: The scene with Dudley was, I think, artfully done, as it indicates in a subtle but powerful way that karma is catching up with the Dursleys. Dudley's actions are, objectively, minor, but they are like the turning of an aircraft carrier -- you don't see much in the short run but over time the difference is enormous. We are told that Vernon and Petunia are frightened by what they see in Dudley. Given Vernon's personality, its hard to imagine that he won't contrive to rapidly widen the gap beginning to appear between generations. Such things have a way of building momentum, causing cracks to become canyons over the years. One can easily imagine Vernon and Petunia at the time of the epilogue -- an angry curmudgeon and a bitter haridan constantly complaining about their ungrateful son who was ruined by "that lot" whom they were so foolish as to associate with, long ago. SLYTHERIN HOUSE: Well, Slytherin ends as it began, the house of cowardice and evil. True, individual Slytherins can overcome the worst traits of the House (Snape, Slughorn, Regulus), but by and large one wonders why they don't just shut the thing down. Nor do things seem to have gotten better by the time of the epilogue. Slytherin continues to be held in disdain, and tensions with purebloods continue and in some ways seem to be more open than before judging by Ron's mention of how Arthur will be disappointed if a grandchild of his marries a pureblood. Now, granted it's Ron and granted he's teasing, and granted its hypocritical as he's a pureblood himself, but the fact that everyone seemed to know immediately what he meant, even the children, reveals that there is at least a grain of truth to what he is saying. HARRY'S QUESTIONABLE ACTIVITIES: I counted three Imperios, a Crucio, and a probably AK from Molly. We never saw Marietta again, and the matter of "cheating" in potions didn't come up either. JKR's sense of justice continues to be very stern. THE EPILOGUE: I have to say the one point in the book where I guffawed in derision was the "Albus Severus" episode. But, as I said above, Christ-figures are expected to do extraordinary and unbelievable things. The tone of the epilogue also does not fit well with the rest of the book. I could easily believe it was written, in the main, about the same time as PS/SS. But then again, it does do a very good job of getting across the "happily ever after" ending. Lupinlore, who flips off the wood-chipper, picks up the books under one arm, pats JKR approvingly on the hand, and chuckles loudly at the way Albus maneuvered his abusive potions master into a very satisfying and ironic end From mario.pitre at videotron.ca Wed Jul 25 00:58:32 2007 From: mario.pitre at videotron.ca (oiramertip) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:58:32 -0000 Subject: Why was Mad-Eye able to see through the invisibility cloack? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172458 This looks like a mistalke to me... From nemetfire21 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:00:37 2007 From: nemetfire21 at yahoo.com (nemetfire21) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:00:37 -0000 Subject: Poor Fred :( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172459 Sally: > I think of all the twists and turns in HPatDH, the loss of Fred was > the thing that shocked me the most. The Weasley twins were my two > favorite characters in the series. I guess I just don't understand, > why Fred? If another Weasley had to meet their maker, why not Bill or > Charlie? Or Percy, he is annoying. Why couldn't she kill one of them? > I just needed to get that off my chest! nemetfire21: The twins are also my favorite good guys. And I was so upset by Fred's dead and also Dobby. But I think that she wanted to really show how sad the reality of war is and how it can totally destroy a family. From lucy1_8 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 00:56:28 2007 From: lucy1_8 at yahoo.com (lucy1_8) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:56:28 -0000 Subject: my incoherent rambles on DH - MAJOR SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172460 [In response to Susan McGee's post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172451 ] You know, I was really suprised at Neville too, but I was glad at the same time. All through the books, he's seen as the slow one, not really important, and I'm so glad she gave him a juicy part in the end, his parents would be proud. I am very curious as to who Jo gave the reprieve to also, hopefully she will reveal that in her interview on Thursday and Friday. Myself I think it was Ginny, and she killed Lupin and Tonks instead SNAPE!!!!!! UGH, you know, I've hated that man since Day 1! I've had the exact same feelings toward him that Harry had; but in one chapter that was totally turned around!! I still can't understand it actually. Eight years worth of loathing, hatred and pain gone; with a few simple memories!!!!! When you think about it, how could Snape not feel the way did towards Harry? The child of a woman that he loved, but a man that he loathed. Bad place to be in. I really had no clue about Snape and Lily, and was suprised that people actually did LOL. It seems so strange that Snape knew Petunia, and that Petunia was actually more in touch in the wizarding world that Harry ever knew. No wonder Petunia was so angry with anything to do with magic, she wanted to be part of that world but couldn't be, that has to be what a Squib feels like huh. Your incoherent rambles were a great post!!! Lucy1_8 From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 01:09:26 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:09:26 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172461 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sofrina Hinton" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > > > > Sandra: > > > > I mean, Ron > > > 'copied' Harry? > > Ron only had to say one word: Open. That's all Harry said to the > locket. And the text says he had to try it a bunch of times to get > right. Ron also passably mimics Wormtail at Malfoy manor which makes it slightly more believable, it probably would have helped a lot if Ron was shown to be good at vocal imitations earlier in the series as well but I can't think of any instance off the top of my head where he did anything of the sort, IIRC the twins were known to do great imitations of Percy and Mrs Weasley, but thats it. Valky From dougsamu at golden.net Wed Jul 25 01:10:40 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:10:40 -0400 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics References: <1185323405.11.56673.m51@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <4231904D-5D29-4603-9F3B-5F92C1D73B9D@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172462 On Jul-24-07, at 7:50 PM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com wrote: > bamf: > > It's also WHY Harry survived the AK. Voldie killed > the piece of his soul that was in Harry, instead of > Harry, IMHO. doug: Hmm This twigged something for me. It would seem there was a fifty / fifty chance of the Avada Kadavra taking one or the other soul. Same pretty much with the Veil or a Dementor. Obviously the difference is that the "soul" has to be willing to die for the Avada Kadavra to rebound. It is effective, but it's the sacrifice which "comes back" on the caster. (?) So, as Voldemort's soul was unwilling to die, *it* was the one which was killed. I would as yet like to see Rowling's explanation of the mechanics here, because, as I understand it, it was Lily's sacrifice which caused the rebound, but presumably the spell which killed Voldemort was the one which he cast at Harry. Nope, nope. I think I see. Avada Kadavra takes the Life, not the Soul. So it was Harry's sacrificial state of mind - for the sake of others. So as Lily's sacrifice protected Harry, and Harry's sacrifice protected others... his Death separated the two souls he harboured, and it was because he was Master of Death, that he didn't actually die... (?) So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time and not the second? Why was the house at Godric's Hollow destroyed but nothing in the Forbidden Forest? hmmmmm... As I said in another post, the story is driven by character, not physics. Does Sacrifice linger then as an extent force? ___ __ From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:12:00 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:12:00 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172463 Ron and Hermione made me believe they were in love in this book, even more than Harry and Ginny or Tonks and Lupin. Ron has grown up enough to know what he wants and needs. It was fun to see him putting the tips he got from the book on how to charm witches to profitable use with Hermione. If not for the locket giving rise to his insecurities, I don't think he would have left. The scenes where he battles Riddle's insinuations and finally triumphs over them shows as much bravery as anything in the book. Even more touching was the scene where he begged Bellatrix to take him instead when she began to torture Hermione and when he went crazy trying to get out of the dungeon when he heard Hermione screaming. Hermione's tears when he left and her rage when he returned were both realistic, as was the way Ron handled them. He's familiar with strong women who nag the ones they love and enjoy a good debate. He was handling her exactly the way his father probably handles his mother after one of her rages. He'll let Hermione know when he's had enough, but most of the time he'll give as good as he gets and be both amused and turned on by their battles. Harry's instinct was to put a Shield Charm between them, but he probably should have left them to work it out on their own. They would have had more fun fighting it out and then making up. Harry hates conflict; Ron and Hermione thrive on it. How appropriate it was that Hermione finally kissed Ron when he expressed concern for the house elves. I was thrilled with the people these two characters have grown into and really enjoyed getting a glimpse of what their family life is like. Hermione probably knows darned well that Ron Confunded the driver's license examiner, but she's letting it slide. They must be living in a Muggle community. Maybe Ron's a Muggle liaison for the Ministry of Magic like his dad. Hermione has probably written a couple of history of magic books in between lobbying for better treatment of goblins and house elves. It's nice to think of them with their Rosie and Hugo. I picture Rosie with bushy red hair and a ton of freckles. She'll never wear braces because Hermione will have fixed her buck teeth magically. She'll probably fall for Scorpius Malfoy (I bet he'll turn out to be the family black sheep and will end up in Gryffindor.) The nice thing about the epilogue is that there's still room for speculation. From taykimson at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:05:42 2007 From: taykimson at yahoo.com (taykimson) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:05:42 -0000 Subject: A Little Less Harry... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172464 Overall, I enjoyed the book. However, I think it would have helped the storytelling tremendously if there were A and B storylines. If it didn't happen to Harry or if it was not told to Harry (in some way - he heard it, he read it, he saw it in the Pensive, etc.), we didn't find out about it. I think this (A& B stories) would have allowed for a briefer version of the `tent wandering' and the lull in the story that came with it (or maybe it wouldn't have and this is wishful thinking on my part) Things that I would have liked to have seen as potential `B' story lines: ? Ron's adventures when he left Harry and Hermione ? Events at Hogwarts told as they happened, not told after the fact from Neville (to Harry, I might add). ? Actions of the Order of the Phoenix ? besides the radio program, what else were they doing? ? Voldemort's activities ? outside of what Harry saw through visions. Just because that was the only way Harry could find out what Voldemort was up to, doesn't mean it was the only way we could find out what Voldemort was up to a little dramatic irony please? I believe the only time we saw a `B' storyline was the 1st chapter. Sonya From va32h at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 01:13:49 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:13:49 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172465 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > It is sad that all of the Marauders and their contemporary and rival > and foil, Severus Snape, had to die. But, clearly, their story has > closed and it's time for Harry's generation, and Albus Severus's after > him, to do a better job. va32h here: I just want to expand on this and say that I think it is not necessarily sad but poignant that the Marauders and Snape had to die. Poignant, and necessary. How much of the tragedy and turmoil of that last 17 years grew out of those schoolday rivalries? The Marauders tormented Snape, who loved Lily, who in turn rejected Snape and chose James. Was that the action that caused Snape to become a DE? Had Snape not been there to overhear the prophecy and share it with Voldemort, would the Potters have ever been hunted? Even if they were, had James and Sirius not treated Wormtail like a mascot instead of a true friend, would he have betrayed them? And because of that betrayal, Sirius ended up in Azkaban, ruining his life, then broke out of Azkaban, and the end result of Sirius' pursuit of Wormtail is to send a servant back to Voldemort, to bring him back to power. (And of course along the way Lupin loses the best job he's surely had, because of Snape). Of course Dumbledore says, the consequences of our actions are so complicated and far reaching that they are impossible to predict. Voldemort could have risen, and been destroyed, and risen again, without the involvement of any of the Marauders or Snape. And yet as the story did happen - those six people, James,Lily,Sirius,Lupin,Wormtail,Snape are at the heart of it all. They had to die - to let all the bitterness and pain surrounding those days die with them. And Harry's generation *will* be different. Harry saved Draco, his rival, and not just to keep himself out of trouble (as James did with Snape) but truly altruistically. And Draco recognizes that - his curt nod at the train station shows that they will never be friends, but they will not be the bitter enemies that Snape and James and Sirius were. Ron will never be Wormtail - Ron is loved and respected and appreciated by his friends, he resisted the temptation to betray Harry. Hermione will not be Lupin - she isn't ashamed to be different (Mudblood and proud of it) and is strong enough not to let her desire for friendship cloud her judgement as to what is right and wrong. Which is why, of course, all of them had to live. From BrwNeil at aol.com Wed Jul 25 01:17:17 2007 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:17:17 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Poor Fred :( Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172467 In a message dated 7/24/2007 8:51:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, greendayisawesome at yahoo.com writes: >I think of all the twists and turns in HPatDH, the loss of Fred was the >thing that shocked me the most. The Weasley twins were my two favorite >characters in the series. I guess I just don't understand, why Fred? If >another Weasley had to meet their maker, why not Bill or Charlie? Or >Percy, he is annoying. Why couldn't she kill one of them? I just needed >to get that off my chest! >Sally Sadly, you just gave the reason. Few people liked Percy and Bill and Charlie were minor characters. Few of us readers would have shed a tear over any of the three older Weasley boys. George, Fred, Ron and Ginny were our favorites. It had to be one of those three. Neil ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From myspacetraveller at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:09:55 2007 From: myspacetraveller at yahoo.com (myspacetraveller) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:09:55 -0000 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172468 I know JKR said that Harry and Voldy were not related, but as it turns out they are in fact related. Both are descendants of the 3rd Peverell brother since he was the only one who had children. DD said Harry was the rightful owner of the Cloak because he is the last-born descendant of Ignotus, but so is Voldy since his grandfather (Gaunt)mentioned that he was a descendant of Peverell. I am not sure if JKR realized that when she said that, but that is what their lineage says. Even though they are very distant. myspacetraveller From aetomasko at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:23:12 2007 From: aetomasko at yahoo.com (Ada) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:23:12 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172469 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bookworm857158367" wrote: > > I'm glad Snape turns out to be (sort of) good, but he still comes > across as mighty creepy in the end. He was willing to sacrifice Harry > and James so Lily could live (and presumably come back to him.) He > saved Harry for Lily's sake, but didn't love her enough to actually be > KIND to her son. And why, for heaven's sake, couldn't he take a bath > and wash his hair? He's not the bravest man Harry has ever known, not > by a long shot. He's an obsessive stalker who never moved past his > teenage crush and has spent twenty years doing good behind the scenes > while torturing students and being incredibly unpleasant. > Ok, I'm sorry but I need to TOTALLY disagree with you here! Chapter 33 was my favorite in the whole book, and the end when Harry was talking to his son Albus, and he says "Albus Severus you were named for two headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew."-- had me in tears! I think you must have missed in chapter 33 where Snape always saw James in Harry.... and do we not remember from The Order of the Phoenix that James wasn't the nicest person to Severus. Snape not being perfect doesn't mean that he wasn't brave. He spared Draco from destroying himself by killing Dumbledore himself, he went back to Voldemort countless times at his own risk. So he didn't like Harry.... he was still risking his life for YEARS to save him, and to defeat the being that killed the love of his life. He loved Lily so much, maybe selfishly at times, but that love never died, he never moved on. And what about his Patronus being the same as hers? What about him leading Harry to Gryffindors sword?? It was amazingly brave! Who cares that he always saw james in Harry and treated him accordingly, he honored a love to a woman that never loved him back, and whom had never asked anything of him. He did with honor until he himself died. Ada From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 01:25:36 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:25:36 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172470 Alla: > > True, he is ten and he is not a stalker at that time, but we already > hear the word watches **greedily**, that gives me stalkering vibe. Ceridwen: "Greedily" doesn't always mean negative things. It can also mean with longing, non-negative. I saw him more as a child who didn't have many friends, looking at someone who was like him in a unique way, and wishing very hard she was his friend. Ceridwen. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 01:26:39 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:26:39 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: <4231904D-5D29-4603-9F3B-5F92C1D73B9D@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172471 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, doug rogers wrote: > > On Jul-24-07, at 7:50 PM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com wrote: > > > bamf: > > > > It's also WHY Harry survived the AK. Voldie killed > > the piece of his soul that was in Harry, instead of > > Harry, IMHO. > > doug: > > Hmm This twigged something for me. It would seem there was a fifty / > fifty chance of the Avada Kadavra taking one or the other soul. Valky replies: Actually no I don't think there was a fifty fifty chance, it was more like 80/20 in favour of Harry, I'd say, because the blood that kept him tethered to life was Harry's own it didn't belong to the horcrux. The chances were much greater that Harry himself would survive as of Voldemort stealing his blood. > Nope, nope. I think I see. > > Avada Kadavra takes the Life, not the Soul. So it was Harry's > sacrificial state of mind - for the sake of others. So as Lily's > sacrifice protected Harry, and Harry's sacrifice protected others... > his Death separated the two souls he harboured, and it was because he > was Master of Death, that he didn't actually die... (?) I also thought that it was because he was Master of Death at the time, but a second read made me think again, it wasn't that. Harry himself *was* immortal at the moment of his death and I think the Hallows may have been involved in that to a point but Dumbledore seemed to think (so I'm going along with his guess) that the strongest magic acting in this uncharted realm was the prescence of Harry's blood in Voldemort effectively entwining their living being so deeply that Harry could not die without taking Voldemort with him, and Voldemort vice versa could not live without taking Harry back. So in essence they stopped each other at the point of death in a push-me-pull-you for that brief magical moment. The blood had a lot to do with Harry surviving, his mastery of death I think only came into play in how he experienced that short time with Dumbledore beyond the veil compared to how Voldemort experienced it. Valky From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:27:27 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:27:27 -0000 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal In-Reply-To: <46A66FC9.7060701@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172472 >>CJE Culver: > > As to HP7 specifically, I didn't find the whole Deathly Hallows > storyline worked particularly well. I understand what JKR was > trying to do, but in the end, I just didn't feel it integrated well > into the overall narrative. > Betsy Hp: Oh my gosh, I totally agree. We heard not hair nor hide about the Hallows in any of the previous books and suddenly JKR decides that what this great McGuffin hunt needs is... three more McGuffins. The hell? And then to have to get through those agonizingly boring moments where Harry hems and haws over which McGuffin to go after... blech. I suppose they were invented to help Harry's decision to commit suicide that much easier? What with the siren call of his beloved dead surrounding him. (And yeah, *that* was another uncomfortable scene for me. I actually had a "think of the children!" moment. I never like it when authors force me onto a moral high horse. ) > >>CJE Culver: > While JKR has an incontrovertible gift for story-telling, > unfortunately, too often her creaky prose distracted. > > This was particularly apparent while reading the climatic battle in > HP7; rather than being able to fully enjoy the story, a part of me > was distracted by the unpolished prose. > Betsy Hp: Again I agree. JKR's never been what I'd call a graceful writer. Though I'll actually take issue with JKR having an "incontrovertible gift for story-telling". This last story was such a mangled mess of rambling plots and jerky characterizations that I think her overall story gets lost. (Honestly, I think she lost hold of the story way back in the first few books and this was a last gasp attempt to pull everything back on track. Which ends, as those sort of things are wont to do, in a train wreck.) No, I must be fair, she does have some talent. It was not well harnessed. I'm not sure that the sudden fame and fortune did her any good. I think a strong editor who wasn't too focused on the buckets of cash coming in may have helped shape JKR. Instead I'm afraid her talent has been spoiled. But yes, the battle scenes. Lord, spare me badly written battle scenes. Goodness, even Harry forgot what he was supposed to be doing for a while there. > >>CJE Culver: > > And, finally, the near deal-breaker: > > Moral Inconsistency Betsy Hp: Hee! I'd only argue "near". > >>CJE Culver: > "But I thought they were bad?" > > My 11-year-old actually asked me this as we read HP7 together, and > I had no answer except to say I thought JKR was wrong. > > He was referring to the Unforgivable Curses. > Betsy Hp: That encapsulates everything, doesn't it? Turns out this wasn't a battle between good and evil. It was between bad and worse. And yeah, Voldemort was definitely the more brutal of the two. But in their subtle evil, the "good" guys may be even more dangerous. They aren't good by their actions. They use the same methods their enemies use. They aren't good by their endgame. The WW is left exactly as it was when Harry is first introduced to it. The only thing missing is the immediate threat of Voldemort. But the constant pressure of hiding themselves from the Muggles, the quartering of their people into good, okay, questionable, and bad (as illustrated by Hogwarts) remains. So yeah, I had a similar question as your son's. Only mine was directed to Harry and company. "I thought they were good?" > >>CJE Culver: > All of which, in light of the moral discussions I had had with my > son, left me feeling a bit (well, more than a bit) betrayed. Betsy Hp: Betrayed is a good word. Actually, I feel like a massive fool. Jesus, I wasted a lot of time in this brutal, dark, and mean-spirited world. Betsy Hp From cayseeme2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:23:33 2007 From: cayseeme2 at yahoo.com (cayseeme2) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:23:33 -0000 Subject: Did I miss something? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172473 famoustish wrote: > > Am I crazy or was there no real explination about why it was so > > important that Harry had Lilly's eyes? Aida: > It's a way for Snape to see Lily's son, not James Potter's son, > whenever he looks at Harry. I think Harry having Lily's eyes just added to Snape's lifelong torment. Her eyes were a constant reminder of his love and heartbreak, while the rest of Harry was a constant reminder of James. How hard it must have been for Snape during the occlumency lessons when he had to penetrate those eyes! All for the protection of one who reminded him so much of the man he hated! Now that's love! cayseeme2 From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 01:07:37 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:07:37 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) References: Message-ID: <010201c7ce58$31a30680$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172474 Ali: I think I might well get some strong contentions on this opinion, but that's just how it is. JKR has yet proven to me that Snape isn't evil. In fact, while I always thought Snape wasn't good, I never even thought Snape was evil *until* this book. Let me explain that one before I get buried under the flames. Before DH, Snape was a man who stood for something. He did what he wanted and didn't worry about what others thought. He wasn't nice, but his methods had reason. True, his teaching Neville was less than desirable, but I've had teachers who've yelled and thought that served as motivation. Snape just wasn't evil; he was just awful and mean - he exemplifies Sirius' remark that the world isn't divided between good guys and Death Eaters. In DH, he was a guy who always went after the dark arts, wanted to be a Death Eater from very early on; he was someone who chose that over his friend Lily. (And don't even get me started on how much I dislike Snape-Lily.) In the end, I feel like JKR wanted me to believe that "Snape turned good for the love of a woman," but what I felt was that this man decide to *switch sides* for his own purposes. He didn't turn good; he bargained with Voldemort to save Lily first. Had it worked out that Lily was saved, I doubt that Snape would've worked for Dumbledore. Working for good didn't make him any less evil. Pah. (Yes, start sending the flames my way. I accept that my view is entirely unpopular.) Shelley: Oh, heck no. No flames from here. I just can't buy the Snape loved Lilly theory, even if we have it in canon that Snape told that to DD, and DD believed it, then Snape showed that memory to Harry. It's too shallow. Snape could have, at any time, turned away from his friends at Slytherin, become a good guy while still at Hogwarts. He didn't do it then. Lilly didn't break that relationship up- Snape did, by driving her away. He didn't have the balls to go after her- he didn't have the guts to change things then. Using the love of a woman as an excuse to return from being a Death Eater- a woman, who, by that time, had married, and was sleeping with another, and in fact, had a son by her lover and husband, and then murdered- is a bunk argument, because no matter what he did, he would never get her back. NEVER. He needed an excuse to get the "trust" of Dumbledore, pure and simple, so he could still spy for Voldemort. That's what I still think. I think DD was a fool, or, maybe he played along to accomplish his own manipulations. Snape was good at both Occulemency and Legilemens- we must remember that. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:31:46 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:31:46 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172475 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > I think it is > going to be important to acknowledge as time goes along that > Dumbledore and Snape had a very difficult and complicated > relationship. Snape was loyal to Dumbledore, he seems to have > respected Dumbledore and wanted his trust and approval. He seems, > over time, to have adopted at least some of Dumbledore's values. But > in the end he was, after all, driven by his own ends and needs. Leslie41: I don't see that at all. He imperils his own soul by killing Dumbledore. Perhaps that's true when he first goes into Dumbledore's service, but by the end of it Snape is not merely fighting for Lily. He mourns the loss of those that he had to watch die because of his status as a double-agent. And he saves the life of (cough! cough!) Remus John Lupin, when it would have been far easier and better for him not to. These are things he did not have to do to relieve the "crushing emotional burden" of his onrequited love for Lily and her death. Lupinlore: > Dumbledore for his part respected Snape and developed compassion and > pity for him. But he also felt disapproval, disappointment, and > outright disgust for many of Snape's choices and attitudes and > practices, and is expressing those feelings in rather harsh terms > right up until late in HBP. Leslie41: Go back to "The Prince's Tale". That chapter is late in HPB, but it covers a period of about 25 years in Snape's life. Dumbledore exhibits disgust with Snape when he returns before the Potters are killed. That's perfectly true, but that's when Snape is around 21 or so, after he comes to DD as a Death Eater. When Snape puts himself in Dumbledore's service after the Potters are killed (shortly after that), Dumbledore promises not to reveal Snape's secret, which he calls "the best of you." After that, every single thing Dumbledore says about Snape is admiring, even loving. Lupinlore: > The "business" aspect of their relationship explains a great deal, > particularly with regard to Dumbledore's attitude and action. Snape > was, at the end of the day, a servant. He was not a beloved > disciple,nor did Dumbledore have feelings of paternal love for him > as he did for Harry. Leslie41: And when Snape sees the white doe burst from Snape's wand, and knows what that white doe means, and his eyes fill with tears, is that part of the "business" too? > That it was Snape, rather than Harry, who was most clearly being > set up as a pig for slaughter was ... delicious. So, er, are you, *Lupinlore*, relishing in the death of the character who, at some risk, deflected a curse that saved Remus Lupin's life? Now there's an irony I find delicious... From celizwh at intergate.com Wed Jul 25 01:35:23 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:35:23 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172476 wrote: > I'm glad Snape turns out to be (sort of) good, > but he still comes across as mighty creepy in the > end. He was willing to sacrifice Harry and James so > Lily could live (and presumably come back to him.) > He saved Harry for Lily's sake, but didn't love her > enough to actually be KIND to her son. And why, for > heaven's sake, couldn't he take a bath and wash his > hair? He's not the bravest man Harry has ever known, > not by a long shot. He's an obsessive stalker who > never moved past his teenage crush and has spent > twenty years doing good behind the scenes while > torturing students and being incredibly unpleasant. houyhnhnm: " . . . thought we were supposed to be friends?" Snape was saying. "Best friends?" "We are, Sev . . . ." Note the question marks. Without the question marks, Snape's words could be heard as sarcasm or whining, but with them, he's asking her a question. "Are we friends, best friends?" And Lily says yes, we are. Stalkers are not interested in the feeling of their victims. They don't ask, "Are we friends?" In Snape's earliest memory of Lily, the two children were only nine or ten years old. If Snape looked at Lily greedily, it was only the innocent longing of a lonely, neglected little boy for a friend. From what we know of Mr. and Mrs. Evans, Lily had a loving home, and no doubt that radiated from her. Finally, stalkers do not sacrifice their lives for a child begotten by another man. Lily had not only rejected Snape, she had married his most hated rival. A stalker would not have felt desperation when he found out Lily was targeted by Voldemort. He would not have tried to save her or felt remorse when she died. A stalker would have felt she got what she deserved. His initial response to finding out Voldemort was after the Potters *was* selfish (as was the "love", initially, of most of the teenagers we observed in the Potterverse). "You disgust me," Dumbledore said. And Snape did not argue. He didn't whine. He accepted Dumbledore's judgement and offered to do *anything* to keep all three safe. Snape loved Lily with as honorable and unselfish a love as any depicted in the books, in my opinion. These are life and death issues, salvation and damnation. What on earth does a hairdo have to do with any of it? From bamf505 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:27:28 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <377000.712.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172477 > wrote: > > > > I'm glad Snape turns out to be (sort of) good, but > he still comes > > across as mighty creepy in the end. He was willing > to sacrifice > > Harry and James so Lily could live (and presumably > come back to > > him.) > > Leslie41: > Oh, I don't think he necessarily thought Lily would > come back to > him. It's obvious they haven't spoken for years. > But his love for > her isn't conditional on whether or not she comes > back to him. He > wants her to live. > bamf: And if she had lived, the possibility existed that she would eventually come around and love Snape, despite his many flaws. Not that it would have happened right away, but he could at least prove his love to her and win her in the future. > Bookworm: > > He saved Harry for Lily's sake, but didn't love > her enough to > > actually be KIND to her son. > > Leslie41: > Yes, that's true, but remember that he saw Potter in > Harry, not > Lily. He only sees Lily in Harry as he dies. > bamf: I'm not sure I fully agree with Leslie, but it seemed more to me that every time he saw Harry's green eyes, so much like his mother's, it reminded Snape that he had failed to save the one person he had loved, and had for a while given him much needed friendship and SOME one to talk to regarding the wizarding world and his home life. That Lily knew about his home life says that he trusted her a lot. Probably more than he trusted anyone other than Dumbledore. > Bookworm: > > And why, for heaven's sake, couldn't he take a > bath and wash his > > hair? > > Leslie41: > As a child, it's obvious that he was not taught > proper hygiene. As > an adult, my guess is he was depressed, and didn't > give a crap how he > looked. bamf: Someone long ago pointed out that Snape was the Potionsmaster. He worked over cauldrons and with many a different ingredients. A lot of his 'greasy' hair could be due to the long hours making potions. (Ever work at a fast food place? You learn that the grease gets everywhere.) If he is consistently working with ingredients that have an oil base, they easily could get in his hair. hygiene, in my opinion, isn't the problem. bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433 From taykimson at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:33:19 2007 From: taykimson at yahoo.com (taykimson) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:33:19 -0000 Subject: Why was Mad-Eye able to see through the invisibility cloack? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172478 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "oiramertip" wrote: > > This looks like a mistalke to me... Oh that bugged me as well. REALLY bugged me. I kept waiting for an explanation as to why Moody could see through the cloak - because how could it be a Hallow - but alas, the explanation never came. taykimson From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:42:02 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:42:02 -0000 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172479 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "myspacetraveller" wrote: > > I know JKR said that Harry and Voldy were not related, but as it turns out they are in fact related. Both are descendants of the 3rd Peverell brother since he was the only one who had children. DD said Harry was the rightful owner of the Cloak because he is the last-born descendant of Ignotus, but so is Voldy since his grandfather (Gaunt)mentioned that he was a descendant of Peverell. I am not sure if JKR realized that when she said that, but that is what their lineage says. Even though they are very distant. > > myspacetraveller > I thought of this as well, but I don't think this was a mistake, necessarily. What I think is that Gaunt CLAIMED he was a descendant of a Perevell, but that doesn't make the claim valid. It seems like, in his poverty stricken life, anything to make himself seem important, he would have tried to project...true or not. My feeling is that is heard the story of the deathly hallows and started claiming he was a descendant...who was going to argue? Just a thought. Adam From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:42:35 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:42:35 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172480 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "muscatel1988" wrote: > > > "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more > than our abilities." That sentence is, for me, the judgement on > Dumbledore. His overarching choice was to raise Harry as a pig for > slaughter. Snape recoils at the idea; it is hard not to. > Well, except that by DH, at least, he wasn't intending Harry to be a pig for slaughter. He was intending Harry to live and triumph through the resurrection magic that he was confident would be activated by Harry's selfless sacrifice. He was, in effect, lieing in his conversation with Snape (as, to be fair, JKR lied. or at least bent truth to the breaking point, when she said magic could not bring back the dead). However, it does seem that there is a character being prepared as a pig for slaughter in HBP and DH, and that character would be Snape. Consider this -- DD wants the Elder Wand to be left without a master, thus his decision to willingly die at Snape's hand. However, he must have known that Voldemort would assume Snape was now the master of the wand. Therefore, he must have known what would happen. Snape, for his part, did not even have the truth to defend himself with, as he did not know anything about the Hallows (not that it would have made any difference to Voldemort). The fact that Draco intervened and messed up DD's plan really doesn't change anything as far as Snape goes. Voldemort still thought Snape the master of the wand, just as DD must have intended. Even if Snape HAD been the master of the wand, it wuld have made no difference, as he did not understand what he would have been master of. However you cut it, DD seems to have put a plan in play that would almost inevitably lead to someone being killed in order for Voldemort to be defeated. But he was lieing to Snape about who he planned to sacrifice. It was not Harry, his beloved grandson-substitute, but Snape the troublesome and ambivalent servant who would die so that the Dark Lord could be vanquished. When all was said and done, Dumbledore was perfectly willing that Snape die so that Harry could live. Whether that is just or not is, I suspect, a subject of some controversy. Lupinlore From prep0strus at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:48:03 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:48:03 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172481 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > His initial response to finding out Voldemort was after > the Potters *was* selfish (as was the "love", initially, > of most of the teenagers we observed in the Potterverse). > "You disgust me," Dumbledore said. And Snape did not > argue. He didn't whine. He accepted Dumbledore's > judgement and offered to do *anything* to keep all > three safe. > > Snape loved Lily with as honorable and unselfish a > love as any depicted in the books, in my opinion. He may have truly loved her. She treated him kindly at a time in his life when no one did. But it doesn't make him a wonderful person. It makes him a person who had one spot of goodness in his life. In comparison to Riddle, who had no goodness, it's the world. And that one shining example of goodness, well, it enabled him to be one of the bravest in the fight against evil. and that's nice. But I still can't have too much respect for him. That one spot of goodness wasn't enough to make him into a fair person, or a nice person. He couldn't be decent to Harry, only protect him out of a sense of obligation left over from a tragic, unrequited love. And worse... that spot of goodness couldn't even make him a not evil person until it was directly affected. It didn't stop him from going towards the dark arts, towards voldemorte, towards hatred to an entire group of people (a group of people he is a part of, in fact). He had a bad childhood, but harry didn't even have a 'lily' the first 11 years of his life. If Harry wasn't the object of the prophecy, Snape would likely never have changed the path he was on. He would've continued on the side of evil, killing people that Lily loved - even James or Harry if he had crossed their paths. Snape turns out to have been 'good' for the series which many of us thought he would. But he wasn't nice. And his goodness is qualified. In the end... I don't know that i can have more respect for him than Pettigrew, or even Umbridge. There are different layers of good and evil, nice and mean, fear and bravery, love and hate in JKR's world. Snape was an interesting character. But a brave man, to be emulated? I don't think so. concerning his 'soul'... I think he was lucky to have ever known lily - her life and her death being all that stopped Snape from complete evil. Btw... if he had truly accomplished dumbledore's request and defeated dumbledore... would his death at voldy's hands mean harry would've died in that final conflict? From vhkeys at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 01:45:54 2007 From: vhkeys at yahoo.com (vhkeys) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:45:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <688756.96199.qm@web31814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172482 > Alla: > > > > True, he is ten and he is not a stalker at that time, but we already > > hear the word watches **greedily**, that gives me stalkering vibe. > > Ceridwen: > "Greedily" doesn't always mean negative things. It can also mean with > longing, non-negative. I saw him more as a child who didn't have many > friends, looking at someone who was like him in a unique way, and > wishing very hard she was his friend. > Hi everyone, I thought Snape observed personality traits in Harry that reminded him of James. I'm speaking of unpleasant personality traits like those which allowed James to behave like a jerk toward Snape. Snape was doing Harry a favor by giving him tough love and displine to help him get past those weaknesses of his father. Bill From aida_costa at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 01:49:31 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:49:31 -0000 Subject: Why was Mad-Eye able to see through the invisibility cloack? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172483 I suspect it's Moody's magical eye. That eye was never explained, but it's pretty darn powerful magic. Aida From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 01:55:36 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:55:36 -0000 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172484 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adamjmarcantel" wrote: > > My feeling > is that is heard the story of the deathly hallows and started > claiming he was a descendant...who was going to argue? Just a > thought. > > Adam > Except I'm pretty sure JK made it clear he had no clue what it was. I'm guessing he was grabbing at straws. Remind me, did he remember the Slytherin connection? Julie From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 01:58:01 2007 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:58:01 -0000 Subject: I have even less respect for Snape now Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172485 I'll post my review of the whole book tomorrow but I had to put this up now while it is still fresh in my mind. I've been on a road trip to comic-con so I just now finished the book--I didn't like it BTW. Snape strikes me as a petty, pathetic, short-sited man whose life of misery and pain is completely deserved. Snape's love isn't pure, isn't good, no matter how fuzzy his patronus is. It is selfish and possessive. If he really loved Lily, he would have done so much more for Harry than what he did over the past seven years. I know that if the woman I love died, I would do everything for that kid--especially if he was a student of mine. I would have trained him, and cared for him and made him want to be around me because every second he stared at me with those green eyes I would have been Happy. I would have been reminded of the person I love and I would take solace in knowing that they were smiling down on me with gladness. Instead he treats Harry like crap and in his final moments demands to see Lily's green eyes one more time. Why didn't he want to do that for the past six years? why wouldn't he want to see Harry grow up into the kind of boy Lily would have been proud of. That would have been a worthy testament to her. If it was the James factor, well that still doesn't make a whole lotta sense for a smart slytherin with a well developed sense of revenge. what would be better than taking the son of a man you hated with the woman you loved and becoming a father figure to that boy? Harry was so starved for a genuine father figure, Snape would have had the boy worshiping him as much as he did Dumbledore. Snape could have done some good and gotten his revenge over James as well by actually being there for Lily's child. This is stream of conciousness and scattered. its my first chance at a computer on my trip since I have finished the book so it's all just rushing out. But the bottom line is, is that if Snape really loved Lily, he would have treated her son with actual diginity and respect and taken Harry under his wing. The fact that he didn't shows just how selfish his love really was. phoenixgod2000, who thinks the epilogue is a travesty and hasn't been this disappointed in a book in a long time. From jsfigiel at aol.com Wed Jul 25 02:00:40 2007 From: jsfigiel at aol.com (Jamie Figiel) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:00:40 -0000 Subject: My Thoughts On DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172486 I am trying to keep up with all of the posts...everyone, as usual, is giving me food for thought. However, I will give a few thoughts for what it is worth. Personally, I LOVED the book. I read it on pins and needles the whole time, trying to finish it before anyone could ruin it for me! I was also surprised by much in the book and I have already started rereading it slower to absorb it better. I was very upset by Hedwig though in hindsight, it makes sense. Really, how could Harry have taken her with him? It would have been easy to track him if Hedwig was flying around delivering messages all the time. I think the whole part about Dumbledore not being what I thought he was made me more angry than anything else in the book. I was really mad at him for setting Harry up that way. It didn't seem as though he truly loved him as I had been led to believe throughout the series. Maybe upon rereading it will make more sense to me but I was really mad at him. Well, I have always been "anti-Snape," however, while the revelations weren't entirely earth-shattering, I have a much better feeling about him now than I ever had before. I still think he could have been nicer all around but at least we know for sure why he did what he did. I was also very sad about Dobby and quite pleased with Kreacher's turn-around. I also think Neville (or Gran) should have been the one to do in Bellatrix rather than Molly but I am so glad he killed Nagini and showed what a true hero he was. All around I thought the book answered alot of the questions and I am kinda glad it did not answer ALL of them. I still like speculating. The epilogue was a nice way to end it but I also would have liked more detail. I was so pleased that it ended the way I wanted it to end that I hadn't really thought about it until I read all of the posts and I agree that it could have had a lot more detail than it did. Maybe it opens the door for an "in-between" book that takes us from the end of the war through the 19 years we're missing. One can hope anyway. Jamie F. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:06:56 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:06:56 -0000 Subject: Bragging Rights answer key, chekhov's guns, spoiler report, etc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172487 Anne: Snip snip Sounds like mugglebornsare accepted and equal under under the law. Just my reading of this scene. Juli -> For the Weasleys being muggleborn was never an issue. There could still be some prejudice, those things die hard Snne: > Snape is a bat animagus. It's at the end of the Sacking of Severus > Snape chapter. Juli-> Something Bat-Like flew put the window... not a bat. Snape had his wand, he could have transformed himself into anything with wings just like Krum turned into a shark in the TWT Juli From doliesl at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:08:04 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me Message-ID: <932103.37465.qm@web82204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172488 Alla: > > True, he is ten and he is not a stalker at that time, but we already > hear the word watches **greedily**, that gives me stalkering vibe. Ceridwen: "Greedily" doesn't always mean negative things. It can also mean with longing, non-negative. I saw him more as a child who didn't have many friends, looking at someone who was like him in a unique way, and wishing very hard she was his friend. D: Yeah, 'greed' as in hunger for companionship and acceptance coming from a poor, awkward, neglected and lonely child from an unhappy family. On the other hand the Draco-ish James and Sirius from train scene totally disgusted me. The word 'just a crush' is used inappropirately and totally undermined what was in the memories (so it's easier for readers to brush off) We know that Snape and Lily were childhood friends, pre-puberty. Snape probably put the memories of young Lily on a pedestral in a way because she was his first friend and his only comfort, and their time together was probably the happiest time of his life. They've known each other for a long time and drifted apart in seperate ways around 5-6th year. Leslie: > His love for her, his anguish at losing her, and his redemption, are > all dependent on the fact that his emotions are real and true, as > true as James' for Lily, or Sirius' for James, or Hermione's for > Harry. > Alla: You are likely to be correct, but I most definitely see lots of ambiguity in those emotions. They can be read differently and I read them that way. D: Anyone can selectively interpret and ignore anything pure and geniune into as ugly and negative as possible because of biased, one can determined to think only the worst and be content in hatred. Except these kinds of interpretation contradict and cannot be reconcil with the final word from Harry: Snape being the bravest man he's ever known, and naming his son after him. And what everything Harry said during the final duel with Voldemort about Snape. D [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kjones at telus.net Wed Jul 25 02:09:09 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:09:09 -0700 Subject: Slapstick Comedy - was Deathly Hallows Reaction Message-ID: <46A6B0C5.3000903@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172489 Johnbowman19 writes: Imagine the fortitude and strength it would take to kill probably the closest person to a friend you have had in your life, simply because your friend told you it was necessary for the "Greater Good." KJ writes: Personally, I think that Snape found it much easier to kill Dumbledore when he found out that he had been lied to all those years about protecting Lily's son in her memory so he could be killed at a convenient time to further Dumbledore's plan. Also, I found Dumbledore to be critical, spiteful, and often sarcastic when he spoke to Snape. Other than his constant crocodile tears, he showed no empathy or true friendship for Snape that I recognized. When he told Harry that he trusted Snape, it was because he knew Snape would have to find the opportunity to speak to Harry and live long enough to tell him what he needed to know. He also told Snape that he did not put all his secrets in one basket, particularly one hanging on Voldemort's arm. Stupid stuff: Why teach the kids to say Voldemort's name out loud to prevent it being more feared, when you turn the name into a Deatheater magnet in the last book? Harry must have had a real hard time biting his tongue. Voldemort AK's Harry in book 1 and blows himself up. He AK's Harry in book 4, and screws up his wand, and Harry's wand, and looks like an idiot in front of his servants. He AK's Harry in the forest, as Harry does a Lily and gives it all for Dumbledore. The blast knocks him on his arse and out cold. Does he learn? No! Is it the only spell that Voldemort knows? What is with this? Why is Dumbledore, who isn't afraid of the next great adventure still hanging around in the train station to make sure Harry doesn't stuff up at the end? He just has to make sure? Throw the sword in an ice covered pond? Dumbledore said"....." It probably could have been thrown in the tent. Hermione, who apparently was a boyscout in a previous life has everything they need to survive winter except food? Harry wears a soul piece in his head for 17 years, hardly bothered him at all, but one on a necklace tries to drown him? Hermione breaks Harry's wand when Voldemort changes his wand just to let us know that the wand doesn't mean anything and then turns up with a wand that Harry accidently ends up owning which saves Harry's butt. Again Covenient? Dumbledore telling Harry that he has to go back and maybe die again, suggesting that it's no big deal now. Of course, now it's a little more permanent. A deadly curse in the Gringott's vault that makes treasure multiply itself twenty times and is "hot." Oh please! Why the Hell did Voldemort send the spiders to catch Hagrid. Was it only so Hagrid could carry Harry back to the school? By the end of the book, I liked Voldemort better than Dumbledore. He knew Voldemort was going to look for the Elder Wand. He knew Snape was going to be thought the owner of the Elder wand. Did he warn Snape? No! Then he says "Poor Severus..." Even Aberforth hated his brother. The white faced-look on Snape's face was not the fear of death, it was the knowledge that Dumbledore had screwed him over. Again Neville whipping another Godric's sword out of a burning hat as has been mentioned by others. How many are there? We shouldn't have to come up for explanations of how this might come to be. They can't put that in a movie! Aberforth's eye in a piece of magic mirror that Sirius had. Explain that if you dare! Funny stuff: Snape said that Harry got by on luck, mediocre magic, and more talented friends. Truer words were never spoken. Throwing a Deatheater in the house with Kreacher and having Kreacher show up triumphant. I wonder what happened to the Deatheater? Every time one of the faithful called Voldemort to tell him that Harry was captured, he escaped. Voldemort killed more of his Deatheaters than the Order did. Considering that he only started with less than thirty, they must have multiplied like rabbits. Picking the wrong people to turn into when they drank the polyjuice potion. Typical HP clusterf... Doing the same thing again, expecting better results at the bank. Took a chapter out of Voldie's book. Even better clusterf.... Climbing on a half-blind dragon and managing to escape by the skin of his teeth. Again Grawp throwing Hagrid through the window. Snape jumping out the window leaving a "Snape-shaped hole" Nice mental picture. Mad-eye's magic eyeball stuck in a door like a peep-hole. Harry reveres it so much, he buries it under a tree. I wonder if he buried it looking up or down? Was JKR on anti-depressants while she wrote this book? KJ From mikcers at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:02:09 2007 From: mikcers at yahoo.com (Kim) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:02:09 -0000 Subject: Answers and Questions In-Reply-To: <20070724203348.0185131B8@socom1.uol.com.br> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172490 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, james black potter wrote: > A. Godric owned Griphook. That, and the goblin lost any right over > the sword when he betrayed the trio. > Q. How did Neville got Gryffindor's Sword out of the hat? I've been wondering how Neville got the sword. Is the above statement true? Or was it because the sorting hat can access certain things in times of need? Or something else? Any ideas? Kim From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 25 02:14:30 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:14:30 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A6B206.8040300@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172491 eggplant107 wrote: > I once said you couldn't have a good Snape and a good book 7, it turns > out I was wrong. I also said if JKR can figure out a way to do it then > she's an even better writer than I thought she was, it turns out I was > right, she really is a better writer than I thought she was. Bart: She used pretty much the same explanation that virtually all the DDM!Snape people were giving. The ONLY difference is that Snape was a childhood friend of Lily's. eggplant107: > But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of the I > love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading the book > you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? Bart: No; everything was confirming to me that he was under deep cover, including him becoming Headmaster of Hogwarts to protect the students. And, as I mentioned it, as soon as the doe Patronus showed up, that was all I needed. eggplant107 > If JKR wanted to be really diabolical she could have included 60 blank > pages after that so I'd feel the thickness of those pages when I hold > the book and they would give me a false sense of security; Bart: Well, it would not have worked for me; I always thumb to the end of the book, covering the text, to see how many pages there are. eggplant107: > One thing about the book does puzzle me, why did JKR invent Percy? It > seems to me an evil Weasley would be more interesting, we already have > enough good Weasleys. When Percy apologized I expected to see a grand > betrayal, but no, it turns out his apology was sincere. If Percy is > going to do that then what is the point of the man? Bart: Because Percy was very much a product of his parents' upbringing. He was taught to follow the rules, work hard, join the Ministry, and get ahead. From his point of view, it was he who was betrayed; he had been taught to act a certain way all his life, and, when he should have been rewarded, his parents treated him like a traitor. It took a while for him to get over it, but, as he said, once Morty took over, escape became difficult. Bart From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:07:58 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:07:58 -0000 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172492 Julie: > > Except I'm pretty sure JK made it clear he had no clue what it was. > I'm guessing he was grabbing at straws. Remind me, did he remember > the Slytherin connection? > Deepthi: Yes, Marvolo did remember. In HBP, he tells the ministry wizard (I forget his name), that he is a direct descendant of Slytherin on his mother's side. Deepthi From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:15:16 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:15:16 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172493 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: > And worse... that spot of goodness couldn't even make him a not evil > person until it was directly affected. It didn't stop him from > going towards the dark arts, towards voldemorte, towards hatred to > an entire group of people (a group of people he is a part of, in > fact). He had a bad childhood, but harry didn't even have a 'lily' > the first 11 years of his life. Leslie41: Of course all that's true, and that's why Rowling talks about Snape's life as being part of a redemptive pattern. He evolves past that, and redeems himself. Prepostrus: > If Harry wasn't the object of the prophecy, Snape would likely never > have changed the path he was on. He would've continued on the side > of evil, killing people that Lily loved - even James or Harry if he > had crossed their paths. Leslie41: Perhaps. But that's a "what if". What *really* happens in the books is that Snape turns away from the Dark Arts, and helps to save the world. Why not judge him by what he actually does, instead of what he might have done? Harry *might* have been in Slytherin. He *might* have fallen into the Dark Arts just like Voldemort. But we judge him by what he does, which is to resist Voldemort, and sacrifice himself for the greater good. Just like the man Harry claims is the bravest man he ever knew, Snape. From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:10:07 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:10:07 -0000 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172494 myspacetraveller: > I know JKR said that Harry and Voldy were not related, but as it > turns out they are in fact related. Both are descendants of the > 3rd Peverell brother since he was the only one who had children. > DD said Harry was the rightful owner of the Cloak because he is > the last-born descendant of Ignotus, but so is Voldy since his > grandfather (Gaunt)mentioned that he was a descendant of Peverell. > I am not sure if JKR realized that when she said that, but that > is what their lineage says. Even though they are very distant. Deepthi: Sorry if I'm missing something, but can you refer me to the canon that says that only Ignotus had children? I assumed that Marvolo must have descended from Cadmus (the second Peverell brother). Thanks, Deepthi From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Jul 25 02:16:37 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:16:37 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172495 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bridgetteakabiit" wrote: > > Clio > > In DH 'The prince's tale' we learn Snape's patronus is the doe. In 'A > > flaw in the plan' Harry tells Voldemort that Snape has the same > > patronus as Lily Potter. > > Odd. How does Harry know? Am I overlooking something? I can't shake > > the feeling that there was a conversation about this edited from the > > book. > > > When I first read the section about the doe, I immediately thought of > Lily. Since James' was a Stag, it made sense to me that Lily's, his > wife, would be the female equivalent. Maybe that's where the idea came > from. Vivamus: I seem to remember something about that, too, but perhaps that is in a conversation never recorded in the books. Perhaps JKR mentioned it in an interview. > My pressing question is: what was so important about Lily's eyes? I > thought there was supposed to be some big huge important thing about > how Harry had Lily's eyes. Dumbledore points out Harry's eyes to > Snape, but I couldn't get anything more out of it, except maybe that's > what encouraged Snape to help protect Harry? Vivamus: I think it is that the "eyes are the windows of the soul", to quote Proverbs. His eyes show his true nature, which is, as DD points out, much more like Lily than James, even though he looks more like James. I think the very important thing about Harry's eyes being like Lily's is that SS would not have been able to do what he did for Harry, if it were not for Lily's eyes. Remember, as SS lay dying, he wanted to look into those eyes one last time. Odd that he managed to hate Harry all through that, but he was definitely a believably damaged person -- in JKR's words, a "deeply horrible" person -- yet he kept his word to the very last breath in his body. > I was totally shocked that Harry was a Horcrux, even though it made > sense. The whole "limbo" section where he was talking to Dumbledore > completely threw me off, and I don't think it was really explained > where they were, how they got there, or why Dumbledore was there too. It shocked me, too, as I have a hard time making it fit with Harry's character and behavior. I was expecting the horcrux to be the scar. It was obvious that a soul-bit of LV was somehow attached to Harry; else the dreams, visions, etc. would be much harder to explain, but I thought his soul would be pure, not somehow mixed with LV. I think the King's Cross section was deliberately vague, because he HAD really died, but wasn't going on into death. So it was only a way station created in Harry's mind, as whatever Harry wanted to imagine it as being. As DD said, it was Harry's party. > I feel the book spent too much time describing them running and > hiding, and should have spent more time explaining! Yes, that was the one tedious bit. One of the things I would have liked explained a bit more in the King's Cross bit was that thing under the seats. Was that the bit of LV that was in Harry, which Harry now left behind to die when he returned to his body? Or, was it the bit of LV that was in LV's body, that was semi-dead at the same time? Harry's comment to LV later about it seems to imply the latter, but the scene and DD's comments seem to imply the former. Vivamus From tenne at redshift.bc.ca Wed Jul 25 01:10:29 2007 From: tenne at redshift.bc.ca (Tenne) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:10:29 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) References: Message-ID: <026101c7ce58$97b899d0$797ba8c0@terrilaptop> No: HPFGUIDX 172496 Carol responds: Their child grows up loved and happy--with heroic parents who are fondly remembered by their fellow members and HRH. (Harry, too, had heroic parents but didn't know it till he was eleven.) Teddy will hear fond anecdotes about his parents from many people. Terri: I was thinking the same thing about some of the people who died. One major theme of these books has always been that there are things worse than death, and for some charactors I believe that is life. Teddy grows up with hero's for parents, instead of a shunned father who is ashamed of himself. Dobby has no place in his own world, he is an outsider for wanting his freedom. Sirus' personality has no use for life in a non war zone. He needs excitment and action. He is so unhappy and now is in the company of his best friend forever. The twins would always depend on themselves and most likely never really grow up or apart. Now George has no choice but to become a person, not just a twin Terri [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:17:55 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:17:55 -0000 Subject: Snapes love for Lily (Was: DH rambles and crows eating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172497 Alla: > > Heeee, to get to Snape for a second, I guess his death makes my point as well that she wanted to show suddenness and senselessness, but at the same time I cannot help but smile at the delightful irony JKR brought there ?V potion master dies from poison with no chance to get an antidote or anything like that. > > Leslie41: > That may indeed be an irony, though I would guess Rowling finds it less than "delightful". It's clear from the book that she intends for us to admire Snape just as much as Dumbledore. Perhaps more. > > Alla: > > I wanted confrontation between Snape and Harry so badly, but now I cannot help but think that JKR??s way is so much better. She would not let Snape taunt Harry ?V haha, I am Dumbledore??s man, (or is he?) who loved your mother, Harry just learns it all afterwards. > > Leslie41: > Why should there be a confrontation now? What is needed is understanding. Of course she would not let Snape taunt Harry, because Snape's taunts of Harry usually had a point to them. They were usually used to educate him. And when those taunts failed (as with Harry's occlumency lessons), it's Harry that is seen to be at fault, not Snape. Carol responds: i agree with everything Leslie says in this post, including the snipped portions, but I want to add that I see no reason to think that Snape wants to taunt Harry one last time. It seems to me that Snape is desperate to reach Harry to give him the information he needs to defeat Voldemort, that his scar contains a soul bit and that Harry must sacrifice himself. That, after all, is what the last memory contains. Snape is furious with Dumbledore when DD tells him that Harry has to die: "Have you raised him up as a pig to be slaughtered?" And think how Harry would have taken it if a living Snape dressed as a Death Eater had given him this information or had even tried to talk to him. Sadly, ironically, the only way he can do so is by giving it to him in the form of memories as he's dying. So Snape's death, and his last act, is far from pointless. Harry doesn't even need to forgive Snape, merely to understand him. As Leslie said, he came to Dumbledore for a selfish reason, the desperate and unrequited love of a woman he wanted to save, with no concern for her son or her hated husband. But we see him change, we see him watching over Harry for Lily, but we also see him risking his life for Dumbledore. As for remaining unpleasant to the end, what is he supposed to do? He's under cover posing as a loyal Death Eater, and the only way he can do that is "acting [his] part convincingly [in the chase]" (DH Am. ed. 688) and pretending to approve of the death of Charity Burbage, putting on an indifferent expression as she pleads with him to rescue her. When DD asks him how many men and women he has watched die, he responds, "Lately, only those whom I could not save save" (687). But to attempt to save Charity would only result in Snape's death along with hers and sabotage all of Dumbledore's plans. Dumbledore is "counting upon [Snape] to remain in Voldemort's good books as long as possible, or Hogwarts will be left to the mercy of the Carrows" (DH Am. ed. 688). So not only must he appear loyal to Voldemort, providing him with seemeingly useful information with the key element left out, Confunding Mundungus so that he provides that key element, taking part in the chase of Harry (the price is George's ear, but if he had hit his real target, the hand of the DE trying to kill Lupin, his loyalty might have been suspected and the consequences would have been much worse: a DE takeover of Hogwarts which his mere presence staves off. What does he do as headmaster? He can't do much about the Carrows, true, but he keeps on the old staff members (McGonagall, Flitwick, sprout, etc.) who oppose them rather than replacing them with DEs. He sends a fake Sword of Gryffindor to the vault and makes sure that Harry and Ron get the real one. Meanwhile, he has Phineas Nigellus keeping an ear on HRH (his eyes are blindfolded, thanks to Hermione). His "terrrible" detention for the stolen sword consists of helping Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest. Snape has apparently set some sort of watch over the secret passages and reinstituted the protections on Hogwarts since no Death Eaters get in until he's kicked out. He's consulting with Portrait!Dumbledore and following his recommendations. He reinstitutes Umbridge's rules. Why? Surely, it's to make himself look like a tyrant (and loyal DE) and get the kids to rebel. (He knows what happened under Umbridge. Why follow her example unless he wants the same results?) When Neville and the others go into hiding, he doesn't go after them or their protector, Hagrid, out of hiding. When Harry arrives and McGonagall goes after the "murderer" and "coward" Snape with conjured daggers, Snape doesn't fight back. Rather than duel her and risk hurting innocent students, he hides behind a suit of armor and leaps through a window. (The DEs are already tied up and McGonagall is in charge; the students are in no immediate danger and he can no longer protect them. He just has to watch for LV to start keeping Nagini close and then somehow get to Harry to warn him. But Harry hates him; it's highly unlikely that he would have succeeded in attempting to talk to him. The only way he can tell Harry what Harry needs to know to defeat Voldemort is to give Harry his memories as he dies. He has already expressed his fury to DD that Harry has to die: "And now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter--" (687). It doesn't matter that Snape has been protecting him for Lily's sake and not on principle. His motive has been love, and we are meant, I'm sure, to see that as good--certainly better than if he'd been doing it to pay off a lifedebt to James. And Snape keeps protecting Harry, keeps working against Voldemort at great personal risk even after he has killed DD on DD's orders. Voldemort never for a moment suspects him. He dies for a wholly unrelated reason that shocks Harry to the core. But he doesn't die for nothing. His death, bleeding to death from Nagini's bite rather than dying instantly from an AK, gives him the opportunity to dowhat he could never otherwise have done, persuade Harry that he has to sacrifice himself to defeat Voldemort. (Imagine Harry believing Snape telling him that in any other circumstances.) Harry's reaction to the memories is "Finally, the truth" (691). It's a brilliant and terrible stroke on JKR's part (terible for snape and for Harry and for many readers). And as far as I'm concerned, Snape's just reward is Harry's vindication of him to Voldemort in front of everyone present at the battle. JKR has both Harry and Dumbledore comment on Snape's courage. Harry names his second son after him and DD). Surely, that's more than just a clue to exactly how JKR wants Snape to be read. I didn't want Snape to love Lily, either, Alla, but his love is devotion, not physical desire. Obsession or not, it sustains him as Sirius Black's belief in his own innocence and desire for vengeance on Wormtail sustained him. JKR pulls it off and IMO mkes him noble, not selfish. What can he possibly gain from such a love? Nothing for himself, except, at the last, the respect and trust and maybe the affection of Dumbledore. But from the rest of the good side, his reward is vilification. Until the end, after his death, when Harry reveals the truth. Carol, hoping to find out in the upcoming chat that Snape's portrait hangs in honor beside Dumbledore's From sherriola at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 02:19:34 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:19:34 -0700 Subject: my DH reactions minus Snape Message-ID: <46a6b337.1c528c0a.04d0.ffffc23a@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172498 No Snape in this one, because we'll be discussing him for years to come, and I'd like to touch on some other things. These thoughts are in no particular order. still confused. I do not get the whole deathly Hallows thing at all. Did Harry end up Master of death? But he still destroyed the Horcruxes. How did Harry live in the end? If his mother's blood in Voldemort tethered him to life when Voldemort killed him in the forest, then how did he live when Voldemort tried it again in the great Hall? I just don't get it, and I'd be glad for clarification. Things I loved or that moved me or made me laugh. Ron Saving Harry was great. At first I was thinking, oh no, not Ron and Harry fighting again, but I was sure Ron would come back. In fact, I loved how the trio seemed to mature over the year and worked together as a smooth team. I particularly liked and understood why it was to Ron and Hermione that Harry wanted to talk after the end of Voldemort. The strength of their friendship was the best part of the book and entire series. Kreacher's tale was one of the most moving things in the book to me. It was one of the few times I cried while reading, thinking of both Kreacher and Regulus. loved molly being the one to get Bella! We've debated molly's personality for a long time, and I loved seeing her take some strong action and do her part in the war. Neville. How to say how wonderful Neville's parts were. His character has grown and matured and strengthened with every book, and I was glad to see him come into his own, show his leadership and courage. I was scared when Voldemort put the hat on his head and started it on fire and cheered when he cut off Nagini's head. Hey, how did the Sorting hat not burn up anyway? I loved Potter Watch. In real world wars, people do communicate that way, give information and seek it. Even in the wizarding world, something as simple as radio was so useful. In fact, JKR used some interesting ways to give information to Harry, and to us, things like the radio, overheard conversations, Voldemort's thoughts. The argument between Harry and Lupin was great! Yes, it was about time somebody called Lupin on his self-pitying poor little me attitude. I had never disliked Lupin more than when he wanted to cop out and leave his wife and child, playing up his poor little werewolf status and expecting sympathy from Harry. I laughed and applauded when Harry told him off, but I was also glad when they saw each other again and Lupin asked Harry to be godfather. I thought Dobby's death and burial was the most moving moment of all in the book, even more than Harry's walk toward death with his parents, Sirius and Lupin. more about that walk in a minute. The image of Harry manually digging the grave, the others coming to help him and the words he put on the stone, will live with me for a long time. I actually loved the battle for Hogwarts. I loved the McGonagall and her desks, the suits of armor, the Mandrakes, even Grawp. I particularly enjoyed the role of the DA. The walk to death. I know that was supposed to be very moving, and it was, but I found myself thinking, is that it? That's all? That's the oh so important reason Sirius had to die, so he can accompany Harry to his death? I was very disappointed. I liked Lily. I've been so afraid I would not like her, because having been raised by my father, I've almost resented the way fathers are portrayed so negatively and mothers so wonderfully in the series. I've sarcastically called Lily, "the sainted Lily". But I liked her a lot. In the Snape memory scene, I saw a strong girl, a person who befriended people not based on their looks or standing in the community. She was a friend to Sev, even as he turned more toward his death eater type friends, even though she knew he called other Muggle Borns mudblood. She tried to accept him and be his friend, till she couldn't do it anymore. All I'll say about Snape here is that I agree with whoever said earlier today, that perhaps Snape's worst memory is the worst because of calling Lily mudblood and not because of the incident with the Marauders. And of course, there has to be some things I didn't like. I thought there was way too much camping. I missed seeing the other characters. The scene in the home of Bathilda Bagshot. ewwww. And mostly, Harry using unforgivable curses. It's one thing, in a war, for a soldier to have to kill, but to torture is quite another. It unsettled me a lot and I wondered if there couldn't have been other ways for Harry to handle those situations. I was very glad we didn't see Hermione's torture first hand, as hearing it was bad enough! And what about Wormtail? Did the silver hand punish him for feeling a bit of concern about Harry, and is that why it strangled him? That was another confusing moment for me. Overall, I think I liked it, though after I finished it the first time, I felt let down, disappointed and almost like I'd been reading an elaborate fan fiction story. I had to think about it a few days for it to settle in and for me to see its strengths and the great things about it. How did Hagrid get away from the spiders anyway? Did I miss that? Sherry From dougsamu at golden.net Wed Jul 25 02:23:50 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:23:50 -0400 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics Message-ID: <0915E900-416F-4EF8-B2EB-849CC6461722@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172499 doug said: and Harry's sacrifice protected others... his Death separated the two souls he harboured, and it was because he was Master of Death, that he didn't actually die... (?) So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time and not the second? Why was the house at Godric's Hollow destroyed but nothing in the Forbidden Forest? and Donna said: Donna exclaims: Voldy "killing" Harry took care of the (accidental) horcrux in Harry, so now Harry is horcrux free, the connection there is GONE. Voldy has nothing left in Harry to keep himself alive. But Harry did not die along with that horcrux because his protection from Lily was still throbbing in Voldy's veins. DD says "Remember what he did, in his ignorance, in his greed and his cruelty...he took your blood and rebuilt his living body with it! Your blood in his veins, Harry, Lily's protection inside both of you! He tethered you to life while he still lives!" Doug: So to reiterate - reminded of a more careful reading- it was Harry's blood in Voldemort that tethered Harry to the living. So it remains unclear, and at this point an unnecessary distinction that Avada Kadavra affects the Life, not the Soul (?) But still no answer to: why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time and not the second? Why was the house at Godric's Hollow destroyed but nothing in the Forbidden Forest? Oh well. ___ __ From entangledhere at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:25:10 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:25:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DH:Harry/Lily's Eyes Message-ID: <286515.87503.qm@web51409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172500 Julie, that is a beautiful explanation for Lily's eyes. I wish Jo could have put that in the book somewhere, because your words were really touching. Lovely. *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 bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 25 02:30:35 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:30:35 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A6B5CB.70105@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172501 Katie wrote: > Don't get me wrong - I wanted an epilogue. Desperately. I really > wanted to know what happened. But I wanted it to be sooner than 19 > years later, first of all. That was too far. And, I wanted it to be > true to the series. It just was off. Too Disney and cute and > perfect. Bart: But that's pretty much the point; to show that all the sacrifice was worthwhile. It was also supposed to show that Harry was finally cured of his hero complex. I know that I have a habit of bringing other stories in, but there was a Broadway musical called PIPPIN, about a young prince who is offered by a Satanic figure an extraordinary life, and, having found out what extraordinary is, decided to give it all up for an ordinary one. That is pretty much what the epilogue was all about; with all the adventure, all the heroism, all the fighting, and all the death, to the heroes (not to mention Draco), an ordinary life looked pretty damned good. Bart From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Wed Jul 25 02:27:34 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:27:34 -0000 Subject: FILK: A Dumbledore Kedavra Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172502 SPOILER WARNING!!!!! Here it is, my first DH filk. It does scan, but you have to accent some words on their ordinarily unaccented syllables. A Dumbledore Kedavra (DH, Chap. 33, 35) To the tune of A Little More Mascara from Jerry Herman's La Cage Aux Folles You-Tube performance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSisCkkPSL4 Dedicated to Siriusly Snapey Susan THE SCENE: DUMBLEDORE'S office, as he confirms that SNAPE is truly DDM. impetuous DUMBLEDORE: Like a fool I was sorely tempted by the ring of old Marvolo Gaunt Bringing Ariana and my parents back was a thing I dearly did want With some dim deviation `twixt reckless enchantment and churlish complaint I find I'm attended by Severus after a mighty curse made me faint He reports that a jinx he has trapped in my hand must eventually spread But I tarried too long, and I can't buy more time, and in months I'll be dead So the Dark Lord, you see, is now at my mercy .. When hexed by a not-too-nice ring, so I've got only a year before I'm gone I'll do the self-sacrifice thing, and put a Dumbledore Kedavra on. SNAPE: We're soon to lose the Ministry, and Voldy will make himself the Hegemon. I'll put you out of your misery, and put a Dumbledore Kedavra on. BOTH: And it will be flash of green! Tower fall! Phoenix flight! And then a funeral with much ado 'Cause when I/you my/your maker meet, daisies push, bucket kick You'll/I'll be in good graces with good ol' You-Know Who! SNAPE: When Bellatrix comes to call with a witch or two And the Dark Lord picks Draco to be his pawn We'll pull off the old switcheroo And wham! We will bamboozle DE spawn! DUMBLEDORE: Sure as the Cannons finish last I'll end with a Canonic blast And put a Dumbledore Kedavra on. BOTH: And it will be portraiture! R.A.B.! Marble tomb! You/I won't have to break your/my Vow, you'll/I'll save Draco's soul 'Cause ev'ryone's thunderstruck, flabbergast, woebegone When Albus gets blown away, and Snape's on a roll! SNAPE: When all my fans have completed the Half-Blood Prince, They'll have to wait two years till the next book's read. DUMBLEDORE: We'll leave them with hardly any hints And literally we will knock them dead! By your AK, I'll not be hurt SNAPE: I give to you a nod that's curt You won't compose your epitaph DUMBLEDORE: But we will get the final laugh SNAPE: I may have loathing on my face. DUMBLEDORE: Your name may be in deep disgrace BOTH: But Potter must get the tiara, And so our Dumbledore Kedavra's on. Flash of green! Tower fall! Portraiture! R.A.B.!...On! Portraiture! R.A.B.!... Phoenix flight! Marble tomb! Thunderstruck, woebegone, on! Thunderstruck, woebegone, on! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From prep0strus at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:31:45 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:31:45 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) In-Reply-To: <026101c7ce58$97b899d0$797ba8c0@terrilaptop> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172503 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tenne" wrote: > > The twins would always depend on themselves and most likely never really grow up or apart. Now George has no choice but to become a person, not just a twin I agreed with a lot of this post, but Fred & George... there may be some truth in what you said. I know I never really took too much time to think of which twin was saying what. They weren't really individuals to me. They were a team. But something Harry said when he gave the twins his goblet of fire winnings comes back to me - that the world will need laughs in the time to come. A lot of laughs went out of the world with Fred gone. Characters that die in the last book of a series (or episode of a tv show or movie in a series) don't affect me as much as ones that leave earlier on. Because while they're gone for the characters, we're really saying goodbye to everyone - and we don't have to really see a world in which they aren't present. I found the deaths very sad - Lupin was one of my favorites, and poor hedwig, and Dobby who never got the love and respect he deserved... But a world without Fred... a George without Fred... there's nothing sadder than I can imagine. I don't know if perhaps JKR thought it might be easier to lose a character who was really only 1/2 of a whole. Or if she knew how hard that would be. But I think the loss of Fred represents the true sacrifice - a less innocent world, even with Voldemorte gone, to lose someone who with his last breath was joking, and impact his twin who we can imagine will never be quite the same. Not sure what my overriding point was supposed to be, or turned out to be. But I sure wish Fred had only lost an eye, instead of his life. From random832 at fastmail.us Wed Jul 25 02:28:28 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:28:28 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DH: Right and Wrong In-Reply-To: <11863738.1185311140994.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <11863738.1185311140994.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <46A6B54C.9020400@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 172504 Bart Lidofsky wrote: > B) Did anybody else, the second the doe Patronus appeared, say to themselves, "Snape!"? I > did, and, for the life of me, I'm not entirely sure why it seemed so obvious to me. I think it's because his patronus was built up as being this big secret/would be a spoiler/etc. > C) Snape's running away cinched it for me, though. Whatever else he is, Snape was no coward. > > D) My frequently repeated explanation of why Snape killed DD was dead on. But > I'm still only giving myself a 95% for that, because I didn't figure out WHY > DD kept his reason for trusting Snape a secret. And in retrospect it seems so simple. He didn't tell anyone because Snape asked him not to. > 3) Does anybody know who the person who didn't use magic before who used it late in life was? Leading theory seems to be that it was Merope, in book 6. I think a lot of people assumed it was going to be book 7 because we'd all built up "It's going to be Petunia! or it's going to be Dudley!" From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:32:24 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:32:24 -0000 Subject: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172505 prep0strus: > Btw... if he had truly accomplished dumbledore's request and defeated > dumbledore... would his death at voldy's hands mean harry would've > died in that final conflict? > Actually, in that case, would LV have been able to kill Snape with the Elder wand? From what happened with Harry, I would guess not! Deepthi From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 25 02:41:18 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:41:18 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A6B84E.80308@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172506 Right Honorable wrote: > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to > fake Parseltongue well enough to access the Chamber of Secrets Bart: He wasn't speaking Parseltongue; he was repeating a single word he heard. I speak a grand total of one phrase in Cantonese; it took me about 5 seconds to learn, using a mnemonic. Ron must have heard Harry use the word numerous times, in numerous combinations, trying to open up the Snitch, probably until he was sick of it. Bart From muellem at bc.edu Wed Jul 25 02:39:57 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:39:57 -0000 Subject: LILY!Snape & Peter's Hand (Was: Snapes love for Lily ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172507 >Sherry wrote: >And what about Wormtail? Did the silver hand punish him for feeling a bit >of concern about Harry, and is that why it strangled him? That was another >confusing moment for me. colebiancardi: well, LV gave Wormtail that hand. And I believe it was cursed - if Peter *ever* did anything to betray LV, it would turn on him & kill him. And Wormtail betrayed LV by not killing Harry - he hesitated. That's my take on it > Carol Wrote: >I didn't want Snape to love Lily, either, >Alla, but his love is devotion, not physical desire. Obsession or not, >it sustains him as Sirius Black's belief in his own innocence and >desire for vengeance on Wormtail sustained him. JKR pulls it off and >IMO mkes him noble, not selfish. What can he possibly gain from such a >love? Nothing for himself, except, at the last, the respect and trust >and maybe the affection of Dumbledore. But from the rest of the good >side, his reward is vilification. Until the end, after his death, when >Harry reveals the truth. colebiancardi: Carol, I could have lived with LOLLIPOPS, but this scene in the book, which took place during the actual DH time-span, killed me and made me think that Snape's *love* was of a physical nature (and a tad creepy-obsessive): "And next, Snape was kneeling in Sirius's old bedroom. Tears were dripping from the end of his hooked nose as he read the old letter from Lily. The second page carried only a few words: 'could ever have been friends with Gellert Grindelwald. I think her mind's going, personally! Lots of Love, Lily' Snape took the page bearing Lily's signature, and her love, and tucked it inside his robes. Then he ripped in two the photograph he was also holding, so that he kept the part from which Lily laughed, throwing the portion showing James and Harry back onto the floor" from DH, US Ed, chapter 33, pages 688 -689 I mentioned this back in post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172225. It wasn't the crying that made me upchuck - that is normal, when you love someone and they are dead and gone. Nor was it keeping part of the letter - but the ripping of the picture to keep just the part of Lily. That made me sick and I realized that JKR's Snape is emotionally stuck in a teenage boy's mindset. JKR could not deal with Snape maturing into a man who knew what the real reasons were for defeating LV. Even his last conversion with Alive!DD, Snape still states it is all for *Lily*. I can ignore some of JKR's Snape. It will take time to get over it, but I *do believe* that he did mature, despite JKR's writings that point otherwise. I don't understand her characterization of Snape - she did such a fantastic job with Regulus, back in Chapter 10. Crying for Regulus now... colebiancardi (I have a ton of questions back in the above post - hopefully, when the list cools down, my fellow listies will help me with them....) Didn't anyone else LOVE Luna's bedroom? And Sibyll throwing her crystal balls - hey, she found a good use for them, finally!! From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:48:39 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:48:39 -0000 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172508 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jastrangfeld" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adamjmarcantel" > wrote: > > > > My feeling > > is that is heard the story of the deathly hallows and started > > claiming he was a descendant...who was going to argue? Just a > > thought. > > > > Adam > > > > Except I'm pretty sure JK made it clear he had no clue what it was. > I'm pretty sure he had no idea that he knew what was in the ring. I think he just knew of the story and, in his mind, it made sense to claim he was descendant of a Perevell by way of Slytherin...because, obviously, being a Slytherin did little to help his life. Do we even know that Slytherin was a descendant of a Perevell? Adam From jeopardy18 at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 02:47:31 2007 From: jeopardy18 at comcast.net (seanmulligan2000) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:47:31 -0000 Subject: First Comments on HP:DH In-Reply-To: <002501c7ce2e$20764db0$ecc25a45@dtv.gfed.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172509 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jenni Merrifield" > e. Not one Slytherin student stayed behind to fight or even returned during the second wave with the Hogsmead villagers. I really expected to see at least a few who knew that fighting Voldemort was the right thing to do and were willing to choose the right way not the easy way. seanmulligan2000: That was my biggest dissapointment as well. It seemed that Rowlings was confirming stereotypes of Slytherins as the Death Eater House, although I don't remember if she said that none of the Slytherins fought for Hogwarts. Some of them might have fought for the light and were but they were just not mentioned. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 02:51:17 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:51:17 -0000 Subject: my DH reactions minus Snape In-Reply-To: <46a6b337.1c528c0a.04d0.ffffc23a@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172510 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Gomes wrote: > > No Snape in this one, because we'll be discussing him for years to come, and > I'd like to touch on some other things. These thoughts are in no particular > order. > > still confused. > I do not get the whole deathly Hallows thing at all. Did Harry end up > Master of death? But he still destroyed the Horcruxes. How did Harry live > in the end? If his mother's blood in Voldemort tethered him to life when > Voldemort killed him in the forest, then how did he live when Voldemort > tried it again in the great Hall? I just don't get it, and I'd be glad for > clarification. Hi Sherry, It seems to me that the second time, in the Great Hall, then, Harry was the undisputed Master of Death. That was the moment when he took possession of the last Hallow and mastered it in his magical control, the only thing he hadn't done yet, and so in that moment, he could not die. Voldemort's immortality was gone as of Nagini's death so he could die, and via the shared blood it is possible he could have taken Harry with him, it was at that moment, I believe, that Harry had achieved the legendary immortality bestowed by the Hallows and thus couldn't die. Voldemort's second AK backfired on him as the Elder wand spun through the air, I think, my guess is that the wand flipped around perfectly and pointed straight at Voldie discharging the spell at him and him alone, in that moment when Voldemort died the now weakened connection between him and Harry failed, he couldn't take Harry with him into death because Harry was more pure in his immortality than Voldemort had ever been, and when that happened and the connection finally broke completely Harry could not tether Voldemort to life either so LV's death was final. This is all very theoretical, I know, but it's a complex ending isn't it? It takes a little speculation to understand I think. Sherry: > I thought Dobby's death and burial was the most moving moment of all in the > book, even more than Harry's walk toward death with his parents, Sirius and > Lupin. Valky: This was my number one moment too, although I can't really separate the best parts of the book to call any a favourite, there were lots of favourites for me. Dobby's burial really moved me though, it was special. Sherry: > And of course, there has to be some things I didn't like. I thought there > was way too much camping. Valky: Oh I so agree! There was too much camping, and it felt like the middle of he book was slowing to a boring halt, I cheered when they lost that darn tent, so glad it was gone at last, silly boring smelly old thing!! Sherry: > And what about Wormtail? Did the silver hand punish him for feeling a bit > of concern about Harry, and is that why it strangled him? That was another > confusing moment for me. > Valky: Yes, I'm pretty sure you have that right. It's how I read it. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 02:50:32 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:50:32 -0000 Subject: Why Snape is my hero, an analysis of "The Prince's Tale" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172511 Zara: > It would have made little psychological sense for Harry to spend > much time processing this data right after seeing it, since > together with the story of Snape's fall and redemption he got the > news that he himself must die within the hour, a matter which > naturally absorbed his full attention. (On the other hand, as I was > a sobbing weepy mess too teary eyed to read for several minutes, I > did). But his final evaluation, at a later time, I deem to have > been similar to mine. Nothing else explains his choice to give his > younger son, the one who inherited his grandmother's green eyes, > the middle name "Severus". Jen: There was one moment in the forest that made me realize Harry had taken in everything he witnessed in Snape's memories and already come to see him in a new way: "But he *was* home. Hogwarts was the first and best home he had known. He and Voldemort and Snape, the abandoned boys, had all found home here." (Chap. 34, p. 697, Scholastic) He could recognize the similarities between all three of the boys at 11 even if their lives took such different turns in the end. There wasn't any judgement in Harry's mind in that moment in recognizing Snape as someone like himself (or amazingly, judgement for Voldemort, either). After re-reading chapters 33-36 this morning, I'm certain Harry believes Snape is Dumbledore's Man through and through. And Harry's belief is good enough for me. :) I expect Harry speaks for the author when he proclaims Snape's love for his mom since childhood in front of everyone and names his son after Snape. I still have much sorting out to do for myself from the new information in DH; the story of Dumbledore was a blow for me although the chapter at 'King's Cross' did much to alleviate my disappointment. After all, JKR has consistently made her adult 'good guys' both flawed and remarkable in their own ways, imo. There were also pleasant surprises, such as Kreacher's story & Regulus and the fact that Lily and Petunia once had a relationship (not to mention Tuney's request to attend Hogwarts - priceless!) Jen From montavilla47 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:53:26 2007 From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:53:26 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172512 > Eggplant wrote: > > I once said you couldn't have a good Snape and a good book 7, it > > turns out I was wrong. I also said if JKR can figure out a way to > > do it then she's an even better writer than I thought she was, it > > turns out I was right, she really is a better writer than I > > thought she was. > > > > But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of > > the I love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading > > the book you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? Montavilla47: Nope. Not for a single split-second did I doubt in Snape's essential goodness. It played out exactly as I had predicted at least a year ago. I knew that if Snape was going to be good, then JKR would start out DH by continuing to make him look as bad as possible. If, on the other hand, he was going to be evil, that she would continue to plant doubt in our heads by having him provide vital information or some such thing. I had minor spoilers about his patronus possibly being a doe before I started reading, but I think I would have recognized it as Snape's anyway (even though no one I know ever guessed he would have a doe patronus), because Red Hen had theorized that Snape would send Harry useful information with a patronus that no one would recognize (because it had changed, see, like Tonks's). However, JKR got around that difficulty by simply never having Harry *ask* who in the order had a doe patronus. This may have made reading the story less enjoyable, as I kept waiting for the big Snape revelation, and of course, it wasn't going to happen until the end. I was very excited when Harry poured those memories into the Pensieve. And there were plenty of great parts to the story before. I loved the Ministry sequence. Montavilla47 From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jul 25 02:53:16 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:53:16 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172513 "eggplant107" > > But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of the I > love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading the book > you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? Potioncat: Oh, I thought that even before this book. In fact, I went into DH wondering how it would really turn out. While I "felt" Snape would be some variation of DDM, I knew there was enough evidence for it to work the other way. I think JKR did a great job of creating the Snape she did. He doesn't really fit what I expected, and he doesn't fit what the Sanpe-foes expected either. From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 02:53:23 2007 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:53:23 -0000 Subject: Snapes love for Lily (Was: DH rambles and crows eating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172514 This more of an idea post than a reply to any particular post. I think the irony of Snape's death is that he was the head of Slytherin house and he was eaten by a Snake (Slytherin's house mascot). Furthermore, speaking to Snape's love of Lily, his final words of "Look...at...me" speak volumes to me. In the past, JK has told us that Harry's eyes play an important role in the story arc of HP. To me, this important role is that they are exactly the same as Lily's; meaning Snape's dying wish was to see the eyes of the woman he loved for one last time. His love for Lily was his motivation for every good act he did as a Double Agent, so looking into Harry's (really Lily's eyes) probably made dying a little easier. Notice also that Snape did not demand to look into Harry's eyes until after Harry had gotten Snape's memories. Once Harry had the tool he needed, Snape's mission to protect Harry was complete. He put his mission ahead of seeing the eyes of the woman he loved. Showing just how selfless Snape could be, Snape put DD's mission ahead of his own dying wish. John who has pitched his tent firmly in the Snape camp, post DH. From seusilva at uol.com.br Wed Jul 25 02:32:19 2007 From: seusilva at uol.com.br (james black potter) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:32:19 -0300 Subject: the peverell's hallows Message-ID: <20070725024054.9BB1FE000520@socom4.uol.com.br> No: HPFGUIDX 172515 I tend to agree with Dumbledore, when he says that the Hallows were human made. Powerfull they are, but far from perfect. The Wand - Dumbledore beat Grindelwald (to say the least) The Stone - it does not really bring back dead people The Cloak - 'Mad-Eye' was able to see (in some sense*) through it (of course, his eye was also an unique artifact)** (*) Harry thought that Mad-Eye was able to see him properly, but that might not be the case (Fake Moody even says: "nice cloak you have there" etc) (**) we must consider also that Harry was not using it for most noble purposes on that night james black potter From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 02:55:07 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:55:07 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Answers and Questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172516 In a message dated 7/24/2007 9:12:02 P.M. Central Daylight Time, mikcers at yahoo.com writes: A. Godric owned Griphook. That, and the goblin lost any right over > the sword when he betrayed the trio. > Q. How did Neville got Gryffindor's Sword out of the hat? I've been wondering how Neville got the sword. Is the above statement true? Or was it because the sorting hat can access certain things in times of need? Or something else? Any ideas? Well I doubt that Godric owned Griphook. Griphook is a goblin not a house elf. I think that the only reason that Neville could access the sword is simply because he is a True Gryffindor and he was in need of it. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From prep0strus at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:56:40 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:56:40 -0000 Subject: my DH reactions minus Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172517 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > It seems to me that the second time, in the Great Hall, then, Harry > was the undisputed Master of Death. That was the moment when he took > possession of the last Hallow and mastered it in his magical control, > the only thing he hadn't done yet, and so in that moment, he could not > die. Voldemort's immortality was gone as of Nagini's death so he could > die, and via the shared blood it is possible he could have taken Harry > with him, it was at that moment, I believe, that Harry had achieved > the legendary immortality bestowed by the Hallows and thus couldn't die. > This is really interesting. But it also assumes that possession doesn't require being in the presence or physical control of a Hallow. That being the case... wouldn't Harry still be the master of all three objects for as long as no one finds the stone in the woods or bests harry in a duel? Making him, in effect, immortal? The besting in a duel, I'm sorry to say, still baffles me, though I've been following the threads for thoughts. What truly transfers ownership of the elder wand, and why was Harry able to take mastery from Draco, but Voldy didn't get it from Harry when he blasted him? From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 03:01:27 2007 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:01:27 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172518 Ali: > >In the end, I feel like JKR wanted me to believe that "Snape turned good for> the love of a woman," but what I felt was that this man decide to *switch> sides* for his own purposes. He didn't turn good; he bargained with> Voldemort to save Lily first. Had it worked out that Lily was saved, I> doubt that Snape would've worked for Dumbledore. Working for good didn't> make him any less evil. Pah. (Yes, start sending the flames my way. I> accept that my view is entirely unpopular.) PJ replies: No flames from this direction! As far as I'm concerned, you're right! JKR didn't show us DDM, ESE or even, my choice of OFH. As Colebiancardi so aptly phrased it, what we got was a really gross and disgusting LILY!Snape. And I'm sorry, but this particular LILY!Snape is nothing more than a stalker who confuses obscession for love. There was NOTHING heroic about that slime at all. He was pathetic. Yes he worked for Dumbledore but at heart he was a death eater. He did not share the values of the Order and only wanted LV to die because he'd killed Lily. I found it poetic that JKR had both Snape and LV repeat the same error when it came to understanding human emotional responses. Snape expected Lily to be grateful to him for saving her life (had she been spared), totally ignoring the fact that he'd been a main contributor to the death of both her husband and son. LV expected Snape to just "get over it" and find another woman... Neither man had a clue. I sort of liked the book but there were huge parts of it that really sucked... All those "I'm bored, let's find a Horcrux" moments in the woods, the whole evil Dumbledore section and especially, the ending. I don't care how many kids Ginny had. I wanted to know important stuff like who worked where (Did Harry ever fullfil his wish to become an Auror?), who became headmaster of Hogwarts and who raised Tonk's son? :) PJ _________________________________________________________________ Missed the show?? Watch videos of the Live Earth Concert on MSN. http://liveearth.msn.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:54:06 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:54:06 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172519 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > > > Leslie41: > Yes, of course...and at that point he is pathetic and disgusting. He > evolves out of that, and spends the next twenty years of his life > making up for his past ill deeds. And, I think, committing even more. Like abusing the child of the woman he supposedly truly loved. Funny way of showing true love, that was. Now, of expressing jealousy, rage, and obsession, not so funny. > > > Alla: > > Heeee, to get to Snape for a second, I guess his death makes my > > point as well that she wanted to show suddenness and senselessness, > > but at the same time I cannot help but smile at the delightful > > irony JKR brought there ?V potion master dies from poison with no > > chance to get an antidote or anything like that. > > Leslie41: > That may indeed be an irony, though I would guess Rowling finds it > less than "delightful". It's clear from the book that she intends > for us to admire Snape just as much as Dumbledore. Perhaps more. Oh, dear. I'd say if that's what she intended she fell flat on her face in the mud. Snape and Dumbledore are both very complicated characters, no doubt about it. Both of them carry heavy burdens of guilt. Dumbledore's is expiated by his love for Harry. Snape has no such redeeming emotional factor, unless you count a neurotic obsession with a dead woman whose husband and child he would gladly have slaughtered. In the end his books have to be balanced in other ways. It is true that seems to adopt some of Dumbledore's values over the years -- witness his "saving people thing" (irony of a similarity to Harry, of course). But his burden of sin, both past and continuing, is too heavy for him to escape an extremely high price. In the end, Snape's books have to be balanced in blood. > > > Leslie41: > Why should there be a confrontation now? What is needed is > understanding. Of course she would not let Snape taunt Harry, > because Snape's taunts of Harry usually had a point to them. They > were usually used to educate him. And when those taunts failed (as > with Harry's occlumency lessons), it's Harry that is seen to be at > fault, not Snape. ROTFLMAO! Harry's fault, was it? My goodness gracious. I think the point of a confrontation would have been much needed justice. But, that is overtaken by events in the narrative. Snape finds a very satisfying and appropriate end, having been revealed to have been at most a useful servant of Dumbledore's, never a subject of approval or paternal regard. Harry, having become a Christ-figure, graciously forgives him as Christ-figures are wont to do. > > > Leslie41: > Somehow I don't think this is so. Snape made his mistakes, but he > paid for them a thousand times over. If Lily and Snape were to meet > again (and there's no reason to suspect they won't, since such things > seem to happen in the Wizard afterlife), how do you think she would > treat the man who was her beloved childhood friend, the man who saved > her son's life, again and again, when his own father, her husband, > failed? > I'd say if she is not a cruel, idiotic wife and mother indeed she would have no use whatsoever for the obsessive creep who abused her son for years in the name of his love for her. And if she does have a use for him, both James and Harry would be well within there rights to turn their backs on her decisively. Not that at least Harry would do so. Christ-figures are forgiving that way, more's the pity. Lupinlore From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 02:57:54 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:57:54 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172520 lupinlore: > SNAPE: > in the end he was, after all, driven by his own ends and needs. He > wanted a way to escape the crushing emotional burden placed on him by > his unrequited love for Lily and her death. By working to keep Harry > alive and defeat Voldemort he at least aimed in that direction. But > he did not love or respect or value Harry for the boy's own sake, as > he makes clear. Deepthi: Working to keep Harry alive, far from relieving his burden, kept it intact. Every time he looked at Harry, he was reminded of Lily. The fact that he did not love or respect Harry makes it _more_ admirable that he risked his own life for him, not less. And are we here not expecting more out of Snape that out of Harry? It is perfectly acceptable for Harry to hate Snape, but it is not acceptable for Snape to hate the son of the man who humiliated him in front of the whole school? lupinlore: > Nor did he love Dumbledore like a father or regard > him as an avatar of goodness who could lead him to moral redemption. > Deepthi: Snape achieved his redemption the minute he decided to work against LV after Lily's death. We don't see any evidence of him ever having cold feet about his role as spy. lupinlore: > > The "business" aspect of their relationship explains a great deal, > particularly with regard to Dumbledore's attitude and action. Snape > was, at the end of the day, a servant. Deepthi: Dumbledore doesn't think in terms of servants. He's the one who thinks that house-elves out to be treated with respect and kindness. If Snape was a servant, Harry was equally a servant. lupinlore: > Dumbledore's final words > on the subject (paraphrasing wildly): "Poor Severus, the plan didn't > work out well for him. Oh well, too bad. Now, let me get back to > telling you what a wonderful person you are, Harry!" > Deepthi: It wasn't like that. After talking about Snape, they sit in silence "for the longest time yet", and when they talk again, it is about what needs to be done next. lupinlore: > I don't see Dumbledore as a kindly mentor who regards > Snape as a substitute son. In the end many readers love Snape. I > don't think Dumbledore does. And thus, when it is necessary to > defeat Voldemort, and as importantly to save the young man he DOES > love, he sends Snape to his death. I think he acts regretfully, he > acts with pity, but if anybody has to die to defeat the Dark Lord, he > would much rather it be Snape than Harry. And I think that, in > truth, is where justice lies, as well as irony. That it was Snape, > rather than Harry, who was most clearly being set up as a pig for > slaughter was ... delicious. > Deepthi: But Dumbledore intended Snape to end up as the master of the Elder Wand. And that means that he didn't intend him to die, he intended him to keep the Elder Wand out of LV's hands so that Harry doesn't have to face that in the final battle. lupinlore: > > HARRY'S QUESTIONABLE ACTIVITIES: I counted three Imperios, a Crucio, > and a probably AK from Molly. > Deepthi: Yeah, the unforgivable curses from Harry were sad. Getting to Molly, how else was she supposed to get rid of Bellatrix? It is self-defence, not everyone can get AK's to rebound using Expelliarmus. It was unavoidable for the good guys to have to kill sometimes. Deepthi - who never liked Snape but found chapter 33 the most touching and convincing in DH. From kjones at telus.net Wed Jul 25 03:08:50 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:08:50 -0700 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related. Message-ID: <46A6BEC2.10606@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172521 KJ writes: I assume that if Voldemort inherited the Peverell ring, passed down through the family, he was descended from the second brother. Harry inherited the cloak made by the third brother. Yes they would have been related, which I don't think JKR actually intended. I don't know how British inheritance laws work, but would this not now make Harry the heir of Slytherin as Voldemort's last remaining relative???? KJ From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Jul 25 03:07:59 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:07:59 -0000 Subject: Rose and Hugo was Re: The return to normalcy (Was: The (Hated) Epilogue) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172522 "justcarol67" We > see Harry and Ginny and Ron and Hermione as proud parents (the names > Hugo and Rose seems to come out of nowhere, but the boy's name starts > with his mother's first initial and the girl's with her father's). > Potioncat: It went something like this: Ron named the daughter. He "said" he was naming her for his Aunty Rose, but really it was for Rosmerta. Hermione named the son. She "said" it was for her favorite Muggle author. She just didn't mention to Ron what Mr. Hugo's first name was. ;-) From kslmoran at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 03:02:55 2007 From: kslmoran at comcast.net (kslmoran) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:02:55 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172523 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bookworm857158367" wrote: > > Ron and Hermione made me believe they were in love in this book, > even more than Harry and Ginny or Tonks and Lupin. Ron has grown > up enough to know what he wants and needs. kslmoran: I have to say that the fate of Ron and Hermione was in the forefront of my wanting to read this book. I've enjoyed their fighting and the very long road they have taken to get together. I agree with Bookworm that their romance was believable. Harry and Ginny a bit, but it was sidestepped so often I don't think it ever had a chance to really sink in to our minds that they had real feelings for each other. And the Harry/Ginny thing seemed to happen quite fast with not a ton of build up. Harry was gaga over Cho for a few books and then all of a sudden he has feelings for Ginny. But they never really dwelled on it with the exception of a few stray thoughts of Harry's in the final book. Unlike Ron and Hermione who bickered and fought like an old married couple practically from the beginning. They were so fun to read. I have to say Ron is probably my favorite character. He's so real! He's not some super powered wizard who exceeds at everything. He has many failings. He's not much of a student, he loves to eat all the time. He's fairly stubborn when he wants to be and he shows his fear quite out on the open. But he is as loyal as they come. And you'll notice he is always the first one to stand up for Hermione when someone threatens her. In COS he comes to her defense when Malfoy calls her a Mudblood. And he's only 12 at the time. As for Lupin/Tonks, I never really felt that connection. It was skimmed over very quickly. Of course the books give so much details of everything else, how can you fit even more in? And it's just more stuff the moviemakers will leave out. kslmoran From joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:09:18 2007 From: joyfulstoryteller at yahoo.com (joyfulstoryteller) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:09:18 -0000 Subject: Reflections on DH (Long and Spoilers aplenty!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172524 Well, I thought I would read through all of the posts already made and reply to them in some grand conglomeration of replies, but then I realized that I was continuously about 100 posts away from finishing no matter how fast I read them! So instead I am going to post my views and note where someone (or many) expressed similar thoughts... My first overarching reaction was that this is almost my favorite book except for the Epilogue (and I'm not alone in that). Mostly I felt that the epilogue (which was supposedly written long ago) didn't reflect JKR's growth as a writer...I don't mind a hearkening back to the innocence of the first book, I don't mind (too much) that many characters I wanted to hear resolution about were not included in it, but I was hoping that it would reflect not only the growth of the characters but the growth of the writer. I thought that it could have been longer, or else that there needed to be one more chapter between the victory and the epilogue to tidy things up a bit. I loved the opening chapter...even though I was leaning toward the DDM!Snape, I had a few doubts and thought he might possibly be "in it for himself" so this chapter gave me the shivers. I also liked the way it showed the fall of the Malfoys from a powerful, sleek and influential family to worn, frightened and desperate individuals who were sneered and jeered at by the other DE's who had previously cowered before them. I sobbed at the death of Snape and The Prince's Tale...I agree with JKR that Snape is a horrible man, but I also believe that he truly learned the error of his ways and paid dearly for his mistakes in life (and I was so glad to have him confirmed as DDM! or at least LILY's). I felt in many ways that this chapter also showcased how in many ways Petunia was similar to him... prejudiced, looking for the worst and seeing it, holding a life-long grudge fueled by jealousy and unfufilled desire. I always did think that Snape was the one Petunia referred to when she mentioned "that horrible boy". I was creeped-out by the obsessive/posessive nature of the young Snape's "love" for Lily Evans, and felt great pity for him that it took her choosing to die to save her son, rather than choosing to save herself, to bring Snape to examine his behavior and beliefs. Like many, I missed that "the person who would perform magic very late in life" has been Merope in HBP. It hadn't been clear to me that she really was a Squib, I just thought she was too terrorized to bring the proper focus to spell casting. Plus being 20 or so doesn't seem to qualify as being "very late in life" to me, so I was feeling frustrated about not seeing some character in DH begin to do magic and I'm still not sure I'm satisfied about it. How I goggled at Dudley's reaction to realizing that Harry wasn't coming with them into hiding! Dobby's funeral was a wonderfully touching (and three handkerchief) moment, I loved the way they dressed him... a free elf indeed standing up to the Malfoys. Kreacher's transformation was also a joy to read, I was firmly in the Regulus as R.A.B. camp, and so I really liked this part of the story. I thought that Ron getting the parseltongue for Open was perfect! He's been shown to be an excellent mimic throughout the books, and this was a good use of that talent (plus he was finally showing some initiative)! Someone mentioned that they felt the Fiendfyre cast by Crabbe in the RoR was a bit too convienent, and to this I say in my best Jack Sparrow immitation "Hello! Room of Requirement!". The very magic of that room is such that Harry's need to destroy the diadem upon finding it might have led Crabbe to cast that spell. I wanted to know if Lavender died or lived...when last we hear of her she is feebly twitching... I too thought that the deaths of Remus and Tonks were unnecessary, or that they ought to have at least gotten more exposition. I thought that the Hallows storyline was a bit spotty. I liked it, and yet there were bits of it that I had a hard time believing (mostly the wandlore). I suppose that the Potters have so much gold because they were descended from a very old wizarding family, but we still don't know if James or Lily had careers, and I thought that was supposed to be important somehow. Speaking of careers, why do we only know about Neville's? And does Luna end up with Dean? I'll probably get my thoughts more well organized as I continue to reflect. I've read it through twice now, so in a few days I ought to be leaping into the analytical fray. apologizing for any run-on sentences =) Joyfulstoryteller From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 03:18:16 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:18:16 -0000 Subject: my DH reactions minus Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172526 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > It seems to me that the second time, in the Great Hall, then, Harry > > was the undisputed Master of Death. That was the moment when he took > > possession of the last Hallow and mastered it in his magical control, > > the only thing he hadn't done yet, and so in that moment, he could not > > die. Voldemort's immortality was gone as of Nagini's death so he could > > die, and via the shared blood it is possible he could have taken Harry > > with him, it was at that moment, I believe, that Harry had achieved > > the legendary immortality bestowed by the Hallows and thus couldn't > die. > > > > This is really interesting. But it also assumes that possession > doesn't require being in the presence or physical control of a Hallow. > That being the case... wouldn't Harry still be the master of all > three objects for as long as no one finds the stone in the woods or > bests harry in a duel? Making him, in effect, immortal? > Yes, I'm sure you're right. But for Harry to die a natural death in the end all he would need to do is give up possession of the Cloak to his son and he could. Provided the rest of his life is uneventful and he remains master of the other objects, of course. > The besting in a duel, I'm sorry to say, still baffles me, though I've > been following the threads for thoughts. What truly transfers > ownership of the elder wand, and why was Harry able to take mastery > from Draco, but Voldy didn't get it from Harry when he blasted him? > This bit *is* confusing, I agree. All I can think of is that Voldemort defeated himself with the elder wand when he blasted Harry, so he didn't really win that battle at all, he lost decisively to Harry who chose sacrifice to defeat LV, the wandlore itself must have been deep enough to understand that. From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:19:24 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:19:24 -0000 Subject: The Magic Within, WAS: Harry Potter as a "Classic" Series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172527 "Katie" wrote: > >SNIPPAGE>>> > > These are classic books, on the level of LotR and Narnia. At least > > to me. This is a classic story, and she stuck to the appropriate > > happy ending. > > Of course the book wasn't perfect. No book is. But she has brought > > magic back into my life, and made me remember the best of myself at > > moments when that seemed unlikely, and these books hold a lot more > > whimsy AND profundity than most adult novels I can think of. >>>SNIPPAGE>>> > Claire: > Katie, I completely agree with you. They are classics, and the fact > they are, perhaps, flawed does not detract from that at all, not for > me at least. They are full of magic and not just the kind where you > wave a wand or speak a spell to make things happen. They're magic > because they transport the reader out of her mundane, Muggle life > into an emotional realm that makes things possible. They entertain, > instruct, touch each one of us in different ways. And they have > brought a disparate group of people together, adults, discussing > passionately a group of "children's" books. If that's not magic, I > don't know what is. > *****Katie replies:***** I was trying to explain that very point to my husband the other day. He is not a Potter fan and also not a big reader, in general. We actually had an argument, because he felt I was "obsessing" over the release of the book. I was trying to explain the transportive power of the books and also the feeling of community amongst the fans. You managed to put it into words better than I could have. There really is something remarkably unique about the magic in these books. It is both literal and philosophical. While I love the wands and the spells, the potions and the brooms...I love the philosophy that the most fundamental and powerful form of magic is love. We see this, of course, with Lily's sacrifice...but also the love of the Weasleys for each other and for Harry, the love of Dumbledore for Harry(though many will dispute that, I am sure), and finally, the love Harry has for his friends and his willingness to die for them...that truly is magical. I know some feel like JKR missed the mark with some of the morality in HBP and DH, but I disagree. She showed us that the MOST loving people can be fallible, wrong, and make bad choices, but be redeemed by their friends, family, and by their own choices. This is a fundamental lesson for all of us, not only children. I do not want my children (ages 4 and 2) to think of the world as a black and white place, where there are good people and bad people. Everyone has light and dark, everyone makes bad choices and can be selfish, but still be good and loving people. I think we don't see fallible heroes enough, in children's OR adult literature. "The world is not divided into good people and Death Eaters." And these basic themes of, for lack of a better phrase, "the magic within", this is what makes the series a classic. Not only the creation of a whole new world, but the classic and fundamental questions of human existence. Good versus evil, love versus hate, and what makes us human...these are JKR's themes, and she tackles them with levity, wisdom, and complexity. Truly, Harry is forever. Katie From kiely78 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:09:15 2007 From: kiely78 at yahoo.com (Kiely78) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:09:15 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172528 Sandra: Hello Libby! That jumped out at me when I read it, and I found the > whole section a surprisingly abrupt episode. I mean, Ron > 'copied' Harry? Parseltongue is a strange collection of > throat-gargly sounds which mean nothing to most wizards, so > how on earth could he have managed all the right hacking > noises after hearing Harry just once? He could have said > something rude or meaningless, or ended up making himself > cough a lot! And he and Hermione just disappeared for a few > pages in all the tension and prelude to chaos, and then > reappeared with a basilisk fang or two. At the very least, that was > worth a half chapter or even a whole one, so that Ron and > Hermione's relationship could have been shown to develop > more. I didn't feel there was the slightest girlfriend/boyfriend > thing going on, and the moment when they do kiss seemed to > be thrown in as a convenient place for them to do the obligatory. > That made me feel quite empty about their situation, and it > seemed rushed. Considering there were seven books, that > could have been done far sweeter. Krista: First post here, delurking to say I feel the same way about R&H. I was secrently hopeing that "something" else was going on while they were missing. (Wink Wink) I was very dissapointed in R&H's kiss, I wanted more and the funny thing is I was not a shipper until they didn't pour thier hearts out to each other. Oh well, On topic, I though he just got Open Me right. Harry has said that often in Parseltongue, Ron might have remembered from Chamber of Secrects too. Krista From marilyn at gehennom.net Wed Jul 25 03:20:28 2007 From: marilyn at gehennom.net (Marilyn) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:20:28 -0000 Subject: UN answered Questions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 In-Reply-To: <368438.80887.qm@web55704.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172529 Chancie wrote: > Lily's Eyes This one, at least, did come into play. In Snape's final moments of life, he wanted only to look into Harry's--and therefore Lily's--eyes. Not sure if it's the huge plot point I was expecting, but it was the tip of the iceberg with the truth behind Snape. --marilyn From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 03:25:25 2007 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:25:25 -0000 Subject: The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172530 > However, after writing over 4000 beautiful, remarkable, classic > pages of wonder and magic, I'm willing to allow JK a little slack > and a crappy epilogue. ;) KATIE See, I'm not. If you are going to get one thing right in a four thousand page series it should be the epilogue. I can forgive mistakes made in the middle far more easily than mistakes made in the end. phoenixgod2000 From ekrdg at verizon.net Wed Jul 25 03:33:19 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:33:19 -0400 Subject: Exciting ! (was - [HPforGrownups] Re: The Magic Within ) References: Message-ID: <01b801c7ce6c$8c4943b0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 172531 "Katie" wrote: > >SNIPPAGE>>> > > These are classic books, on the level of LotR and Narnia. At least > > to me. This is a classic story, and she stuck to the appropriate > > happy ending. > > Of course the book wasn't perfect. No book is. But she has brought > > magic back into my life, and made me remember the best of myself at > > moments when that seemed unlikely, and these books hold a lot more > > whimsy AND profundity than most adult novels I can think of. >>>SNIPPAGE>>> > Claire: > Katie, I completely agree with you. They are classics, and the fact > they are, perhaps, flawed does not detract from that at all, not for > me at least. They are full of magic and not just the kind where you > wave a wand or speak a spell to make things happen. They're magic > because they transport the reader out of her mundane, Muggle life > into an emotional realm that makes things possible. They entertain, > instruct, touch each one of us in different ways. And they have > brought a disparate group of people together, adults, discussing > passionately a group of "children's" books. If that's not magic, I > don't know what is. > *****Katie replies:***** I was trying to explain that very point to my husband the other day. He is not a Potter fan and also not a big reader, in general. We actually had an argument, because he felt I was "obsessing" over the release of the book. I was trying to explain the transportive power of the books and also the feeling of community amongst the fans. You managed to put it into words better than I could have. Kimberly here: I had the same thing with my husband who "just doesn't get it". I went along happily to the book release party with my 3 children, friends, their children, etc. At one point on Saturday, my oldest daughter and I were deeply immersed in our copies of DH and something struck me... I became just thrilled with the idea that at that moment, there were MILLIONS of people all over doing just what we were doing, pouring over the pages of a book, curled up on their sofa, bed, etc. experiencing DH and all that the characters were going through.. One woman managed to bring those people together ! It just really excited me to think of all the people that were reading along at the same time. And yes, for me that's magical and very exciting. Kimberly From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:22:46 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:22:46 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172532 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > > > Lupinlore: > > Dumbledore for his part respected Snape and developed compassion and > > pity for him. But he also felt disapproval, disappointment, and > > outright disgust for many of Snape's choices and attitudes and > > practices, and is expressing those feelings in rather harsh terms > > right up until late in HBP. > > Leslie41: > Go back to "The Prince's Tale". That chapter is late in HPB, but it > covers a period of about 25 years in Snape's life. > > Dumbledore exhibits disgust with Snape when he returns before the > Potters are killed. That's perfectly true, but that's when Snape is > around 21 or so, after he comes to DD as a Death Eater. When Snape > puts himself in Dumbledore's service after the Potters are killed > (shortly after that), Dumbledore promises not to reveal Snape's > secret, which he calls "the best of you." > > After that, every single thing Dumbledore says about Snape is > admiring, even loving. ROTFLMAO! Let's see. The last scenes in "The Prince's Tale" to be set in the context of HBP: "What are you doing with Potter, etc (page 684) DD's reply: "Why? Are you trying to give him MORE detentions, Severus?" Not loving or supportive or fatherly. Sounds like tension, disapproval, and a reluctant acceptance of the undesirable parts of a business relationship to me. As well it should. One of the more elegant ways JKR avoids the trap of approving of child abuse. Page 687 "Don't be shocked Severus, how many people have you watched die?" Not at all loving, that. Particularly as it echoes Dumbledore's disgust of so long ago. "But this is touching, Severus," said Dumbledore seriously. "Have you grown to care for the boy, after all?" Disapproval, tension, and what for Dumbledore is biting sarcasm. All in the same tone he uses to word whip the Dursleys in HBP. Sorry, I don't buy for one minute that DD had a loving, paternal relationship with Snape, or that Snape regarded Dumbledore as an archon of light and goodness that he followed as the way to general moral redemption. You are right that Dumbledore feels pity and compassion for Snape, as shown in the episode with the doe. This in no way negates the other aspects of this layered and deep relationship -- a relationship that resists being reduced to a simple positive reading, or indeed a totally negative one. > So, er, are you, *Lupinlore*, relishing in the death of the character > who, at some risk, deflected a curse that saved Remus Lupin's life? > > Now there's an irony I find delicious... > Absolutely! Snape's fate is satisfying and fits well with the demands of moral and karmic justice. The multiple levels of irony that fold around it make it all the more satisfying and amusing. Lupinlore, who chuckles every time he rereads the Snape/Dumbledore interactions in DH and says to all of those who find Dumbledore to be a jerk -- "YES! And Snape richly deserves every jibe and criticism." From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 03:33:18 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:33:18 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter as a "Classic"/Snape's Redemption Message-ID: <380-22007732533318343@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172533 Katie: I hear some people saying they'll never read the series again and some other such nonsense. Why? Would be my question. Now that I know HRH makes it through, I can't wait to read them ALL over again, and share them with my children and my grandchildren... Magpie: Um, because they've already read them and don't care to read them again? Why is that strange? There are thousands of books I've read once. Pip!Squeak: The Prince's Tale Chapter does show Snape's moral redemption; it shows it happening slowly, year by year. At the beginning of Snape's going over to Dumbledore he's doing it to save Lily. He doesn't care if James and Harry get killed. Magpie: I realize he seemed to be better behaved as he got older--it couldn't help being around better people (which is why they might want to think of splitting the Slytherins up) but no, I didn't see him becoming what I thought he was. He was much more narrow than I had imagined. I didn't miss any of the things you listed here. None of them are near what I assumed he had been doing all these years. As for collateral dammage...I think he could deal with a bit of it, yes. D: I've heard all these 'for his own purposes only', 'selfish' readings on Snape. But let me ask you what would Snape gain for personal purpose by saving all those people they mention while undercover? Magpie: We're not dismissing what he did, we're just pointing out what was eventually revealed to be going on with him. He switched sides. We can acknowledge and respect the things that he did without having to lie about what we saw in the character. I personally don't throw around the word evil and wouldn't call Snape that. He just doesn't look good next to the guy I thought was Snape up until now. Snape gained a personal redemption. Hurray for Snape. He was an effective double agent. dkewpie: I'm surprsied at Ali and your one note reading of Snape. Just because we found out Lily being the *initial* motivation for Snape doesn't mean he never evolve or not care for anything else beside Lily later on. And it certainly shouldn't flatten of his character in the previous books, as least not the way I see it. Magpie: I don't have a one-note reading of Snape. (Though given the guy was all "always her!" for his whole life, one should remember that "one note" actually was pretty important to him--he wasn't exactly well-rounded as a personality.) I said he was less than I thought he was, and he is. I didn't ignore the change that he went through over the years. It was a personal change, and not as much of a personal change as I had imagined. And I am somebody who's always been a Snape fan--and who happily predicted LOLLIPOPS. I still haven't called him evil. He just shrunk. DKewpie: Leslie, EXACTLY! And Snape doesn't care for fame/recognitions/order of merlins or whatever superficial things that haters used to always bashed Snape for either. In fact, Snape does the right thing and risk his life knowing he gets NOTHING in return, and when i say nothing I really mean NOTHING. Magpie: You're assuming that he must have gotten NOTHING because he didn't get any material gains. One can do things that are important to one without that kind of gain, that doesn't mean you're not getting anything out of it. This was something Snape needed to do for himself. He's not doing it for personal gain in the sense we usually think of it, but I would never say he got nothing out of it. It was his personal obsession. Lily meant something to him, and his way of loving her and doing right by her after her death did something for him. houyhnhnm: " . . . thought we were supposed to be friends?" Snape was saying. "Best friends?" "We are, Sev . . . ." Note the question marks. Without the question marks, Snape's words could be heard as sarcasm or whining, but with them, he's asking her a question. "Are we friends, best friends?" And Lily says yes, we are. Stalkers are not interested in the feeling of their victims. They don't ask, "Are we friends?" Magpie: On this small point I have to say: yes, I think they would. All the time. I'm not saying this proves Snape is a stalker, but it doesn't seem like he particularly isn't there. He's demanding that she pledge herself as his. Snape and Lily's friendship ended because Snape had a lot of screwed up ideas about what it meant to be friends--and I don't think he ever really did quite understand them. He did the best he could as he understood things, but I look at him and see tons more missed opportunities another man wouldn't have missed. But Snape can only be himself, of course. -m From montavilla47 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:43:42 2007 From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:43:42 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172534 > Magpie: > Yeah, I was surprised when people felt there was any better unity > between the other Houses and Slytherin...as far as I can tell > Slytherin seemed a lot worse than they had that first day Harry went > to Hogwarts. Then they just seemed unsavory and I assumed it was his > imagination. Their behavior in the battle hardly seemed to give anyone > a reason to trust them more. All the Slytherins, to me, came across as > essentially selfish and incapable of the kinds of choices Gryffindors > could make--I wouldn't trust them. Snape was a Death Eater with a > convenient obsession with Lily Potter... I'm going to disagree with you about Snape, Magpie. I can see how JKR tried to make him as creepy as possible, but there's a definite progression in his viewpoint from the obsession with Lily to a more general concern for people in general. Dumbledore trusted him to protect the students at Hogwarts, and he did so to the utmost of his abilities. Considering the shabby way he was treated by Dumbledore-- and everyone else at the school, that's nothing short of miraculous. I'm disappointed that she doesn't give Draco a bit more... spine, I guess. His impulse at Malfoy Manor is to help his fellow students, but he's not in any position to do it. But then, once he got back to Hogwarts, I expected... something. Some gleam of humanity from him. We get Narcissa's help at the end--which seems like the small sort of service Dumbledore (or the reader) was expecting to get from Pettigrew. But it's so little. Maybe there's something I missed with the Draco sneaking back into Hogwarts bit? I don't understand why there is such a complete lack of help from the Slytherins. Unless JKR is just that bleak. If she was going to do that, I wish she would have stayed away from the whole elements aspect of the Houses. By making Slytherin completely negative, she seems to be rejecting emotion itself. Montavilla47 From ekrdg at verizon.net Wed Jul 25 03:44:07 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:44:07 -0400 Subject: Funny lines Message-ID: <01e701c7ce6e$0f0bbb60$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 172535 Maybe it's too early for a "funny lines" thread but I just wanted to say that I loved Ron in this book. He said two things that just had me in tears laughing. Just before the wedding when Mrs. Weasley is making him clean his room... He says something to the affect, "And are they getting married in my bedroom ? No !"..... "Why in the name of Merlin's saggy left-" I don't know why but I just thought that was the funniest thing...! Then again when they are discussing packing for their journey.... Hermione can't think what books to bring and Ron says... pg. 95 Amer. ed. "Oh, of course, .....I forgot we'll be hunting down Voldemort in a mobile library". I loved these lines and just how funny and frank Ron was, especially to Hermione. Kimberly (whose daughter talked her into eating Bertie's Beans... ewwwww !) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bgrugin at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:48:05 2007 From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:48:05 -0000 Subject: Confused about wand rules (plus Lee rocks!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172536 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: I am confused about some of the new rules regarding wands. But the part I have a difficult time with > is... why didn't voldemorte gain control when he 'killed' harry? I > think that was as much a defeat as draco gave dumbledore and harry > gave draco, if not more. MusicalBetsy here: Harry *willingly* let LV kill him, so LV did not beat Harry - exactly why Snape would not have had control over it when he killed DD, because DD wanted him to kill him. Then the power over the wand would have been destroyed, which is what Harry is hoping will happen with the wand now. I guess we'll see - maybe JKR will write another book about it!! From susanawhite123 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:44:14 2007 From: susanawhite123 at yahoo.com (Sue White) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:44:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <122191.7956.qm@web33112.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172537 I can't agree more. I loathed how the epilogue tied everything up in bows. Actually I would have much preferred if the series ended entirely at the end of King's Cross with the following well penned words "Of course it is happening in your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real." That would have been sublime. --- phoenixgod2000 wrote: > See, I'm not. If you are going to get one thing > right in a four > thousand page series it should be the epilogue. I > can forgive > mistakes made in the middle far more easily than > mistakes made in the > end. > > phoenixgod2000 > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 03:51:03 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:51:03 -0000 Subject: Why Snape's love for Lily was real Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172538 Several posters have comments that Snape's love for Lily was an obsession, that he was a stalker, that if he truly loved Lily he couldn't *not* be nice to her son. Here is my rebuttal of those assertions: We first see Snape as a boy who is obviously not well cared for, alone, sneaking a peek at two little girls playing, focused on the one little girl in particular--Lily. His expression is "greedy." Point one: What is approximately 10 year old Snape greedy for? Sex? Domination? Does he want to tie her up and have his way with her, then keep her for himself? I think NOT. He's a child. A neglected child in an unhappy home who sees another child--yes a pretty girl child--who clearly has everything he doesn't-- love, laughter, caring attention paid to her needs. He doesn't want to possess her (and never once as child or adult shows any desire to do so), he wants to be *with* her, to share in what she has. And, for god's sake, who could blame the poor child? (Not me, that's for sure) The children become friends. We have no evidence that Snape had any other friends as a child, and given that he's from the wrong side of the tracks, not attractive and wearing mismatched and obviously handed-down clothing, we can easily guess why. Folks, children are CRUEL. And a boy like this, awkward, unattractive, DIFFERENT, is a boy who is going to find very little or no acceptance from other children. Except that Lily accepted Snape for who he was from the beginning. She never once judged him on his looks, on his living conditions, on his family situation, only on his actions. And Lily, while not a saint, is IMO a very good person. One of the few good people Snape has, or ever will have, a friendship with. Certainly even at this point Snape sometimes gives in to his less noble impulses--like breaking the tree branch over Petunia after she insults him. But it is his friendship with Lily, a person of good character, that induces him to feel ashamed of those acts. Sadly the stage is set when they enter Hogwarts and are sorted into separate houses--not just separate houses, but the two houses that most oppose each other. I am of the opinion that the politics inherent in the House system of Hogwarts sealed Snape's fate. Snape being in Slytherin solidified the incipient enmity between himself and the Marauders that we glimpsed on that first train ride. After all, Gryffindors and Slytherins are mortal enemies. It's always been so. Snape belongs to Slytherin now--and this is a boy who's never felt he belonged *anywhere,* who longed to go to Hogwarts with a passion, to escape a home that was no home at all. I know, it's still his choice. He can choose to remain friends with Lily, he can refuse to take the side of his House-mates on the issues of Voldemort's ideals and Pureblood supremacy. He can make enemies of his whole House, be taunted and hated *where* he lives, and be satisfied that Lily remains his friend. But the truth is, Snape is not Harry Potter. He is not a person of exceptional moral courage. He is far more average than that, I'm afraid. He can't give up the belonging that he yearned for so deeply, even to keep the respect of the person he loves most. Because even with that respect, she will still be in Gryffindor, among his established enemies, and there is no acceptance or belonging to be had there. Yet even after Lily rejects him, Snape does nothing to hurt her. He doesn't follow her, or taunt her, or go after James once it's clear he has taken Snape's place in her heart. Snape simply leaves her alone. Now I inject Point 2: You call this guy an obsessive stalker?? No, an obsessive stalker DOES NOT stop just because the girl tells him they are through. He begs her to take him back, he demands she take him back, he threatens her, he threatens her friends and her newest guy who has replaced him. And eventually he hurts her, or her guy, perhaps kills one or both of them. A obsessive stalker's mentality is of the "If I can't have her then no one can have her" type. Snape is so NOT a stalker. No, he simply leaves Lily to her life, offering no threats or interference, and no anger directed at her. Somewhere deep down he knows it was his doing, that *he* drove her away, not the other way round. Yet he never stops loving her, and when he finds out that Voldemort plans to kill the Potters, thanks to a Prophecy Snape brought right to him, he's beside himself. Yes, Snape first asks Voldemort to spare her, not really interested in what Voldemort does to James or the child. And he admits as much to Dumbledore who is rightly disgusted by this attitude. There's no evidence Snape actively wanted Voldemort to kill James and the child, only that he was completely focused on saving Lily. To him, James and Harry weren't even in the equation. And here's where I insert Point 3: Snape did not ask *for* Lily. I.e., he didn't ask Voldemort to spare her and bring her to him, so he could keep her as a prize, or lock her up somewhere until he convinced her to love him. He only wanted her to live. There is a difference, and it highlights to me that while Snape's love of Lily was an obsession in his live, his *love* was not the obsessive type. He was not trying to possess her, to coerce or force her into anything. Admittedly he acted primarily in his best interests, so he could be at peace knowing she was still living. I don't think he fully considered or even understood that Lily couldn't just keep living after the devastation of losing her husband and child. Such is the way of those who have experienced as little real love as Snape has. But making a pact with Dumbledore turned that tide anyway. Agreeing to spy for Dumbledore, to protect Harry Potter from Voldemort, and to risk his life repeatedly was NOT in his best interests, not unless his best interests were making amends and earning the respect of the woman he loved. I.e., he did it all for Lily. Only one more point to go, 4. You do NOT have to love or even like someone to put his interests ahead of your own. You don't even have to be nice to him, as Snape never was to Harry Potter. He loved Lily, he didn't love her son. Her son, who was also the son of his worst enemy, James Potter. There's a dichotomy for you. Child of a person you love deeply and a person you truly despise. How much easier would it have been for Snape to devote his life to protecting a child he actually liked, one who didn't look--and yes, often act--like the hated James Potter? But Snape drew the short end of the stick throughout his life, didn't he? I would add that I was not initially a fan of Snape loved Lily. I would have been unable to accept a Snape who first saw Lily at Hogwarts and loved her from afar, but the fact that they were childhood friends saved it for me. In fact, I find it quite believable, because there is simply no reason Snape shouldn't love her. And if it was all possessive self-interest on his part rather than genuinely selfless love, then Snape would have acted very differently than he did. BTW, obsession isn't always a bad thing, is it, fellow members of the Obsessed with Harry Potter Association, which I'll now refer to as OHPA! (whilst imagining raising a glass of ouzo and delivering a Greek toast to those assembled with me ;-) Julie From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 03:46:58 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:46:58 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: About Potterwatch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172539 In a message dated 7/24/2007 7:42:18 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Aisbelmon at hotmail.com writes: Metylda wrote: > > So, my curiosity is to why all the members of the > radio show Potterwatch had 'R' code names? River, > Royal, Romulus, and Rapier/Rodent. > I think it was more like those pseudonyms fit their real names River : Lee Jordan . .the River Jordan Royal: KINGsley Romulus: Remus (the twins raised by wolves) Rodent: Weasel. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ardiningtiyaspitaloka at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:14:23 2007 From: ardiningtiyaspitaloka at yahoo.com (ardiningtiyaspitaloka) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:14:23 -0000 Subject: Lost in HP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172540 Dear Potterian... So sad..knowing people who we love are gone.. the HP characters. I think JK not only wants to remind us the meaning of love, friendship but also emphasize them. Hardly to realize.. that ironically, it comes through a loss. That's what JK is eager to show for all of us. By the loss of those we love.. we memorize them more and more deep in our hearts. Do we still remember what Dumbledore said, when Harry asked about his parents and Sirius death? 'Are you sure they're gone, Harry? Don't they live more in your heart? They're not gone.. they remain deep..in our heart..' Let's memorize them by spelling charm... Expecto Patronum. What do you think? Piet From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 04:06:22 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:06:22 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry Message-ID: <380-2200773254622640@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172541 > Magpie: > Yeah, I was surprised when people felt there was any better unity > between the other Houses and Slytherin...as far as I can tell > Slytherin seemed a lot worse than they had that first day Harry went > to Hogwarts. Then they just seemed unsavory and I assumed it was his > imagination. Their behavior in the battle hardly seemed to give anyone > a reason to trust them more. All the Slytherins, to me, came across as > essentially selfish and incapable of the kinds of choices Gryffindors > could make--I wouldn't trust them. Snape was a Death Eater with a > convenient obsession with Lily Potter... Montavilla47: I'm going to disagree with you about Snape, Magpie. I can see how JKR tried to make him as creepy as possible, but there's a definite progression in his viewpoint from the obsession with Lily to a more general concern for people in general. Dumbledore trusted him to protect the students at Hogwarts, and he did so to the utmost of his abilities. Magpie: I know there was a progression. There was not as much of one as I assumed he had, which is why for me Snape shrunk in DH, he didn't get bigger. He had concern for people in general, but a lot less of it than I'd imagined he had. Montavilla47: But then, once he got back to Hogwarts, I expected... something. Some gleam of humanity from him. We get Narcissa's help at the end--which seems like the small sort of service Dumbledore (or the reader) was expecting to get from Pettigrew. But it's so little. Maybe there's something I missed with the Draco sneaking back into Hogwarts bit? Magpie: I couldn't figure out why he did that given what we'd seen of him before trying to stay out of it. It seemed like he just did it so that he could be there for his parents to go after. Montavilla47 I don't understand why there is such a complete lack of help from the Slytherins. Unless JKR is just that bleak.If she was going to do that, I wish she would have stayed away from the whole elements aspect of the Houses. By making Slytherin completely negative, she seems to be rejecting emotion itself. Magpie: I thought Snape was kind of part of that. He obviously was heroic and did a lot to help--but it was a personal redemption that he won for himself. It didn't seem to reflect well on the house to me. -m From prep0strus at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:09:13 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:09:13 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: <01e701c7ce6e$0f0bbb60$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172542 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly" wrote: > > Maybe it's too early for a "funny lines" thread but I just wanted to say that I loved Ron in this book. He said two things that just had me in tears laughing. I agree - I read this book outloud to my old roommate, using up the whole weekend, and we were in stitches for a lot of it - I think JKR's dialog has really improved and was quite witty, and even the narration was pretty spiffy. It's hard after a first read to remember where some of my favorite lines were, but I did enjoy: "Dawlish is still in St. Mungo's and Gran's on the run." "he was pressed against the back of the wall as they ran past him, the mingled members of the Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore's Army, and Harry's old Quidditch team" (how did they get in touch with Wood, anyway? he didn't have a coin) When Ron was talking about Twleve Fail-Safe Ways to Charm Witches - "You'd be surprised, it's not all about wandwork, either." Talk about Harry Potter for Grownups! Sounds like Harry Potter after dark... From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:51:24 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:51:24 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172543 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sdeepthi" wrote: > > > > > Deepthi: > But Dumbledore intended Snape to end up as the master of the Elder Wand. And that > means that he didn't intend him to die, he intended him to keep the Elder Wand out of LV's > hands so that Harry doesn't have to face that in the final battle. > PG 721 "You planned your death with Snape. You meant him to end up with the Elder Wand, didn't you?" PG 742 "Dumbledore intended to die undefeated, the Wand's last true master! If all had gone as planned, the wand's power would have died with him, because it had never been won from him!" Dumbledore did NOT intend Snape to be the master of the wand. He intended for Snape to end up with a wand that had no master, and thus could not be used to defend himself against Voldemort. Furthermore, however the plan unfolded, Voldemort would assume (and surely Dumbledore knew this) that Snape was the master of the wand, and thus that he had to kill Snape in order to claim it. What did Dumbledore expect would happen? Particularly since Snape had no knowledge of Hallows and thus would have no idea of what Voldemort wanted or intended. Indeed, he seemed to have no idea when Voldemort summoned him to his death, although he could obviously sense he was in great danger. Regardless of what would have happened, even if DD's plan had gone as intended, Snape would have ended up with a wand that did not acknowledge him. Not a good position to be in when facing a demanding Dark Lord. Lupinlore From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:39:46 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:39:46 -0000 Subject: Bragging Rights answer key, chekhov's guns, spoiler report, etc In-Reply-To: <46A68272.70805@fastmail.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172544 random832: > > CHEKHOV'S GUNS > - Lily's/Harry's eyes > Nothing on this so far as far as I know > Deepthi: The eyes are significant only in the fact that Harry's eyes are exactly like Lily's. Just before he dies, Snape says to Harry "Look at me". And in chapter 33(page 678 of the US edition), Dumbledore tells Snape "He has her eyes, precisely her eyes. You remember the shape and color of Lily Evans's eyes, I am sure?" I don't think it could be made clearer than that. random832: > - Dudley's reaction to dementers > I think this was touched on, as to him having matured some. > Deepthi: Yes, but wasn't the original question about what Dudley's worst memory was? since dementors force you to relive that? random832: > - Dumbledore's gleam of triumph > We see a lot of Dumbledore's past that I don't think any of us > anticipated > Deepthi: True. DH makes it more likely the Dumbledore planned a lot more things than has been revealed. It is still possible that the gleam of truimph was nothing but Dumbledore anticipating the effect of Lily's blood when LV next tries an AK on Harry. random832: > > - Pettigrew -- silver hand, life debt > Nothing. We don't even get anything else on life debts generally > Deepthi: Pettigrew was unable to strangle Harry, and the silver hand turned and strangled him instead. It is because of the life debt that Pettigrew relaxed his hold on Harry's throat, though Harry needed to remind him of it. random832: > - Occlumency & legilimency > Not so much. Deepthi: In the Prince's tale, when Dumbledore is telling Snape what to tell Harry (page 686), he _closes_ his eyes, and he tells an actual lie. He says ".... a fragment of Voldemort's soul was blasted apart from the /whole/..." (emphasis mine). It looked like he was avoiding Snape's fabled powers as a Legilimens. He opens his eyes only after he finishes talking about what Harry must do, and that Harry must die. random832: > - DD's visions drinking the potion. > I think that what we've learned about his past might go towards > explaining this, but I'd have to reread HBP to be sure. > Deepthi: At least Harry thinks that he was reliving the duel with Grindelwald where Ariana dies, and Aberforth is subjected to Cruciatus. (page 567-8) random832: > > 36. Werewolves, including Fenrir Grayback and Lupin > I don't remember any big showdown between them, but by then it was > late in the morning, did I miss anything > Deepthi: There wasn't. We actually don't know how Lupin died, Jo didn't say. Random832: > 45. Will Pettigrew repay his life debt by turning against LV and > helping Harry ? > Nope. > Deepthi: He didn't help Harry _against_ LV, but he couldn't kill Harry either, so it did help. From kiely78 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 03:49:02 2007 From: kiely78 at yahoo.com (Kiely78) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:49:02 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172545 bookworm857158367 wrote: Harry's instinct was to > put a Shield Charm between them, but he probably should have left > them to work it out on their own. They would have had more fun > fighting it out and then making up. Harry hates conflict; Ron and > Hermione thrive on it. How appropriate it was that Hermione finally > kissed Ron when he expressed concern for the house elves. Kiely78: I posted somewhere back that I was not a total shipper for anyone in the books but was dissapointed in Ron and Hermoine's kiss, I did LOVE that she came running to him though. I love them as a characters and thier love story, but I didn't want that to overshadow the book. Well it didn't, and I wanted more of a confession of love between them. I actually see a lot my my relationship with my husband before our feelings were revealed, in R&H. Oh well, I can fanfic in my head what went on afterward right. OH and I totally thought they were ummm...being teenagers alone.... when they were offscreen, not finding the Basilisk fang. Kiely78 From kslmoran at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 04:07:34 2007 From: kslmoran at comcast.net (kslmoran) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:07:34 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172546 > Sandra: > And he and Hermione just disappeared for a few pages in all the > tension and prelude to chaos, and then reappeared with a basilisk > fang or two. At the very least, that was worth a half chapter or > even a whole one, so that Ron and Hermione's relationship could > have been shown to develop more. I didn't feel there was the > slightest girlfriend/boyfriend thing going on, and the moment > when they do kiss seemed to be thrown in as a convenient place > for them to do the obligatory. > That made me feel quite empty about their situation, and it > seemed rushed. Considering there were seven books, that > could have been done far sweeter. kslmoran: I think Ron and Hermione's relationship HAS been building in all of the books. Now, they were only 11 when they first came to Hogwarts but even then they already started to bicker with each other. And any reader of Romance novels knows that's the first sign of a good romance. And you can see so many times when Ron stands up for Hermione. Just off the top of my head I remember in book 2 COS, Ron faces off against Malfoy after Malfoy calls Hermione a Mudblood. And poor Ron and his broken wand end up with a mouthful of slugs. Book 4 GOF the tension between Ron and Hermione during the Yule Ball is incredible. Ron is so jealous but won't admit it, he blames it on her being a traitor by dating Krum (whom he had loved as a Quidditch player until now). And Hermione is broken hearted that Ron hadn't really noticed she was a girl until then (or at least she didn't think so). Book 6 HBP, Hermione is out of her head jealous over the whole Ron/Lavendar thing. And when Ron finally wises up (after he drinks the poison wine and ends up in the hospital wing) he seems embarrassed about Lavendar. But Hermione (who rushed to his side as soon as she heard) seems to forgive him and even helps him figure out how to get rid of Lavender. And Ron is the one consoling Hermione at Dumbledore's funeral (or they are consoling each other). Harry even wonders about Ron and Hermione's potential relationship, thinking that if they get together it might backfire if it doesn't work out. Unfortunately we can't really SEE what is going on during the time Ron and Hermione are off getting the Basilisk fangs, Book 7 DH) since that isn't the way JKR writes. It's very rare that she shows us anything but Harry. The only exceptions are things from the past or Voldemort. And even then many of the times it is a vision Harry is having. I would like to have seen all the times Ron and Hermione were together as Prefects during Book 5 OoTP. I just saw the movie and was disappointed that they never even mentioned that both Hermione AND Ron were prefects. But don't get me started on the movies, complete different story there. And I loved the kiss. And thought it was perfect timing. Ron has always been more worried about himself than things like house elves. So when, on his own, he shows his genuine concern for them, something Hermione has worked so hard to achieve, Hermione realizes just how much he has grown. And I love Harry's response, "Is this the moment?" and then "OI! There's a war going on here!" after they didn't stop kissing. Maybe because I am such a hopeless romantic, I "SAW" all the little hints that JKR gave us regarding Ron and Hermione. I would bet if you went back and re-read the books knowing what happens, you may see them too. They were very subtle but definitely there. I was thrilled that JKR finally let them get together. kslmoran From darksworld at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:31:24 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:31:24 -0000 Subject: My take on DH. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172547 I was trying to read everyone's posts befor I did mine, but there ain't no way that's going to happen. I may repeat or step all over what others have said, but these are my opinions, and I just want to air them so, here goes: I loved it, and hated it all at the same time. This was not the book I'd been expecting. It is so much more and less than I wanted to see. I would say that it is definitely JKR writing what she wanted to, and the devil with what we'd say about it, it's *her* story. I wanted the opening scenes with the Dursleys to be so much different. I wanted Harry to get his revenge on them, and I don't mean making them go off with "some of his lot." I wanted Harry, Ron, and Hermione to sit them down and educate them on why their treatment of Harry was wrong, preferably in a way that involved some bumps and bruises for Vernon Dursley. As I have said in another post, the one death I can never forgive her for is Hedwig. Uncool. Very uncool. While I don't like it, JKR did prove that Dumbledore is a conniving son-of-a-bludger. I knew there was a lot that he wasn't letting on, but I had no idea of the scope of his lies. Yes, he was on the side of good, but zark. Harrycrux. Yuck. I rejected this theory time and again, only to have it smacked back into my face by the author herself. Other Horcruxes: This is where JKR shines in this book. To have horcruxes destroyed by different people is great. My wife pointed out that each of the horcruxes in DH was destroyed by a person who LV had negatively affected. Locket: Ron, who lost a brother and had family members mutilated and posessed. Cup: Hermione, the muggleborn who LV's regime was trying to exterminate. Diadem: Crabbe, a representative of all those kids of DE's who had family life leading them toward the dark side. Nagini: Neville, who suffered the loss of his parents minds to LV's cause. Kreacher: YES!!! I was so stoked that the little toerag could turn over a new leaf. I want so much for Kreacher to be Harry & Ginny's elf for the remainder of his days, because it would be exactly what Kreacher wants too at this point. Dobby: If I didn't already wear all black all the time, I would be doing so now for Dobby. This is the one character death that truly made me cry. It was salient and meaningful, but nonetheless painful. Moldybutt's Ministry: Yuck again. I know I wasn't supposed to like it, but from Rufus Scrimgeour's lockstep anti-DE to totally lost in about a month. Can you say contrived? I knew that you could. The humor: This is something that very few writers can really do effectively, the comic relief in dark times. Ron saying "Really gives a feeling for the whole scope and tragedy of the thing, doesn't it?" was just the balm my frazzled nerves needed. The epilogue: Almost perfect. (And yes, I can hear the Ginny haters warming up their blowtorches.) It did need more, I felt. I wanted some info on "His Holeyness" and Luna. Those two additions, and I would have been satisfied with the epilogue. There's about twelve billion other things that I'm sure will get discussed, but I don't have the time or energy to type them all. Charles, who thinks that JKR left herself room to write another seven book series on the rebuilding of the WW, centering on Kingsley, Arthur, and Percy. From jwlerch78 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:15:03 2007 From: jwlerch78 at yahoo.com (jwlerch78) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:15:03 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: <0915E900-416F-4EF8-B2EB-849CC6461722@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172548 The mechanics at the end are definitely confusing - but here's my analysis for what it's worth: Initial questions I had were: 1) What was the reason that Harry did not die in the forest? A few possibilities all seemed likely: a) He was tethered to life by his blood in Voldemort (per DD at King's Cross) b) He was master of death (all 3 hallows) c) The Elder wand couldn't kill him because he was its master? 2) If the Elder wand couldn't kill Harry, then what was the point of DD's discussion of being tethered by Voldemort's own blood? My interpretation (and I'm sure there could be several that work) is the following: Harry was a Horcrux, and for a Horcrux to be destroyed it's container (i.e. Harry) needs to be destroyed (per Hermione earlier in the book). If Harry did not go willingly to his death in the forest than the forest battle would have gone just like the final battle actually did go (i.e. - the Elder wand would have backfired on Voldemort because Harry was its master). The problem here would be that the piece of Voldemort would have lived on in Harry as a Horcrux and still need to be destroyed. Since Harry willingly chose death, the Elder wand followed through with the Avada Kadavra curse - and in doing so it killed off the piece of Voldemort's soul and sent Harry to death or its brink. However, Harry did not die since Harry was tethered to life via his protected blood in Voldemort. When Harry faced Voldemort in the end, he understood he was the Elder wand's master. Since he did not wish the Elder wand to kill him, but to kill Voldemort instead, the wand obliged. My interpretation is that Deathly Hallows, again per DD at King's Cross, were simply 3 objects created by the gifted brothers and legend built around them. The legend that the possessing all 3 made one the master of death could certainly be read to be more metaphorical - i.e. make you very formidable and near invincible. As DD says, to be the master of death you need to accept death. It's not that possessing all 3 makes you the master of death; you need to be the Master of death in order to possess all 3 safely. In short, I think the mechanics at the end work best if power created by united Deathly Hallows is more legend and metaphor. Anyway - just my two cents. JWLerch From kmrhapsody at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 04:14:43 2007 From: kmrhapsody at gmail.com (kmrhapsody) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:14:43 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172549 > > > > Betsy Hp wrote: > Wishful thinking I'm afraid. No healing for the WW. Where Anne > Frank was able to look at the world around her and think, "I know in > my heart that people are good" (or words to that effect), JKR > apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know in my > heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half of them > are okay, and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates in > a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. Yeah. I'm pretty > much done with the series. > Not to mention that I was kinda surprised that we didn't see more of an international effort in trying to dismantle the single biggest threat to the global wizarding world at the time. In GOF we were told that wizards were -everywhere- and that the governments worked together as needed. So why was the final battle with Voldemort only fought with only British teenagers and their adult allies? Especially if we are going to be teased with characters like Krum coming back into the fray. I'd hate to relegate his cameo to that of a red herring for a plot device as I think he had more to offer. Despite some of these glaring loopholes, I found myself enjoying the ride much more in this volume than I did in HBP. HBP lowered the bar on some levels, so perhaps my expectations weren't that high. Then again, I was doped up on cold medicine the whole time while I read it so it's also possible that I was a little numb to most everything. I'll still rock my Ravenclaw colors regardless. Much love, kmrhapsody From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:36:36 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:36:36 -0000 Subject: Orson Scott Card's Masterwork on Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172550 To the List Elves: I know I'm waaaay over my post count, but this isn't really a new post! I'm not responding to anyone on the list, or starting a new topic for discussion. I merely want to post a link . Pretty please? The link is to Orson Scott Card's article, "Who is Snape?" from this month's Intergalactic Medicine Show. It is the best, most comprehensive discussion of Snape as a character I have ever seen, and spans the first six books. He uses his novelist's perspective to predict the outcome of DH (like us, he's right about Snape), but more importantly he discusses why it had to be that way. Just incredible. Puts all of us here to shame. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stellarwells at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 04:14:34 2007 From: stellarwells at gmail.com (Heather A. Gardocki) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:14:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's patronus? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172551 Can some one please explain the significance of Snape's patronus being a doe? How does this relate to DD trusting him? Hoe does it tie in to his love for Lilly? I didn't start reading until 2005.. thanks! heather From red-siren at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 04:27:42 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:27:42 -0000 Subject: The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: <122191.7956.qm@web33112.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172552 phoenixgod2000: > > If you are going to get one thing right in a four thousand page > > series it should be the epilogue. I can forgive mistakes made in > > the middle far more easily than mistakes made in the end. Sue White: > I can't agree more. I loathed how the epilogue tied > everything up in bows. I also was disappointed with the epilogue. Did Hermoine find her parents? What happened to Luna/Kreacher/Dean/George/etc. There are a few other things also, but I am glad JKR did not end the book with Harry & Ginny's or Ron & Hermione's weddings or childbirths. That would have been so sweet we'd all need massive doses of insulin. I did like that Harry named one of his sons after Snape. That showed that he had forgiven Snape. Sue From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:46:30 2007 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:46:30 -0000 Subject: Great and Subtle Moments in Deathly Hallows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172553 SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS (You've been warned!) Okay, I've already read the book through twice and picked up some rather subtle stuff the second time through.... 1. When Harry was viewing Snape's memory where Dumbledore told Snape that Harry had to be killed by Voldemort in order for the bit of Voldemort's soul inside of him to die (i.e. for Harry-as-Horcrux to be destroyed) to cause Voldemort's downfall, Dumbledore CLOSED HIS EYES! Why? Because Snape is an excellent Occulemens and it's possible that Snape would have seen Dumbledore's lie in his eyes if he hadn't closed them! The truth was that Dumbledore did use Snape to pass on the idea to Harry that Harry had to die in order to finish Voldemort, but without ever telling Snape that this was just a necessary step in order for the Horcrux'd soul inside Harry to be destroyed and that Harry wouldn't die unless he really wanted to. If Snape had been able to gleen the truth from Dumbledore and relay that to Harry in his memories then Harry's sacrifice of his own life probably would not have resulted in that special protection for all the people he was trying to die for. 2. Snape might have loved Lily Evans, but he was still a horrible git. Why do I write that? Because Snape didn't care one whit about Harry or James at all, regardless of the fact that those two people were the most important people to Lily in her entire life. Snape's love for Lily was strong, but it was a very selfish love. Dumbledore had to point out to Snape that helping Lily's son survive would be an appropriate way to show his love for Lily. Over the many years he knew him, Snape refused to see the truth - that Harry was very much like his mother, and much less like his father when it came to how he treated other people. When Snape seemed taken aback in the memory by Dumbledore's instructions that Harry had to die, Dumbledore seemed surprised by the very idea that Snape might actually care even the smallest amount for Harry. Snape might have felt he owed a debt to Lily for betraying her (and he clearly always wanted her for himself, IMO, even if just as his best friend, but probably as his wife more), but he never saw Harry as more than a means to an end to assauge his guilt and grief over and to atone for her death. Dumbledore called Snape disgusting because he truly was a despicable person. He may have ultimately been on the side of the good, but that does not make him a good human being. Yes, he was brave spying on Voldemort for the order, however he would never put aside his jealously, pettiness, anger and bitterness towards James (and by extension, Harry) to reveal the truth about his feelings for Lily to anyone other than Dumbledore until the very moment he was actually bleeding to death. 3. I find it incredibly ironic that Voldemort and Harry ended up being each other's Horcruxes! I use the term loosely in Harry's case because none of Harry's soul was in Voldemort, however the end result was the same. Harry could never die while Volemort lived with Harry's blood (protected by his mother's sacrifice) running through his veins. Voldemort could never die while Harry lived with that parasitic piece of Voldy's soul clinging to his own soul. The fact that Voldemort created a Horcrux without knowing it while anchoring Harry to life just delights me. Talk about your own vices biting you in the arse! 4. At the end, Voldemort was shown up by Harry as the amazingly stupid, short-sighted, selfish nitwit he always had been. I loved it when Harry called him Tom at the end. Harry was feeling exactly like I was; how could all those Death Eaters think this guy was brilliant? Sure, he was cruel and heartless and very good at magic, but he discounted powerful magic (house elves, goblins, love, sacrifice, etc.) just because he didn't understand it or thought it was beneath him. His shortcomings resulted in him not knowing about the Deathly Hallows, not knowing about sacrifice-as-a-powerful- protection-spell (twice!) nor about how the Elder Wand truly gives its allegiance. He honestly thought that no other students at Hogwarts would ever find the Room of Requirement, specifically the room that held everything that needed to be Hidden? Yep, Tom Riddle was a total moron. It's shocking that so many died at the hands of such a dolt.... 5. When Snape asked Harry to take the memories pouring out of him as he lay dying, he said "Look...at...me.". To me, this was Snape finally wanting to expose what he felt was the best of himself to Harry. Snape's love for Lily and his grief at being partly responsible for her death was his biggest secret, a secret he refused to reveal until just seconds before his death. As Dumbledore told him, "...I shall never reveal the best of you." With his last words, Snape asked Harry to see the person he truly was, or thought he was, a man who opposed Voldemort, stood by Dumbledore, was on the side of the Order, was exceptionally brave and still hopelessly in love with a woman who had died sixteen years earlier. I'm sure that if Snape could have spoken to Harry alone, earlier when he wasn't dying, that Snape would have only relayed Dumbledore's message that Harry must die in order to rid Voldemort of the Horcrux inside him. It is interesting that at his moment of death that Snape chose to tell Harry everything about his true motivations and inner character. It makes me wonder if Snape finally did see the truth at last - that Harry was like Lily and that Snape should have befriended him instead of hating him because of Snape's own past mistakes. Diana L. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:50:12 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:50:12 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: <01e701c7ce6e$0f0bbb60$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172554 Kimberly: > Maybe it's too early for a "funny lines" thread but I just wanted to say that I loved Ron in this book. He said two things that just had me in tears laughing. zgirnius: Dark, but I offer: "Would you like me to do it now? Or would you like a few moments to compose an epitaph?" From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 04:41:40 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:41:40 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes References: Message-ID: <018301c7ce76$185b06f0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172555 Clio: > On the doe: Of course it is obvious, that a doe as the stag's mate > symbolizes Lily. But does that necessarily mean that Lily had a doe > patronus? And btw what would that teach us after 30 years of feminism, > if Lily Potter defined herself over being the docile mate of someone > cool? Shelley I would disagree- we have no proof that James made his Stag first, and then Lilly got subservient with a Doe Patronus! Rather, I think it's much more likely that Lilly first produced her Doe, and then James, wanting to be the one to "get her", made his the handsome Stag. After all, we have proof from earlier memories seen in the Pensieve that James adored Lilly long before they developed a relationship. From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:56:13 2007 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:56:13 -0000 Subject: Snape's patronus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172556 Snape's patronus was some other animal before Lily died. Lily's patronus was a doe and Snape's patronus changed its shape to match hers after her death. Thus, when he showed Dumbledore that his patronus was *still* the same as Lily's so many years later it proved that his torch for Lily and his remorse over his part in her death were still fresh for him. Dumbledore would know Snape truly felt remorse over what he'd done because Snape can't fake his patronus changing shape. In HBP, we were shown that Tonks' patronus changed its shape after she sunk into a deep depression after Lupin rejected her love. It is interesting that the two patronuses that changed shape did so because of unrequited love.... Diana L. > Can some one please explain the significance of Snape's patronus being a > doe? How does this relate to DD trusting him? Hoe does it tie in to his > love for Lilly? > > > I didn't start reading until 2005.. > thanks! > heather > From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 04:56:10 2007 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:56:10 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Please Observe Posting Limit Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172557 Greetings, We are experiencing a record number of posts already! Please try to respect the limit of 5 posts in a rolling 24-hour period as a courtesy to your fellow list members. Excessive posting will be considered a violation of list rules, and members may be remoderated for a brief period if we've attempted to contact off-list without a return acknowledgement or posts continue to be submitted. Any questions can be sent to: HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com Thanks, The List Elves From jenlundq at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 04:43:35 2007 From: jenlundq at hotmail.com (pwrmom2) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:43:35 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: <010201c7ce58$31a30680$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172558 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma" > I think DD was a fool, or, maybe he played along to accomplish > his own manipulations. Snape was good at both Occulemency and > Legilemens- we must remember that. Bottom line, whether good or evil the fact is Snape did everything that DD asked him to do, no matter what his reasons are. If anything, maybe he was more human than the other characters. I don't like Snape, even at the end, for a lot of the reasons already commented upon, especially since he let his hatred of James flow into his teaching. Call me idealistic, but I'd like to think a good teacher would try to overcome that, but Snape never even gave Harry a shot. Harry may not have shown Snape so much downright animosity if Snape hadn't treated him like crap and singled him out from the get go. Granted Snape was mean to everyone who wasn't Slytherin, but he really went after Harry from the beginning. But I digress. I repeat, bottom line, Snape did EVERYTHING DD asked him to do. If anything, knowing that DD told him that Voldemort needed to kill Harry, then if Snape was truly on Voldemort's side, he never would have kept pushing to get Harry there. Yes, some of his motivation in the end may have been to try to butter up V to avoid his imminent death, but if he was truly trying to help the dark side and prove himself to V he would have told him DD's theory that if V kills Harry then it would help the good. Maybe his motives were mostly just revenge against V for killing Lily, but who cares? He still did everything DD asked him to do. I choose to let JKR guide my thoughts on this and that Snape wasn't completely evil. Just very human with real feelings as already posted who was in reality risking himself constantly to do whatever DD asked him to do. pwrmom2 From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 05:03:47 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:03:47 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172559 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Zara" wrote: > > Kimberly: > > Maybe it's too early for a "funny lines" thread but I just wanted to > say that I loved Ron in this book. He said two things that just had > me in tears laughing. > Julie: >From Aunt Muriel at the wedding: "What is Xenophilius wearing? He looks like an omelet." And in loving memory of Fred and his amazing one-liners: "...he can move faster than Severus Snape confronted with shampoo." Julie From pamela at wayswriter.com Wed Jul 25 05:00:37 2007 From: pamela at wayswriter.com (Pamela Kock) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:00:37 -0400 Subject: Talking Portraits In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A6D8F5.4020909@wayswriter.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172560 Answer me something, OK? How come some of the portraits of dead people (Dumbledore, Phineas, etc.) can continue to communicate with live people, but others (photos of Harry's parents, Sirius, etc.) can't? Pam, HP4G newbie pamela at wayswriter.com From tongin_1971 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:49:15 2007 From: tongin_1971 at yahoo.com (tongin_1971) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:49:15 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172561 > > Tenne: > > > > The twins would always depend on themselves and most likely never > > really grow up or apart. Now George has no choice but to become a > > person, not just a twin > > prep0strus: > > Not sure what my overriding point was supposed to be, or turned out to > be. But I sure wish Fred had only lost an eye, instead of his life. > Or maybe the opposite ear to George's. Ulliowl From red-siren at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 04:33:55 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:33:55 -0000 Subject: Neville, a true Gryffindor Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172562 I always knew Neville had it in him! He faced Voldemort without an ounce of fear. He may have got knocked on his backside, but he got right back up and did what needed to be done! He is definitely a grandson to be proud of. Sue From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 05:06:06 2007 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:06:06 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: <018301c7ce76$185b06f0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172563 > Clio: > > On the doe: Of course it is obvious, that a doe as the stag's mate > > symbolizes Lily. But does that necessarily mean that Lily had a doe > > patronus? And btw what would that teach us after 30 years of feminism, > > if Lily Potter defined herself over being the docile mate of someone > > cool? > > > Shelley > > I would disagree- we have no proof that James made his Stag first, and then > Lilly got subservient with a Doe Patronus! > > Rather, I think it's much more likely that Lilly first produced her Doe, and > then James, wanting to be the one to "get her", made his the handsome Stag. > After all, we have proof from earlier memories seen in the Pensieve that > James adored Lilly long before they developed a relationship. To me, Lily's patronus being a doe while her husband's was a stag just symbolized how well suited they were to each other as a couple. After all, your patronus repreents your true inner self. Yes, Lily may have hated James Potter, but he matured, she got to know him better and then they ened up getting on like wildfire. Snape's patronus was most likely a bat originally, IMO. Did anyone else think that the large bat-shaped object flying away from the castle after Snape jumped out the window was Snape in his animagus bat form? After all, James' animagus shape was a stag, just like his patronus. Maybe Snape learned how to transform into a bat between HBP and the final events in DH? Diana L. From jenlundq at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 05:03:43 2007 From: jenlundq at hotmail.com (pwrmom2) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:03:43 -0000 Subject: The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172564 phoenixgod2000: > See, I'm not. If you are going to get one thing right in a four > thousand page series it should be the epilogue. I can forgive > mistakes made in the middle far more easily than mistakes made in the > end. pwrmom2: I agree, my problem with the ending was it felt more like, it was written with the attitude that she'd better hurry and get it written that she had run out of gas from all of her other great writing or something. Even if she had written it years ago, it should have been revisited. It was not only rushed, but kind of trite. I like that she showed the relationships of most of our old friends and enemies, but still, she's saying goodbye to a beloved character. She claims Harry was like another child and in fact HP changed her whole life, I think he deserved a better goodbye. Like others have mentioned, tell us the careers of our favorites, anything except for making it feel like a rushed job. The last chapters of all the other books took the needed time to explain things, why not the final epilogue of an entire beloved series? That said, I love the whole series, think JKR has a great imagination and is a great story teller and wish she would still write other books. Yes, they may never in a million years live up to HP (what could?) but still I think my children and myself would have benefitted from more stories by this great author! From dwalker696 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 04:37:28 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:37:28 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172565 OK, the rest of your questions are also buzzing in my brain, I will make a stab at them and hope someother people have some insight as well! Mindy asks: > 4) Was the rest of Mad Eye's body actually ever recovered? Geez good question, I wondered the same thing myself, while I was wondering how the hell and WHY did Umbridge get it? For me, discovering Alastor's eye in Umbridge's office door was like finding out that Voldemort was using Lily's wedding dress as toilet paper. Mindy asks: > 5) Harry used so much relatively simply magic throughout the book to > slip from the Death Eaters such as Accio, Expelliarmus, Stupefy, > Imperio... I'm surprised none of the Death Eaters ever did that... a > simple "accio harry" or disarming him would've helped their cause a > lot, I'm surprised they never thought of it - they weren't dumb > wizards! Donna wonders the same time: No kidding!!! Well, I wouldn't perhaps say Imperio is simple, but I thought the same thing in OOP when the kids rallied off a herd of DEs using Petrificus Totalus and Jelly Legs Jinx. OK, back to DH... Maybe the DEs weren't dumb, but certainly shortsighted. The dumbest being Voldemort! What was he thinking? Hmmm...I AK'd this kid when he was a defenseless, wandless infant and it didn't work, I AK'd this kid 13 years later surrounded by enough Death Eaters to make a basketball team and it didn't work, I just AK'd this kid 10, maybe 15 minutes ago in the forest and it didn't work, but, what the heck, let's try it again!! Mindy comments: > 7) The most infuriating plot development for me personally was Snape > jumping out the window, instead of sticking around and giving over > Harry his memories BEFORE the Great Battle of Hogwarts. Can you > imagine, had Harry NOT been in the Shrieking Shack at just the right > moment, he never would have gotten access ot those memories and never > would have known he was Horcrux and had to die so that LV could die > too. Where was Snape's sense of responsibility/loyalty to Dumbledore - > why didn the give over the memories BEFORE he jumped out the window? > Perhaps he didnt know yet that LV had reached the stage where he > wasnt letting go of Nagini? Donna agrees: I have been going over and over that as well! Certainly JKR uses quite a bit of lucky coincidence and irony, but I was aghast to think that Harry could have missed all that info. Certainly Snape was trying to get the info to Harry - he asks Voldy like 20 times, "let me bring the boy to you my Lord". Why didn't he just TELL Harry or throw him a vial of his memories when he saw him in the castle? Who cares McGonagall was standing there, the gig was up, what on earth did he need to go back to Voldy for, he could have stayed and helped! My only guess is exactly what you said - DD told him to tell Harry if and when he ever saw Voldy acting phobic for the safety of Nagini. And I suppose if Harry hadn't been at Snape's side at death, we wouldn't have had those haunting last words - "Look....at.....me..." which I found sad (and mildy unhealthily obsessive) at the same time. Snape wanted, essentially, for Lily's eyes to look at him, he wanted to be able to gaze upon those eyes he loved so much, despite that Lily's eyes were gazing at him out of Harry's body. Sad. A little twisted, I think even DD recognized Snape's love for Lily (and her eyes) as being obsessive. Donna From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 05:14:15 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:14:15 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Great and Subtle Moments in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40707242214x1f2fd58eqaefd99934372fd67@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172566 > Diana: ... snip ... > 5. When Snape asked Harry to take the memories pouring out of him as > he lay dying, he said "Look...at...me.". To me, this was Snape > finally wanting to expose what he felt was the best of himself to > Harry. Snape's love for Lily and his grief at being partly > responsible for her death was his biggest secret, a secret he refused > to reveal until just seconds before his death. As Dumbledore told > him, "...I shall never reveal the best of you." With his last words, > Snape asked Harry to see the person he truly was, or thought he was, > a man who opposed Voldemort, stood by Dumbledore, was on the side of > the Order, was exceptionally brave and still hopelessly in love with > a woman who had died sixteen years earlier. I'm sure that if Snape > could have spoken to Harry alone, earlier when he wasn't dying, that > Snape would have only relayed Dumbledore's message that Harry must > die in order to rid Voldemort of the Horcrux inside him. It is > interesting that at his moment of death that Snape chose to tell > Harry everything about his true motivations and inner character. It > makes me wonder if Snape finally did see the truth at last - that > Harry was like Lily and that Snape should have befriended him instead > of hating him because of Snape's own past mistakes. Kemper now: Snape's death was beautiful in its subtlety. Snape wasn't asking for Harry to see the best in him. And he wasn't seeing that Harry was like Lily. He was dieing. "Look... at... me" What Snape wanted most in his last moment was to look into Lily's eyes. Harry looked like his dad, but he had his mother's eyes. After reading The Prince's Tale, I understood. And wept. Kemper From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 05:08:44 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:08:44 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who came to magic late in life? References: <804694.73329.qm@web80510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01a801c7ce79$e23de3e0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172567 >> Eddie >> Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? dkewpie: > A few of us stressed many times on this list that person is Merope. > For some reason that seems to be so hard to believe for a lot people and I > still don't understand why. > It just seems so obvious to me when JKR mention that prior the release of > HBP in the interview she's referring to Merope. > > Just please, I hope no one is wasting time asking her that again in the > upcoming live chat...that'll be such a wasted question which could have > been other more interseting question. > > It's MEROPE, people just accept that and leave it at that! > > Jo Shelley: No, I won't! I'm sorry- I've seen this question asked on so many lists- hundreds of times already since DH came out- not just this one, but also on Mugglenet and others, that it's pretty clear to me that a LOT of people expected her to answer that question in Book 7. If a lot of the fandom has that same question, then it would be a perfect question to ask in the live, upcoming chat, because it really is common question. You are the first person I've ever heard say Merope. That doesn't even fit canon- we never see a time when she doesn't use magic, and then is later able to. We see Dumbledore saying "she wasn't at her best" when her dad was bossing her around every 5 seconds, belittling her in every way, but once he lands in jail, she is free to "be herself" and relax, and it's then that she shows her true abilities. That isn't anywhere near "learning to use magic LATE in life". It's the same way that Neville would be excluded- he does magic in his early years at Hogwarts, even if it's lacking in confidence until he gets Harry as a teacher in DA and then starts blooming in confidence and strength. The reverse process is seen in Tonks during her mourning time when she's lovesick over Lupin- a great witch who's powers are diminished for a while. I bet the moment Lupin gave in and they started planning their wedding, all of her "powers" were returned in full. That theme is echoed in Deathly Hallows, even, when Harry finds himself having trouble creating a Patronus because that darned Horcrux!Locket was sapping his happiness and strength, and he's revived after taking it off. All those circumstances are really different from "never" doing magic to suddenly being able to do magic, which is really what I think the fans were searching for. I wonder if perhaps we misunderstood or misinterpreted that part of that interview question? In which case, then it's still a perfect one for the fandom to ask to get it cleared up for once and all so we are on the same page. From Grosskopf5 at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 05:07:01 2007 From: Grosskopf5 at gmail.com (Debbie Grosskopf) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:07:01 -0500 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? Message-ID: <89d7a880707242207m1ba9f95dw492d6de1345818a5@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172568 Emerges from the shadows as a former lurker..... Isn't the Patronus supposed to be a unique creation for everyone? How can Snape and Lily have had the same Patronus? Isn't is supposed to be so unique that it is a secure form of messenger? Back to the shadows..... Debbie Grosskopf From squeaker19450 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 04:53:33 2007 From: squeaker19450 at yahoo.com (barb burke) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DH Thoughts Message-ID: <436897.11603.qm@web36607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172569 The fact remains that anyone who believes in Harry can take as FINAL CANON Harry's last words on Severus(and by extension JKR's) "you are named for two Hogwarts Headmasters, one of them a Slytherin and probably one of the bravest men I know' .....not Dumbledore, not Sirius, nor Lupin, not even his own father, but Severus Snape.......may he rest in peace. "always" barb From lynx412 at verizon.net Wed Jul 25 05:20:04 2007 From: lynx412 at verizon.net (Cheryl Huttner) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <196078.55028.qm@web84315.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172570 carodave92 wrote: While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle initial of F... Obviously, it's Lily Frederica. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From casmir2012 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 05:19:39 2007 From: casmir2012 at yahoo.com (casmir2012) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:19:39 -0000 Subject: Umbridge (theory) and Scrimgeour Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172571 Scrimgeour irritated me from the off, and I cringed when I had to read his scenes; however, he redeemed himself to me when he took Harry's secret location with him to his grave....or did he? Those DE's showed up awfully quickly at the wedding after killing him. Here's my Umbridge theory... Do you think that she was so mean because she wore that locket regularly? It seemed to have an effect on the trio... From percchick at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 05:06:27 2007 From: percchick at yahoo.com (Gina M. Gerwell) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:06:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows Message-ID: <143063.73922.qm@web60912.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172572 > kslmoran: > I have to say that the fate of Ron and Hermione was in the forefront > of my wanting to read this book. I've enjoyed their fighting and the very long road they have taken to get together. I agree with Bookworm that their romance was believable. Harry and Ginny a bit, but it was sidestepped so often I don't think it ever had a chance to really sink in to our minds that they had real feelings for each other. And the Harry/Ginny thing seemed to happen quite fast with not a ton of build up. Harry was gaga over Cho for a few books and then all of a sudden he has feelings for Ginny. But they never really dwelled on it with the exception of a few stray thoughts of Harry's in the final book. percchick: OKAY...I agree that Ron and Hermione are believable. I definitely can feel a certain....destiny that they might have. I liked the pairing before it was a "pairing". I thought they were "kismet"- I mean, if they were so determined to agree to disagree so often, they had to be fated to be more than friends, right? And Harry's blunt explanation of "we're just friends, mate" to Ron-poor guy, Ron-he was worried something more was going on between Harry and Hermione (He must have been reading some of the fan-fic...lol). I think, in the long run, Hermione and Ron are justly matched. The one thing that did disappoint me, however- If JK (in her infinite wisdom) wanted Harry and Ginny together, why didn't she "allude" to this somewhere other than Ginny's kiss early in DH? I would have personally liked to see Harry "whisking Ginny in his arms" or something throughout the duration of the book, other than Ginny's stolen b-day kiss. percchick From gregtaylor02 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 05:17:52 2007 From: gregtaylor02 at yahoo.com (gregtaylor02) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:17:52 -0000 Subject: The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172573 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: > No, I didn't love the epilogue, either. It was trite and lite and > didn't fit with what we know of the series, the characters, or > JKR's > writing. I felt like she had written it a long time ago (which she > did actually do, right?) and then felt she couldn't, or shouldn't, > alter it. > All that said, I did love seeing Hermione and Ron together. I was > never a huge fan of Harry/Ginny, so that was just ok. I also loved > the comment Harry made about Snape being one of the bravest men he > had ever known. That made me cry. I also enjoyed hearing that > Neville was the Herbology prof, and that Hagrid was still at > Hogwarts. But aside from those things, I didn't love it. It was a > snapshot, really, not an epilogue. gregtaylor02: I know some people may be upset with the epilogue but I was not. I think that if we subject every piece of JK's writing to this scrutiny then we will find flaws with a lot more than an epilogue. JK has never claimed she was perfect, she openly admitted she had a student going to Hogwarts beyond his 7 years (Marcus Flint I believe). She said that either it was her mistake or maybe he just didn't meet the standards, she prefers the later of the two. Also I always liked Harry/Ginny and know everyone that I read with also enjoyed it. We were upset when he fell for Cho more than anything. JK had to go ahead far enough that Harry's children would be attending Hogwarts. That means they're 11. Harry and Ginny would take at least 1 year to give birth after she came of age because we know her mom wouldn't approve of Ginny getting pregnant before that, even with Harry. She was 1 year younger than Harry meaning. The term of pregnancy is (rounded up to the nearest year) 1 year. Doing the math, 11+1+1= 13. That is if everything happened right away, come on he just defeated the dark lord, give the boy a vacation. I would have liked to know more about what harry did (for a job - auror?). I also wanted to know what his parents did for a job as well. In the end though, isn't it a good thing to leave some things to our imagination. Maybe JK will discuss this on her website, I don't know but I think calling her epilogue crappy is a slap in the face to everyone that enjoyed it, as well as to her, even if you think you can cut her some slack, please next time don't be so harsh. gregtaylor02 From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 05:26:03 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:26:03 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape, mostly (was:Re: My Officially First Deathly Hallow... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172574 In a message dated 7/24/2007 5:01:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time, spaebrun at yahoo.com writes: (the whole Petunia thing has no purpose in Snapes memories, in my opinion. It should better have been addressed at the beginning, before the Dursleys leave). Well it did answer the often asked question of what was the identity of the horrible boy whom Petunia overheard talking to Lily about dementors. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mariabronte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 05:32:00 2007 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:32:00 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172575 > houyhnhnm: > I thought the epilogue was Rowling at her most > Austenesque. Mari now: This is a nice way of putting it. I happen to agree, because the epilogue satisfied me too, though I know I am in the minority ;-) houyhnhnm again: > not everything in the Wiazarding World > is happy at the end. The sorting goes on. The > rivalry between the houses goes on. Gryffindors > and Slytherins still dislike and mistrust one another. > Draco and Harry nod curtly to each other, but they > are not friends. No doubt, the house elves are still > enslaved. The Ministry of Magic is as undemocratic > as ever. Other magical beings are not recognized > as equals by wizards, despite Grawp and the last > minute aid of the Centaurs. Still, that world is > brighter. Voldemort is gone. A new Dark Lord has > not yet arisen. Harry's scar has not pained him for > nineteen years. All is well (for the time being.) Mari again: Not everything is happy, no. I do see some evidence, however, that the generation that includes the children of Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione will be perhaps a little less likely to make instant snap judgements about people or other magical creatures. I can't help hoping that Slytherin might, at some time in the future, be integrated into the life of Hogwarts in a way they were not in Harry's time. Harry has seen outstanding courage shown by at least one Slytherin, and has taken the time to tell his son about this so that he knows the house can produce people worthy of emulation: "Albus Severus", Harry said quietly, so that nobody but Ginny could hear, and she was tactful enough to pretend to be waving to Rose, who was now on the train, "you were named for two headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew." What more need be said? :-D Harry has come a LONG way since the first book. From pamela at wayswriter.com Wed Jul 25 05:26:51 2007 From: pamela at wayswriter.com (Pamela Kock) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:26:51 -0400 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: <01a801c7ce79$e23de3e0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> References: <804694.73329.qm@web80510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <01a801c7ce79$e23de3e0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: <46A6DF1B.7040401@wayswriter.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172576 Maybe I'm weird, but I was hoping it'd be Dudley. Granted, Duddykins is what, 18-19, which isn't exactly "late in life" but for a wizard, it sort of is late. I was really cheered by Dudley's change of heart when the family split town. After his Dementor attack, he seemed to change quite a bit; he was even described as "muscular" instead of fat, lazy and bloated as he has been described in the past. Even the illustration seemed to echo that - I would never have guessed the illustration of a blonde boy shaking Harry's hand was supposed to be Dudley. And supposedly muggles can't see Dementors, correct? Yet Dudley saw them, which might imply he wasn't quite 100% muggle... I would have really loved if somehow the Dursleys were involved in the latter part of the story and Dudley turned out to be a bit of a wizard too, even if a rather weak, incompetent one. Pam pamela at wayswriter.com From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 05:19:57 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:19:57 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Epilogue: What about FRED??? References: Message-ID: <01b301c7ce7b$7139a150$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172577 "carodave92" wrote: >> While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after >> Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about >> FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle >> initial of F... >> > > va32h here: > It isn't Harry's responsibility to make sure that everyone who died > in the wizarding war is remembered in his mere three children, or > else they would all have names like: > > > Albus Severus Alastair Dobby Fred Remus or Lily Hedwig Nymphadora > Lavendar - and that would just be silly. Not as silly as you might think, not at all! Let's remind you of Dumbledore's full name: Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore! So, as easily as one child is named Albus Severus, the other one could have been named James Fred. Shelley Who could envision Hagrid's kids to be named Nortberta and Aragog. From hautbois1 at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 05:55:08 2007 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:55:08 -0000 Subject: The (beautiful) Epilogue WAS: The (Hated) Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172578 It seems to me that most people who dislike the epilogue do so because it does not tie up every loose end of the series. I believe it was a brilliantly appropriate ending. While there were things I still wanted to know, had they been compiled neatly at the end of the series we would have missed a rare moment: seeing Harry finally happy. Not "quidditch" happy, or "snogging Cho" happy, but really happy. We are shown one small moment 19 years later. A glimpse into the truly happy lives Harry and his closest friends have made for themselves. I'm sure they still have their ups and downs, but we finally get a brief look at a life without horror around every turn. To me this is a breath of fresh air. Like meeting an old friend many years down the road; they may be surrounded by unfamiliar faces and have stories from events you didn't witness, and though you may not know them as you once did you can content yourself in the happiness they have found. I would personally not have traded a Dragnet-style "Harry went on to become..." or "Hermione continued on to..." for this epilogue. Yes there are things I still want to know, but I am happier knowing that a character I feel very close to after all these years is happy and having learned that in this way rather than in a list of character achievements is lovely. I am glad that this short glimpse into what came after was provided. I found it neither trite nor contrived and I fully admit I wept like a lost puppy at finding Harry named his son Albus Severus. -PM From hautbois1 at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 06:09:49 2007 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:09:49 -0000 Subject: Great and Subtle Moments in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <700201d40707242214x1f2fd58eqaefd99934372fd67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172579 SNIP!!! > Kemper now: > Snape's death was beautiful in its subtlety. Snape wasn't asking for > Harry to see the best in him. And he wasn't seeing that Harry was > like Lily. He was dieing. > "Look... at... me" > What Snape wanted most in his last moment was to look into Lily's eyes. I fully agree...and was on my way to posting that... Snape my have been noble in his devotion to keeping Harry safe (as terrible as Snape acted) but he was driven throughout by the image and memory of Lily. It was tunnel vision, he loved her and that was in...no one else...he did what he did because he was tormented by her death. In the end Snape wanted to imagine he was looking into Lily's eyes before death. PM From h.m.s at mweb.co.za Wed Jul 25 06:05:40 2007 From: h.m.s at mweb.co.za (H.M.S) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:05:40 +0200 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? Message-ID: <64cblj$s14pm@mail-04.jhb.wbs.co.za> No: HPFGUIDX 172580 I think Fred's name would be left available for George to use and remember his twin Sharon - South Africa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bamf505 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 06:29:13 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:29:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] DH: Short - A continuity error? or some other explanation? (chapt 9 spoiler) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <97346.32465.qm@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172581 --- Gary wrote: > This kind of jumped out at me on my first read. > > Early on, Hermione reveals that she altered her > parents' memory and > sent them packing to Australia. Later, in chapter > nine, (around page > 190-200 or so, I don't have the book at hand here at > work) they were > going to do a memory charm on the two death eaters > that went after > them in the cafe, and when Ron said he'd never done > a memory charm, > Hermione claimed that she had also never done a > memory charm. So how > did she alter her parents' memory without a memory > charm? Is this a > simple continuity error, or is there some other way > of altering > memories that she might have used on her parents? > > Trivial issue, of course, but I found it mildly > annoying. > > Other than that I thought the book was fabulous. > > --gary > > bamf: I believe mugglenet.com sorted that out. What Hermy did to her parents was not the same as the memory charm "Obliviate". It would seem to be a much trickier working as she would have to give her parents fake memories (new names and all), and not just make them forget something. It's like the difference between being in the witness protection and having amnesia. bamf, who is going to go hide her keyboard now and not post until tomorrow... There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 06:29:55 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:29:55 -0000 Subject: Great and Subtle Moments in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172582 > > Kemper now: > > Snape's death was beautiful in its subtlety. Snape wasn't asking for > > Harry to see the best in him. And he wasn't seeing that Harry was > > like Lily. He was dieing. > > "Look... at... me" > > What Snape wanted most in his last moment was to look into Lily's > eyes. > PM: > I fully agree...and was on my way to posting that... Snape my have > been noble in his devotion to keeping Harry safe (as terrible as Snape > acted) but he was driven throughout by the image and memory of Lily. > It was tunnel vision, he loved her and that was in...no one else...he > did what he did because he was tormented by her death. In the end > Snape wanted to imagine he was looking into Lily's eyes before death. zgirnius: I don't doubt Snape wanted to see her eyes again. However, I can't dismiss the additional meaning of also actually asking Harry to look at him, and see him as he is. The reason is the memories he gives Harry. He could have given just the relevant memory, of the explanation that Harry is a Horcrux. If he feared that would be disbelieved as a fabrication, just enough about the past to establish the reasons for Dumbledore's trust. Even if he thought ALL those older memories were needed for that, why show more recent ones? Why does Snape want Harry to know that what happened to George was an accident? I conclude we are supposed to think that, at some point, Snape actually wanted Harry to think well of him. Personally, I don't think this was a deathbed conversion, either. His objection to Dumbledore's plan suggests it a year earlier, for one. There are signs of such an attitude in the earlier books - possibly Snape's extreme reaction to Harry at the end of HBP (though much else was going on then that was emotional, I grant). The moment in Occlumency lessons in OotP when Harry makes what he intends to be a cutting remark, that figuring out what Voldemort is up to is Snape's job, and Snape agrees, looking satisfied. From ag0991 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 06:06:13 2007 From: ag0991 at aol.com (siriusly_severus_snape) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:06:13 -0000 Subject: I have even less respect for Snape now In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172583 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: >pheonixgod200: > > Snape strikes me as a petty, pathetic, short-sited man whose life of > misery and pain is completely deserved. Snape's love isn't pure, > isn't good, no matter how fuzzy his patronus is. It is selfish and > possessive. If he really loved Lily, he would have done so much more > for Harry than what he did over the past seven years.... I would have trained him, and cared for > him and made him want to be around me because every second he stared > at me with those green eyes I would have been Happy. If it was the James factor, well that still doesn't make a whole lotta > sense for a smart slytherin with a well developed sense of revenge. > what would be better than taking the son of a man you hated with the > woman you loved and becoming a father figure to that boy? Harry was > so starved for a genuine father figure, Snape would have had the boy under his wings. I for one respect Snape now more than ever before and must completely differ on this one. I admit I spent almost the entire last half of DH absolutely bawling and even now, upon re-reading i can hardly glance at Snape's name without sheading a tear. Beyond obsession? Maybe.. I have blindly trusted Snape simply because Dumbledore has trusted him so impeccably and he has saved Harry's life (or at the very least his butt) on too many occasions to ignore. From his actions against Quirrell in SS, to secretly setting Harry and Hermione up with Gryffindor's sword in DH - he is irrefutably trustworthy, we have all established that at least upon reading "a Prince's Tale". However, as Dumbledore says, " We shall be leaving the firm foundation of fact and journeying together through the murky marshes of memory into the thickets of wildest guesswork."(HBP, 197) Rowling has already established that Snape is, for want of a better word, good. He is on Dumbledore's side and wants Harry to succeed, that much is obvious. So, we are left to wonder-why the resentment towards Harry? snape is an incredibly complex character that does everything for a reason and has not made a sizable mistake since he turned over Lily and James to Voldemort. Thus, he must have a good reason for treating Harry "like crap". After Voldemort's return, it can be safely said that showing too much affection towards Voldy's arch-enemy would put him in a very awkward situation indeed. Ignoring Voldemort, I think Snape does somewhat have a soft spot for Harry. The only logical reason Snape had for showing Harry his memories that weren't related to Voldy's undoing is that he truly cares about Harry and what he thinks of him and wants Harry to know the sacrifices he has made for him. Moreover, you saw how infuriated he was at Dumbledore when he told he that he was "raising him [Harry] like a pig for slaughter." (DH, 687) If there's one thing we know about Snape, it's that he fancies himself a stoic. Frankly, what choice does he have as a double agent? The wrong emotion at the wrong time and Voldemort's lost all trust in him...or he's dead. It's when he's alone that we see "tears dripping from his hooked nose as he read the old letter from Lily" (DH, 689). Thus, it is possible Snape has feelings that he is just not letting on. It's much more complex than this though. We know that he hated Harry's father because he could be downright cruel but loved his mother, with whom he was childhood friends. Since Harry looked so like James, merely with his mother's eyes, Snape could not help but be reminded of the man he so disliked. Yet, could not help but be reminded of the mother with whom he was so close. Quite an interal conflict there for poor Sev. Needless to say, he and Harry got off on th wrong foot. Now, about Snape's relationship with Lily: I disagree with the "Snape is a creepy, selfish stalker" theories. Snape was always far too respectful of Lily to be stalker-like except for the one time he called her a "mudblood", which he sooo obviously regreted and only did so in the first place because he was angry and possibly because his Death Eater, pure-blood lovin' friends were watching (if that were the case, I wonder, why didn't they help him out?. Besides, I think that thier relationship was not at all physical;deep down I think he knew he didn't have much of a chance so, their relationship became more Harry/Hermione-like. And most importantly, the reason he was so obsessed was because he felt incredibly guilty for her death. Mind you, I think he always had a little somethin for Lily, but he knew she was married with a son. I'm sure he would have at least tried to move on but after causing her death, he couldn't let it go. He hoped that by having Lily ever present in his thoughts, hopes and desires, he could virtually bring her back or at least ease the pain of her absence. siriurly_severus_snape who thinks the real reason Lily stopped talking with Snape is because she was grossed-out by his very nasty underwear ;) From Schlobin at aol.com Wed Jul 25 06:32:16 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:32:16 -0000 Subject: Umbridge (theory) and Scrimgeour In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172584 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "casmir2012" wrote: > Here's my Umbridge theory... > Do you think that she was so mean because she wore that locket > regularly? It seemed to have an effect on the trio... Goodness, no, I don't think it had any effect on her. Umbridge demonstrated how evil she was in the Order of the Phoenix. Her activities in DH are a logical extension of her character....the real surprise is why she didn't become a Death Eater earlier..... Susan McGee From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 06:43:20 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:43:20 -0000 Subject: Harry and Voldy Related - Techincalities. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172585 --- "sdeepthi" wrote: > > myspacetraveller: > > > I know JKR said that Harry and Voldy were not > > related, but as it turns out they are in fact > > related. Both are descendants of the 3rd Peverell > > brother since he was the only one who had children. > > ... > > > Deepthi: > Sorry if I'm missing something, but can you refer me > to the canon that says that only Ignotus had children? > I assumed that Marvolo must have descended from Cadmus > (the second Peverell brother). > > Thanks, > Deepthi > bboyminn: I'm inclined to agree with Deepthi. Logically the Ring traveled down one line, the Cloak down another, and the Wand pasted from /winner/ to /winner/. Now, I don't recall reading that the Other Peverall brothers had no children, but even if they didn't that doesn't mean they had no inheritors. The Ring could have simply been inherited by another family member, close or distance, and continued down that line to the Gaunts. Further, at least I don't recall, that could have been many many many generations ago. We don't know the age of the Peverall brother who passed the Cloak down to the Potter line. We don't know how wide the family tree spreads. By the time we get down to the level of the youngest Gaunt and Harry, they could be many many branches apart. Note if the tale of 'Three Brothers' has been made into a children's fairytale, we can assume the brothers live a long time ago. Being technically related to someone doesn't mean much. By some long and twisted path I am related to one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence through my fathers side, but at the same time, no member of my direct upward line has ever lived in the USA prior to the 20th Century. I know that sound contradictory, but such is the nature of 'technical' genealogy. Yes, by some technical stretch, Harry and Voldemort were related, but it is like a big and distant stretch. So, distant as to be meaningless. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From distorted_illusion at juno.com Wed Jul 25 06:30:05 2007 From: distorted_illusion at juno.com (kodeendreemz) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:30:05 -0000 Subject: snape - animagus or? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172586 > Diana L. said: > Did anyone > else think that the large bat-shaped object flying away from the > castle after Snape jumped out the window was Snape in his animagus > bat form? ---- I am sorry if this had been already covered. I admit I do not follow this list as closely as I should -guilty smile- Anyhow... although I am unsure anyone can say for sure definitely... do you think Snape actually TRANSFORMS into a large bat? (Animagus) or that he just has the ability to fly? (Like Voldemort does) and he looks like a "large bat" (He has been described as looking this way before, with his demeanor and large swirling black robes) I thought the way the book described the even was too vague ... Anyone have a compelling argument for one or the other? LKH From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Wed Jul 25 06:54:00 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:54:00 -0000 Subject: Snape, mostly (was:Re: My Officially First Deathly Hallows Post!!) In-Reply-To: <65EBBFD7-6960-4554-8A87-0CA8FF36506A@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172587 On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:53 PM, spaebrun wrote: Really the only 'good Slytherin' we learn about in this book was Snape and then this remark to him - it really implied that he should have been a Gryffindor. So we learn that all decent people are Gryffindors at heart, or what? > I was really disappointed that the whole sorting thing was never really questioned. Book 5 talks so much about uniting the houses, and what do we get? 3 houses against Slytherin. Bad message. *sigh* --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maeg wrote: Not only a bad message, but inconsistent within the themes of the series. That really bugged me. > I had always expected some sort of final scene where we learn that Hogwarts is no longer divided, that it's gone back to how it was in the beginning, and Salazar Slytherin is redeemed. Perhaps with the Hogwarts banner -- four quadrants, each devoted to one house -- to symbolize a final unity? > Maeg > Marika: I had also expected the houses to be united at the end. I always thought that Snape would be the one make this possible. His friendship with Lily would have made a perfect parallell to the fact that once Slytherin and Gryffidor had been the best of friends, but when Slytherin no longer wanted to teach muggleborns it ended.(I can't remember which book this is from, but the Sorting Hat sings a song about it.) Now these parallell stories has the same ending. Too bad... From shagufta_naazpk2000 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 06:56:33 2007 From: shagufta_naazpk2000 at yahoo.com (shagufta_naazpk2000) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:56:33 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172588 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > Betsy Hp: > Wishful thinking I'm afraid. No healing for the WW. Where Anne > Frank was able to look at the world around her and think, "I know in > my heart that people are good" (or words to that effect), JKR > apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know in my > heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half of them > > are okay, and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates in >> a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. So you think the world is made up of good people and only good people? This world of ours where murder and torture and terrorism are a sad reality - this world is made up of good people? I think JK is spot on - the world is made up of the good and the evil and in her words (roughly paraphrasing) all we can do is fight the evil again and again and yet again, until perhpas, one day, it becomes too weak to take over. That's the message of the books IMO, and a wonderful message for our times. Shagufta > Betsy Hp > From karen.eidukas at googlemail.com Wed Jul 25 06:50:32 2007 From: karen.eidukas at googlemail.com (karen.eidukas@ntlworld.com eidukas) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:50:32 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Talking Portraits In-Reply-To: <46A6D8F5.4020909@wayswriter.com> References: <46A6D8F5.4020909@wayswriter.com> Message-ID: <49312c440707242350q494a317u9b26f8a6c7fb4f1a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172589 Harry has photos of his parents...not portraits. it's the portraits that do the talking, photos just wave and so on. Karen From ag0991 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 07:16:48 2007 From: ag0991 at aol.com (siriusly_severus_snape) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:16:48 -0000 Subject: Umbridge (theory) and Scrimgeour In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172590 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "casmir2012" wrote: > Scrimgeour irritated me from the off, and I cringed when I had to > read his scenes; however, he redeemed himself to me when he took > Harry's secret location with him to his grave....or did he? Those > DE's showed up awfully quickly at the wedding after killing him. I would like to suggest that you re-read page 206. Scrimgeour may very well have told the Death Eaters the location of the wedding, since it was being the attended by many members of the Order of the Pheonix I dare say it would have been of interest to them. But, it was Harry's whereabouts they tried to torture out of the minister, therefore he did not give Harry away. Also, I do think you will agree that Umbridge was rather mean (to put it nicely) before anyone (but Kreacher, of course) knew of the locket. You may have a point however, it may have improved her already ::cough:: very pleasant nature. siriusly_severus_snape From ag0991 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 07:35:12 2007 From: ag0991 at aol.com (siriusly_severus_snape) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:35:12 -0000 Subject: inconsistency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172591 > LL: > Still catching up on all posts-- forgive if this is a repeat, > but how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had > an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point > was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? Truly, I think the Elder Wand gives the bearer confidence (or in Voldemort's case, overconfidence) more so than giving extraordinary magical power. True, it must be a very powerful wand: it repaired Harry's pheonix wand when none other could. but, this is all IMO. I think the real factor is that Grindelwald made some stupid mistake like Voldemort in his final duel. Voldemort could have easily killed Harry if he hadn't given himself Harry's blood or if he used another wand or if he simply set Nagini after Harry. But, no... Voldemort had to be an arrogant moron. I'm inclined to think that Grindelwald made the same sort of mistake. siriusly_severus_snape From mariabronte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 08:10:29 2007 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:10:29 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prince=92s_Tale?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172592 Marika wrote: > Snape died before the last battle without even knowing if his > efforts (to help Harry survive and conquer Voldemort) had been for > nothing or if they actually made a difference. The last word spoken >(yelled) to him from a member of the Order was Minerva calling him a > coward (before he turned himself into a bat). In my point of view > he had deserved to be recogised for who he really was and for all > he had done before he died. The knowledge that he would go down in > history as a brave and heroic man had probably made him pleased. Mari now: I'd like to offer a bit of comfort, based on something I am pretty sure we can assume from previous canon. Remember, Snape was a HEADMASTER of Hogwarts. Although Harry looks for Dumbledore, not Snape when he returns to the office, presumably at some stage a portrait of Snape would appear. It's not the same as being alive, and knowing what has happened, but if he has a portrait in the office I am sure he'd be told by someone that his mission was accomplished. Also remember Harry has cleared Snape publicly before this, so if McGonagall or any other teachers in the school wish to do so they can communicate with his portrait in the office as well. I think its pretty likely that they did :-) Marika again: > And I can't believe that Hogwarts (in the Epilogue) kept sorting people > into Houses. Not because Voldemort suggested that Slytherin was the > only necessary house to keep, but for the same reason that Dumbledore > told Snape that sometimes he thought it was too early to sort at the > age of 11(DH p. 545), but I wish to add that besides being too early > it also prevents Slytherins to choose the good path. The parts of you > that are bad will grow worse since people around you are not very > good. To me is seems like ending up in Slytherin is like spending time > in prison (where serious criminals influence the less serious ones to > become even worse) - but before you actually have comitted any crimes. Mari again: I absolutely concur with this, and have set out in a previous post my conviction that the Epilogue gives us reason to hope that the generation of children attending Hogwarts nineteen years later might be less likely to automatically judge Slytherins as bad. Slytherin House itself was never the problem, its the PERCEPTION of it being full of dark wizards that causes people like Severus Snape to decide that if that's what people believe of him anyway, why not *be* what people *believe* that you are. Yes, this was a wrong choice, and very hard to redeem. Nevertheless, Snape's courage shows most of all in the fact that throughout the series he has unwaveringly walked the path he knew was set out for him, difficult though it might be, cost what it might, because he knew it was the right thing to do, even if it was anything but easy. From nightmasque at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 07:27:12 2007 From: nightmasque at yahoo.com (Feng Zengkun) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:27:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <568312.72416.qm@web52603.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172593 Betsy Hp: > JKR > apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know in my > heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half of them > are okay, and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates > in a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. Shagufta: > So you think the world is made up of good people and only good > people? This world of ours where murder and torture and terrorism > are a sad reality - this world is made up of good people? > > I think JK is spot on - the world is made up of the good and the > evil and in her words (roughly paraphrasing) all we can do is > fight the evil again and again and yet again, until perhpas, one > day, it becomes too weak to take over. > > That's the message of the books IMO, and a wonderful message for > our times. nightmasque at yahoo.com writes: I don't think that was the point at all. I think the point Betsy was making was that it was simplistic of Rowling to divide the good and bad people into Gryffindors and Slytherins respectively; to use your analogy, it would be like saying all Slytherins are terrorists, and all Gryffindors are defendors of liberty and freedom and all that good stuff. It has been pointed out elsewhere that all the Slytherins who were on the 'good side' so to speak were given ulterior motives for doing so, i.e. Snape's was Lily. I myself can't think of (m)any Slytherins who were shown to be on the good side (mainly) because they were good innately; therefore the message of this book at least seemed to be that Slytherin = Bad, no exceptions. Which IS an ugly message to be putting out there. This however is slightly mitigated by the otherwise atrocious epilogue, when Harry doesn't seem to mind if his son is sorted into Slytherin. But one paragraph does not alleviate an entire book's / series's ugliness. nightmasque at yahoo.com From lisa at lisapeake.org Wed Jul 25 08:51:45 2007 From: lisa at lisapeake.org (lisa.peake) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:51:45 -0000 Subject: DH: Life lessons on grief, gratitude, coming of age Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172594 Hello Grownups, I just finished DH and before you begin to doubt my loyalty, know that I am in an intensive 28 day professional seminar, so the only time I could steal away for Harry happened in the middle of the night. I not only liked the book (even the epilogue, though a bit surreal and rosy next to the rest of the book), I found it deeply meaningful, even healing. Here is my post about what the whole HP series meant to me, in the context of my own growing up and losses in my life. These are lessons that I find easiest to communicate with grownup language, but truly I believe kids "get it" as well as we do, if not better. http://www.lisapeake.org/archives/36-The-Lessons-of-Harry-Potter.html Would love your comments, particularly to know if you took away any life's lessons that were different from my own. LP From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 09:24:59 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:24:59 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <143063.73922.qm@web60912.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172595 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Gina M. Gerwell" wrote: > > > kslmoran: > > I have to say that the fate of Ron and Hermione was in the forefront > > of my wanting to read this book. > I would have personally liked to see Harry "whisking Ginny in his arms" or something throughout the duration of the book, other than Ginny's stolen b-day kiss. > percchick > It's funny how people read things so differently! Ron and Hermione have never been believable to me, and for the most part they've always come across simply as two friends who are generally awkward with each other. I think JKR's distance from them showed up quite awfully in TDH because their kiss was so poorly presented and felt like it was thrown in because everyone was expecting them to kiss sooner or later. There was no dialogue showing a developing tenderness or understanding between them, there were no warm exchanges that I noticed, and I didn't for a moment feel they had much going on below the 'bickering friends' relationship. I was disappointed by it, and far from convinced. As for Harry and Ginny, I have no idea where their love came from or how it grew. To start with, Ginny had an awe struck crush on Harry in book 2, then it drifted away for her new boyfriend and very little happens except for a few walks in the horrible book 5 or 6, and suddenly by book 7 all is well with their world? I'm sorry but there's no way I buy that , and in my view the portrayal of the love interest side of HP world wasn't an area JKR felt comfortable with at all otherwise it would have been far better portrayed. You have to look far and wide in all 7 books for those feel good moments when any of the characters were at ease or feeling comfortable with their apparent 'beloved.' I think the romantic side should have been an important and significant aspect in the last few books because it would have showed the emotional development of the characters beyond the combative "all wands blazing" fights and arguments. Instead of Hermione thumping Ron during the dullest and most uninspired part of DH (when Ron returns to the camp thanks to the embarrassingly convenient glowing light) they should have had a flare up followed by a heart to heart telling of their feelings, or at least a display of genuine vulnerability rather than a burst of hotheaded anger. I don't regard JKR as a romantic writer, I think there's a hard streak in her that shys away from it. Had the heartfelt angle been picked up more, and given me more reasons to feel close to the characters, I'd have rated the whole series a lot higher. But that's just my view! Sandra x. From kelticpete at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 09:07:35 2007 From: kelticpete at yahoo.com (Pete Z) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:07:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A fine meal, and afterwards, terrible coconut pie! Message-ID: <9723.52023.qm@web82909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172596 The epilogue: I liked the children's names: very British of them to honor the dead that way. The epilogue is just how the real world is. You may win the Olympics or be the man that killed Hitler, but usually, you spend your time doing what you have to, wiping noses, sending kids to college. Real life is DULL. What did you want, a new bad guy? Also a normal life with love in it is all Harry ever wanted, let him have it. Having to be polite to Draco is how things are in the real world. if the person you dislike does not get convicted or you decide not to sue him, then you just get over it. I found the epilogue short and banal. Which is fine. Life is banal, and the point is that after the greatness, harry willingly accepts mundanity. Hating the epilogue and saying that seems rude. It is like being served a great meal and then during dessert saying "What!I hate coconut pie! I object." If one were an editor, or even a book reviewer, it might be acceptable. but seriously, as a fan? Pete From guzuguzu at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 09:29:08 2007 From: guzuguzu at yahoo.com (guzuguzu) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:29:08 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prince=92s_Tale?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172597 Mari wrote: > I'd like to offer a bit of comfort, based on something I am pretty > sure we can assume from previous canon. Remember, Snape was a > HEADMASTER of Hogwarts. Although Harry looks for Dumbledore, not > Snape when he returns to the office, presumably at some stage a > portrait of Snape would appear. Maybe. Snape was a Ministry-appointed Headmaster, right? Is there a portrait of Umbridge in the Headmaster's office? It's not mentioned either way, but when Harry walks in to all the applause and tears of the portraits at the end, I think Umbridge's would have stood out, had it been there; it wouldn't have been too happy. Also, in HBP, Dumbledore's portait appears in the office almost immediately after he dies (though his picture is asleep). Based on that, I am not convinced a portait of Snape would appear in the Headmaster's Office. guzu From guzuguzu at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 09:31:04 2007 From: guzuguzu at yahoo.com (guzuguzu) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:31:04 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172598 With reference to DH, the Prince's Tale: Does anyone else find it completely implausible that that Harry would not have known if Snape and Lily were "best friends" for at least five years of their lives? Especially since they both hated James? It could not have escaped the Marauders who the Griffindor girls of their year hung around with, especially if they were hanging around with "slimy git" Slytherns, yet Sirius and Lupin never mention this fact to Harry, though they had several good places to do it: First, in GoF, when the trio meets Sirius in his cave, they discuss whether Snape is to be trusted. Sirius says that while in school, Snape hung with a gang of Slythern friends who all turned out to be Death Eaters, and then he actually ticks off a list Snape's school friends. No mention of Lily. Of course, Lily wasn't a Death Eater, but it indicates that Sirius knew exactly who Snape's friends were. Second, in OotP, after Snape's Worst Memory (where we learn that his "mudblood" comment is what caused Lily to completely end their friendship), Harry has a fireplace talk with both Sirius and Lupin. They discuss, at length, the relationships between James and Lily, and James and Snape. No mention that Snape and Lily even knew each other. Are we meant to believe that James had a crush on Lily, who had been good friends with Snape since before they came to Hogwarts and yet James and Snape hated each other "just because"? It seems ridiculous that the Lily-Snape connection would not come up. Third, in HBP, at Christmas Lupin and Harry discuss again Snape and whether or not Snape is trustworthy, and Lupin actually spends a page of text defending Snape. I think the fact that his mother was best friends with him for years would have made a good justification to trust him, yet Lupin doesn't mention it. So, I wonder what Rowling was thinking? Was it that Snape's perspective led us (and Harry) to believe that he and Lily were better friends than they were? Lily actually agrees that they are "best friends", so that doesn't seem right. Maybe they were meant to be secret friends? However it's really not presented that way in Snape's memories at all. I am truly inclined to think it was that Rowling did not decide the exact nature of the Snape-Lily friendship through until she was in the middle of writing DH, but I welcome any theories to explain this. guzu From kelticpete at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 09:10:22 2007 From: kelticpete at yahoo.com (Pete Z) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:10:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: The best misunderstanding so far (spoilers) Message-ID: <662741.48137.qm@web82913.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172599 I forgot that earlier in the book, Hermione told Harry that remorse could fix a broken soul/horcrux situation. So when Harry asked Voldemort if he had remorse, I thought the wrong thing. I thought he was trying to spare voldemort from dying and spending all eternity as a scared, crumpled up little boy, cringing in fear. Maybe he meant that as well. Some nargle on beliefnet said that Harry Potter was not like Jesus. I thought of that when harry slowly and deliberately took off his cloak, to die that so many might live. pax, Pete From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 09:38:26 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:38:26 -0000 Subject: A fine meal, and afterwards, terrible coconut pie! In-Reply-To: <9723.52023.qm@web82909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172600 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pete Z wrote: > > The epilogue: > The epilogue is just how the real world is. > If one were an editor, or even a book reviewer, it > might be acceptable. but seriously, as a fan? > > Pete > True, but that's another glaring omission from JKR. I always wondered what on earth the characters could do after leaving Hogwarts, and she never said a word about their lives. I started a thread on this a year or so ago, and the best anyone came up with was Dragon Tickler, or something along those lines - no-one had a clue but faith was given that JKR would mention something for Harry. But instead, she thought of nothing because there was never a point to Hogwarts existing in the first place. This bothered me about book one, all those years ago. A child is summoned to Hogwarts to learn about magic and will leave 7 years later with qualifications appropriate for the mock medieval world of magicland, and although they can return to Muggleworld as and when they please (somehow) they're trained for absolutely nothing in that Muggleland and thus have to get by (should they prefer it to Magic Town) doing either jobs where a CV is not required, or Confunding everyone into believeing they're qualified at something which they're not. I was looking forward to JKR coming up with a role for Harry, Hermione, Ron and the others, even a vague suggestion would have been fun, but nothing was offered up. So other than being a dad, what exactly IS Harry, the grown up child-hero of the world "19 years later"? Or Ginny, or Draco. They can't all work for the Ministry or sell magical things from magical shops to magical people. There was never a point to Hogwarts existing and therefore the HP world, and now that book 7 has gone without any suggestion of their lives beyond studying odd subjects, I'm left feeling empty about it all. Sandra, not too happy. From h.m.s at mweb.co.za Wed Jul 25 10:00:58 2007 From: h.m.s at mweb.co.za (H.M.S) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:00:58 +0200 Subject: inconsistency? Message-ID: <64cblj$s46dg@mail-04.jhb.wbs.co.za> No: HPFGUIDX 172601 Still catching up on all posts-- forgive if this is a repeat, > but how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had > an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point > was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? Grindelwald STOLE the Elder wand from Gregovitch (sp?) (the wandmaker who made Krum's wand) The Elder wand is unbeatable when it is FORCED into allegiance with a new owner ie the old owner is defeated - presumably in a duel. D/D DEFEATED Grindelwald and so had mastery over the wand. Mouldy Vort thought Snape had defeated D/D and that by killing Snape he would then have mastery over the wand - but D/D had already been defeated by Draco at the top of the tower when he managed to get D/D's wand away from him. Harry then defeated Draco at Malfoy Manor, therefore he was the true master of the Elder wand. Harry intends to end the wand's power by re-burying it with D/D, not advertise that he had mastered the wand and by dying a natural death eventually. Sharon - South Africa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 09:55:36 2007 From: fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com (fitzchivalryhk) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:55:36 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172602 lupinlore: > Sorry, I don't buy for one minute that DD had a loving, > paternal relationship with Snape, or that Snape regarded > Dumbledore as an archon of light and goodness that he > followed as the way to general moral redemption. > You are right that Dumbledore feels pity and compassion > for Snape, as shown in the episode with the doe. This in > no way negates the other aspects of this layered and deep > relationship -- a relationship that resists being reduced > to a simple positive reading, or indeed a totally negative > one. fitz: Actually, I partly agree with your interpretation on Snape / Dumbledore relationship, that it is multi-layered and not as loving as that of the one between Harry and Dumbledore. However, I do not think this can be reduced into a "simple negative" one as well. The evidence you and Leslie provided above shows that there is affection and caring between Snape and Dumbledore, as well as manipulation and calculation. Yet, is it that much different from the way Dumbledore treat Harry? Remember, Dumbledore was not entirely sure if Harry will survive after he willingly let himself be killed by Voldemort, but he had no hesitation in pushing Harry to face Voldy. Does this mean Dumbledore has no love for Harry as well? Dumbledore is just a ruthless general. No matter how much he loves someone (even himself), he is still ready to sacrifice that person for "the greater good". lupinlore: > Absolutely! Snape's fate is satisfying and fits well with the > demands of moral and karmic justice. The multiple levels of > irony that fold around it make it all the more satisfying and > amusing. > Lupinlore, who chuckles every time he rereads the Snape / > Dumbledore interactions in DH and says to all of those who > find Dumbledore to be a jerk -- "YES! And Snape richly > deserves every jibe and criticism." fitz: Delighting in the agony of others, and approval in the ruthless use of one human as a pig for slaughter, as long as they deserve it. Now I see why Umbridge can be so self-righteous when she's ordered Harry to use the self-cutting quill on himself, because in her opinion, Harry deserved it. From distorted_illusion at juno.com Wed Jul 25 09:46:33 2007 From: distorted_illusion at juno.com (kodeendreemz) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:46:33 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172603 Sandra wrote: > I don't regard JKR as a romantic writer, I think there's a > hard streak in her that shys away from it. Had the heartfelt > angle been picked up more, and given me more reasons to feel > close to the characters, I'd have rated the whole series a > lot higher. No, I totally agree with you. JKR sucks at romance. For one... I do not get all the Hermione/Ron shippers. It is not normal in my opinion to constantly bicker with your crush... Usually people put on their BEST behavior when trying to win the one they love. Their bickering reminded me of brother/sister relationships. Not that of people who are fond of one another. Ron was such a prat through the whole series I don't see how anyone could even Like him. This coming from a Snape/Hermione shipper, I admit. Still, Ron was a complete arsehole- he was never redeemed in my books. And the Harry/Ginny was creepy. I like H/G... I'll admit I wanted them to end up together... but JKR constantly talking about Harry apprieciating a girl who didn't cry (unnormal... everyone cries) and the infatuation with his mother (he wanted to FEAST upon her image) made the ship entirely creepy. There wasnt enough true buildup.... No connectionof souls so to speak. JKR's blatant lack of understanding human Sexuality killed the whole story for me. I was sorely dissapointed that she could delve into the aspects of Torture and other deeply disturbing human emotions.. yet she couldnt touch sexuality with a ten foot pole. LKH From drcarole71 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 10:14:15 2007 From: drcarole71 at yahoo.com (drcarole71) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:14:15 -0000 Subject: Epilogue as snitch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172604 The epilogue is the most elusive Golden Snitch of all. Did JKR catch it? It really doesn't matter. She has played so hard and so well as a gifted Seeker for many years. The geme has been won; let's hoist her up on our shoulders and have a party! From leahstill at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 10:34:56 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:34:56 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172605 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" > houyhnhnm: > > I thought the epilogue was Rowling at her most > Austenesque. Here is what the late critic Mark > Schorer had to say about the ending of _Pride and > Prejudice_: > > >>The movement of these individual human beings > exists, of course, within a larger movement, that > of the whole world about them. Not everything in > that world is happy at the end. The Bennets are > left with their entailed estate. Mrs. Bennet, like > the life force, will persist as foolishly as > ever . . . The gaunt spector of Lady Catherine > has not been laid . . . Pride and predjudice have > not departed from the world. And Jane Austen need > not have feared: hers is a moral relativism, and > the world is not intolerably bright by any means. > Still, it is brighter.<< > > Similarly, not everything in the Wiazarding World > is happy at the end. The sorting goes on. The > rivalry between the houses goes on. Gryffindors > and Slytherins still dislike and mistrust one another. > Draco and Harry nod curtly to each other, but they > are not friends. No doubt, the house elves are still > enslaved. The Ministry of Magic is as undemocratic > as ever. Other magical beings are not recognized > as equals by wizards, despite Grawp and the last > minute aid of the Centaurs. Still, that world is > brighter. Voldemort is gone. A new Dark Lord has > not yet arisen. Harry's scar has not pained him for > nineteen years. All is well (for the time being.) Leah: I found that a rather odd critique of Austen actually; Pride and Prejudice is a comedy of manners. I've certainly never read it in the expectation that the union of Elizabeth and Darcy is going to bring about profound, or indeed any, social change or that individual behaviour will be altered by it. However, that expectation has been raised in the Potterverse. We have had SPEW and the Fountain of Magical Creatures, and the centuars and in this book, Griphook. I wouldn't expect a whoopedy- do world after Voldemort's defeat, with all house elves liberated overnight, but I would have expected some sort of abolition movement. I would have expected some evidence of a change in mindset. It would be wrong and ridiculous to suggest that there was no more racial discrimination in Europe once the Nazis had been defeated. But there was that change in mindset. In the 1930s, it was acceptable for well known public figures, not just politicians but eg writers, to express anti-Semitic sentiments. It is no longer acceptable. The world is far from perfect, as always, but something has moved on. Similarly, in England in the sixteenth century, the torturing to death of animals for public entertainment was a good laugh. It isn't today. There is still cruelty to animals, but again the mindset has altered. I would just liked to have seen some evidence of that change taking place. It wasn't there. And then there's the whole Slytherin problem. From Hagrid in book one onwards, Slytherin has been the despised, the evil house; it's been reinforced in every book. Even in DH, DD doesn't say, "You've been a brave chap,Severus, there must be good in Slytherin", it's "we sort too soon", ie. you should have been a Gryffindor, mate (and Pettigrew presumably in Slytherin). As others have pointed out, no Slytherin student is named as fighting with Harry. If Slytherin is indeed so corrupt and hopeless, why does it still exist? Or why hasn't it been renamed Snape House and reformed? We're talking about changing a school system here, not the world. Harry's behaviour in the epilogue is totally inconsistent. He whispers to Albus Severus that it won't matter to the Potters if their son is in Slytherin. But if Slytherin is what it seems to be, it should matter. On the other hand, if Harry believes that Snape's life and death make Slytherin worthy of equal treatment, then why does he whisper this, and not shout it out? Why has he allowed one son to taunt the other all summer with the threat of being in Slytherin, without apparently doing anything to stop him? If the septology had just been about the defeat of Voldemort, the mythic overcoming of good by evil, I wouldn't mind. This would be as you say, an individual victory and the world goes on unchanged. However expectations on the social level have been raised throughout the book and there is no delivery of them at the end. If Harry had said to Albus Severus, go ahead, be in Slytherin, do things there we can be proud of, then one could see things being done quietly, as in the epilogue to 'Middlemarch': 'the growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts'. I wanted to see that in the epilogue, and I didn't. Leah From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 11:01:03 2007 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:01:03 -0000 Subject: My Thoughts on Deathly Hallows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172606 There were a lot of things that I liked, and a lot that I didn't. I can't really write anything in depth now because I'm still mourning... Fred's death. The horcrux hunt was endless. It would have been a lot more interesting to read about what was going on at the school. I didn't know that opening the Chamber of Secrets was so easy. Apparently, all you have to do is hiss like a snake. lol Why was it important that Ginny was a powerful witch, the only daughter in the Weasley family, and the seventh child? IT WASN'T Wormtail's death made me laugh. Fred, Tonks, and Lupin's death made me sick. Poor Teddy Ruxpin Lupin I hated when Hermione was tortured. And I get the feeling that Dumbledore's sister was raped. This is a great kids' book, no really. Albus Severus and Scorpius? LOL (Fans are already writing fanfic for this ship. It's called the ASS ship.) I knew that Dumbledore had a checkered past. Freakin Puppet Master JKR has a sick sense of humor. She told Dan that she was going to make him as naked as possible in book 7 because of his role in Equus. And she did. *snickers* She also seems to have felt bad for the Hermione/Harry shippers because she gave them a moment in the book. Yes, Voldemort ships HG/HP. LOL The Harry/Draco shippers probably loved the broomstick ride scene. :p Ginny almost gave her virginity to Harry in book seven. SLUT! (I'm kidding. lol) I thought Voldemort destroyed the sorting hat? And then it shows up again in the epilogue. I think Voldemort had the right idea (except for the wrong reasons) to destroy that thing. That hat has no business complaining about disunity in the school when its job is to cause it. The fight scenes were good. I LOVE NEVILLE! The moms rocked in this book! Molly and Narcissa were awesome! (I liked that Narcissa and Lucius were worried about Draco. ) I think that JKR should have had a few Slytherins help in the final battle. I think this was a big mistake. Wasn't there one Slytherin kid JKR mentioned could think for himself? Was it Nott? I can't wait to see Snape fighting Minerva in the seventh movie. Wow. Snape turned out to be all emo. Someone please tell me that the "golden snitch" wasn't a metaphor for Snape. (I need an icon for this, or some aspirin.) I like how JKR solved the problem of Emma's bad acting abilities. Just write a bunch of scenes where Helena Bonham Carter gets to play Hermione playing Bellatrix. The epilogue sucked. This is what she kept for fifteen years? It needed to be at least 30 pages. What happened to George, Luna and everyone else? God, I miss Fred. From CariadMel at aol.com Wed Jul 25 11:13:15 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:13:15 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172607 How I agree with much of what Leah wrote here. I was expecting a far more rounded picture of the WW post the Battle for Hogwarts. What has it all been for? The pleas of the Sorting Hat for House Unity seem to have fallen on deaf ears. Slytherins are still the bad guys,worse still now, they are positively the untouchables! For all JK's promotion of House-elf rights, parity for non-wizard magical folk and acceptance of Muggle-borns/Half-bloods,there is still prejudice towards Slytherins. Instead of a pithy epilogue,there should have been a chapter, as in all previous books, where a feast was held to bring everyone together.There Harry could have stepped into DD's shoes and addressed the Hall; a moment to honour the fallen, to explain the purpose of his 'chosen lfe' and his debt to Snape. I feel to leave the ending as it was, Harry sloping off to eat a sandwich in the dorm, was shocking. It smacked of, "well, I've done my bit to save the world, so what?" The 7th book was an exciting ride,an adventure, but spoiled by the "happy ever after". --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > > > > Leah: > > > >SNIP.... I wouldn't expect a whoopedy- > do > world after Voldemort's defeat, with all house elves liberated > overnight, but I would have expected some sort of abolition > movement. I would have expected some evidence of a change in > mindset. SNIP > > And then there's the whole Slytherin problem. From Hagrid in book > one onwards, Slytherin has been the despised, the evil house; it's > been reinforced in every book. Even in DH, DD doesn't say, "You've > been a brave chap,Severus, there must be good in Slytherin", > it's "we sort too soon", ie. you should have been a Gryffindor, mate > (and Pettigrew presumably in Slytherin). As others have pointed > out, no Slytherin student is named as fighting with Harry. If > Slytherin is indeed so corrupt and hopeless, why does it still > exist? Or why hasn't it been renamed Snape House and reformed? > We're talking about changing a school system here, not the world. > Harry's behaviour in the epilogue is totally inconsistent. He > whispers to Albus Severus that it won't matter to the Potters if > their son is in Slytherin. But if Slytherin is what it seems to be, > it should matter. On the other hand, if Harry believes that Snape's > life and death make Slytherin worthy of equal treatment, then why > does he whisper this, and not shout it out? Why has he allowed one > son to taunt the other all summer with the threat of being in > Slytherin, without apparently doing anything to stop him? > > If the septology had just been about the defeat of Voldemort, the > mythic overcoming of good by evil, I wouldn't mind. This would be > as you say, an individual victory and the world goes on unchanged. > However expectations on the social level have been raised throughout > the book and there is no delivery of them at the end. If Harry had > said to Albus Severus, go ahead, be in Slytherin, do things there we > can be proud of,...SNIP > From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 11:18:50 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:18:50 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172608 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "AmanitaMuscaria" wrote: > > > Yes, Ron's sudden ability to impersonate > > Parseltongue was lame. > > I don't find it lame at all, not even a little! Yes Ron couldn't > discuss the subtleties of Ludwig Wittgenstein's philosophy in > Parseltongue as Harry could, but he did know one word of the language, > just one word, "open"; he knew that word because he heard a very good > friend of his say it. I mean, would it stretch your mental capacities > to the breaking point to learn ONE word of Chinese? Couldn't you > manage one word? > > Eggplant > Eggplant - No, it would not stretch my intellectual capacities, but as it's a language with no links, connections, or soundsystem common to English, it would probably stretch my vocal abilities to the extent that the word might not mean what I wanted it to in Chinese. Parseltongue is noted, by Ron, as being very rare. As far as I remember, Ron heard Harry say 'open' once in Parseltongue, in Moaning Myrtle's bathroom. Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Jul 25 11:25:56 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:25:56 -0000 Subject: I'm Glad We did not Get all the Answers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172609 I'm Glad We did not Get all the Answers Did I want to hear what was in the locked room, or Lily and James' professions, or who does magic late in life (unless it was Merope in book 6,) or all the rest? Of course I did! I am glad, however, that JKR had the courage to follow the story as it took on a life of its own. The worst thing an author can do to a good story is twist it out of its natural shape, damaging the credibility. I think no author can resist that temptation entirely, but if it is only done here or there, for very good reasons, it doesn't limit the story. All of those things we were going to find out were, I'm sure, on JKR's fully-intended list of things to display or reveal in DH. The story, it seems, had other ideas, and took her where the only way she could have inserted them was to twist the story out of its natural track, when it was rolling along like the Hogwarts Express. I am hoping we'll get answers directly from JKR on them, but in the meantime, I'm glad she had the courage to write the best story possible -- even if it did not have everything in it she thought it would have. Me 'ats off to you, my lady. Vivamus From need_to_sleep_now at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 11:29:16 2007 From: need_to_sleep_now at yahoo.co.uk (need_to_sleep_now) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:29:16 -0000 Subject: Talking Portraits In-Reply-To: <49312c440707242350q494a317u9b26f8a6c7fb4f1a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172610 But what confuses me is does that mean Dumbledore is not really dead? If it's possible to have a conversation with him then, as long as the portrait exists, he could still be headmaster really, couldn't he? It doesn't make sense to me! need_to_sleep_now From doppioprego at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 11:32:26 2007 From: doppioprego at yahoo.co.uk (doppioprego) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:32:26 -0000 Subject: Nagini and the Invisibililty Cloak - thoughts? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172611 I have spent the whole morning catching up on the posts and nowhere can I see mentioned Nagini's ability to see through the cloak. In Godric's Hollow, Nagini (as Bathilda) was able to see, recognise and beckon Harry to come into the house, despite the fact he and Hermione were under the cloak AND disguised as a middle-aged couple. In the Shrieking Shack during the Voldemort/Snape showdown she is shown is floating around in the bubble whilst Snape repeatedly asks Voldy to 'let me bring you the boy'. Why would Nagini not have spotted Harry hiding under the cloak and told Voldy of this? Would have spared an awful lot of time and magical effort in destroying the Hogwarts castle to root him out. Forgive me if I am remembering inaccurately (I don't have the book to hand and have only read it the once). I'd be interested to hear your views. Dee, a long-time lurker but first time poster From mariabronte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 11:52:41 2007 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:52:41 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prince=92s_Tale?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172612 guzu wrote: Maybe. Snape was a Ministry-appointed Headmaster, right? Is there a portrait of Umbridge in the Headmaster's office? It's not mentioned either way, but when Harry walks in to all the applause and tears of the portraits at the end, I think Umbridge's would have stood out, had it been there; it wouldn't have been too happy. Mari again: Well, I see Snape's situation as different. Yes, he was appointed by the ministry, who was effectively controlled by Voldemort. However, because of his actual loyalty to Dumbledore, he had access to the same office that Dumbledore and the other legitimate headmasters and mistresses had used, and interacted with their portraits. A major purpose of having the portraits there is to give advice to new incumbents. If you remember, Umbridge, because she was NOT actually loyal to the school or acting in its best interests, was not able to gain access to the office at all. She had to continue to use her own office, not Dumbledore's. It looks as if the magic operates to shut out any headmaster or headmistress who does not have the legitimate right to be there. Remember DUMBLEDORE wanted Snape to watch over things at Hogwarts, and perhaps he thought the best way Snape could do this was by being Headmaster. He was, after all, Dumbledore's right hand man. He could continue to get advice from Dumbledore's portrait. Snape even used 'Dumbledore' as the password to gain access to the office! The above suggests that even if it is not canon, it is *possible* that a portrait of Snape would exist in the office. After all, it doesn't seem that Phineas Nigellus was a perfect headmaster while he was alive, if the behaviour of his portrait is anything to go by. He nevertheless has a portrait in the collection. From snosageau at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 11:53:43 2007 From: snosageau at hotmail.com (snosageau) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:53:43 -0000 Subject: About Potterwatch In-Reply-To: <382739.43115.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172613 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Metylda wrote: > I also thought it was odd that Ron, who had listened > to the show previously, was finally figuring out who > was who on the show. It really seemed like a light > bulb was going on over his head as he listened to > it... > > bamf ___________________________________________________________________________________ I took Ron's reaction more as a bit of excitement - he wanted to make sure Harry and Hermione were aware of who everyone was seeing as this was his 'discovery' & something H&H knew nothing about previously. (the way Harry keeps having to remind him that they recognise the voices too) Rebecca From krisasselin at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 11:59:02 2007 From: krisasselin at yahoo.com (Kristine Carlson Asselin) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:59:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows Message-ID: <112941.54917.qm@web84102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172614 I normally lurk in this group, but had to respond to this topic. Ron and Hermione are my two favorite characters and I love them dearly. JKR presents their romance through Harry's eyes. He's not going to see a heart-to-heart that R/H might have, so we're not going to see it. I was wondering all throughout the book if we were going to see anything more than the shoulder squeezes, and the concern for each other - because the bottom line is that Ron learned from his fiasco with Lavender, and was not going to repeat it. And R/H have never had that type of touchy - feely friendship, so it would have been incredibly unbelieveable if they had suddenly started groping and snogging one-another in front of Harry. The one thing that I thought might have been missing is that Hermione might have confided in Harry her feelings for Ron during the time that he left -- but then again, she was so mad at Ron at that point, that she wouldn't even say his name. From the first book forward Ron is almost constantly concerned about Hermione's safety (even before he "realized" that he fancied her) and that is amplified in DH. The most heart-wrenching scene for me is the one in Malfoy Manor when Hermione is being tortured - Ron is absolutely beside himself with terror and grief and frustration for not being able to help her. JKR didn't write a romance novel - so you don't see a lot of blatant romance. I think it's believeable (come on, doesn't Ron act exactly like a teenage boy acts? Especially for a boy who had confidence issues? And the scene with his destroying the locket explains why -- he fears that deep down Hermione would prefer Harry -- it's all back to his feeling like second-best. He doesn't feel like he's worth her love). After Ron returns to the tent after leaving them - his confidence changes. He starts to be the leader, he does some pretty amazing things to help his friends. And lastly, I don't believe that the kiss in the ROR was their first kiss -- it's just the first one Harry witnesses. Sorry for the rant -- I'm back to lurking. Kris [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:10:13 2007 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:10:13 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172615 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: (snip)> But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of the I > love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading the book > you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? Ginger admits: Yes, yes I did. I'm not proud of it. I lost it when he was driven out by McG and the other teachers. I would have never believed that he would have a cover that deep. My only thought was "oh, dear, how ever shall I face Alla?" She at least had canon backing her. I had only a love for Snape since he gripped the back of the chair when Ginny got dragged into the chamber. Mine was fantasy, hers was canon. I felt a huge hole in the pit of my stomach as though Snape had betrayed me personally. (Never felt that way about JKR- only Snape.) All the Snape haters can at least say they read Snape the way he was supposed to be read. May I also say, Eggplant, that it was very good to read your post. I had wondered how many people would be willing and able to go on if their expectations were not met. You have read the book objectivly, and modified your opinion once the evidence was fully in and fully considered, that's what it's all about. Not to mention having the intestinal fortitude to post it. Ginger, back after several months of being so far behind that I gave up. From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:14:56 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:14:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] I'm Glad We did not Get all the Answers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <308565.15483.qm@web52712.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172616 vivamus42 wrote: I'm Glad We did not Get all the Answers <<>> I am glad, however, that JKR had the courage to follow the story as it took on a life of its own. The worst thing an author can do to a good story is twist it out of its natural shape, damaging the credibility. I think no author can resist that temptation entirely, but if it is only done here or there, for very good reasons, it doesn't limit the story. All of those things we were going to find out were, I'm sure, on JKR's fully-intended list of things to display or reveal in DH. The story, it seems, had other ideas, and took her where the only way she could have inserted them was to twist the story out of its natural track, when it was rolling along like the Hogwarts Express. I am hoping we'll get answers directly from JKR on them, but in the meantime, I'm glad she had the courage to write the best story possible -- even if it did not have everything in it she thought it would have. Me 'ats off to you, my lady. Vivamus ***Katie Replies:*** 'Ear, 'ear! Quite honestly, it never even occurred to me to not like Deathly Hallows - because I knew that was the story that was supposed to be told. It wasn't up to me to like it or dislike it, at least in a literary way, because it had such momentum. Actually, the whole series has had that momentum - it has almost been like JKR didn't write it, but more transposed it as it was told to her, like a mouthpiece. I think that's why it feels so real - everything that has happened has had that momentum of something that is inevitable. While I can certainly feel grief and sadness for those who died, I feel their deaths were inevitable, because that's the way the story went. Am I phrasing this right? I feel like I'm not actually saying what I'm trying to say... Here's what it is --- This story was already written. It had to go where JKR took it, because that's how it had to be. I don't regret anything that's happened, at least in the sense of feeling like JKR got something wrong, because the story just had to go there. In terms of not getting all the answers, I am also glad that not everything was tied up...leaves room for the imagination...and maybe another book about the WW? Love and Harry, KATIE _,_.___ . --------------------------------- Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:21:11 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <861568.90011.qm@web52711.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172617 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" <<<>>> I mean, would it stretch your mental capacities > to the breaking point to learn ONE word of Chinese? Couldn't you > manage one word? > > Eggplant > <<>> No, it would not stretch my intellectual capacities, but as it's a language with no links, connections, or soundsystem common to English, it would probably stretch my vocal abilities to the extent that the word might not mean what I wanted it to in Chinese. Parseltongue is noted, by Ron, as being very rare. As far as I remember, Ron heard Harry say 'open' once in Parseltongue, in Moaning Myrtle's bathroom. Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria ****Katie:**** I thought the Parseltongue was lame and wierd, too, until I reread. Ron hears Harry say "open" a lot, as Harry is constantly trying to open the snitch. In fact, if Ron and Hermione hadn't picked up on how to say that one word, that would have been strange. I think it works. Katie . --------------------------------- Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:21:40 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:21:40 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <568312.72416.qm@web52603.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172618 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > JKR apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know > > in my heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half > > of them are okay, and there's one quarter that's just > > unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates > > in a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. > >>Shagufta: > > So you think the world is made up of good people and only good > > people? This world of ours where murder and torture and terrorism > > are a sad reality - this world is made up of good people? > > Betsy Hp: I think it's impossible to decide someone is going to be a terroist and a murderer at age eleven. Unless they're a sociopath of some sort, and I believe that's pretty rare. Or at least, should be rare enough to not make up a quarter of a school's population. (And then some. Ravenclaw is a fairly questionable house too. And Hufflepuff ain't great. Really, it's the golden Gryffindors who everyone else should fall before and worhip.) However, that's not how JKR sees it. Some (few) people are good, some are bad, and that can easily be determined by a magical hat at age eleven. And once that determination has been made there's no need to look at actions. If a Slytherin throws a Crucio or Imperius at someone, well, he's Slytherin so what do you expect. If a Gryffindor does the same, well he's Gryffindor so there's a noble purpose behind it. Oh, and of course, once the Sorting is done, that's it. There is no hope for change. > >>nightmasque at ... writes: > I don't think that was the point at all. I think the > point Betsy was making was that it was simplistic of > Rowling to divide the good and bad people into > Gryffindors and Slytherins respectively; to use your > analogy, it would be like saying all Slytherins are > terrorists, and all Gryffindors are defendors of > liberty and freedom and all that good stuff. Betsy Hp: Yes, that's it exactly. Basically JKR is showing us that not only *can* you judge a child as to how good a human being he or she is at a young age, you *should* judge them. Oh, and they can never change. Actions don't matter. (The rare exceptions are only there to prove the rule.) > >>nightmasque at ...: > This however is slightly mitigated by the otherwise > atrocious epilogue, when Harry doesn't seem to mind if > his son is sorted into Slytherin. But one paragraph > does not alleviate an entire book's / series's ugliness. Betsy Hp: Harry's son James didn't learn his "Slytherin is bad" attitude in a vacuum though. So there's commentary on the commentary. "Slytherin is okay ::wink, wink, nudge, nudge:: except for how it totally isn't." Betsy Hp From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 12:22:07 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:22:07 -0000 Subject: The reprieved person... In-Reply-To: <01aa01c7ce3c$27b3c180$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172619 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly" wrote: > > was Mr. Weasley. TLC has a link to an interview with JKR in which she states this. Also, she WILL write a HP encyclopedia !!!!!!!!! :-) > > > Kimberly > > "Don't bother me, I'm reading..." > 7/21/07 > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > Excellent news! However, I do hope she works with others, maybe the Lexicon? to get the various datelines, numerics, and plotholes corrected - I know it makes for lots more wiggle-room, but now the series has ended, it would be good to clear up some of the anomalies. She's mentioned the encyclopedia before - I do hope she does it. Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria From tareprachi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:24:14 2007 From: tareprachi at yahoo.com (pforparvati) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:24:14 -0000 Subject: How come DD didn't know about Snapes patronus? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172620 Hello all.... I was surprised to find that DD didn't know about Snape's patronus until Snape himself showed him. After all the years working for order,especially after GoF when Order was recalled and started working, how it was possible that DD never got a message in the form of Snape's patronus until HBP. I assume that memories Harry saw in the pensieve[DH] were in sequence. Since this memory was after the memory of Snape arguing with headmaster in the forest[HBP] in which DD asked Snape to come his office so that he can show how much he trust Snape. In that night meeting, Snape showed Dumbledore his patronus...Isn't it strange that this happened in HBP... profParvati, feeling more disappointed to find the way Snape's Death occured...certainly one of the best DADA teacher like Snape deserved more fight than this... From write2stephenie at bellsouth.net Wed Jul 25 12:25:42 2007 From: write2stephenie at bellsouth.net (write2stephenie at bellsouth.net) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 7:25:42 -0500 Subject: Aberforth, etc. Message-ID: <20070725122541.RRWN275.ibm65aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172621 I'm reading on digest, so this may have come up between my reading and this post, but I thought that the few non-storytelling lines Aberforth was given were excellent! I *loved* the line to the effect of "brains like that you could be a deatheater." It captured his very different-from-Dumbledore personality...gruffier and yet clever. As a mother, I found that the epilogue was ( I've said this elsewhere) a hug and healing balm..a way of binding the wounds inflicted. I appreciated that especially when dealing with my 11yo daughter's intense emotions. She went through a serious mourning process, which surprised me because she hasn't been that sensitive to now. SEEing that that the trio was "okay" was very Important to her. If not for my children, I might have liked the book to end before the epilogue, even with all the questions left unanswered. Still, I'm satisfied. A marvelous line from "The Woman Warrior" is when she writes that "her mind was enlarged to make room for paradoxes." I believe that is exactly what JKR wanted to do, and to my enlarged mind she succeeded brilliantly. It has been a dark and brilliant journey. -Stephanie From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:39:04 2007 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:39:04 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: <650861.43940.qm@web33114.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172622 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sue White wrote: > > Why did JKR ruin this book and perhaps series for me > with the trite epilogue? > > I quite literally laughed out loud as I read it, it > was unbelievable: the children's names, the treatment > of grown-up Draco etc... > > Am I alone? > Tammy's Reply: I can live with the whole 'Snape loved Lily just like in all the silly fan fictions' part of the plotline. But ending the whole series with an epilogue that could have been written by any sappy 13-year-old fan fiction writer is just unforgivable. It's the same ending that all the really bad fan fictions have, and I for one expected a lot more from JK Rowling. I agree with others that this book overall, and especially the epilogue, felt rushed. I would have waited another year just to have it all finished properly. I would have liked to have seen a flash forward not of 19 years, but just a few weeks/months to see everyone still dealing with the aftermath of the big battle and the end of the war. -Tammy From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Wed Jul 25 12:45:06 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:45:06 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prince=92s_Tale?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172623 Marika wrote: > Snape died before the last battle without even knowing if his > efforts (to help Harry survive and conquer Voldemort) had been for > nothing or if they actually made a difference. The last word spoken >(yelled) to him from a member of the Order was Minerva calling him a > coward (before he turned himself into a bat). In my point of view > he had deserved to be recogised for who he really was and for all > he had done before he died. The knowledge that he would go down in > history as a brave and heroic man had probably made him pleased. Mari now: I'd like to offer a bit of comfort, based on something I am pretty sure we can assume from previous canon. Remember, Snape was a HEADMASTER of Hogwarts. Although Harry looks for Dumbledore, not Snape when he returns to the office, presumably at some stage a portrait of Snape would appear. It's not the same as being alive, and knowing what has happened, but if he has a portrait in the office I am sure he'd be told by someone that his mission was accomplished. Also remember Harry has cleared Snape publicly before this, so if McGonagall or any other teachers in the school wish to do so they can communicate with his portrait in the office as well. I think its pretty likely that they did :-) Marika again: Thanks for your comforting words :-) It seems reasonable to believe that his portrait is in the Headmaster's office, and I really hope it is. Even nicer would have been if he had showed up among the dead people Harry met when he used the stone. If so, that would have been the real him (well, his soul, which hopefully passed on after his death - the portraits are just fragments or memories of the persons in them - at least I think so). I had also wanted to know if Lily forgave him. Marika From kennclark at btinternet.com Wed Jul 25 12:41:12 2007 From: kennclark at btinternet.com (Kenneth Clark) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:41:12 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172624 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwlerch78" wrote: > > The mechanics at the end are definitely confusing - but here's my > analysis for what it's worth: > > Initial questions I had were: > > 1) What was the reason that Harry did not die in the forest? A few > possibilities all seemed likely: > a) He was tethered to life by his blood in Voldemort (per DD at > King's Cross) > b) He was master of death (all 3 hallows) > c) The Elder wand couldn't kill him because he was its master? > > 2) If the Elder wand couldn't kill Harry, then what was the point of > DD's discussion of being tethered by Voldemort's own blood? > Ken says: Yes, I've been puzzling over the two AK attempts as well. Why were the results different? What stopped Harry being killed each time? In the forest did he survive because: a. he had the stone. Did he need all three to avoid death? Have I read the Hallows info wrong? I thought he merely needed the stone in the ring. (in any case he has all three as it is) b. he was de facto master of the wand and it would not kill its master. But if this was the reason why did it not rebound and kill Voldemort there and then. Did the wand know he was its master before he declared himself so before the second AK attempt? c. he shared his blood with Voldemort and the latter could not kill him whatever as a result. This last is the explanation Dumbledore gives and if so then Harry has been practically invulnerable for the past three books. Voldy has specifically instructed his deatheaters not to kill Harry and, though he does not know it, he cannot kill Harry himself. Only contact with rogue elements like Crabbe and Goyle and the odd werewolf constitute dangers to him. Maybe he was double (triple?) protected without knowing it. The stone appears "at the end" specifically to show he owns/controls it, the wand is, unknowingly, his and he shares his blood with his attacker. So we have a situation where he expects to be killed but is, in fact, double or triple protected. When we turn to the second AK he has discarded the stone so is it still protecting him? He is still its owner but it is no longer caried by him (have I got that right?). He still shares his blood with Voldy so the latter cannot kill him and he has now explicitly told the wand (and Voldy) he is its master so whatever its (the wand's) understanding in the forest it now acknowledges him as such. The result is that it turns Voldy's spell round on him and kills him. Why didn't it do that in the forest? I can't believe it is because it faces him as it spins around - by that logic it could have killed anyone it happened to be facing as it spun - it can only be because it didn't know in the forest that Harry was its master - which seems a bit unmagical, if you know what I mean. All in all a tangled series of events which I, for one, am having real trouble coming to grips with. Ken Clark From annbosco at rogers.com Wed Jul 25 12:32:59 2007 From: annbosco at rogers.com (poetryfreedom) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:32:59 -0000 Subject: Right about Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172625 It's funny but I had predicted the unrequited love of Snape for Lily. (see previous post. But it was disappointing in the end, because it seemed disproportional to his character. If he had that much love for her, one would think that it would trickle out into a grudging affection at some point for her son. And that Snape wouldn't have taken such pleasure in Harry's humiliation in his potions classes. It seems then that Snape's hatred for James outweighs his love for Lily. Snape should have a spin-off series of his own! annbosco From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:43:48 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:43:48 -0000 Subject: DH rant Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172626 I need to let out some steam quickly. I was preparing myself for some disappointment, but not that much disappointment. As the end of the series, DH sucks big. I don't even know where to start. Snape and Harry don't interact in DH at all, not before Harry discovers the truth and not after. That meeting between them that we've all been waiting for, it never happens. So long for "the relationship between Harry and Snape is the most important in the series", I guess. Even worse, when Harry finally learns the truth about Snape and about his mother (the big surprise every Potter fan has been speculating about since the first or second book) Harry doesn't care. He doesn't even *think* about it at all, because he has also just discovered about being a Horcrux and going to die, which of course takes precedence. So we are robbed even of the Harry's "Noooooo!!!" moment that was always supposed to be the main Bang value of LOLLIPOPS. What a plop. In fact, Snape doesn't do much in DH at all except getting sacked and getting killed. He sends the sword to Harry but that was merely following a direct order from that horrible Dumbledore portrait thing (more about that below). Oh yes, and he gets to cut off George's ear. By accident. Even worse, we find that Snape's character hasn't developed at all since the first chapter of the first book. No big insights about himself or about Harry. Even after he learns from Dumbledore that Harry is intended as a sacrifice, he doesn't change his attitude one bit. No change we get to see after killing Dumbledore. No saving Harry's life or another big redemption moment in DH. In short, Snape's character arc ends with nothing. He doesn't even die fighting like Sirius. He isn't killed because he was DDM or something. Heck, Voldemort never even learns before he dies that Snape wasn't his man after all. Well, you might say I'm just disappointed because I predicted that DDM!Snape and LOLLIPOPS won't happen. So lets move to something I did predict correctly: Harry has indeed become a Horcrux in GH, exactly the way I described it. But the way JKR handled Harrycrux was, to me, an even bigger disappointment than the way she handled Snape. Being a Horcrux was merely a plot device. There was no interaction at all between Harry and the soul part, the kind of interaction with Diary!Riddle that makes the climax of CoS so great. Even Ron had more interaction with the locket Horcrux than Harry had with the Horcrux he was living with for 16 years, the Horcrux from which all his mysterious powers were supposed to come. What a plop. And did anybody understand how Voldemort using Harry's blood changed anything in this? Because I didn't. Dumbledore's "explanation" was no better than any HPfGU newbie post explaining The Gleam during the last five years. The same goes for the explanation of "either must die at the hand of the other". Actually Harry didn't die at Voldemort's hand and Voldemort didn't die at Harry's hands. After we have all spent years analyzing these words. And what about an explanation for "in essence divided"? Or did I miss that? Gee, if you have a Harrycrux that is a mere plot device, then at least get the plot to make sense. Also, Harry learns about being a Horcrux only at the last moment and only from Dumbledore's words, instead of coming to this realization himself. He never even suspects it before. Just another of those "how can he be so blind???" Harry moments, and in the very last book. Heck, even *Hermione* never suspects it, after reading to us about the "unstable soul" from the Horcruxes book, and knowing all about Harry's connection with Voldemort and his mysterious powers. The powers we've been speculating about since CoS, and are still mysterious after the end of DH. What was that golden light, anyway? I guess we'll never find out, unless JKR explains it in an interview. So Harry has been running around with these great powers throughout the whole series, and he never uses them accept one time by accident. Another plop. Instead JKR introduces the Elder Wand in the last book, another contrived plot device that is completely redundant because Harry has the powers to fight Voldemort within himself. And the whole unstable soul thing is another wasted plot device because Voldemort having his soul in eight parts rather than seven never plays out. The worse of all: Dumbledore was running the show in DH, throwing clues to the trio and ordering Snape through the portrait. We had a character that was nominally "dead", yet living for all practical plot purposes, and after JKR told us that portraits aren't the real thing, and that she killed Dumbledore so that Harry can finally do the job himself. I can't even criticize JKR regarding the moral issue of ordering somebody to kill you, since Dumbledore certainly wasn't dead in DH. So the whole plot became an artificial game. You have to wonder why couldn't Dumbledore simply give Harry another portrait of himself? Then he could order the trio around too, as well as connecting them with Snape. But of course, that would have given out the game too soon. The problem with a puppet master running the show is that we are left with a hero that is a puppet (the same goes for Snape, who is an even more of a puppet than Harry in DH). Perhaps the most artificial part in this game comes when Harry finally arrives at the headmaster office with Snape's memories, and just then Dumbledore is suddenly *absent* from his portrait, so that he doesn't have to tell Harry about being a Horcrux face to face. He doesn't even leave a note on the refrigerator: "Gone to watch the battle below. Hope Snape remembered to tell you it's your turn to sacrifice your life. Good luck! Oh, did I mention that if you had someone take your portrait you can keep on living as a character even after your death? Well, if I didn't it's too late now. Bye". Which makes the final talk with Dumbledore in the King Cross chapter another plop, instead of a climax, because by then it's like: Oh, so he's finally decided to show up in person. How charming. Not that DH is such a bad book in itself. There are parts that are quite good. The idea to show us a Hogwarts under the DEs regime was awesome, although we saw far too little of it. The "Seven Potters" chapter was possibly the best action sequence in the series. The Battle on Hogwarts was generally great (except for several incredibly cheesy moments). It is just that as the end of the series we've all waited for, DH sucks big. Neri, member of the I Hate Hallows Even More Than I Hate Horcruxes Association From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 12:16:18 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:16:18 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: References: <771932.76330.qm@web50409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707250516h177ddcb9o14ec1563c1c9fcad@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172627 > > Betsy Hp: > Wishful thinking I'm afraid. No healing for the WW. Where Anne > Frank was able to look at the world around her and think, "I know in > my heart that people are good" (or words to that effect), JKR > apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know in my > heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half of them > are okay, and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates in > a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. Yeah. I'm pretty > much done with the series. montims: Anne Frank wrote that, perforce, while she was still in hiding, hoping for an Allied victory and expecting to become a great writer and have a family of her own. She was betrayed, and all the members of her family, except for her father, died in circumstances of misery and torture and brutality. How many Annexe members survived? And they wouldn't have been discovered if they hadn't been betrayed by somebody. Some people still have a problem with Germans today, 63 years after WW2 ended. And after WW2, nothing really changed, any more than it did after WW1. People just got on with their same lives and opinions. Why should the Potterverse be any different? THAT would have been unrealistic, IMO. And look at the world around you now. I mean the world, not just your own little part of it (that "your" directed generally at everybody now - not Betsy - I've opened this out). People are being tortured and slaughtered in large numbers because they are different. And this is condoned officially and enthusiastically carried out. Look at JKR's affiliations. Look at what Amnesty International works against. Look at the caged children she drew attention to a couple of years ago. I like JKR's cleareyed picture of the world. I don't want to read that everybody really is nice deepdown, because that isn't true - life is not as written by Disney. The point, surely, is to face it, acknowledge it, and then battle it. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:51:02 2007 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:51:02 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172628 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle > initial of F... > Ginger: That's a very good question. Of course it could be James Fred (except that's my uncle's name), but I think James Sirius is more likely. It could be Hugo Fred. Don't know why not. Several have thought that George would have been the most likely to name a child after Fred, but the person who popped into my mind was Percy. He was there when Fred died, and Fred was the first one to accept him back into the family. He was there seeing a child off on the HE. It would also be likely that his kids would be a bit older than Ron and Ginny's, so if George has no kids, then maybe Percy continued the name. Ginger, just reading by topic nowadays due to the volume, but glad to be here again. From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 12:54:25 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:54:25 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: <861568.90011.qm@web52711.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172629 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Lambert wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" > <<<>>> > I mean, would it stretch your mental capacities > > to the breaking point to learn ONE word of Chinese? Couldn't you > > manage one word? > > > > Eggplant > > > > <<>> > No, it would not stretch my intellectual capacities, but as > it's a language with no links, connections, or soundsystem common to > English, it would probably stretch my vocal abilities to the extent > that the word might not mean what I wanted it to in Chinese. > Parseltongue is noted, by Ron, as being very rare. As far as I > remember, Ron heard Harry say 'open' once in Parseltongue, in Moaning > Myrtle's bathroom. > Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria > > ****Katie:**** > I thought the Parseltongue was lame and wierd, too, until I reread. Ron hears Harry say "open" a lot, as Harry is constantly trying to open the snitch. In fact, if Ron and Hermione hadn't picked up on how to say that one word, that would have been strange. I think it works. Katie > > Hi Katie - I don't understand - why would Harry be saying 'open' in Parseltongue to the snitch? The snitch was 'set' by Dumbledore, who may or may not have been able to understand Parseltongue, but we've been given no indication that he could speak it. The reason the snitch didn't open when Scrimgeour (like JKR's pronunciation - skrimjaw) placed in Harry's hand was, as Harry explains to Ron and Hermione, that he'd caught it in his mouth ... Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria From fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:55:23 2007 From: fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com (fitzchivalryhk) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:55:23 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172630 guzu: > So, I wonder what Rowling was thinking? Was it that Snape's perspective led us (and Harry) > to believe that he and Lily were better friends than they were? Lily actually agrees that they > are "best friends", so that doesn't seem right. Maybe they were meant to be secret friends? > However it's really not presented that way in Snape's memories at all. I am truly inclined to > think it was that Rowling did not decide the exact nature of the Snape-Lily friendship > through until she was in the middle of writing DH, but I welcome any theories to explain > this. fitz: According to Harry Potter Lexicon, here's how JK Rowling answered a question about Penseives: Q: Do the memories stored in a Pensieve reflect reality or the views of the person they belong to? A: It's reality. It's important that I have got that across, because Slughorn gave Dumbledore this pathetic cut-and-paste memory. He didn't want to give the real thing, and he very obviously patched it up and cobbled it together. So, what you remember is accurate in the Pensieve. (TLC) Since in Snape's memories, Lily directly confirm that she and Snape are best friends, I do not think that Snape's perspective is skewed such that we believe they were better friends than they really were. I do not think it's a matter of JK Rowling deciding the relationship between Snape and Lily in the middle of writing DH, since there are a lot of hints in prior books that Snape and Lily may know each other. I believe it is a case of the Mauraders witholding information from Harry. Sirius and Remus are both friends of James. As James' friends, they naturally would like to paint James in a positive light. That includes painting James and Lily's relationship in a positive light. So anything that might cause Harry to suspect his parents' relationship would be left out in their conversation, unless Harry happened to come across it and confront them directly. (Much like how they treated Snape's being bullied by James) Although Snape and Lily never shared a romantic relationship (at least there's no evidence of that), given the mentality of high school students, a girl/boy relationship is often assumed to be romantic in nature. The mauraders might have suspected and hated Snape for that. In order to maintain Harry's impression that James and Lily are perfect for each other (and they probably are), Sirius and Remus conveniently omit to mention the friendship shared by James and Snape. That's my theory anyway. fitz From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 12:50:42 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:50:42 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172631 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fitzchivalryhk" wrote: > > > fitz: > Actually, I partly agree with your interpretation on Snape / > Dumbledore relationship, that it is multi-layered and not as > loving as that of the one between Harry and Dumbledore. However, > I do not think this can be reduced into a "simple negative" one > as well. The evidence you and Leslie provided above shows that > there is affection and caring between Snape and Dumbledore, as > well as manipulation and calculation. Yet, is it that much > different from the way Dumbledore treat Harry? Remember, > Dumbledore was not entirely sure if Harry will survive after > he willingly let himself be killed by Voldemort, but he had > no hesitation in pushing Harry to face Voldy. Does this mean > Dumbledore has no love for Harry as well? You are quite right that it is not entirely negative, and cannot be easily summed up that way. Dumbledore as I have said felt pity and compassion for Snape, and respect. But love? No, I don't think so -- at least as compared to his feelings for Harry. Now, the interesting question, dealt with in another part of this thread, are what were his intentions for Snape? As written, it doesn't seem they were very good -- i.e. he put Snape into a position where he would certainly be killed, as Voldemort would assume he was the master of the Elder Wand when in fact he was not. Of course, the whole issue of wandlore and DD's intent (at one point it is said that DD wanted Snape to end up with the wand but a few pages later it is said that he didn't want Snape -- or anyone else -- to be Master of the wand, whether he possessed it or not) is terribly contorted. > > Dumbledore is just a ruthless general. No matter how much he > loves someone (even himself), he is still ready to sacrifice > that person for "the greater good". > > lupinlore: > > Absolutely! Snape's fate is satisfying and fits well with the > > demands of moral and karmic justice. > > fitz: > Delighting in the agony of others, and approval in the ruthless > use of one human as a pig for slaughter, as long as they deserve > it. Absolutely! A large part (although not the whole) of justice is inflicting pain on people who deserve it. And this is, I might add, something that JKR seems to approve of broadly. Thus we have Marietta, who pays a richly deserved price for her treachery and whose comeuppance the heroes enjoy quite a bit. And Amycus, recipient of a highly successful Crucio. And Lucius Malfoy, whose schemes end in his own ruination. And Dudley Dursley, recipient of a highly deserved and morally regenerative dementor attack. And Grindlewald, imprisoned in his own fortress. And Dumbledore, wracked by well-deserved doubt and guilt. And Crabbe, incinerated in his own Fiendfire. And Scrimgeour, who pays for his stupidity with his life. Snape is certainly brave. But much of his action, particularly his treatment of Harry, is I think nothing short of utterly contemptible. His end comes in the way he himself has prepared, and is richly deserved. The criticism and tension he endures from Dumbledore is also richly deserved. So yes, I delight in it and find it most satsifying, and make no apologies for that whatsover. Of course, much pain is not deserved. Fred and George and Remus and Tonks and Hedwig and Dobby and others suffer injustly. Who deserves pain and who doesn't? That is an irreducibly subjective judgement, and is why we have politics. But I think it would be mealy mouthed and dishonest to claim that each of us don't have opinions about who deserves to be punished and who does not. And it would be dishonest, I believe, to deny that one function of justice is to provide legitimate revenge and satisfaction by inflicting pain on those who have caused it. At one time many posters claimed that a theme of the Potter series would be that justice is not a matter for Harry and his friends to give out by way of punishing the guilty. Exactly who IS supposed to give out justice in the Potterverse is something I've never understood, but the arguments were there. Well, that doesn't turn out to be the case. The heros DO deal out "death and judgment" to use a Gandalfian turn of phrase, and their right to do so, and the justice of the pain they inflict, is rarely if ever questioned in the story. Rather the attitude, by and large, is "Justice is Served." Whether that is the case with Snape, ... as I say, that is why politics exists. Lupinlore, who was also glad we didn't see any whining and gnashing of teeth over treacherous Marietta's dermatological problems From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 13:01:17 2007 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:01:17 -0000 Subject: Snape increasing/Dumbledore decreasing(was) I have even less respect for Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172632 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > > I'll post my review of the whole book tomorrow but I had to put this > up now while it is still fresh in my mind. I've been on a road trip to > comic-con so I just now finished the book--I didn't like it BTW. > > Snape strikes me as a petty, pathetic, short-sited man whose life of > misery and pain is completely deserved. Snape's love isn't pure, > isn't good, no matter how fuzzy his patronus is. It is selfish and > possessive. If he really loved Lily, he would have done so much more > for Harry than what he did over the past seven years. I know that if > the woman I love died, I would do everything for that kid--especially > if he was a student of mine. I would have trained him, and cared for > him and made him want to be around me because every second he stared > at me with those green eyes I would have been Happy. I would have been > reminded of the person I love and I would take solace in knowing that > they were smiling down on me with gladness. Instead he treats Harry > like crap and in his final moments demands to see Lily's green eyes > one more time. Why didn't he want to do that for the past six years? > why wouldn't he want to see Harry grow up into the kind of boy Lily > would have been proud of. That would have been a worthy testament to > her. > > phoenixgod2000, who thinks the epilogue is a travesty and hasn't been > this disappointed in a book in a long time. > Tammy's reply: Perhaps Snape could have been nicer, but then who would have been there to toughen Harry up? Snape couldn't afford to be nice to Harry and still be worthy as a spy. He couldn't get close to Harry and be close to Voldemort. I think perhaps if he had lived, the pair of them would finally have understood each other and become something closer to friends. Harry has always had friends of his father around him, but never really anyone who was close to his mother (which always struck me as odd I must say). I'm certain he and Snape would have loads to talk about. Honestly I think Snape winds up looking a heck of a lot better than Dumbledore. The follow passage in particular intrigues me: >From Ch 33 The Prince's Tale: (after telling Snape that Harry must be killed by Voldemort) Dumbledore opened his eyes. Snape looked horrified. "You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?" "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many mena nd women have you watched die?" "Lately, only those whom I could not save," said Snape. He stood up. "You have used me." "Meaning?" "I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter's son safe. Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter - " "But this is touching Severus," said Dumbledore seriously. "Have you grown to care for the boy, after all?" So basically all this time, Snape's motive has been to protect Harry and to keep him from harm. Meanwhile Dumbledore has been positioning Harry to die, then let someone else kill Voldemort. Despite his words to Harry previously that he cared too deeply and thus allowed himself to be blinded, he didn't care one wit about Harry. He just wanted Harry alive. Who would have thought that in the end of Book 7, Snape would be the good guy and Dumbledore would be the bad guy? -Tammy From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 13:04:09 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:04:09 -0000 Subject: Our Own Epilogue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172633 Soooo....since many of us are dissatisfied with the epilogue, why don't we do some pondering of our own as to what happened after DH? I know we all have what we wish had happened: Hagrid: Cleared of all the charges that have ever been levied against him, he is allowed to finish his schooling at Hogwarts and gets a new wand, which he no longer has to hide in a pink umbrella. He marries Madame Maxime, and together they teach Care of Magical Creatures, while raising Grawp. Obviously, Beauxbatons has to get a new headmistress. George: Mourning Fred, but knowing he has to move on, he continues to run the joke shop for a few years alone. He does open up the Hogsmeade branch, naming it "Fred's Wizarding Wheezes". He eventually gets married and has just one son - Fred, of course, who grows up to run his father and uncle's business. Luna: Leaving her creepy and weak father behind, Luna becomes the astrology teacher at Hogwarts after her 7th year is complete. She and Neville realize they are in love, and they remain at Hogwarts to get married, since Neville is the Herbology prof. Luna continues to make sure her father is cared for, because it wouldn't be Luna to leave someone in the dirt, but she's so put off by his betrayl of her friends that she can't bear to se him anymore. Neville and Luna have several children, all of whom inherit their father's aptitude for Herbology, and thus begins a long line of Longbottom Herbology profs at Hogwarts. Neville: Aside from what I already mentioned, Neville also becomes the godfather to Harry's children, and Harry finally reveals the entire prophecy to him, letting Neville become a much closer friend than before. Neville finds a confidence in himself that he never had before, and he becomes, in addition to Herbology prof, the magical plants liasion for the MoM, and the leading world authority on magical plants. Percy: Realizing what a mess he's made of his life, especially in the wake of Fred's death, Percy decides to travel the globe, seeking answers about the nature of good and evil and the meaning of family. After a ten-year wandering, and a true change of heart, Percy returns to England and overhauls the MoM, ridding it of corruption and becoming the first truly good Minister of Magic. He never marries, but remains living at the Burrow to take care of his parents as they age. Flitwick: Becomes the Headmaster, since McGonagall is too elderly and exhausted to take on the job, and eventually (obviously more than 19 years in the furture) eliminates the House system from Hogwarts. He rids Hogwarts of prejudice and creates a more loving and inclusive learning environment, free of classification and stigma. Kreacher: While too old to feel that he can lead a political rebellion, he is nevertheless the de facto leader of the House Elf Liberation Front, and works closely with Hermione Weasley to gain political and social rights for House Elves. His years of calling her a "Mudblood" over, Kreacher becomes Hermione's closest elf friend, and they celebrate together when the WW finally recognizes the rights of elves and allows them to practice magic and carry wands. That's all I can think of for now...what do you guys think? Harry on, Katie From LivinNY1961 at optonline.net Wed Jul 25 13:01:54 2007 From: LivinNY1961 at optonline.net (Kathleen) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:01:54 -0000 Subject: Lurker Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172634 I am new to this group. This is my first post. Here goes... I loved the book... I have enjoyed the whole series. I have spent the whole morning reading and enjoying your posts. The one thing in the book that stood out to me was in the battle at Hogwarts. How Harry's friends would not let him fight on his own... they wanted to be with him and help him. It was so amazing to see how the students, the teachers, everyone came together as one to defeat Voldermort.... LivinNY From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Wed Jul 25 13:04:28 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:04:28 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172635 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "guzuguzu" wrote: With reference to DH, the Prince's Tale: Does anyone else find it completely implausible that that Harry would not have known if Snape and Lily were "best friends" for at least five years of their lives? Especially since they both hated James? It could not have escaped the Marauders who the Griffindor girls of their year hung around with, especially if they were hanging around with "slimy git" Slytherns, yet Sirius and Lupin never mention this fact to Harry, though they had several good places to do it: -------------- So, I wonder what Rowling was thinking? Was it that Snape's erspective led us and Harry)to believe that he and Lily were better friends than they were? Lily actually agrees that they are "best friends", so that doesn't seem right. Maybe they were meant to be secret friends? However it's really not presented that way in Snape's memories at all. I am truly inclined to think it was that Rowling did not decide the exact nature of the Snape-Lily friendship through until she was in the middle of writing DH, but I welcome any theories to explain this. guzu Marika: I think you're absolutely right about them not being secret friends. She told him that her friends did not understand why she was his friend, and he also said he was going to sleep outside the Gryffindor entrance if she did not talk to him. I'm just as confused myself why Lupin never told Harry.(Black disliked Snape so much that I doubt he would ever say anything "good" about him.) The only thing I can come up with is that Snape told Lupin not to tell (like he one had asked Dumbledore), and that Lupin agreed because he thought that Harry didn't need to know... From mariabronte at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 13:06:11 2007 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:06:11 -0000 Subject: DH rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172636 Neri writes: > Snape and Harry don't interact in DH at all, not before Harry > discovers the truth and not after. That meeting between them that > we've all been waiting for, it never happens. Mari: In fact, they do meet and interact, although briefly, when Snape gives Harry his memories, just before he dies. Had they had an extended confrontation, I doubt Harry would have listened to, or believed anything Snape might have tried to say. I think Snape knows this, which is why he stayed in the background, not letting Harry know he was protecting him. To me what happened is more believable. No hysterical pleas for forgiveness, no ranting speeches; just a moment of acknowledgement from both Snape and Harry that neither has been able to see the other for who they are because Harry has never known the TRUTH and neither has Snape, it turns out, for most of the time he was protecting Harry. Neri again: > In short, Snape's character arc ends with nothing. He doesn't even > die fighting like Sirius. He isn't killed because he was DDM or > something. Heck, Voldemort never even learns before he dies that > Snape wasn't his man after all. Mari again: I really can't let this one go by. Harry, when he duels with Voldemort for the second time, PUBLICLY CLEARS SNAPE for all to hear, taunting Voldemort with the fact that Snape was never his man, and that Voldemort's plan to become master of the Elder Wand by killing Snape has not succeeded because Snape and Dumbledore planned Dumbledore's death between them. It's right there in the text! Voldemort DOES know before he dies that Snape wasn't his man. From cambition at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 12:58:51 2007 From: cambition at gmail.com (oliveu2cm) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:58:51 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172637 > Ken says: > > Yes, I've been puzzling over the two AK attempts as well. Why were > the results different? What stopped Harry being killed each time? > > In the forest did he survive because: > b. he was de facto master of the wand and it would not kill its > master. But if this was the reason why did it not rebound and kill > Voldemort there and then. Did the wand know he was its master before > he declared himself so before the second AK attempt? I definitely thought Harry would escape death in the forest by having the 3 Hallows, although that wasn't what Rowling indicated by the Kings Cross chapter. However your hypothesis (b) here makes a lot of sense to me. Harry was owner of the wand and it could not kill Harry, so therefore it killed the part of Harry that was not him - the Voldemort bit! That's why I think the spell did not rebound and kill Voldemort there and then, because it had found part of Voldemort in Harry and eliminated that. But the force of the spell was so profound and the fact it killed something that had been w/ Harry since he was a child, it knocked Harry into this "experience" with Dumbledore. Additionally, I can't help but wonder if Voldemort didn't have a similiar "experience" as Harry in this scene. When Harry comes to, he realizes that Voldemort had been thrown to the ground as well. Harry wondered if striking him had hurt Voldemort. I wonder if Voldemort wasn't actually experiencing life as that shriveled non-human baby thing? Perhaps Voldemort went to the white place too and saw what it would be like if he continued? But he awoke and didn't care, whereas the experience changed Harry? oliveu2cm From horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 13:10:01 2007 From: horadesiesta at yahoo.co.uk (horadesiesta) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:10:01 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172638 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > > > JKR apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know > > > in my heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half > > > of them are okay, and there's one quarter that's just > > > unquestionably good." > > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates > > > in a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. > > > >>Shagufta: > > > So you think the world is made up of good people and only good > > > people? This world of ours where murder and torture and terrorism > > > are a sad reality - this world is made up of good people? > > > > > Betsy Hp: > I think it's impossible to decide someone is going to be a terroist > and a murderer at age eleven. Unless they're a sociopath of some > sort, and I believe that's pretty rare. Or at least, should be rare > enough to not make up a quarter of a school's population. (And then > some. Ravenclaw is a fairly questionable house too. And Hufflepuff > ain't great. Really, it's the golden Gryffindors who everyone else > should fall before and worhip.) > > However, that's not how JKR sees it. Some (few) people are good, > some are bad, and that can easily be determined by a magical hat at > age eleven. And once that determination has been made there's no > need to look at actions. If a Slytherin throws a Crucio or Imperius > at someone, well, he's Slytherin so what do you expect. If a > Gryffindor does the same, well he's Gryffindor so there's a noble > purpose behind it. > > Oh, and of course, once the Sorting is done, that's it. There is no > hope for change. > > > >>nightmasque@ writes: > > I don't think that was the point at all. I think the > > point Betsy was making was that it was simplistic of > > Rowling to divide the good and bad people into > > Gryffindors and Slytherins respectively; to use your > > analogy, it would be like saying all Slytherins are > > terrorists, and all Gryffindors are defendors of > > liberty and freedom and all that good stuff. > > Betsy Hp: > Yes, that's it exactly. Basically JKR is showing us that not only > *can* you judge a child as to how good a human being he or she is at > a young age, you *should* judge them. Oh, and they can never > change. Actions don't matter. (The rare exceptions are only there > to prove the rule.) > > > >>nightmasque@: > > This however is slightly mitigated by the otherwise > > atrocious epilogue, when Harry doesn't seem to mind if > > his son is sorted into Slytherin. But one paragraph > > does not alleviate an entire book's / series's ugliness. > > Betsy Hp: > Harry's son James didn't learn his "Slytherin is bad" attitude in a > vacuum though. So there's commentary on the commentary. "Slytherin > is okay ::wink, wink, nudge, nudge:: except for how it totally isn't." > > Betsy Hp > Clara adds: "Hat say anything interesting?" asked Harry, taking a piece of treacle tart. "More of the same, really... advising us all to unite in the face of our enemies, you know." (HBP, ch 8, Snape Victorious) Well, even the Sorting Hat wanted it to happen, and I was sure that it would, to underline DD?s message to Harry that your choices are what counts in life. A good lesson for the children, too, no more pre- destined baddies in Slytherin. All are capable of redeeming themselves by their actions. Hope for all of us there. Except... it didn?t happen. IMO, JKR missed an opportunity to change the Wizarding World?s age- old prejudices by uniting the four houses. Instead, we learn that some houses are more equal than others. And since when can Harry use Unforgivables with impunity? Slytherin uses Unforgivable Curse = just shows how evil they are. Gryffindor uses Unforgivable Curse = totally justifiable. Clara, disappointed with the "Once an evil Slytherin, always an evil Slytherin" subtext. Along with other facets of the book. From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Wed Jul 25 13:10:54 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:10:54 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172639 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AmanitaMuscaria" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" > wrote: > > > > "AmanitaMuscaria" wrote: > > > > > Yes, Ron's sudden ability to impersonate > > > Parseltongue was lame. > > > > I don't find it lame at all, not even a little! Yes Ron couldn't > > discuss the subtleties of Ludwig Wittgenstein's philosophy in > > Parseltongue as Harry could, but he did know one word of the > language, > > just one word, "open"; he knew that word because he heard a very good > > friend of his say it. I mean, would it stretch your mental capacities > > to the breaking point to learn ONE word of Chinese? Couldn't you > > manage one word? > > > > Eggplant > > > > Eggplant - No, it would not stretch my intellectual capacities, but as > it's a language with no links, connections, or soundsystem common to > English, it would probably stretch my vocal abilities to the extent > that the word might not mean what I wanted it to in Chinese. > Parseltongue is noted, by Ron, as being very rare. As far as I > remember, Ron heard Harry say 'open' once in Parseltongue, in Moaning > Myrtle's bathroom. > Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria > Ken: This is one of the items that a lot of people choke at but it seems plausible to me. I don't know if there were any previous examples of Ron being a vocal mimic but he does do a passable Peter Pettigrew earlier in the book. That scene in the bathroom would certainly be etched in Ron's mind, it would only be a slight stretch for him to remember the word from that incident. He has a much more recent and vivid memory to draw on though. Harry used the same word to open the locket in the scene where Ron destroys that horcrux. Ron will never forget that evening! I, a Baptist with no languages beyond English, once stood at the front of a Catholic Church with a hundred of my closest friends and sang: Quoniam tu solus Sanctus, Quoniam to solus Sanctus, Tu solus Dominus, Tu solus Altisimus, Jesu Christe, Jesu Christe. as well as the rest of the bass part of Vivaldi's Gloria in D. It was a much bigger job that imitating one word and while we had far more time to learn it than Ron did, it was not particularly hard. I can sing a song for you in Portuguese too, although I could not begin to spell the lyrics correctly. I can believe that Ron managed to spit out one word in Parseltongue. He probably spoke it with a terrible accent! ;-) Overall I liked the book. It is of a piece with the rest, neither better nor worse. It showed some signs that it would have benefited from a revision or two, nothing new there. It resolved the essential plot lines nicely, I thought. I even guessed one thing right: Harry was a horcrux and LV did AK his own soul bit without killing Harry. I like the epilogue. Most of us would be familiar with these words: "But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate?we can not consecrate?we can not hallow?this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract." I think that the epilogue shows the living doing one essential thing that must be done to ennoble the sacrifices of the dead, whether they participated in the struggle or not: living the life they died to make possible. Snape, to choose one example, would have died in vain if the survivors had not gone on to build normal lives and a better world. And if you open your mind to it, the epilogue hints at other things you might have hoped would be resolved that aren't stated directly. Ken From breakfree at xtra.co.nz Wed Jul 25 13:04:52 2007 From: breakfree at xtra.co.nz (daimauwr) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:04:52 -0000 Subject: I'm Glad We did not Get all the Answers In-Reply-To: <308565.15483.qm@web52712.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172640 vivamus42 wrote: > I'm Glad We did not Get all the Answers > > <<>> > I am glad, however, that JKR had the courage to follow the story > as it took on a life of its own. The worst thing an author can do > to a good story is twist it out of its natural shape, damaging the > credibility. I think no author can resist that temptation entirely, > but if it is only done here or there, for very good reasons, it > doesn't limit the story. > I am hoping we'll get answers directly from JKR on them, but in the > meantime, I'm glad she had the courage to write the best story > possible -- even if it did not have everything in it she thought it > would have. Katie replied: > 'Ear, 'ear! > Quite honestly, it never even occurred to me to not like Deathly > Hallows - because I knew that was the story that was supposed to > be told. It wasn't up to me to like it or dislike it, at least in > a literary way, because it had such momentum. > In terms of not getting all the answers, I am also glad that not > everything was tied up...leaves room for the imagination...and > maybe another book about the WW? Love and Harry, KATIE Daimauwr: Somehow I don't think we needed all the answers. JK is renowned for the red herrings she planted. For me (at very advanced years) the way in which the MAIN PLOT has been developed and resolved (Voldemort's rise, fall, rise and fall) started with a backlash of magic and ended in one, has been terrific. I have reread every book and watched the DVD's countless times. Film #1 remains my favourite because it unfolded to us a whole new world into which we could escape. Each succeeding book has been about Harry achieving maturity through 1: A lack of magic education until Howarts, 2: Endurance - learnt from the cupboard under the stairs, 3: His need to find the right friends, 4: The angst of puberty. and based around a single event - The Stone, the Chamber, Sirius, Triwizard, The Prophecy, Horcruxes and finally the Shoot-out. To JK - bravo, bravo and encore. Yes I would like to read more about Mr Potter but perhaps where he is not the central figure but again based around an event. Daimauwr From heiloo at aol.com Wed Jul 25 13:11:31 2007 From: heiloo at aol.com (susan4508) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:11:31 -0000 Subject: The Princes Tale In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172641 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marika_thestral" wrote: > > "And I can't believe that Hogwarts (in the Epiloge) kept sorting people > into Houses. Not because Voldemort suggested that Slytherin was the > only necessary house to keep, but for the same reason that Dumbledore > told Snape that sometimes he thought it was too early to sort at the > age of 11(DH p. 545), but I wish to add that besides being too early > it also prevents Slytherins to choose the good path. The parts of you > that are bad will grow worse since people around you are not very > good. To me is seems like ending up in Slytherin is like spending time > in prison (where serious criminals influence the less serious ones to > become even worse) - but before you actually have comitted any crimes." But notice the difference when Harry tells his son that the bravest man he ever met had been a Slytherin. I take that to mean that there has been a change of attitude towards Slytherin over the ensuing 19 years. (Bad analogy: sort of like how Germany and the average German slowly came out of the shadow of Hitler--there was a history of violence and hatred, but, in the main, the country and its people showed themselves to have moved beyond that hatred.) I'm sure there are still people like the Malfoys who prefer the pureblood wizarding families, but they've seen the devastation that can be caused by hatred. After what Draco saw as a teenager living with the Death Eaters, I seriously doubt he would condone his kid being any sort of neo-Death Eater. So while Hogwarts still sorts into houses and there may be vestiges of resentment, there's probably not the high level of hatred that there once was. Susan From jenlundq at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 13:11:01 2007 From: jenlundq at hotmail.com (pwrmom2) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:11:01 -0000 Subject: Talking Portraits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172642 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "need_to_sleep_now" wrote: > > But what confuses me is does that mean Dumbledore is not really > dead? If it's possible to have a conversation with him then, as > long as the portrait exists, he could still be headmaster really, > couldn't he? It doesn't make sense to me! PWRMOM2: I don't know the lore of why the headmasters' pictures can talk or why the pictures at Hogworts in general at least react to things going on (unlike normal pictures like HP's parents) but just accept it as fact that the Headmasters' portraits at least do talk and have a way to interact within other portraits of their frames. Notice Sirus' forbearer whose picture was taken along on the Horcrux hunt. Hermione put the blindfold on it so they could talk to him without worrying about him telling Snape what was going on. Also remember in HP5 when DD sent one of the potraits to another of his portraits to make sure someone found Ron's dad when he was attacked by the snake at the MOM. My guess is there is some special mojo on certain pictures or picture frames when one becomes a headmaster, because I also don't think that all of DD's pictures were able to interact, just certain ones. Guess this means that Snapes picture must have been there to listen in on Harry's converstation with the portrait as well. Actually, even Sirus's mother's picture has some reaction to all of the filthy mudbloods and blood traitors in her house. Maybe you pay extra for the interactive photo deveoping? (j/k) From hautbois1 at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 13:27:28 2007 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:27:28 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172643 SNIP!> > > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it > cumlminates > > > > in a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. > > > > Betsy Hp: > > > > Oh, and of course, once the Sorting is done, that's it. There is > no > > hope for change. > > > > > >>nightmasque@ writes: it was simplistic of > > > Rowling to divide the good and bad people into > > > Gryffindors and Slytherins respectively; to use your > > > analogy, it would be like saying all Slytherins are > > > terrorists, and all Gryffindors are defendors of > > > liberty and freedom and all that good stuff. > > > > Betsy Hp: > > Yes, that's it exactly. Basically JKR is showing us that not only > > *can* you judge a child as to how good a human being he or she is > at > > a young age, you *should* judge them. Oh, and they can never > > change. Actions don't matter. (The rare exceptions are only there > > to prove the rule.) > > Betsy Hp > > > Clara adds: > Except... it didn?t happen. > IMO, JKR missed an opportunity to change the Wizarding World?s age- > old prejudices by uniting the four houses. > > Instead, we learn that some houses are more equal than others. > Clara, disappointed with the "Once an evil Slytherin, always an evil > Slytherin" subtext. I think you've all missed the boat completely. JK makes a good point here. All is not happy and puppy dogs and I think it would be a disservice to a series whose morality so closely mirrors the "real world." All cannot be "happily ever after," rather it's just "well." destroying Voldemort simply meant ridding the world of that one evil. The end of WWII did not bring happiness and perfection to the world...it simply eliminated an evil and returned things to the way they were. She was never making the statement that ONLY Gryffindors are good and ONLY Slytherins are evil...we know that is not true. Not all Gryffindors are without fault and not all Slytherins are evil. That's a rather narrow view of the books. Thinking the houses to be reunited and the MoM to be cleaned up is completely unbelievable. This is not a fairy tale. It may be fantasy, but it's based in a world that very closely mirrors our own...and in our own nothing is every perfectly happy and ending the books that way would be completely contrary to the rest of the books. That doesn't make it "ugly," it just makes it more believable. PM From carodave92 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 13:34:01 2007 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:34:01 -0000 Subject: Neville facing LV and Peter's Hand - Questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172644 I read the book quickly (had to pass it along to impatient family members!) and maybe didn't read these parts clearly...but... How did Neville escape the fire unscathed when LV put the sorting hat on his head and it burst into flames? I expected him to at least be burned and scarred when he emerged (I am assuming that he performed the spell to turn flames into a tickling sensation, like the witch in Harry's history book in PS/SS, but that isn't mentioned). Also - why did Peter's hand strangle him? DD specifically told Harry that Peter's life debt to Harry could help Harry in the future. A second's hesitation in killing him is not exactly mercy...just the hesitation of a coward, which Peter definitely was. I read this to mean that his hand had been cursed by LV, causing the hand to kill Peter if he ever wavered on an order from LV. So what about the life debt? Peter didn't make a decision to show Harry mercy - he just had a moment of hesitation. Carodave From mac_tire at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 13:32:48 2007 From: mac_tire at hotmail.com (pattiemgsybb) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:32:48 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172645 > Bobbi: > > From a complete lurker(me)....and likely to become one again. > I was totally crushed when Hedwig died. I cried and cried, but from > a weird sort of standpoint I could understand it. > If we look at the name thing and see Hedwig as a symbol for St. > Hedwig, the patron St. of orphan children, then her 'death' could be > seen as one of the turning points where Harry becomes a man rather > then a child. > > Please don't throw stones or sharp objects. I'm going back to the > dungeon now. to a fellow lurker: Bobbi, I read someone elsewhere making that point and I thought it was a good one (I had never known about the patron business); as you say, it helped me adjust to that death (somewhat!). Like the first poster, I didn't like the idea that Hedwig's was a meaningless death, and this information suggests to me that her death really did have meaning. Before reading your post I really wanted to block this sad scene out of my mind, but now I'm thinking -- maybe another reason for Hedwig's death was to underline the fact that war means death for many besides the warriors, including many innocents. For anyone who loves animals and their innocence -- keeping in mind, as another has said above, that Hedwig had no choice about going into battle -- Hedwig's sudden, unexpected death would have to be very hard to take. And it was made harder because Hedwig had become such a character in her own right. Just before reading DH I was telling my mother how well JKR individualizes the kids' (and Hagrid's) pets; Hedwig's so distinct from Pig, from Errol -- she has a quiet dignity and her feathers are easily ruffled (forgive me for that one) yet she's clever, hard-working, and she clearly has real affection for Harry. I'm with everyone whose heart broke over Dobby's death. The one thing I would say about that death is that the way Harry dealt with it was so touching. And how right is it that Dobby's last words were what they were? Another case of an innocent caught in the cross-fire in a sense, though Dobby chose to enter the fray for the sake of saving the being he loved best in the world. Talk about brave -- Dobby should've had a bed in Gryffindor. In terms of whose deaths devastated me most, Fred's and Lupin's broke my heart into pieces as well -- but there's a different quality in my grief for them because unlike Hedwig and Dobby they did choose to go into battle. ~ Kit From breakfree at xtra.co.nz Wed Jul 25 13:37:50 2007 From: breakfree at xtra.co.nz (daimauwr) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:37:50 -0000 Subject: Rose and Hugo was Re: The return to normalcy (Was: The (Hated) Epilogue) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172646 > Potioncat: > It went something like this: > Ron named the daughter. He "said" he was naming her for his Aunty Rose, > but really it was for Rosmerta. > > Hermione named the son. She "said" it was for her favorite Muggle > author. She just didn't mention to Ron what Mr. Hugo's first name was. > > ;-) > Daimauwr Oh Potioncat you have an evil mind - evil but brilliant !! What did happen to Victor Krum? :-)) From chaomath at hitthenail.com Wed Jul 25 13:51:15 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:51:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <112941.54917.qm@web84102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <112941.54917.qm@web84102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <986F1734-7040-4B15-B657-4263760D33B9@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172647 Kris wrote: > I normally lurk in this group, but had to respond to this topic. > Ron and Hermione are my two favorite characters and I love them > dearly. JKR presents their romance through Harry's eyes. He's not > going to see a heart-to-heart that R/H might have, so we're not > going to see it. That excuse doesn't work. Not everything in the books is shown through Harry's eyes; there are plenty of scenes -- nay, entire chapters -- that Harry has no knowledge of. (Kris continued) > JKR didn't write a romance novel - so you don't see a lot of > blatant romance. I think it's believeable (come on, doesn't Ron > act exactly like a teenage boy acts? Especially for a boy who had > confidence issues? And the scene with his destroying the locket > explains why -- he fears that deep down Hermione would prefer Harry > -- it's all back to his feeling like second-best. He doesn't feel > like he's worth her love). Yes, these aren't romance novels, but they are *drama* and JKR talks a lot about the redeeming power of love. I felt Harry's love for Sirius, I really believed it, much more than any romantic entanglement. The Remus/Tonks thing was completely unbelievable, I never saw that Harry really loved Ginny (as opposed to being told), and she hit us repeatedly over the head with the Ron/Hermoine relationship. Bleh. She can't write convincing romantic love, which is really a problem when the kids start to grow into these kinds of relationships. LKH wrote: > And the Harry/Ginny was creepy. I like H/G... I'll admit I wanted > them to end up together... but JKR constantly talking about Harry > apprieciating a girl who didn't cry (unnormal... everyone cries) > and the infatuation with his mother (he wanted to FEAST upon her > image) made the ship entirely creepy. There wasnt enough true > buildup.... No connection of souls so to speak. Exactly what I was trying to say. And isn't Ginny just a heavy-handed surrogate for his mother? I don't know how many times I had to read about them both having red hair.... Got a bit irritating. Sandra x wrote: > I think the romantic side should have been an important and > significant aspect in the last few books because it would have > showed the emotional development of the characters beyond the > combative "all wands blazing" fights and arguments. > Instead of Hermione thumping Ron during the dullest and most > uninspired part of DH (when Ron returns to the camp thanks to > the embarrassingly convenient glowing light) they should have > had a flare up followed by a heart to heart telling of their feelings, > or at least a display of genuine vulnerability rather than a burst of > hotheaded anger. I don't regard JKR as a romantic writer, I think > there's a hard streak in her that shys away from it. Had the > heartfelt angle been picked up more, and given me more > reasons to feel close to the characters, I'd have rated the whole > series a lot higher. Good point about needing balance between action and personal development. As it was, we had a balance between action and exposition -- which made it tough going at times. As the books grew longer and longer, there was more and more exposition, which was never a good sign. I reached my limit in DH. The most Harry seems to grow is in the epilogue, when he whispers that Snape was brave. And that was just thrown in, so it isn't saying much. Thanks for pointing out the "embarrassingly convenient" Put-Outer. What an awful deus ex machina for Ron. Margaret martin at hitthenail.com Design for a Better World www.hitthenail.com From CariadMel at aol.com Wed Jul 25 13:50:29 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:50:29 -0000 Subject: Neville facing LV and Peter's Hand - Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172648 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > I read the book quickly (had to pass it along to impatient family > members!) and maybe didn't read these parts clearly...but... > > How did Neville escape the fire unscathed when LV put the sorting hat > on his head and it burst into flames? I expected him to at least be > burned and scarred when he emerged (I am assuming that he performed > the spell to turn flames into a tickling sensation, like the witch in > Harry's history book in PS/SS, but that isn't mentioned). > > > Carodave The answer to this is on p.591 (UK book) When H & V go head to head. ... " I was ready to die to stop you hurting these people." " But you did not!" "- I meant to and thats what did it.I've done what my mother did. haven't you noticed how none of the spells you put on them are binding? you can't torture them. You can't touch them ..." Sorry, don't have canon proof to why Peter's hand turned on him, just conjecture that evil does as evil-made. Cariad. > From leah at mindcite.com Wed Jul 25 13:47:02 2007 From: leah at mindcite.com (leahkron) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:47:02 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172649 AmanitaMuscaria: > Parseltongue is noted, by Ron, as being very rare. As far as I > remember, Ron heard Harry say 'open' once in Parseltongue, in Moaning > Myrtle's bathroom. leahkron: He did say open when he opened the locket. From vsacchet at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 13:49:46 2007 From: vsacchet at yahoo.com (vsacchet) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:49:46 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172650 Marika wrote: >>> I think you're absolutely right about them not being secret friends. She told him that her friends did not understand why she was his friend, and he also said he was going to sleep outside the Gryffindor entrance if she did not talk to him. I'm just as confused myself why Lupin never told Harry.(Black disliked Snape so much that I doubt he would ever say anything "good" about him.) The only thing I can come up with is that Snape told Lupin not to tell (like he one had asked Dumbledore), and that Lupin agreed because he thought that Harry didn't need to know...<<< Valerie says: This is my first post, so I hope that I am following the rules here, but I thought it would be interesting to chime in on this issue. During the whole "Mudblood" incident with Snape, Lily and James were not really friends at this point. If anything, she thought James was a show off. If this incident marks the end of Lily and Snape's friendship, it is possible that James and the gang never really knew how close Lily and Snape had been before Lily and James became involved in each other. The guys all hated Snape already and it is possible that Lily just decided to stop defending him because he was well on this way to becoming a Death Eater. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Wed Jul 25 13:57:42 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:57:42 -0000 Subject: Classical & Biblical Quotations Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172651 The Libation Bearers by Aeschylus ("the father of tragic drama ? and tragedy in Greek means "goat song," because in the earliest dramas, the chorus often dressed like satyrs) was the second play in a trilogy about the fall of the House of Atreus. The trilogy was first performed in 458 BC. In the first play, Agamemnon, is an account of the title character, the king of Mycenae, as he returns home from the Trojan War. His wife Clytemnestra harbors anger against her husband due to his sacrifice of their daughter Iphigenia as he embarked to Troy, in order to appease the gods. Clytemnestra and her lover Aegisthus murder Agamemnon, along with his concubine Cassandra (the prophetess), unwilling captive of war. Cassandra of course predicts the disaster to come (including her own murder), but is of course ignored. After the bloodbath, Agamemnon's son Orestes is taken away from Mycenae by a loyal nurse. The second play begins with the return of Orestes (accompanied by his friend Pylades) to Mycenae, to avenge his father's death (under orders by Apollo given at the oracle at Delphi). . He observes his sister Electra (who has been reduced to servant status by her mother) and a female chorus pouring libations on Agamemnon's tomb. They have been ordered to do so by Clytemnestra, who has had a nightmare in which she gives birth to a snake. Realizing the significance of this omen, she tries to appease the fates. The long-separated brother and sister rejoice in their reunion and plot their mother's demise. Orestes gains access to Clytemnestra by pretending to be a messenger with news of Orestes 'death. In the ensuing celebration, Orestes kills her and her husband Aegisthus. The second play ends with Orestes pursued by the Furies), for his act of matricide. (In the third play, The Eumenides, resolution is achieved via the intervention of Athena, who organizes a formal trial in which Orestes is acquitted, and the Furies - renamed The Kindly Ones (The Eumenides) agree to become the guardians of Athens. The parallels with the HP saga are obvious, especially the prophecy, a trio of protaganists (one female, two male) and the general atmosphere of violence which the hero must expunge. That final line, "Bless the children, give them triumph now" was a minor spoiler for me. I figured that JKR would not kill Harry after that quotation.Does anyone know which translation she used? There are two Biblical quotes in chapter 16, the Godrics Hollow graveyard. The first Harry sees on the tomb of Dumbledore's mother and sister: "Harry stooped down and saw, upon the frozen, lichen-spotted granite, the words Kendra Dumbledore and, a short way down her dates of birth and death, and Her Daughter Ariana. There was also a quotation: Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. ..Hermione was looking at Harry, and he was glad that his face was hidden in shadow. He read the words on the tombstone again. Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. He did not understand what these words meant. Surely Dumbledore had chosen them, as the eldest member of the family once his mother had died." The quote in found in both Matthew and Luke Matthew 6: 19:21 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." And again Luke 12:33-34 "Sell your possessions and give to charity; make yourselves money belts which do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near nor moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. On the surface, the statement is simply a truism: we love the things that we value most highly. So therefore, we must be sure that the things we love are the things that are of eternal and imperishable benefit. Harry says that he does not understand the words, but ironically, he fulfills them. As Dumbledore says in HBP, "You are protected, in short, by your ability to love!" said Dumbledore loudly. "The only protection that can possibly work against the lure of power like Voldemort's! In spite of all the temptation you have endured, all the suffering, you remain pure of heart, just as pure as you were at the age of eleven, when you stared into a mirror that reflected your heart's desire, and it showed you only the way to thwart Lord Voldemort, and not immortality or riches. Harry, have you any idea how few wizards could have seen what you saw in that mirror? Voldemort should have known then what he was dealing with, but he did not!" What Harry values most are his friends, and he is willing to sacrifice himself to save them. Although he briefly succumbs to the lure of power that the Deathly Hallows promises, he in the end is content to let the Resurrection Stone remain lost in the Forbidden Forest and to renounce the elder wand, just as he earlier renounced the thousand galleon prize at the end of GoF. (Harry notices Ron and Hermione gazing at the wand "with a reverence .he did not to see" ? showing just how potent its lure is.) The second is the inscription of the tomb of James and Lily Potter. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. Harry read the words slowly, as though he would have only one chance to take in their meaning, and he read the last of them aloud. "'The last enemy that shall be defeated is death' . . ." A horrible thought came to him, and with a kind of panic. "Isn't that a Death Eater idea? Why is that there?" "It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means . . . you know . . . living beyond death. Living after death." The quote comes from Paul's First letter to the Corinthians, 15:26. In this passage, which climaxes in the famous line, "Death, where is thy sting?" Paul writes that in the resurrection of Christ is the promise that we will also have rebirth. This passage is 1 Corinthians 15:20-26 "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death." Harry's initial reaction to Hermione's exegesis is despair: "But they were not living, thought Harry. They were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' moldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing ..He let [his tears] fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them." A theme that is developed in DH is that the enemy Death can be destroyed when Death becomes a friend. This is the ending of the Tale of the Three Brothers, where the third brother with the Invisibility Cloak "greeted Death as an old friend, and went with him gladly, and as equals, they departed this life." Harry later learns that, via the Resurrection Stone, he was not fetching the dead, "they were fetching him.". As Sirius tells him, "Dying? [Doesn't hurt] at all. Quicker and easier than falling asleep." Lupin's declaration that his son "will know why I died I was trying to make a world in which he could live a happier life." The quartet with Harry are at peace with their death, knowing that they did not live their lives in vain, in contrast to Voldemort, who thinks nothing is worse than his own personal death, and is willingly to slaughter others to achieve that purpose. Harry retains ownership of the Invisibility Cloak at the end of DH, suggesting, that when it is time, he too will greet Death like an old friend. - CMC From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 13:58:49 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:58:49 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172652 PM: > I think you've all missed the boat completely. JK makes a good point > here. All is not happy and puppy dogs and I think it would be a > disservice to a series whose morality so closely mirrors the "real > world." All cannot be "happily ever after," rather it's > just "well." destroying Voldemort simply meant ridding the world of > that one evil. Magpie: I don't think it's doing JKR a disservice. It seems like it's just acknowledging the very view that you're describing here--that's just what I got. The world was rid of that one evil and will stay okay until another evil comes back. PM: > She was never making the statement that ONLY Gryffindors are good and > ONLY Slytherins are evil...we know that is not true. Not all > Gryffindors are without fault and not all Slytherins are evil. > That's a rather narrow view of the books. Magpie: I didn't think all Slytherins were evil but I absolutely did think that they were of a lower order than others--I felt like there was a very medieval flair to the story and the Slytherins were the non- Christians or Damned or something like that. I absolutely saw a difference between Slytherins and the others, and when I went back to JKR's words about the subject she seemed quite open about that. So I don't think I'm saying anything wrong--I just don't have the same reaction to that idea as you do. PM: > > Thinking the houses to be reunited and the MoM to be cleaned up is > completely unbelievable. This is not a fairy tale. It may be > fantasy, but it's based in a world that very closely mirrors our > own...and in our own nothing is every perfectly happy and ending the > books that way would be completely contrary to the rest of the > books. That doesn't make it "ugly," it just makes it more believable. Magpie: Well, it's based on your view of the world not necessarily the real world. You think it's a fairy tale to think the houses could be reunited, JKR obviously thinks it's a fairy tale to think the houses could be reunited. For some of us *that's* what seems like a narrow view. Perhaps you're also assuming that people are demanding a completely perfect world, which I don't think people are. The point isn't that some need the world to be perfect and happy puppies and flowers. I just didn't agree with the limits and attitudes set down in the book. Which is why we didn't have the same experience of the books and don't think they mirror the world or had a happy ending. -m From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 14:01:06 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:01:06 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <112941.54917.qm@web84102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172653 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kristine Carlson Asselin wrote: > >JKR presents their romance through Harry's eyes. He's not going to see a heart-to-heart that R/H might have, so we're not going to see it. > > Kris Hello Kris, I would agree with you but there's an awful lot that happens which doesn't involve "Harry's Eye View" of things, and entire chapters happen which Harry knows nothing about, so the book isn't done from his point of view. That's my whinge about R and H, there's just no affection there, and nothing is ever shown. If these two are childhood sweethearts who grow up to have a family together, where's the nervous moments, the discovering of emotions and even the first contact between them? When was that moment when they moved beyond friends and became boyfriend and girlfriend? It just wasn't there in any of the books. Ron expresses concern every now and then, but so what? Who wouldn't when a friend is being tortured or in trouble? All we ever had presented to us is the bickering and arguing, and none of the usual joys and anxieties of finding love, especially at that age. JKR couldn't bring herself to give the books that angle, and also overlooked Harry's as well. She could have given just the odd line to let us know that a relationship was blossoming, referring to a certain touch, eyes meeting, hands being held and so on, but all we got were adolescent arguments, H turning violent towards him, and both of them giving no sign of anything "special" happening in their hearts. It was loveless and cold. Someone else pointed out that Harry and Hermione had plenty of time together for Hermione to open her heart up to her 'best friend' but she doesn't. They spent week after week doing nothing but shiver and snipe for a part of TDH until Ron turns up again. That was a big disappointment to me, because it removed a side of the story. It's not just a case of reporting what events took place on the road to killing Voldy, it's also about the events that led onto the epilogue - and as shown, a lot more happened than was ever implied by JKR's storytelling and that's why I felt disappointed. I also think Hermione could have done better than Ron, because the intelectual difference between them is enormous and she would probably get frustrated by him. Sandra. From jenlundq at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 13:51:04 2007 From: jenlundq at hotmail.com (pwrmom2) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:51:04 -0000 Subject: Kreacher and Dobby switched! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172654 Toner: > > > HRH just leave Kreacher to defend himself against the DEs who > > are likely to show up without so much as a warning. How hard > > would it have been to call for him, warn him, and then let him > > return home to defend it? I know they were worried about DEs > > apparating with him, but how hard could it be for all three of > > them to overpower the one or two DEs likely to be touching > > Kreacher right then? > Veronica: > But Kreacher DID work at Hogwarts... for almost a year... > > And I felt that Harry and Hermione, anyway, felt plenty of remorse > at having to leave Kreacher and not be able to warn him... > > Also, if HRH HAD summoned him to come and the Death Eaters came > with him, the DE's could have summoned VD right away as well. > > And I REALLY liked that it was Dobby that came to the Malfoys; > as their prior servant... to me, this fit perfectly that he was > the one to come help the trio and co. there; and everything came > full-circle from 5 years prior: Harry set him free via Lucius > Malfoy and Dobby set Harry free regardless of LM and co. Pwrmom2: I agree with Veronica's answer. Harry flat out couldn't call Kreacher and he was very sad about it. The great thing about Kreacher's power is he absolutely didn't have to do anything the DE said and would be able to leave at any time. He obviously figured out Harry couldn't come back and I LOVE that he showed up at Hogwarts and rounded the house elves to fight the battle in the name of his master!!! I cheered at that point. I also loved how the whole Kreacher thing shows us that often we are treated how we treat others. Harry starts out being rude to Kreacher because he sees Sirius treat him badly and sees how grouchy and rude Kreacher is to everyone else. Once Hermione points out how house elves have feelings and love those that treat them well and decided to live that new motto, things changed. I loved how I started the book not liking Kreacher and ended it thinking while he may not be Dobby he is still pretty cool! Dobby saving Harry from the Malfoys was PERFECT. I was sad he died doing it though. I cried. I was actually shocked that I cried over that particular point, but hey, Dobby has been loyal to Harry since he when he still was a servant. Pwrmom2 From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:07:59 2007 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <896447.77553.qm@web39508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172655 > Marika wrote: > >>> I think you're absolutely right about them not > being secret friends. She told him that her friends > did not understand why she was his friend, and he > also said he was going to sleep outside the > Gryffindor entrance if she did not talk to him. I'm > just as confused myself why Lupin never told > Harry.(Black disliked Snape so much that I doubt he > would ever say anything "good" about him.) The only > thing I can come up with is that Snape told Lupin > not to tell (like he one had asked Dumbledore), and > that Lupin agreed because he thought that Harry > didn't need to know...<<< > parisfan writes: i WAS wondering that myself. But i had also figured Lilly was friends with Snape b/f she and James got together and there is just stuff you don't talk about with your signfigant other. maybe Snape was one of them for Her. And she wouldn't bring it up for Snape and James hated each other and it'd probably cause a huge fight the fact she had been 'friendly' with the enemy. just my thoughts ____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 14:12:30 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:12:30 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172656 > > >>nightmasque@: > > This however is slightly mitigated by the otherwise > > atrocious epilogue, when Harry doesn't seem to mind if > > his son is sorted into Slytherin. But one paragraph > > does not alleviate an entire book's / series's ugliness. > > Betsy Hp: > Harry's son James didn't learn his "Slytherin is bad" attitude in a > vacuum though. So there's commentary on the commentary. "Slytherin > is okay ::wink, wink, nudge, nudge:: except for how it totally isn't." Magpie: Yes, I don't get this idea that Harry's attitude about Slytherin is much of a development just because he respected Snape's bravery. Of course Harry's kid won't be a Slytherin--what about that kid suggested he would be in that house? The fact that he realizes he ought to be afraid of the idea? As Harry himself says, the hat takes preferences into consideration, and as far as I can see the only thing that even puts you in Slytherin is wanting to be there. If you're tempted by that poison apple enough to take it, you're Slytherin. Harry telling his son he'd just be a great Slytherin, imo, is Harry showing his son that he loves him, not that Slytherin was redeemed. I mean, why would Slytherin's behavior in the book improve its reputation? Even Harry's defense of Snape makes the same point--hey, I knew one guy who was a Slytherin who was totally brave! Which is the quality of...Gryffindor house! If the kid wants to be brave I would assume that's where he would be. Slytherin may no longer seem as menacing as it did when Voldemort was around, but I'll bet that was the case at other periods in history too. -m From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 25 14:12:53 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:12:53 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? Message-ID: <32768569.1185372773201.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172657 From: Debbie Grosskopf >Isn't the Patronus supposed to be a unique creation for >everyone? How can Snape and Lily have had the same Patronus? >Isn't is supposed to be so unique that it is a secure form of >messenger? Bart: I've been trying to keep my posts to a minimum (and I'm waiting until after the flood to start looking at series-long discussions, such as Unforgivable Curses, Snape's personality, and Harry as a Horcrux) but here are a few things: 1) Where was it ever established that James' Patronus was a stag? 2) I suspect that Lily's patronus WAS a doe, in that she was in love with an animagus stag. 3) As I've stated before, the moment that I saw the doe Patronus, the very first thing I thought of was "Snape!" I was dead certain that was Snape's Patronus, yet as near as I can tell, there was nothing in the canon to explain this. Can anybody here think of where I might have gotten the idea? 4) Be that as it may, it is clear that Snape associated the doe with Lily. Bart From carodave92 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:13:54 2007 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:13:54 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172658 Carodave: THis has bothered me from SS/PS on! No one ever told Harry anything about his parent's childhoods or pasts - he found out about Sirius being his godfather and father's best friend by overhearing it in a pub; Lupin never told Harry until he had to that he had been a close family friend, and not one of Lily's friends ever contacted him to say 'I knew your mother'. It seems natural that on the platform to the Hogwarts Express, Harry would have been recognized and approached by an old classmate of his parents, (the way that Harry and Ron see Draco on the platform in the dreaded epilogue) but it never happened. There were definitely old friends/classmates who were tapped by Hagrid to donate photos to Harry's album, but none ever contacted him. Maybe there was an unspoken understanding in the WW that it would do cause pain to Harry to hear about his parents? I don't see why. Carodave --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vsacchet" wrote: > > Marika wrote: > >>> I think you're absolutely right about them not being secret friends. She told him that her friends did not understand why she was his friend, and he also said he was going to sleep outside the Gryffindor entrance if she did not talk to him. I'm just as confused myself why Lupin never told Harry.(Black disliked Snape so much that I doubt he would ever say anything "good" about him.) The only thing I can come up with is that Snape told Lupin not to tell (like he one had asked Dumbledore), and that Lupin agreed because he thought that Harry didn't need to know...<<< > > > Valerie says: > > This is my first post, so I hope that I am following the rules here, > but I thought it would be interesting to chime in on this issue. > During the whole "Mudblood" incident with Snape, Lily and James were > not really friends at this point. If anything, she thought James was a show off. If this incident marks the end of Lily and Snape's > friendship, it is possible that James and the gang never really knew > how close Lily and Snape had been before Lily and James became involved in each other. The guys all hated Snape already and it is possible that Lily just decided to stop defending him because he was well on this way to becoming a Death Eater. > From thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:03:36 2007 From: thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com (thesweetestthings23) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:03:36 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: <46A65F51.3040308@free.fr> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172659 Geoff Bannister a ?crit : > > I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of > > the Duke of Wellington about Waterloo that it was "a damned close- > > run" thing. We lost a lot of good people... I wonder whose loss > > affected you most? Dobby Definitely! I always knew that Pettigrew was gonna pay his debt to Harry and lose his life because of it. Along with this line of reasoning, I knew that all the Mauraders were gonna die. So I expected Lupin to kick bricks. But Dobby, it was so heart wrenching. thesweetestthings23 From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:01:54 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:01:54 +0800 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal In-Reply-To: <46A6A223.000008.01268@JUSTME> References: <46A6A223.000008.01268@JUSTME> Message-ID: <46A757D2.6090704@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172660 Debi blessed us with this gem On 25/07/2007 09:06: > > "But I thought they were bad?" > > > > He was referring to the Unforgivable Curses. From Wikipedia: > > In our reality, murder is bad, yet we have wars were many die and are killed > and we honor or veterans who have murdered many. Except that killing in wartime isn't considered murder; certainly we don't put soldiers on trial for killing, within the acceptable bounds for war. Debi: > I belive its the same in the WW, Unforgivable Curses are very very bad, but > in extreme circumstances acceptable, as in the war against Voldemort. Some have argued that, as the ban on the curses was lifted during Voldemort's first war, they were either lifted again, or the first lifting was still implicitly in effect during the second war. But I see too many problems with this theory: First, there is no indication in DH that the ban was lifted. A single sentence from JKR would have sufficed to inform us, but there is none. Second, if the ban had been lifted (or the original lifting reinstated) we really should have seen a lot MORE of them from the good guys. Third, this theory is tantemount, to my ears, to saying murder can become acceptable simply by repealing the laws against it. But, in fact, murder is not wrong because it's illegal; it's illegal because it's wrong. Making it legal doesn't make it OK. Fourth, even if the Unforgivables had been made extraordinarily acceptable, one would still expect at least a bit of moral distaste from people who had been raised all their lives to believe the UCs were wrong. Yet when Harry begins throwing the UCs around, he shows not the slightest moral compunction about it. When Hermione at Gringott's urges Harry to Imperius the goblins, she might at least have paid lip service to the moral component by prefixing her suggestion with, "I know it's wrong Harry, but we don't have a choice." It really seems a case of the whole moral component of the UCs having simply evaporated into the ether somewhere around the latter half of HBP. Fifth, fast forward to the climactic battle: there's Harry, standing mano a mano with the greatest and most evil wizard of all time, with the fate (and the eyes) of the entire wizarding world squarely on him. What more compelling case could ever be made for the extraordinary use of the killing curse? And what does this boy, Harry, who has already demonstrated no moral compunctions over two of three UCs, choose? Expelliarmus. Makes no sense. Sixth, the Ministry of Magic had fallen to Voldemort. Absolutely the first act of the new Ministry, assuming the ban had ben lifted, would have been to reinstate it. 'Nuff said. Finally, this theory still doesn't save Snape. He used the Avadra Kedavra not against the enemy, not in self-defense, but against an already-disarmed Dumbledore. Debi: > Sadly, we could never win a war without killing, How can we expect the WW > to be any different? Killing in war is a tragic necessity. But permitting the Unforgivables, even in time of war, strikes me (sorry to bring politics into this) as a lot closer to the current US administration's attempts to justify torture against "enemy combatants" in the name of peace. Torture -- and the UCs -- lie outside the pale of any civil society and it's use carries the ultimate penalty: loss of the right to call oneself civilized. At least, that's what I got from descriptions of the UCs in books 1 - 5. CJE Culver, Taiwan From jenlundq at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 14:12:55 2007 From: jenlundq at hotmail.com (pwrmom2) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:12:55 -0000 Subject: comments and questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172661 Pwrmom2: First of all, I didn't read all of the replies about the crying creature at Kingscross, so if this was already stated, please forgive me, but IMO I don't think it was just the part of Vodie's soul that was in Harry, but probably all of the pieces from all of the Horocrux's destroyed up to that point...just waiting for the one last peace so it could go on to it's final miserable station in the end (WW equivalent of He-- I assume). Also, are we just going to assume Neville got the sword because there was a dire need and he was lucky enough to get it presumably from the Sorting Hat before Voldemort got it? That part still confuses me a little bit. Lastly, I noticed someone early on commenting on why was Teddy at the train station if he was 19 years old. IMO he was there just to "snog" on Bill's daughter before she heads off to what I am going to assume is her last year at Hogwarts. Someone else commented on Ron's comment about grandpa Weasley disowning a member of the family marrying a pureblood as irony because Weasley's are a pure blood line. This may be true, but look what the 3 kids we know of married. Ron married Hermione. Yes she's a witch, but she's a mudblood, not pureblood. Ginny married Harry, his mother was a mudblood (I know I'm using the horrible word, but it is for quickness of typing) and Bill married a Veela or whatever Fleur is (or 1/2, I think, not full blood). Anyway, track record so far is no pure bloods. Granted we don't know who or if George or Percy married, but I think I made my point. From thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:08:19 2007 From: thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com (thesweetestthings23) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:08:19 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172662 Libby: > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to > fake Parseltongue well enough to access the Chamber of Secrets > Admittedly, he did earlier show skill impersonating Wormtail's voice > well enough to fool the Death Eaters at Malfoy Manor, but > Parseltongue has been billed as such a rare talent that it rang > false for me. > > Seems to me a well-placed Reductor Curse would have accomplished much > the same thing without fudging. I know that alot of people have problems with this part of the book. However, I found it extremely amusing. I literally cracked up when Ron faked it. thesweetestthings23 From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 14:27:07 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:27:07 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172663 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "guzuguzu" wrote: > > With reference to DH, the Prince's Tale: Does anyone else find it completely implausible that that Harry would not have known if Snape and Lily were "best friends" for at least five years of their lives? Dungrollin: It's worse than that; in the Hospital wing at the end of HBP: ************** 'Snape passed Voldemort the information that made Voldemort hunt down my mum and dad. Then Snape told Dumbledore he hadn't realized what he was doing, he was really sorry he'd done it, sorry that they were dead.' They all stared at him. 'And Dumbledore believed that?' said Lupin incredulously. 'Dumbledore believed Snape was sorry James was dead? Snape hated James'" ************** Dungrollin: Right. It doesn't occur to Lupin or McGonagall or Slughorn (who were all at Hogwarts at the same time and *all* knew them both) that Snape might have been sorry that *Lily* died? Honestly, there are millions of inconsistencies. I no longer believe that she had it all planned out from the start. In the Leaky/Mugglenet interview after HBP's publication she told us that Grindelwald was dead, and that he died in 1945. All that Elder Wand loyalty stuff was glued on afterwards. Though I enjoyed the read, I hate the last five chapters, and on further reflection am feeling more and more let down. I don't even have the heart to gloat about the stuff I got right. Dung From thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:13:31 2007 From: thesweetestthings23 at yahoo.com (thesweetestthings23) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:13:31 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172664 Nicole: > While the DH epilogue seems to be a lively source for debate, I just > wanted to say that, to me, is was like coming full circle. This book > is amazing terrific and action packed and dark and really quite > adult... and then the epilogue is there and brings back all the > innocent charm and wonder that we discovered in the first books with > the start of term train rides back to Hogwarts. Maybe this is what > JK had in mind? it certainly worked for me! I think I expected more details. I wanted to know specifics like where people lived. What they did for a living. What happened after the defeat of Voldemort. To pack 19 years into 3 or 4 pages just didn't do it justice for me. Maybe these things are trivial to some but I felt them necessary for closure. thesweetestthings23 From dougsamu at golden.net Wed Jul 25 14:29:41 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:29:41 -0400 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics Message-ID: <2B6FAB79-35D9-4721-A3D7-28DFF7F7DC2F@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172665 oliveu2cm: Perhaps Voldemort went to the white place too and saw what it would be like if he continued? But he awoke and didn't care, whereas the experience changed Harry? doug: Interesting. Voldy wouldn't have a mentor to explain what was going on then either. His experience would likely have been one of extreme misery and pain, (?) ___ __ From krisasselin at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:23:23 2007 From: krisasselin at yahoo.com (Kristine Carlson Asselin) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:23:23 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172666 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sandra Collins" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kristine Carlson > Asselin wrote: > > > >JKR presents their romance through Harry's eyes. He's not > going to see a heart-to-heart that R/H might have, so we're not > going to see it. > > > > > > > Hello Kris, I would agree with you but there's an awful lot that > happens which doesn't involve "Harry's Eye View" of things, and > entire chapters happen which Harry knows nothing about, so the > book isn't done from his point of view. snipped Sandra (thanks for the Hello :)-- you're right there are a few chapters that are not from Harry's perspective, but correct me if I'm wrong, NONE of those are about Harry's friends or things that don't have something to do with the "other" side. Spinner's End, I know is about Snape, and one could argue that it's not the other side, but Narcissa and Bella are prominent. The only chapter that breaks that is the first chapter of the first book. We've NEVER seen the any of the Weasley's or the Order from any other perspective than Harry's. So why would JKR write about Ron and Hermione's romance from any other perspective? I do see your point, and I would certainly have loved to see Ron and Hermione's relationship more fleshed out earlier in the series (not just this book) - but to me, it IS written realistically and entirely appropriately. I guess another argument could be made that they are holding themselves back because the "mission" with Harry is the most important thing. Ultimately, they belong together, but it takes a long time for them to be able to express that in front of Harry. Again, just my $.02. Back to lurking, I promise. Kris From red-siren at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 14:12:21 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:12:21 -0000 Subject: The Princes Tale In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172667 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marika_thestral" > wrote: > "And I can't believe that Hogwarts (in the Epiloge) kept sorting > people into Houses. Not because Voldemort suggested that Slytherin > was the only necessary house to keep, but for the same reason that > Dumbledore told Snape that sometimes he thought it was too early to > sort at the age of 11(DH p. 545), but I wish to add that besides > being too early it also prevents Slytherins to choose the good path. Sue says: I believe they kept with sorting because it is a tradition dating to the founding of the school. Also, DD was correct about 11 being to soon to be sorted. They should wait a year, one reason being many first years are muggleborns and new nothing of the wizarding world before they received their letters. There may have been quite a few more muggleborns in Slytherin if they waited. marika: > > But notice the difference when Harry tells his son that the bravest > man he ever met had been a Slytherin. I take that to mean that there > has been a change of attitude towards Slytherin over the ensuing 19 > years. Sue here: Yes, there is sure to have been a change in attitude, but I believe that statement by Harry just shows that Harry has truly forgiven Snape for most, if not everything, Snape did to Harry. From chell_e_bean at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 14:27:39 2007 From: chell_e_bean at hotmail.com (mddeininger) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:27:39 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew's Hand Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172668 I lost the original thread, so this would be a reply, but at The Sugarquill, someone said that when LV gave Pettigrew the silver hand he said, "May your loyalty never waver." (or something like that) It seems LV knew that Pettigrew might try to help Harry and he made it impossible. Michelle Long-time lurker From gingermc at cox.net Wed Jul 25 14:29:10 2007 From: gingermc at cox.net (Ginger McElwee) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:29:10 -0500 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006301c7cec8$2b0c83d0$81258b70$@net> No: HPFGUIDX 172669 Kit wrote: > In terms of whose deaths devastated me most, Fred's and Lupin's > broke my heart into pieces as well -- but there's a different > quality in my grief for them because unlike Hedwig and Dobby they > did choose to go into battle. Dobby also chose to go into battle. Actually he has been choosing to battle for Harry since he was first introduced. He defied his nature as a house elf to protect Harry in book two. He risked being caught stealing to get gillyweed. Every time he appears, Dobby has shown his willingness to do whatever is necessary to defeat evil. Dobby is a free elf who deliberately entered the Malfoy's house twice during what he knew was a dangerous time. He is a warrior by choice as much as any major character in the series, and his was a heroic death. Ginger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:37:48 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:37:48 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172670 > Lupinlore: > Well, except that by DH, at least, he wasn't intending Harry to be a > pig for slaughter. He was intending Harry to live and triumph > through the resurrection magic that he was confident would be > activated by Harry's selfless sacrifice. He was, in effect, lieing > in his conversation with Snape (as, to be fair, JKR lied. or at least > bent truth to the breaking point, when she said magic could not bring > back the dead). > > However, it does seem that there is a character being prepared as a > pig for slaughter in HBP and DH, and that character would be Snape. > Consider this -- DD wants the Elder Wand to be left without a master, > thus his decision to willingly die at Snape's hand. However, he must > have known that Voldemort would assume Snape was now the master of > the wand. Therefore, he must have known what would happen. Snape, > for his part, did not even have the truth to defend himself with, as > he did not know anything about the Hallows (not that it would have > made any difference to Voldemort). Neri: As much as I can make sense of Dumbledore's original plan, Snape was to be killed by Voldemort and the Elder Wand end with no master. Harry was supposed to eliminate all the other Horcruxes, then find he's the last Horcrux, go sacrifice himself, Voldemort would kill the Horcrux inside him, and then what? It still leaves Harry to fight Voldemort on skill alone, effectively a pig to be slaughtered. The phoenix core wand wouldn't have helped him even if it wasn't broken, since Voldemort wouldn't be using the brother wand, and Harry would lose Voldemort's powers when losing the Horcrux. The plus would be that *everybody else* would be protected from Voldemort because Harry had sacrificed himself for them. So as much as I can make sense of the original plan (I suspect it will never make complete sense) both Snape and Harry were to be sacrificed, with Harry having the advantage of at least knowing he was a sacrifice. Who was to kill Voldemort in the end I have no idea. Neri From unix4evr at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:38:01 2007 From: unix4evr at yahoo.com (UNIX4EVR) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:38:01 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172671 But they were NOT friends at school. JKR makes it clear that after the sorting Lily goes to Gryfindor and Snape to Slytherin. When they met after that it was one on one. People might have known they knew each other before school but they were NOT friends in school. Why would anyone even think twice about the fact that they knew each other as kids? Snape let his love for her be his deep secret. From maccanena at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 14:41:36 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:41:36 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's Worst Memory In-Reply-To: <474437.3250.qm@web53806.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <474437.3250.qm@web53806.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1f40e2480707250741w7245de22oe3c5ed34c416e77@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172672 On 7/25/07, Cassandra Lee wrote: > > I think in light of the chapter "A Prince's Tale" that Snape's worst memory > was actually him calling Lily a "mudblood" and not the Marauders tormenting > him. What do you guys think? He even told one of the portriats not to say > the word. > I have been thinking exactly the same. I always wondered why that was Snape's worst memory. Really, although it was embarrassing, I wouldn't qualify it as the worst a person can have. However, it makes complete sense now, that this was the moment of his biggest mistake, his biggest regret, the moment he pushed Lily away. Maria, who has lurked and been away for ages, but is glad to be back From chell_e_bean at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 14:34:25 2007 From: chell_e_bean at hotmail.com (mddeininger) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:34:25 -0000 Subject: comments and questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172673 Pwrmom2: > Also, are we just going to assume Neville got the sword because > there was a dire need and he was lucky enough to get it presumably > from the Sorting Hat before Voldemort got it? That part still > confuses me a little bit. Neville got the sword because he was a true Gryffindor and he needed it. I thought this was brilliant because for, so long, people wondered why Neville was sorted into Gryffindor. Now we know he was supposed to be there! Neville's retrieval of the sword also shows that Griphook and the goblins do not own the sword, Gryffindors do. Michelle From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Jul 25 14:45:56 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (duffypoo) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:45:56 -0000 Subject: A Sirius Problem Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172674 I've been trying to read all the posts from yesterday and didn't see anything on this topic so here goes. I find it hard to believe that the letter from Lily to Padfoot was found in GP. Sirius left there when he was 16 and, apparently, didn't go back until the house was turned into the OotP HQ, when Sirius was 35-36? He certainly wouldn't have gone into hiding there (from LV during the first war) because the Black family were LV supporters..whether they got cold feet or not. Sirius "hated the whole lot of them: my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that to be a Black made you practically royal...my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them ..." (OotP CanEd Pg 104). If Sirius had the letter in his posession when he was taken in by the Ministry after his "meeting" with Pettigrew, it most certainly would have been confiscated. If he had left it in his hiding place, how on earth did it get back to GP? Say, for argument, that Sirius, after his escape from Azkaban as Padfoot, went back to the original hiding place, and brought the letter with him to GP (OotP HQ) why did he not show it, or at least the picture, to Harry while Harry was residing there? He certainly knew how hungry Harry was for any information about his family. It just seems all very contrived. DuffyPoo aka CathyD sorry I haven't posted in a while and can't remember who I was! From tmarends at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:51:12 2007 From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:51:12 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172675 When Snape sent Neville, Luna, and Ginny to detention with Hagrid, I knew I was right and Snape was good. Tim A --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > >> > But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of the I > love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading the book > you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? > > If JKR had been writing in Shakespeare's day we'd still be reading it, > and if Shakespeare were writing in our day he'd be a billionaire too. > From snifsmak at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:52:48 2007 From: snifsmak at yahoo.com (Natalie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:52:48 -0000 Subject: Invisibilility Cloaks and the hallows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172676 Hi! I was a lurker and this is my first post. I tried to catch up on the posts to see if this has been discussed but it's impossible to read all of them so here are my 2 burning questions... 1. What is the significance of the deathly hallows really? Yes they are powerful and help Harry do things, but I just don't see them play a big part in Voldemort's defeat. The thing that brought about V's downfall was Harry being the last horcrux and his sacrifice. 2. Aren't the hallows supposed to be one of a kind? Yet Moody had 2 invisibility cloaks too which he borrowed to Order members to stand guard at the Dept. of Mysteries.... any theories? Cheers/Natalie From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Wed Jul 25 14:52:55 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:52:55 -0000 Subject: Not Just Lily Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172677 Lily's danger, and later her death may have been the catalyst for sending Snape to the 'right side' but clearly it was not his only motivation for continuing the fight and the proof is that he passed Dumbledore's final message on to Harry, the one that would send him to his death. If it had *just* been about saving Lily's son for her sake Snape would never have done that. For that matter DD would scarcely have been surprised that Snape was still thinking of Lily after all those years if he *hadn't* given clear evidence of being dedicated to the Dark Lord's fall above and beyond any need to 'avenge' her or protect her son. From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Wed Jul 25 14:55:26 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:55:26 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172679 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim" wrote: > > When Snape sent Neville, Luna, and Ginny to detention with Hagrid, I knew I was right and Snape was good. It was a pretty obvious give-away. Come on, Harry! Snape knows all about you and your little friends and Hagrid he would *NEVER* have 'mistaken' a trip with Hagrid into the FF as a punishment. I will admit however that HPB did rattle me just a bit, until I reread the Spinner End and DD's death scenes and realized what might be really happening. From erikog at one.net Wed Jul 25 14:54:26 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:54:26 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "guzuguzu" wrote: > > With reference to DH, the Prince's Tale: Does anyone else find it completely implausible > that that Harry would not have known if Snape and Lily were "best friends" for at least five > years of their lives? My guess is that most people wrote off the Lily/Snape relationship as Lily being kind to a social pariah, but nothing personal-- just her being the kind of girl a lot of people were in love with, to paraphrase one of JKR's interviews. They probably did not "hang out" with others present, just because their pools of friends (drawn from their Houses) were so different. So nobody could say, "Hey, we all partied together back in the day!" Also, I think the classmates that Harry knew (Sirius and Lupin) were very blind about people and particularly focused on James. They never bring Lily up with Harry because they're too busy worshipping James. (And would Lily have likely spoken fondly of Snape in front of James' Snape-hating buddies? She'd probably have kept that private.) Krista From intrignfantacie at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:53:24 2007 From: intrignfantacie at yahoo.com (Ann) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:53:24 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172681 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "UNIX4EVR" wrote: > > But they were NOT friends at school. JKR makes it clear that after > the sorting Lily goes to Gryfindor and Snape to Slytherin. When they > met after that it was one on one. People might have known they knew > each other before school but they were NOT friends in school. > > Why would anyone even think twice about the fact that they knew each > other as kids? Snape let his love for her be his deep secret. intrignfantacie: Exactly, he has merely fell in love as a child, as I have watched my children truly magically find the sweetest girls so enchanting as kindergardeners and growing up knowing they were bound to see each other on a daily basis in school, although not in the same circle, now in high school still not in the same circle, and possibly knowing they will probably never be together, but the enchantment the magic is so apparent when they see each other that i know (they can not because their hormones are sooo unfocused) their magic is very deeply embedded and theirs for a lifetime. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Jul 25 15:00:26 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (duffypoo) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:00:26 -0000 Subject: Invisibilility Cloaks and the hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172682 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Natalie" wrote: > > 2. Aren't the hallows supposed to be one of a kind? Yet Moody had 2 > invisibility cloaks too which he borrowed to Order members to stand > guard at the Dept. of Mysteries.... > > any theories? > > Cheers/Natalie > No answer to your first question, but I'm betting Moody's cloaks are just normal ones, "a travelling cloak imbued with a Disillusionment Charm, or carrying a Bedazzling Hex, or else woven from Demiguise hair..." (DH CanEd pg 333) Harry has the true cloak, "a cloak that really and truly renders the wearer completely invisible, and endures eternally, giving constant and impenetrable concealment, no matter what spells are cast at it." (DH CanEd pg 333) IMO, Harry could be seen by Bagshot/Nagini because he was wearing the Horcrux at the time and Nagini's Voldi-bit connected with the bit in the Locket and the bit in Harry. DuffyPoo CathyD - who never would have believe Harry was a Horcrux and agrees with whoever here said it was a poor plot device. From erinridgeway at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 14:57:32 2007 From: erinridgeway at yahoo.com (Erin Ridgeway) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:57:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? Message-ID: <789950.79966.qm@web62403.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172683 Quoth Nightmasque: <> Ah, precisely. Ulterior motives are the hallmark of a Slytherin. We sometimes forget that students aren?t Sorted based upon their family background, or what they?re wearing that day, or whatever. They?re Sorted based upon what is at the core of their personalities. The criteria for being Sorted into Slytherin (as best I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) is to put self first. To look out for number one. And given what we know now, we can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in JKR?s world. Every Slytherin is motivated by self-interest. Otherwise, they wouldn?t have been Sorted into the house in the first place. That?s why no Slytherin student returned to fight Voldemort in the Battle of Hogwarts. Throwing oneself into the line of fire for the good of others is a selfless act. It?s not a Slytherin?s bag, baby. They don?t get it. Does this mean that Slytherins are all bad, evil terrorists, hell-bent on the destruction of all that is good and pure? By no means. But self-sacrifice isn?t in their nature. In a world where selflessness is valued above all, a group that puts selfishness on a pedestal is not going to find themselves honored. Rich, maybe, and safe. But not loved. The exception is, of course, Snape. His love for Lily leads him from a selfish mindset ? one that wanted Lily safe in part because it suited him, with no thought for her husband and child ? to one where he goes against his basic nature (choices, again!) to protect a child he hates for the good of the entire world. IMO, THAT?S why Dumbledore suggested that they Sorted too soon. Not because he?s basically good, but because he has the ability to selflessly. It seems to me that what JKR is suggesting is that while Slytherin itself is not evil, putting self above others is a swift boat to Evil Island, population you. We learn that from Wormtail. He put his selfish desire for power before his friends, and what does that get him? Strangled by his own hand. Poetic. Personally, I would?ve been displeased if JKR had integrated the houses. It?s not that I appreciate a simplistic black-and-white, Slytherin-bad-Gryffindor-good-everybody-else-just-OK worldview. It?s that I relish the thought that it takes all kinds. Harry has learned that, too, based upon the polite acknowledgement nod he gives Draco at Platform 9 ?. Yep, there are some selfish a-holes in the world, Albus. You have to get along with them. On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of Ariana as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted as possible? Erin From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Wed Jul 25 15:06:38 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:06:38 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172684 Given that he didn't find out about his Dad's best friends until book three, and then only because of that final confrontation in the Shrieking Shack, I find it very believable. Besides it seems clear that being put in opposing houses distanced Lily and Severus. Lily says nobody can understand why she even talks to him; and no doubt he caught a lot of grief from his DE associates about his attentions to a 'mudblood' Gryffindor. I doubt anybody but the two of them knew how close they'd been as children. From erikog at one.net Wed Jul 25 15:08:22 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:08:22 -0000 Subject: Snape: not a stalker; Lily: one more layer of protection Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172685 In re: the discussion of whether Snape's a stalker. Others have already pointed out quite well that he's just a lonely 10 year old when he meets Lily, but I think what is important is what is what doesn't happen--there's no mention of him chasing her around her last years at Hogwarts, interrupting her wedding, trying to find her after marriage, etc. Emotionally, he may have clung to his deep feelings for her, but there's no evidence he pursued her in-person after the "Mudblood" banishment. It seems like the only time their worlds come in contact again is when he goes to Dumbledore to save her life--and it's not a "give her to me/save her, please," just "save her." So, no, he's not a stalker, just a person with a deep love and affection for a person. 2 more thoughts: While much has been said of the "ancient magic" Lily evoked by dying for Harry, I think she worked a more basic magic, too. She tapped Snape's reservoir of love for her (although inadvertently). Just as Lily's magic protected Harry, so did the man who loved her, Snape. Also, what I thought was cool was how Voldemort's choice of Harry in particular added another dimension of his guaranteed downfall. Voldemort, by choosing Harry, picked the one baby whose mother V's agent Snape would willingly give his life for. Snape himself even *asked* Voldemort to spare Lily. By destroying Lily, Voldemort turned Snape into a life-long personal agent for the safety and security of Harry Potter, allowing Harry to get to adulthood and finish Voldemort off. Krista From mac_tire at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 15:04:16 2007 From: mac_tire at hotmail.com (pattiemgsybb) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:04:16 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: <006301c7cec8$2b0c83d0$81258b70$@net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172686 Kit wrote: > > In terms of whose deaths devastated me most, Fred's and Lupin's > > broke my heart into pieces as well -- but there's a different > > quality in my grief for them because unlike Hedwig and Dobby > > they did choose to go into battle. Ginger McElwee wrote: > Dobby also chose to go into battle. Actually he has been choosing > to battle for Harry since he was first introduced. He defied his > nature as ahouse elf to protect Harry in book two. He risked > being caught stealing to get gillyweed. Every time he appears, > Dobby has shown his willingness to do whatever is necessary to > defeat evil. Dobby is a free elf who deliberately entered the > Malfoy's house twice during what he knew was a dangerous time. > He is a warrior by choice as much as any major character in the > series, and his was a heroic death. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise -- I only meant that, in my view, Dobby has an innocence that the adult witches and wizards don't share. Dobby's death *was* heroic -- he was "a warrior by choice," as you say. But it's my belief that his motivation was his love for Harry, first and foremost, and love for the cause only insofar as that is Harry's cause -- and in his eyes Harry's cause must be the right cause. (Remember that when Dobby first appears he is trying to keep Harry safe by preventing Harry from going to, or remaining at, school -- even though this is not what Harry himself wants. His priority is Harry's safety.) Dobby and his fellow elves, whether some be free or not, have no guarantee that they will benefit if Voldemort is defeated -- and they have every reason to believe that the average witch or wizard isn't overly concerned with their welfare. I felt that Dobby's decision to risk his life for Harry's was both a very brave and a very altruistic one for that reason; he put his life on the line for the person he loved, time and time again. ~ Kit From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:09:05 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:09:05 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172687 I think I expected more details. I wanted to know specifics like where people lived. What they did for a living. What happened after the defeat of Voldemort. To pack 19 years into 3 or 4 pages just didn't do it justice for me. Maybe these things are trivial to some but I felt them necessary for closure. > > thesweetestthings23 ****Katie:**** I did too. And I actually started a post #172633 "Our Own Epilogue" about starting our own epilogue and expounding on the skeletal info we were given in the epilogue. yes, this is a plea for people to respond to it and to throw out what they wanted to happen/thought would happen etc. And I don't think it's trivial at all. We spent 10 years with these folks and we want to know that they're ok. Anyway, I posted what I thought would/wanted to happen to some of my favorites...I really want to hear what everyone else thinks! Katie From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 15:13:20 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:13:20 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <789950.79966.qm@web62403.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172688 > Quoth Nightmasque: > < were on the 'good side' so to speak were given ulterior motives for doing so, i.e. Snape's was Lily.>> Erin: > Ah, precisely. Ulterior motives are the hallmark of a Slytherin. We sometimes forget that students aren't Sorted based upon their family background, or what they're wearing that day, or whatever. They're Sorted based upon what is at the core of their personalities. The criteria for being Sorted into Slytherin (as best I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) is to put self first. To look out for number one. And given what we know now, we can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in JKR's world. Magpie: Exactly. Though I don't think Snape's quite so much a success story as you say. He's not the only Slytherin to sacrifice himself--they just sacrifice for reasons that mean something to them even when they're doing the sacrificing. So even Snape's redemptive sacrifice was, imo, a personal one that didn't go beyond himself as it could have. He sacrificed himself and saved himself. I don't happen to find the "it takes all kinds so learn to live with the assholes" all that inspiring myself, but that definitely seems to be the message of JKR's Christ-figure. -m From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:15:49 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:15:49 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172689 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Neri" wrote: > > > > Neri: > As much as I can make sense of Dumbledore's original plan, Snape was > to be killed by Voldemort and the Elder Wand end with no master. Harry > was supposed to eliminate all the other Horcruxes, then find he's the > last Horcrux, go sacrifice himself, Voldemort would kill the Horcrux > inside him, and then what? It still leaves Harry to fight Voldemort on > skill alone, effectively a pig to be slaughtered. Hmmm. I wonder to what extent the wand can be used by someone who isn't its master? Obviously to a certain extent, but does it have crippling deficiencies when used by someone to whom it is not bonded? Also, what about the strange immunities Harry seemed to have on resurrection (no effect from Crucio, etc?) Are these because he is the master of the hallows, or because he is a Resurrected Savior Being? Maybe that is what DD was getting at, to wit: 1) DD willingly killed by Snape, leaving wand without a master; 2) Snape killed by Voldy, leaving Voldy with wand but not as master; 3) Harry sacrifices self, getting rid of disgusting mewling soul- fragment thing; 4) Harry resurrected; now has immunities to some of Voldy's spells 5) Harry faces Voldy. Voldy weakened by using wand that is not bound to him. Harry has advantage of immunities to UCs. 6) Harry defeats Voldy. Has Kreacher fetch sandwich. Takes nap. Or then again, maybe not. Lupinlore, who not for the first time wonders if JKR ever tries to flow-chart this stuff From evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 15:17:17 2007 From: evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com (evil_sushi2003) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:17:17 -0000 Subject: Where is the BANG? - Re: DH rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172690 DH was a real disappointment. On the plot: Everything seemed obvious or redundant. -Harrycrux idea had already been suggested. -RAB is Regulus Black - who would have thought. -Snape loving Lily was so obvious I was hoping against it. -Snape/Dumbledore euthanasia thing due to dead hand can also be found discussed in posts. There was no "BANG wow, why didn't I realise that" moment: -PS has Quirrel!Voldy - the clues were there. -CoS Ginny/Diary!Riddle - some clues here too. -PoA Lupin!Wolf, Scabbers!Pettigrew etc - how did we miss this? -GoF Moody!Crouch - JK had us fooled again. -HBP JK subtley does the pair of chests, which we hear about when Harry first uses floo powder then again when Fred and George do something with a toilet and a Slytherin (memory fails me a bit here but will find cannon) and we even see it in Borgin and Burkes - I was left slapping myself for not thinking of it! In DH was it supposed to be "Oh no I didn't realise that Snape was actually a [kind of] good guy"? - because I'd have never guessed that... The diadem - when I read that Ravenclaw had a tiara I thought brilliant, it was right in front of Harry all along - Murial's tiara - brilliant plot twist. Then it turned out to be some bit of junk that was mentioned once. Harry's memory not failing him he instantly remembers this lone encounter. The hallows plotline didn't fit well - Voldy has just returned and what does he do? Instead of personally going after Harry he decides to find himself a more powerful wand to defeat him with. Why not just overcome the duel cores by getting one of his loyal death eaters to disarm Harry before he finishes him off - problem solved. Ron parseltongue - how can anyone defend JK for that? Also since when does Mundungus come up with brilliant ideas involving polyjuice potion - isn't this just a little suspiscious? Why doesn't the OOP look into how the DE knew Harry was being moved? And why do HHR decide not to go to Godric's Hollow and then end up going there anyway? If they went straight away it would have saved a lot of hiding away doing nothing. If Harry doesn't have a plan why doesn't he make one? Then there were some bits that just confused me -What was the Snape/Lily thing anyway? Snape loving her from afar due to some kindnesses I could understand - but best friends? It seemed a bit implausible really. -Lily portrayed just a bit too perfect - what happened to all the shades of grey JK makes a point of us seeing in James and Sirius? -Snape's love for Lily seemed all off. (Not the fact that he loved her, more the love itself - I get what JK is trying to do, I just don't think that it worked). Some of Neri's points seriously summed up exaclty how I felt when JK destroyed my favourite character (paraphrased). 1. The Snape and Harry confrontation/interactation we've all been waiting for never happens. 2. Harry's reaction to the truth finally learns the truth about Snape and about his mother (the big surprise every Potter fan has been speculating about since the first or second book)is lame. He doesn't even *think* about it at all because JK has given him other things to deal with. 3. Snape doesn't do much in DH. -Gets sacked and killed. He sends the sword to Harry for DD. 4. Worse, Snape's character hasn't developed at all since the first chapter of the first book. No saving Harry's life or another big redemption moment. 5. Snape's death is a bit pointless - Snape's character arc ends with nothing - doesn't even die fighting, isn't killed because he was DDM 6. Too much CHEESE. Poorly written epilogue. Just some thoughts from ES who thought overall DH sucked and wanted more humour - to see Snape survive and be loved by someone (anyone!) would have been brilliant because a Snape without a scowl on his face (or a Snape with a pretend scowl on his face when everyone knew he was pretending) would have tickled me! The only bit I actually enjoyed was the Potterwatch program! *~ES From intrignfantacie at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:17:56 2007 From: intrignfantacie at yahoo.com (Ann) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:17:56 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172691 Nicole: > > While the DH epilogue seems to be a lively source for debate, I > > just wanted to say that, to me, it was like coming full circle. > > This book is amazing terrific and action packed and dark and > > really quite adult... and then the epilogue is there and brings > > back all the innocent charm and wonder that we discovered in the > > first books with the start of term train rides back to Hogwarts. thesweetestthings23: > I think I expected more details. I wanted to know specifics like > where people lived. What they did for a living. What happened after > the defeat of Voldemort. To pack 19 years into 3 or 4 pages just > didn't do it justice for me. Maybe these things are trivial to some > but I felt them necessary for closure. intrignfantacie: I totally agree. an action-packed and glorious 7th book. An honorably lovely ending but ... far too many questions in my feeble ol' mind remain. I was very elated to read HP did not die, Ginny was married to him and R/H were still their best friends also married w/children but what about Dean, Luna, and Neville, McGonagll, Hagrid, Hogwarts, MOM, the Weasleys, and who raised Tonks/Lupin's child ... its a very long list ... From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:25:42 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:25:42 +0800 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A76B76.6030202@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172692 horridporrid03 blessed us with this gem On 25/07/2007 09:27: > > Betsy Hp: > Oh my gosh, I totally agree. We heard not hair nor hide about the > Hallows in any of the previous books and suddenly JKR decides that > what this great McGuffin hunt needs is... three more McGuffins. The > hell? Yeah, didn't make much sense in that way. At the end of HBP Dumbledore entrusts Harry with the sacred task of destroying Horcruxes, only to suddenly start lobbing excruciating hints of Deathly Hallows at Harry out of left field just to -- what? -- demonstrate some sort of sadistic streak? Harry rationalization was that maybe there were things he was supposed to learn, but not use. Come again? Smack in the middle of the Great Horcrux Chase hardly seems the proper time for Dumbledore to be distracting Harry with trivia lesson. I think what JKR was going for was the Revelation, a "Wow -- Harry's Invisibility Cloak is is a Deathly Hallow? That's so-o-o KEWL!" kind of moment. In the end, however, the cost in terms of story line was just too high. CJ From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Wed Jul 25 15:43:55 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:43:55 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: <01a801c7ce79$e23de3e0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172693 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma" wrote: > > >> Eddie > >> Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > > dkewpie: > > A few of us stressed many times on this list that person is Merope. > > For some reason that seems to be so hard to believe for a lot people and I > > still don't understand why. > > It just seems so obvious to me when JKR mention that prior the release of > > HBP in the interview she's referring to Merope. > > > > Just please, I hope no one is wasting time asking her that again in the > > upcoming live chat...that'll be such a wasted question which could have > > been other more interseting question. > > > > It's MEROPE, people just accept that and leave it at that! > > > > Jo > > > Shelley: > No, I won't! I'm sorry- I've seen this question asked on so many lists- > hundreds of times already since DH came out- not just this one, but also on > Mugglenet and others, that it's pretty clear to me that a LOT of people > expected her to answer that question in Book 7. If a lot of the fandom has > that same question, then it would be a perfect question to ask in the live, > upcoming chat, because it really is common question. > > You are the first person I've ever heard say Merope. That doesn't even fit > canon- we never see a time when she doesn't use magic, and then is later > able to. We see Dumbledore saying "she wasn't at her best" when her dad was > bossing her around every 5 seconds, belittling her in every way, but once he > lands in jail, she is free to "be herself" and relax, and it's then that she > shows her true abilities. That isn't anywhere near "learning to use magic > LATE in life". > Brothergib now: It is possible that it is Merope. She was regarded as a squib, and only really managed to perform any magic after her father was taken from her. However, I seem to remember the quote from JKR stated that someone would perform magic late in life under desperate circumstances. I always assumed it would be Filch whilst Hogwarts was under attack. Anyway, if it wasn't Merope, I think JKR simply forgot to add this to the story From glpm93 at adelphia.net Wed Jul 25 15:33:39 2007 From: glpm93 at adelphia.net (G Miller) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:33:39 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172694 IMHO, I think that the epilogue was written a while ago and it was not written for us, the readers. It seems like it was written as a way for JKR to "burn her bridges" and effectively prevent her, or anyone, from continuing this series by writing a book 8. Because how can you have a sufficiently compelling story without the threat that Harry, Ron, or Hermione could possibly die. Nineteen years is an adequate amount of time to have passed because now the focus would be on the kids, not HRH. I re-read the epilogue trying to get more info out of it, especially what Harry was doing for a living. I get the sense from the reaction, that the Potters have been living a quiet life. The one twist I was hoping to read, because of his growth and development over the last 3 books is that Neville would be the DADA professor, not the Herbology professor as has been speculated for so long. Although this does keep the possibility of a new series starting up after the epilogue; and gives JKR a few years to come up with the plot. GJM From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:59:22 2007 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:59:22 -0000 Subject: Another reason for Ron/Parseltongue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172695 I think Ron speaking one word of parseltongue to open the chamber is not such a massive leap for one reason alone. I think he may have picked up quite a bit of parseltonuge when he wore the Locket. Wearing the locket certainly seemed to have a greater effect upon Ron than it did Harry-an ophan or Hermione- muggle parents 1/2 a world away.(not such a big surprise as I think Ron's moving away from home and having family so close to danger all the time, being hungry most of time, and truly not having family close by--no siblings for the first time in this life etc. made Ron more suseptible to it's--err.."charms", for lack of a better word, than the others.) Ron did seem to hesitate a great deal before destroying the Horcrux which I had assumed(given all the italics) was spewing a great deal of parseltongue before it's demise. He even hesitated before the "apparitions" appeared.. Also Ron had heard Harry open not only the locket, but the chamber (by the faucet at least) years before. Doddie, (who was surprised that the destruction of two horcruxes took place off page--the ring in HBP and the cup in DH) From verosomm at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:35:32 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:35:32 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172696 Nicole: SNIP to me, is was like coming full circle. This book >SNIP> thesweetestthings23: > I think I expected more details. SNIP Maybe these things are trivial to some but I felt them necessary for closure. verosomm: Since there are about 100,000 posts in the last 18 hours or so, I can't go through them all... but I think the fact that it's 19 years later is HIGHLY significant. That will be Sept. 1, 2017, almost exactly 10 years from now, and didn't JKR said other than the encyclopedia she may revisist the WW from someone else's perspective in "maybe ten years or so"? I've heard several fans attribute this "10 years" quote to her, and, though I myself can't seem to find it, I've heard it from several HP "fanatics" and ALL of them told me this BEFORE Friday, so there's no way they read the book and took a wild stab in the dark. From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Wed Jul 25 16:02:12 2007 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:02:12 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172697 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "oliveu2cm" wrote: > > > Ken says: > > > > Yes, I've been puzzling over the two AK attempts as well. Why were > > the results different? What stopped Harry being killed each time? > > > > In the forest did he survive because: > > > b. he was de facto master of the wand and it would not kill its > > master. But if this was the reason why did it not rebound and kill > > Voldemort there and then. Did the wand know he was its master before > > he declared himself so before the second AK attempt? > > I definitely thought Harry would escape death in the forest by having > the 3 Hallows, although that wasn't what Rowling indicated by the > Kings Cross chapter. However your hypothesis (b) here makes a lot of > sense to me. Harry was owner of the wand and it could not kill Harry, so therefore it killed the part of Harry that was not him - the Voldemort bit! That's why I think the spell did not rebound and kill Voldemort there and then, because it had found part of Voldemort in Harry and eliminated that. > > But the force of the spell was so profound and the fact it killed > something that had been w/ Harry since he was a child, it knocked > Harry into this "experience" with Dumbledore. > > Additionally, I can't help but wonder if Voldemort didn't have a > similiar "experience" as Harry in this scene. When Harry comes to, he realizes that Voldemort had been thrown to the ground as well. Harry wondered if striking him had hurt Voldemort. I wonder if Voldemort wasn't actually experiencing life as that shriveled non- human baby thing? Perhaps Voldemort went to the white place too and saw what it would be like if he continued? But he awoke and didn't care, whereas the experience changed Harry? > > oliveu2cm > Brothergib: I agree with some of this. Harry was tethered to LV and this is why he survived. The AK from the Elder wand targeted the LV Horcrux and therefore both Harry and LV survived. However, because Harry had accepted death and was therefore master of death, he got to choose. This was what the Kings Cross scene was about. Harry could elect to join his parents or could go back and finish off LV. I think by mastering the Hallows, Harry returned possessing great wisdom and as the true master of the Elder wand. I don't think LV was involved with any such epiphany - he was simply knocked back due to an attempted attack on the Elder wand's master - but was not killed as another piece of his soul had taken the hit. From unix4evr at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:03:54 2007 From: unix4evr at yahoo.com (UNIX4EVR) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:03:54 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172698 Nope. Snape wasn't set up to be slaughtered. As far as Voldemort knew Snape killed Dumbledore when he (Dumbledore) was defenseless (didn't have his wand). Since Snape didn't disarm Dumbledore (and Voldemort knew this even though he didn't know that Draco had disarmed Dumbledore) Snape had no claim to the elder wand. You have to disarm the owner. Harry disarmed Draco (the rightful owner) -- even though the wand Harry took wasn't the elder wand it didn't matter. He had still disarmed (not just beaten) Draco. But Snape knew he was always a potential victim -- he did it for Lily. He was not, however a pig to the slaughter. Harry could have been. Dumbledore hoped that Harry would willingly give up his life for his friends (and thus survive), but he couldn't be sure. But Dumbledore knew the only way for the world to be at peace was for the horocrux in Harry to die -- whether or not Harry had to die with it. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:07:31 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:07:31 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172699 > Lupinlore: > Hmmm. I wonder to what extent the wand can be used by someone who > isn't its master? Obviously to a certain extent, but does it have > crippling deficiencies when used by someone to whom it is not bonded? Neri: Well, we are supposed to understand that Grindelwald was using the Elder Wand for many years, aren't we? Despite only stealing it like Voldy did, not winning it in a fair duel. Or does that qualifies? Anyway, Gregorovich also didn't seem to be bonded. So, does winning the wand from someone who isn't bonded makes you bonded? We do know for sure that Dumbledore, at least, ended up bonded. Hmm, I need a flowchart. > Also, what about the strange immunities Harry seemed to have on > resurrection (no effect from Crucio, etc?) Are these because he is > the master of the hallows, or because he is a Resurrected Savior > Being? Neri: I'd say the most obvious explanation for that is the same explanation for Voldy's last AK not working on Harry. That is, that the Elder Wand wouldn't work on its rightful owner. If another explanation was suggested in DH, then I'm not aware of that. From marlenahooker at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 16:11:09 2007 From: marlenahooker at hotmail.com (clytaemnestra_28) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:11:09 -0000 Subject: Snape's Worst Memory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172700 In all likelihood, Dumbledore probably didn't think to mention it. He often has good guesses, but we've seen that he can be fallible. :-) I would guess that anyone coming across a Penseive ought to react with caution, the same as accidentally stumbling across a person's private journal. Snape probably didn't think Harry would be so disrespectful as to look inside one, or perhaps he meant to put it somewhere more secret and forgot. Marlena From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:02:50 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:02:50 -0000 Subject: I was wrong (contains spoilers, lots and lots of them) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172701 > Eggplant wrote: > But in my own defense let me ask even the most loyal members of the > I love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading the > book you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil? Just wanted to add my 2 cents on Snape. >From book one - I never thought Snape was really on the side of evil. I always thought he was the perfect mole or spy for Dumbledore. Snape did handle Harry badly but not evil-ly - like Umbridge was doing - and Snape had so many advantages to do evil to Harry but he never did. I think Snape seeing Lily in Harry's eyes prevented Snape from truly hurting Harry. Someone who can feel love can not be truly evil - which is what killed Pettigrew - he felt compassion and the silver hand strangled him. Now with all that has been revealed in the last book - I think Harry - a blend of looking like James, the man who stole Lily from Snape and Harry having his mother's eyes was maddening to Snape when he first looked at Harry. Remember that stare Snape gave Harry in the first book. We all thought it was because he was "thee" famous Harry Potter but I now think Snape was seeing Lily, the woman he loved, in her son's eyes but the rest of Harry looked like James, who emotionally for Snape, James was still standing between him and Lily. He also had to think he could have been the father to Harry had things worked out in his favor. I think it was this frustration that Snape had is why he was rough with Harry and Harry's eyes, like his mother's, save him from Snape. Plus Dumbledore kept saying, I trust Snape with my life and coming from Dumbledore that was saying a lot. Plus Rowling writes with an understanding of myths and legends and real witch knowledge. I am not saying she is a witch only that she knows a lot of real knowledge so she has done her research. This is why I never thought Snape was really evil because he couldn't be because myths don't do that. Snape was the perfect balanced blend of evil and good - a bridge to either side and once Snape was dead, that bridge was gone and so the head of evil and the head of good would then annihilate each other, which is what happened - again myth format. The world was again in balance. I was disappointed not finding out what Harry, Ginny, Ron, Hermione, Draco and the rest got as jobs. But the epilouge was necessary to return the world back to a balanced order, again myth format. I wanted to know how George was doing the joke shop without Fred. But all in all, in my humble opinion, the seventh book was written so well even though it never answered all of our remaining questions. Lady Potions From jenlopez1283 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:18:53 2007 From: jenlopez1283 at yahoo.com (jenlopez1283) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:18:53 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172702 This is probably stupid, if Hermione had the books on the Horcruxes what did she do with them? It sounds like they are very rare books and if she managed to get rid of them does it mean that someone like Voldemort would never apear again because he could longer learn how to split their soul? Or what if she still has the books? jenlopez From maccanena at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 16:27:39 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:27:39 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nagini and the Invisibililty Cloak - thoughts? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1f40e2480707250927k261444e0wf930ba3e18c737a0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172703 On 7/25/07, doppioprego wrote: > > In Godric's Hollow, Nagini (as Bathilda) was able to see, recognise and > beckon Harry to come into the house, despite the fact he and Hermione > were under the cloak AND disguised as a middle-aged couple. In the > Shrieking Shack during the Voldemort/Snape showdown she is shown is > floating around in the bubble whilst Snape repeatedly asks Voldy > to 'let me bring you the boy'. Why would Nagini not have spotted Harry > hiding under the cloak and told Voldy of this? Would have spared an > awful lot of time and magical effort in destroying the Hogwarts castle > to root him out. I am a bit confused now as I still have to reread most of the book, but the way I understood it is that visiting James's and Lily's grave is what gave them away. So Nagini was watching behind some bushes and knew they had arrived. Maria From csh at stanfordalumni.org Wed Jul 25 15:20:57 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:20:57 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172704 > Chuck wrote earlier: > > > > The biggest problem I have with the Deathly Hallows theme is that it > > seems that Dumbledore never intended Harry to garner all three > > objects and become the Master of Death: as Harry states quite > > clearly, Dumbledore intended to die as the final owner of the Elder > > Wand, and it was only by accident that Harry (via Draco) becomes its > > owner. Yet he wills the Resurrection Stone to Harry and the "The > > Tales of Beedle the Bard" to Hermione. Could Dumbledore have > > changed his will while slumping on the Lightning Struck Tower? > > Could Dumbledore have known > > that Voldemort would pursue the Elder Wand and was trying to give > > Harry more knowledge about it and its relationship to the other two > > objects? Would knowledge of the Deathly Hallows help Harry in his > > search for the Horcruxes? > > > andy_mycrib_1987: > > Well Dumbledore did give Harry two of the Deathly Hallow items. He > gave him the Invisibility Cloak during his 1st year at Hogwarts and > he gave him the Resurrection Stone in this book. > > As for the Elder Wand, the only way that Harry could have gotten it > from Dumbledore was if Harry defeated Dumbledore (and we all know > that was never going to happen). > > Perhaps Dumbledore knew that if Draco was the one to disarm him (even > if Snape killed him since that death was pre-planned), then Draco > would be master of the Elder Wand instead of Snape. > > I have no idea how he thought this would help Harry get the Elder > Wand, but I'm just thinking off the top of my head here lol. > Actually, after re-reading the Kings Cross chapter, Dumbledore confirms that he had intended Snape to take possession of the Elder Wand. That means that Harry would have to defeat Snape in order to possess all three Hallows. Dumbledore must have had faith in Harry that he would defeat Snape AND spare his life so that Snape could then tell Harry that he must sacrifice himself. So Draco foiled that plan, but even if Draco didn't, it isn't clear that Snape would have taken possession of the wand since he wouldn't necessarily "defeat" Dumbledore by mercifully killing him. Chuck Han From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 25 16:38:47 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:38:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry Message-ID: <33354519.1185381527789.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172705 nightmasque at yahoo.com writes: >I don't think that was the point at all. I think the >point Betsy was making was that it was simplistic of >Rowling to divide the good and bad people into >Gryffindors and Slytherins respectively; to use your >analogy, it would be like saying all Slytherins are >terrorists, and all Gryffindors are defendors of >liberty and freedom and all that good stuff. It has >been pointed out elsewhere that all the Slytherins who >were on the 'good side' so to speak were given >ulterior motives for doing so, i.e. Snape's was Lily. >I myself can't think of (m)any Slytherins who were >shown to be on the good side (mainly) because they >were good innately; therefore the message of this book >at least seemed to be that Slytherin = Bad, no >exceptions. Which IS an ugly message to be putting out >there. Bart: Well, we actually know of 3 "good" Slytherins: Snape, Slug, and Phin. Based on what we've learned from them, a major trait they have is a belief that the end justifies the means. Consider that, with only a few exceptions, none of the Slytherins fought on the side of the DE's, either. It wasn't whether they were good or evil, it was that they figured that whichever side came out on top, they would ally themselves with it. Gryffindors fight for their goals, Hufflepuffs work for them, Ravenclaws think their way through, and Slytherins look for a shortcut. Bart From mnxi_par at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:31:31 2007 From: mnxi_par at yahoo.com (mnxi_par) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:31:31 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172706 >Neri: > Well, we are supposed to understand that Grindelwald was using the > Elder Wand for many years, aren't we? Despite only stealing it like > Voldy did, not winning it in a fair duel. Or does that qualifies? > Anyway, Gregorovich also didn't seem to be bonded. So, does winning > the wand from someone who isn't bonded makes you bonded? Grindelwald stunned Gregorovich when he took elder wand. So maybe that makes him the owner. Draco also had only disarmed Dumbledore. mnxi_par From cindiknits at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:20:08 2007 From: cindiknits at yahoo.com (cindiknits) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:20:08 -0000 Subject: Ted Tonks was always muggle-born - In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172707 > > Valerie Frankel wrote: > Others noticed Ted Tonks, who heals Harry but started as a > muggle. > > Aida: > > I thought that was odd too, but I looked it up: > page 50 in OOTP, Raincoast Canadian Edition: > 'My dad's Muggle-born and he's a right old slob. I suppose it varies, just like it does with wizards?' > (Tonks to Harry, at the Dursley's) > Cindi: Being muggle-born doesn't make you a muggle, does it? Wasn't Hermione muggle-born? I thought you were either a witch/wizard or a muggle at birth, regardless of your parentage. From carmenharms at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:42:25 2007 From: carmenharms at yahoo.com (snazzzybird) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:42:25 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172708 --- "montavilla47" wrote: > > > I'm disappointed that she doesn't give Draco a bit more... spine, > I guess. His impulse at Malfoy Manor is to help his fellow students, > but he's not in any position to do it. > > But then, once he got back to Hogwarts, I expected... something. > Some gleam of humanity from him. We get Narcissa's help at the > end--which seems like the small sort of service Dumbledore (or > the reader) was expecting to get from Pettigrew. But it's so > little. > > Maybe there's something I missed with the Draco sneaking back > into Hogwarts bit? > snazzzybird: Didn't Draco, Crabbe, and Goyle sneak back into Hogwarts to capture Harry and turn him over to Voldemort? I thought they said something like that. (I don't have the book in front of me.) I know that when I got that impression I was disappointed in the lack of growth that it signified. From hfolvik at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:28:03 2007 From: hfolvik at yahoo.com (hfolvik) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:28:03 -0000 Subject: DH - Bloody Brilliant Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172709 This is my firt post and I have saved it until I had something worth posting. I read DH in under 6 hrs, shut myself in a room and read until it was done - taking food and potty breaks of course. I thought it was a great way to end the series, sure everyone still has questions, but no matter how JK ended the book she can't make everyone happy. I have been on several sites where fans are hurt by the lack of explaining in several areas. We didn't find out what the Potters did for work, what happened to so and so and on and on and on - JK said she may not right about Harry again, she didn't say she would NEVER write about Harry again. I think she did a wonderful job in DH, and of course I am saddened that so many of my favorite characters had to die in the course of the book, but when you battle evil to the extent they did there has to be some death. I think discussing the series as adults is great, but come on really.....to complain like kids not getting their way, is it necessary?? I hope everyone in light of my post can understand that discussion and out right complaining isn't going to change the way she wrote the book, I have also heard through a couple of sites that there is a possible Dumbledore biography in the works and maybe a few more comic relief textbooks - maybe a Hogwarts: A History. There is also a place for fan fiction to continue on in areas that were left out, and some of them that I have read are pretty good. So I say read and re-read the series again and again and be happy that such an amazing author shared this story with the world. hfolvik From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 25 16:46:40 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:46:40 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172710 > va32h here: > At one point, Dumbledore says he intends to die willingly, thus ending the > power of the wand, and at another point he says he intended Snape to > get the wand...maybe he meant get it and get rid of it (Snape certainly > doesn't use it). Eddie: If Dumbledore wanted to end the power of the wand, why didn't he just break it? Assuming JKRowling thought of this option and chose to not to have Dumbledore/Snape/Harry take it, then I can only assume that she wanted/needed D/S/H to *use* the power of the Elder wand to defeat Voldemort. Which Harry did, I think. Eddie From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:47:42 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:47:42 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172711 > > >> Eddie > > >> Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > > > > > dkewpie: > > > that person is Merope. It just seems so obvious to me when JKR mention that prior the release of HBP she's referring to Merope. > > > It's MEROPE, people just accept that and leave it at that! > > > > > > Jo > > Shelley: > > it's pretty clear to me that a LOT of people > > expected her to answer that question in Book 7. > > You are the first person I've ever heard say Merope. That doesn't > even fit > > canon- We see Dumbledore saying "she wasn't at her best" when her > dad was belittling her in every way, but once he > > lands in jail, she is free to "be herself" and relax. That isn't anywhere near "learning to use magic LATE in life". > Brothergib now: She was regarded as a squib, and > only really managed to perform any magic after her father was taken > from her. However, I seem to remember the quote from JKR stated that someone would perform magic late in life under desperate > circumstances. Anyway, if it wasn't Merope, I think JKR simply forgot to add this to the story JW: Apologies if the following is redundant - I have over 500 unread messages, and as a first review I am sampling a few from different threads. I do not see how it could POSSIBLY be Merope! She was young, NOT late in life. She was NOT a squib. My position is that insults thrown at her by her deranged father should NOT be taken as truth. After all, he thought muggles, muggleborns and half-bloods were worthless. Does anybody except THOSE statements as truth? If those insults are not taken seriously, why treat the insults thrown at his daughter seriously? As for "late in life" and "under desperate circumstances," she was young, and the most desperate circumstances she faced were when she lay dying after her son's birth. At that time, pregnant, sick, destitute, dying, she chose NOT to use her capabilities. Therefore, Merope is the OPPOSITE of the character that JKR described. Similarly, it could not be Neville. Honing magical skills (while acquiring the special ingredients of self-confidence and FOCUS) at ages 15 thru 17 does not qualify as "late in life." So, who could it be? My conclusion is that, *if the character exists at all*, it is her Molliness. Mrs. Weasley was certainly magical throughout her life; however, the only magic she practiced was in the course of old- fashioned motherly duties. She cooked meals; she laundered clothes; she cleaned her home; she cared for her family... And then,after nearly losing Ginny, Arthur, Ron, Bill, George, Harry, and actually losing Fred, Tonks and Remus (the last two I assume by Bellatrix, who had put them on her to-do list at the beginning of the book) Molly sees Bella trying to crush Ginny. What does she do? Does she call for help? Molly, who has never dueled anything more vicious than doxies (and lost to a boggart) takes on one of the most deranged and successful fighters in the series, and kicks her cruel and demented LV-loving butt. I think it fits better than Nevvy and Merry. She is middle-aged (not old - she would be younger than I am, and I am CERTAINLY not old!) and we witness her doing something we should consider far outside her previously demonstrated capabilities, under VERY desperate conditions. It works for ME! From genderspace at yahoo.co.in Wed Jul 25 15:52:24 2007 From: genderspace at yahoo.co.in (genderspace) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:52:24 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: <650861.43940.qm@web33114.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172712 > Sue White wrote: > > Why did JKR ruin this book and perhaps series for me > with the trite epilogue? > > Am I alone? I've been a lurker but the so so disappointing epilogue compels me to post. How could JKR assume that all we'd want to know is who ended up with whom - So many questions unanswered - what occupations did they have? Who was the new head of Hogwarts? What kind of a new society did post-Voldemort wizard world evolve? What about the elves? Nineteen years later Harry and co are only 36 and yet have children who are over twelve - so is one to assume that they married immediately and then went on the reproduce serially - I'm sorry but this vision of domestic bliss leaves me completely unmoved! The focus seems to be on establishing that after years of a roller coaster ride all Harry wanted (and apparently got!) was predictability and three children! SP From deepam at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 15:47:47 2007 From: deepam at yahoo.com (deepam) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:47:47 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172713 > > Lupinlore: > > Well, except that by DH, at least, he wasn't intending Harry to be a > > pig for slaughter. He was intending Harry to live and triumph > > through the resurrection magic that he was confident would be > > activated by Harry's selfless sacrifice. He was, in effect, lieing > > in his conversation with Snape (as, to be fair, JKR lied. or at least > > bent truth to the breaking point, when she said magic could not bring > > back the dead). > > Neri: > As much as I can make sense of Dumbledore's original plan, Snape was > to be killed by Voldemort and the Elder Wand end with no master. Harry > was supposed to eliminate all the other Horcruxes, then find he's the > last Horcrux, go sacrifice himself, Voldemort would kill the Horcrux > inside him, and then what? It still leaves Harry to fight Voldemort on > skill alone, effectively a pig to be slaughtered. > Who was to kill Voldemort in the end > I have no idea. > You got everything right, but one point that you forgot, which Dumbledore strongly depended on is this: Harry has a piece of Voldemort's soul but Voldemort has Hary's blood in him. Since this blood is protected by Lily's magic, Harry will not die till even one drop of his blood survives. When Harry willingly "gets killed" by Voldemort, the magic "tethers both of them" to life. When Harry fights (in the next round), then since he is the master of Elder Wand, and he is willingly fighting back and he is fighting with the "other Draco wand" (Draco had two wands which switched allegiance to Harry after he overcame Draco), and Voldemort does not have any more horcruxes left to protect. All these complex magic go in to ensure the spell rebounds and kills Voldemort. To the large Dumbledore knew Harry had more than one protection to help him if he willingly dies. The rest was not in Dumbledore's hand but he knew Harry would have one more chance to fight Voldemort. my 0.02 cents. -Deepa From harryp at stararcher.com Wed Jul 25 16:51:55 2007 From: harryp at stararcher.com (Eddie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:51:55 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172714 > jenlopez: > This is probably stupid, if Hermione had the books on the Horcruxes > what did she do with them? It sounds like they are very rare books and > if she managed to get rid of them does it mean that someone like > Voldemort would never apear again because he could longer learn how > to split their soul? Or what if she still has the books? Eddie: They're LIBRARY books! Hermione destroy them?! Heavens! She probably returned them to the library and paid the overdue fines too. :-) OK, seriously (which is hard for me), I think it's an interesting question. I think the right place for them is in the Department of Mysteries, with the Unspeakables. Eddie From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Wed Jul 25 17:01:06 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:01:06 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172715 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Neri" wrote: > As much as I can make sense of Dumbledore's original plan, Snape was > to be killed by Voldemort and the Elder Wand end with no master. I don't think that's quite right. DD himself says he intended Snape to have the Elder Wand, and is disapointed it didn't work out that way, (Kings Cross Station chatper). Personally I find this rather touching evidence both of DD's trust in Snape, leaving him something so powerful and perilous, and his concern for him. Maybe he hoped with the Elder wand Snape might manage to survive the War. From fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:42:20 2007 From: fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com (fitzchivalryhk) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:42:20 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172716 lupinlore: > You are quite right that it is not entirely negative, and cannot be > easily summed up that way. Dumbledore as I have said felt pity and > compassion for Snape, and respect. But love? No, I don't think so -- > at least as compared to his feelings for Harry. You seem to exclude Dumbledore's possibility of love for Snape simply based on his willingness to send Snape to his death by the trick of Eldar Wand, yet by the same logic, Dumbledore should have no love for Harry as well because according to Dumbledore's original plan, Harry would have been sent to (nearly) certain death as well. How do you address this problem? In another post, you have sketched Dumbledore's original plan as this: 1) DD willingly killed by Snape, leaving wand without a master; 2) Snape killed by Voldy, leaving Voldy with wand but not as master; 3) Harry sacrifices self, getting rid of disgusting mewling soul- fragment thing; 4) Harry resurrected; now has immunities to some of Voldy's spells 5) Harry faces Voldy. Voldy weakened by using wand that is not bound to him. Harry has advantage of immunities to UCs. 6) Harry defeats Voldy. Has Kreacher fetch sandwich. Takes nap. While I agree from 1) to 3) of your sketch, my 4) differs: 4) Harry resurrected; the people he protected get immunities of Voldy's spell, Harry does not. 5) Harry get killed by Voldemort, because his magical skill is far beneath Voldy. 6) Other people manage to kill Nagini. 7) Big battle, other people manage to kill Voldemort. The thing that protect Harry's from Voldie's AK is Harry's ownership of the Eldar Wand, yet it is not in the original plan of Dumbledore. If Draco has not conveniently disarmed Dumbledore and got the ownership of the Eldar Wand, if Harry hadn't by chance defeated Draco, Harry would not have got the ownership of the Eldar Wand at all. Voldie's spell won't rebound, and Harry would be dead. So back to the original question, do you still think that Dumbledore only send Snape to certain death, but not Harry? lupinlore: > Absolutely! A large part (although not the whole) of justice is > inflicting pain on people who deserve it. fitz: To me, your joy in Snape's death and suffering sounds much more like revenge than justice. Your wishing of Snape's pain is based on his treatment of Harry, which is mostly unfair taunting, house-point deduction and detentions. None of these are life-threatening or life-long traumatising. On the other hand, you completely ignore what Snape has done for Harry, that he has saved Harry life and helped to defeat Voldemort at great personal risk and pain. How is that fair? Harry's naming his child after Snape is not just a sign of his forgivness, but a show of gratitude for what Snape has done for him and Lily. People do not name their child after someone just because they have forgiven someone, but because they think he has done something worthy of praise or thanks. Perhaps the implication of this act can bring us another perspective to the Snape and Harry relationship, although I doubt you would share Harry's sentiments. fitz From irenetsui at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:04:31 2007 From: irenetsui at yahoo.com (irenetsui) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:04:31 -0000 Subject: Nagini and the Invisibililty Cloak - thoughts? In-Reply-To: <1f40e2480707250927k261444e0wf930ba3e18c737a0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172717 > > On 7/25/07, doppioprego wrote: > > > > In Godric's Hollow, Nagini (as Bathilda) was able to see, recognise and > > beckon Harry to come into the house, despite the fact he and Hermione > > were under the cloak AND disguised as a middle-aged couple. In the > > Shrieking Shack during the Voldemort/Snape showdown she is shown is > > floating around in the bubble whilst Snape repeatedly asks Voldy > > to 'let me bring you the boy'. Why would Nagini not have spotted Harry > > hiding under the cloak and told Voldy of this? Would have spared an > > awful lot of time and magical effort in destroying the Hogwarts castle > > to root him out. > Irene: At that time, Harry was still inside the tunnel, underneath a crate. He was not standing blatantly in the room, under the cloak. Nagini did not see him. From redwooddawn at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 17:03:14 2007 From: redwooddawn at hotmail.com (redwooddawn) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:03:14 -0000 Subject: Last word scar? (was: return to normalcy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172718 > > Katie wrote: > > > > > No, I didn't love the epilogue, either. It was trite and lite and > > didn't fit with what we know of the series, the characters, or JKR's > > writing. I felt like she had written it a long time ago (which she > > did actually do, right?) and then felt she couldn't, or shouldn't, > > alter it. > Carol responds: > > Primarily, though, the epilogue makes it clear that Harry can now live > rather than survive, he can be "just Harry," as he's wanted to be from > the moment he found he was famous. (He can live with his fame now; his > younger son doesn't even know that his father is "really famous.") > As a whole, the epilogue is JKR's way of establishing, without really > needing to say so in that last sentence, that all is well. redwooddawn: I was still expecting the last word to be "scar." With so many specific comments made in interviews over the years, I was expecting more closure, but the fact that Harry lives a nice normal life with people he loves is reward enough. For entertainment purposes only, (I wouldn't DARE, EVER want to rewrite any of the books) and because I was so inexplicably attached to the book ending in "scar" I offer these alternatives: - Little Albus trips as he steps onto the train and Harry consoles him by saying "Albus, don't worry, it won't even leave a scar." OR George is there too, with two sets of twins and another couple children he's sending off to school, and he passes out cigars in honor of his seventh child being born. (hopefully his first born, a daughter, is named Fred) Harry says,"You know, I've still got a scar on my pinkie from the last cigar you handed out. What is this one gonna do?" And George says, "Relax, Harry, sometimes a scar is just a scar." (yes, terrible, terrible, I KNOW !) I especially wanted to touch base with George to know that he was able to find joy in life after losing his twin. I really feel cheated on that count. From aggieraggie at ntlworld.com Wed Jul 25 17:09:29 2007 From: aggieraggie at ntlworld.com (Jo R) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:09:29 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172719 Someone posted that JKR was having a live web chat on 30th July. What would you want to ask her, given the opportunity? 1) My immediate question would be about Snape's portrait in the Headmaster's office. Is it there? If not, why not?!?!? When HRH went to the office at end of DH, I was expecting, nay wanting, Snape's protrait to be there, even if he was asleep. I think I, like others, wanted some sort of confrontation, no a meeting, between Snape and Harry. I agree that it couldn't come before Harry learned 'The Truth' and thus meant Snape had to die but I would have liked an acknowledgment between the two. 2) Why was Dean on the run from the Muggle-Catchers and not his siblings? Was he like Lily and Tuney? JKR says he has an interesting back story and I HOPE SOOOOOO MUCH that she does the encyclopedia!! 3) Who was the one that could do magic late in life? I did wonder, at some point, whether this was Mrs Figg. Not so much as doing magic but one that came into the WW (through our eyes anyway) later in life. I couldn't remember the exact wording that JKR used so was unable to clarify this. My 2 knuts worth. From tmarends at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:09:03 2007 From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:09:03 -0000 Subject: A Sirius Problem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172720 I didn't really have a problem with this. I have things in storage now from when I was in high school (I'm 41). Sirius could have been trying to get all the things that were precious to him (like the letter) after the XMas incident in OotP... especially if they related to Harry. Remember, Harry had not been back to GP since that XMas incident. Tim --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "duffypoo" wrote: > > I've been trying to read all the posts from yesterday and didn't see > anything on this topic so here goes. > > I find it hard to believe that the letter from Lily to Padfoot was > found in GP. Sirius left there when he was 16 and, apparently, didn't > go back until the house was turned into the OotP HQ, when Sirius was > 35-36? He certainly wouldn't have gone into hiding there (from LV > during the first war) because the Black family were LV > supporters..whether they got cold feet or not. Sirius "hated the whole > lot of them: my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that > to be a Black made you practically royal...my idiot brother, soft > enough to believe them ..." (OotP CanEd Pg 104). > > If Sirius had the letter in his posession when he was taken in by the > Ministry after his "meeting" with Pettigrew, it most certainly would > have been confiscated. If he had left it in his hiding place, how on > earth did it get back to GP? > > Say, for argument, that Sirius, after his escape from Azkaban as > Padfoot, went back to the original hiding place, and brought the > letter with him to GP (OotP HQ) why did he not show it, or at least > the picture, to Harry while Harry was residing there? He certainly > knew how hungry Harry was for any information about his family. > > It just seems all very contrived. > > DuffyPoo > aka CathyD > sorry I haven't posted in a while and can't remember who I was! > From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:42:58 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:42:58 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A77D92.5000905@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172721 P J blessed us with this gem On 25/07/2007 11:01: > I sort of liked the book but there were huge parts of it that really > sucked... All those "I'm bored, let's find a Horcrux" moments in the > woods, the whole evil Dumbledore section I'm afraid the whole "evil Dumbledore section" left me wanting to slap Harry (or was that JKR?) silly. That Rita Skeeter's words could have any effect on Harry at all, especially given his personal experience with her fabrications, struck me as implausible. The whole "Fool me once..." thing sprung immediately to mind. And yes, shame on Harry for allowing Skeeter, of all people, to sway his trust in Dumbledore. CJE Culver, Taiwan From hfolvik at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:07:53 2007 From: hfolvik at yahoo.com (hfolvik) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:07:53 -0000 Subject: Very Exciting - She will write again Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172722 I was just checking out another site and found something that will excite everyone - go to this link! http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/19935372/ From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Wed Jul 25 17:14:31 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:14:31 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <33354519.1185381527789.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172723 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Well, we actually know of 3 "good" Slytherins: Snape, Slug, and Phin. Make that four - you're forgetting Regulus. And don't forget the traitorous Pettigrew was a Gryffindor. From courtaud2002 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 17:14:52 2007 From: courtaud2002 at hotmail.com (silvialaura2002) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:14:52 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172724 > mnxi_par wrote: > Grindelwald stunned Gregorovich when he took elder wand. So maybe that > makes him the owner. Draco also had only disarmed Dumbledore. > And Dumbledore only disarmed Grindelwald. silvialaura From courtaud2002 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 17:08:40 2007 From: courtaud2002 at hotmail.com (silvialaura2002) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:08:40 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <33354519.1185381527789.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172725 > Bart: > Well, we actually know of 3 "good" Slytherins: Snape, Slug, and Phin. Let's not forget Regulus. silvialaura From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:20:18 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:20:18 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172726 Montavilla47: > > Nope. Not for a single split-second did I doubt in Snape's essential goodness. It played out exactly as I had predicted at least a year ago. > > I knew that if Snape was going to be good, then JKR would start out DH by continuing to make him look as bad as possible. > > If, on the other hand, he was going to be evil, that she would continue to plant doubt in our heads by having him provide vital information or some such thing. Carol responds: I knew on a rational level that Snape had to be good based on the story structure (the reversal/recognition scene had to come near the end, and, as you say, he had to appear evil for the device to work). I knew, again on a rational level, that she'd been setting us up with his ambiguity for five books and the UV and "murder" of Dumbledore in HBP, but on an emotional level, I started having doubts about his goodness. Was he using Occlumency on Voldemort and forced to watch impassively when he'd much rather have saved Charity Burbage? and what about George's ear? (Lupin's ranting about Sectumsempra as Snape's signature curse made me think *he* might be ESE. What nonsense! Severus would have been kicked out of school if he'd been using a cutting curse that wouldn't heal on fellow students, and Lupin never knew he'd been a DE so he can't have known what he did then.) The doe Patronus and the "terrible" detention with Hagrid of course reassured me, but I got all upset again with "The Sacking of Severus Snape," reading it too quickly and not realizing that he was casting only defensive spells. Imagine if he'd sent McGonagall's daggers firing back at her. So I skipped ahead to his death, which was horrible and which I didn't understand at the time. I had to read the parts I'd skipped and then read "The Prince's Tale" to understand that he'd seen Nagini in a bubble, which meant it was time to tell Harry about the soul bit. He was desperate to talk to him, and his pale face as he understood that Nagini was going to kill him was not fear of death (how many times had he risked it?) or even (mostly) fear of that terrible death, but fear that he would die without talking to Harry, telling Harry what he needed to know to defeat Voldemort. And this way, he got to explain (or show) a lot of things that he'd never have been able to tell Harry otherwise. The "greed" in his eyes in the first scene may be Harry's interpretation. He doesn't yet know that Snape is good. He has hated him until that minute, but now he's in shock over Snape's death and the reason for it. The "greed" could be intense longing. He wants to meet that little girl, to tell her that she's a witch. He's excited by his plan, and we see his dejection when it fails. We also see that while he holds Muggles in contempt (surely because of his father) he has nothing against Muggleborns. Lily is a witch to him, pure and simple, and later on the Hogwarts Express, he innocently hopes that she'll be sorted into Slytherin as he expects to be. (It must have been his mother's House.) He does nothing to earn the contemptuous nickname "Snivellus," which is merely a distortion of his name by another little boy who judges him by the House he wants to be in. We see that he and Lily are really friends, that he's different from the boys he runs around with (and blind to their faults). Oddly, as Valky also noticed, the worst memory comes *after* the so-called Prank, which means that James did not suddenly become noble and heroic. He's still willing to ambush Severus and publicly humiliate him. We're given no alternate version, so Severus's idea that James saved him because he got cold feet must be right, and the worst memory has to be, as the LOLLIPOPS people have always argued, because he slipped and called her a Mudblood and she refused to forgive him even when he slept outside the Gryffindor common room and abjectly begged her to do so. That, and not the worst memory, must have been the turning point. His despair caused him to join his "friends" because he felt he had not other choice. Lily is prejudging him, assuming that because *they* have become Death Eaters, he has done so, too, but I think she's mistaken. Not only does he still love her (not a silly crush like Harry's on Cho at the same age: she's all he cares about other than DADA and maybe Potions, apparently), but she's the one who says, "You've chosen your way. I've chosen mine." (DH Am. ed. 676). There's no evidence that he's done anything worse than turning a blind eye to his friends' Death Eater ambitions. Clearly, he's not like them, nor is there any evidence that he routinely uses the word "Mudblood" or she would not have been shocked by it. That scene is the turning point in his life, and the next time we see him, he's a Death Eater begging Dumbledore, again abjectly, to find a way to save Lily. Dumbledore, who of course knows him to be the eavesdropper, treats him and his request with contempt, and Snape accepts the reprimand, begging him to keep "her--them--safe" and vowing to do "anything" in return, a vow he keeps for the rest of his life (678). His "tale of deepest remorse" is wild grief for Lily which is of course unfeigned. And he promises to protect Lily's son for Lily's sake, but makes DD promise never to tell. "Potter's son" must never know that he's being protected. Dumbledore reluctantly agrees, which explains why he never told Harry why he trusted Snape. But the trust by at this point becomes absolute. We see Snape complaining in Harry's first year about his mediocrity but agreeing to keep an eye on Quirrell, Snape telling DD that he's not tempted to flee like the coward Karkaroff and DD agreeing that Snape is "a braver man by far than Igor Karkaroff," with the left-handed compliment implying that Snape should have been sorted into Gryffindor, which has the odd effect of causing Snape to look "stricken" 630). We see him scolding DD for putting on a cursed ring. Snape has contained the curse in DD's arm (apparently the ring itself is no longer cursed or else he removed it). DD gives Snape a rare compliment ("I am fortunate, extremely fortunate, that I have you Severus"). Snape has already told him about Voldemort's plan involving Draco and that it's intended as "slow torture" for Draco's parents. They agree that LV expects Snape to kill Draco. DD tells Snape that the only way to save Draco from LV's wrath is for Snape to kill him instead. Snape reacts with sarcasm and then, when DD talks about saving Draco's soul, he asks about his own. Clearly, he has never killed anyone before. DD persuades him that saving a dying man from pain and humiliation is better than being mauled by Greyback or tortured by Bellatrix. Snape, apparently realizing that his soul is safe but Draco's would not be, and perhaps hoping that the moment will never come, agrees. We find that he only spends time with the Death Eaters on DD's orders. Apparently, he stayed away from the graveyard intending never to return, to stay at Hogwarts rather than running like Karkaroff, to fight and die rather than rejoin them. He only returned on DD's orders. he would not have done so otherwise. He starts to rebel against killing DD because DD has not told him everything. When DD does tell him about the soul bit, and that Harry must die, he at first says that he thought they were protecting him for Lily. When he learns that Harry has been protected as part of DD's plan and that he must die setting out to meet his own death, Snape is horrified. When DD asks how many men and women he has watched die, he says, "Lately, only those I could not save" (687). This is our glimpse of the true Snape, the brilliant but reluctant double agent who would much rather be saving lives. Yes, it's still for Lily, but she's his ideal. He's like a medieval knight going into battle for the honor of a lady, but it's more than that. Lily, to Snape, represents everything that is good and pure, everything that is worth saving and fighting for, and he is protecting her "mediocre," rule-breaking son, whom DD now seems willing to sacrifice, for her sake. Snape casts his doe patronus, which DD must have seen before but never understood, and he is moved to tears. At this moment, he finally understands Snape. This vignette is also important because it contains the message that Snape must somehow deliver to Harry, somehow get him to listen to, when LV starts becoming protective of Nagini. That, of course, is what Snape was trying to do when Voldemort sets Nagini on him because of the Elder Wand. Ironically, he would have failed. Harry was in the shack already, witnessing the terrible scene, and had he escaped, he would never have found him, nor do I think it likely that Harry would have listened. There's more: Snape as headmaster protecting the students in unseen ways, his very presence preventing the Carrows from taking over the school and filling it with Death Eaters, Snape reprimanding Phineas Nigellus, his connection with HRH, for calling Hermione a Mudblood; Snape arranging and carrying out the lovely plan that will allow Ron and Harry to get back to gether and Ron to retrieve the Sword through need and valor. I'm not sure about Dumbledore, but I wholly admire and, yes, love, Severus Snape. Carol, sure that Snape has earned freedom and happiness in the afterlife and hoping that he is honored in the WW From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Wed Jul 25 17:29:12 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:29:12 -0000 Subject: Classical & Biblical Quotations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172727 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Caius Marcius" wrote: > > > There are two Biblical quotes in chapter 16, the Godrics Hollow > graveyard. The first Harry sees on the tomb of Dumbledore's mother > and sister: > > "Harry stooped down and saw, upon the frozen, lichen-spotted granite, > the words Kendra Dumbledore and, a short way down her dates of birth > and death, and Her Daughter Ariana. There was also a quotation: > > Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. > > ..Hermione was looking at Harry, and he was glad that his face was > hidden in shadow. He read the words on the tombstone again. Where > your treasure is, there will your heart be also. He did not > understand what these words meant. Surely Dumbledore had chosen > them, as the eldest member of the family once his mother had died." > > The quote in found in both Matthew and Luke > Ken: My first thought was that Harry must not have gotten any religious instruction while he was at the Dursley's if he was unfamiliar with those quotes and meanings. The first is quite famous, the second less so but still one that you would have met if you spent much time in a church or Sunday school. I think the first quote, chosen by Dumbledore, says more about Dumbledore than anyone else. Dumbledore briefly made the Hallows his treasure and he paid a terrible price for that. Before that his own fame and success were his treasures. The death of his sister made him see where his heart had gone, in dying she called him back to where he needed to be. The graves of his mother and sister were the birthplace of the Dumbledore we knew. He put this quotation there to make sure he never forgot. The quotation should have bolstered Harry's confidence in the validity of his long held opinion of Dumbledore, if only he had understood it. > Caius Marcius: > > The second is the inscription of the tomb of James and Lily Potter. > > The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. > > Harry read the words slowly, as though he would have only one chance > to take in their meaning, and he read the last of them aloud. "'The > last enemy that shall be defeated is death' . . ." A horrible thought > came to him, and with a kind of panic. "Isn't that a Death Eater > idea? Why is that there?" > > "It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, > Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means . . . you > know . . . living beyond death. Living after death." > Ken: I have a different take on this too. I think Hermione got it wrong, maybe she hadn't been to Sunday school much either. I'm not sure what the author meant although Hermione often speaks for her. The error is one that is critical to me as I try to explain to conservative Christian friends why I don't think Harry Potter doesn't violate the Biblical proscription against magic. Magic as used in the Bible is always an attempt to thwart God's will and so it is rightly condemned. Magic as portrayed in the Potterverse does not exist in the real world. There is no theological objection to people in the Potterverse employing the magical gifts they have been given in this imaginary universe because God does not give gifts and then demand that they not be used. There are Old Testament heroes that do much the same sorts of things that Old Testament witches do but their deeds are not called magic nor are they called witches. The only difference, and it is the crucial one, is that the heroes are seeking to know God's will, not seeking to thwart it. The passage from Corinthians is talking about Christ's final victory over evil and death. The key thing here is that death is the last enemy to be destroyed, sure, but it is Christ and Christ alone to whom that victory belongs. Seen in this light a horcrux is so completely evil because it is an attempt to possess that which is Christ's: victory over death. The quest for the Deathly Hallows represent the same unholy desire. Both are the type of magic that is proscribed in the Bible. Tom Riddle gave himself wholly over to this horrible sin, Dumbledore flirted with it twice and tainted himself just enough so that like Moses he was allowed to see but not enter the promised land -- a final victory over Voldemort in this case. Harry gets to play his Joshua, perhaps Neville is his Caleb. Of the three, the resurrection stone is the most dangerous Hallow. It is the only one that can hardly be used without showing disrespect to God. Harry only uses it to steel himself to do what he was called to do. Dumbledore's manner of conveying it to him helps to ensure that he will not use it inappropriately. Harry shows more wisdom than perhaps he realizes when at the end he decides to leave it lost in the forest. The other two Hallows represent more ordinary means of "cheating death". Arming yourself against your enemies and shielding yourself from injury and disease as best you are able are not proscribed. Bringing back the dead is. We don't know who would have put that quotation from Corinthians on the Potter's grave. Whoever did it made sure that they spoke as powerfully against Voledmort's terrible sin from their graves as they did during their lives. Ken in their death as in their lives the Potter's sent a powerful message of condemnation to those who > The quote comes from Paul's First letter to the Corinthians, 15:26. > In this passage, which climaxes in the famous line, "Death, where is > thy sting?" Paul writes that in the resurrection of Christ is the > promise that we will also have rebirth. This passage is 1 Corinthians > 15:20-26 > > "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of > those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also > came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in > Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the > first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then > comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, > when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He > must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last > enemy that will be abolished is death." > > Harry's initial reaction to Hermione's exegesis is despair: "But they > were not living, thought Harry. They were gone. The empty words could > not disguise the fact that his parents' moldering remains lay beneath > snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing ..He let [his tears] fall, his > lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding > from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones > now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son > stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their > sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping > under the snow with them." > > A theme that is developed in DH is that the enemy Death can be > destroyed when Death becomes a friend. This is the ending of the > Tale of the Three Brothers, where the third brother with the > Invisibility Cloak "greeted Death as an old friend, and went with him > gladly, and as equals, they departed this life." > > Harry later learns that, via the Resurrection Stone, he was not > fetching the dead, "they were fetching him.". As Sirius tells > him, "Dying? [Doesn't hurt] at all. Quicker and easier than falling > asleep." Lupin's declaration that his son "will know why I died I was > trying to make a world in which he could live a happier life." The > quartet with Harry are at peace with their death, knowing that they > did not live their lives in vain, in contrast to Voldemort, who > thinks nothing is worse than his own personal death, and is willingly > to slaughter others to achieve that purpose. > > Harry retains ownership of the Invisibility Cloak at the end of DH, > suggesting, that when it is time, he too will greet Death like an old > friend. > > - CMC > From jkscherme at adelphia.net Wed Jul 25 17:26:18 2007 From: jkscherme at adelphia.net (Kristen) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:26:18 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172728 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmwcfo" wrote: > > > > >> Eddie > > > >> Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > > > > > > > > dkewpie: > > > > that person is Merope. It just seems so obvious to me when JKR > mention that prior the release of HBP she's referring to Merope. > > > > > > It's MEROPE, people just accept that and leave it at that! > > > > > > > > Jo > > > > > > Shelley: > > > it's pretty clear to me that a LOT of people > > > expected her to answer that question in Book 7. > > > You are the first person I've ever heard say Merope. That doesn't > > even fit > > > canon- We see Dumbledore saying "she wasn't at her best" when her > > dad was belittling her in every way, but once he > > > lands in jail, she is free to "be herself" and relax. That isn't > anywhere near "learning to use magic LATE in life". > > > > Brothergib now: > She was regarded as a squib, and > > only really managed to perform any magic after her father was taken > > from her. However, I seem to remember the quote from JKR stated > that someone would perform magic late in life under desperate > > circumstances. Anyway, if it wasn't Merope, I think JKR simply > forgot to add this to the story > > > JW: > Apologies if the following is redundant - I have over 500 unread > messages, and as a first review I am sampling a few from different > threads. > > I do not see how it could POSSIBLY be Merope! She was young, NOT > late in life. She was NOT a squib. My position is that insults > thrown at her by her deranged father should NOT be taken as truth. > After all, he thought muggles, muggleborns and half-bloods were > worthless. Does anybody except THOSE statements as truth? If those > insults are not taken seriously, why treat the insults thrown at his > daughter seriously? > > As for "late in life" and "under desperate circumstances," she was > young, and the most desperate circumstances she faced were when she > lay dying after her son's birth. At that time, pregnant, sick, > destitute, dying, she chose NOT to use her capabilities. Therefore, > Merope is the OPPOSITE of the character that JKR described. > > Similarly, it could not be Neville. Honing magical skills (while > acquiring the special ingredients of self-confidence and FOCUS) at > ages 15 thru 17 does not qualify as "late in life." > > So, who could it be? > > My conclusion is that, *if the character exists at all*, it is her > Molliness. Mrs. Weasley was certainly magical throughout her life; > however, the only magic she practiced was in the course of old- > fashioned motherly duties. She cooked meals; she laundered clothes; > she cleaned her home; she cared for her family... And then,after > nearly losing Ginny, Arthur, Ron, Bill, George, Harry, and actually > losing Fred, Tonks and Remus (the last two I assume by Bellatrix, who > had put them on her to-do list at the beginning of the book) Molly > sees Bella trying to crush Ginny. What does she do? Does she call > for help? Molly, who has never dueled anything more vicious than > doxies (and lost to a boggart) takes on one of the most deranged and > successful fighters in the series, and kicks her cruel and demented > LV-loving butt. > > I think it fits better than Nevvy and Merry. She is middle-aged (not > old - she would be younger than I am, and I am CERTAINLY not old!) > and we witness her doing something we should consider far outside her > previously demonstrated capabilities, under VERY desperate conditions. > > It works for ME! Madeyesgal: Well if we follow your train of thought, which I like, by the way, how about Meville's grandmother? She joined the fight VERY late in life. Anyone else like this idea? > From carodave92 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:33:14 2007 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:33:14 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172729 Carodave: I believe this means Merope. She began to do magic late in *her* life (she died only a year or two later) and the desperate circumstances refer to her desperate love for someone who didn't return her feelings. Carodave --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kristen" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmwcfo" wrote: > > > > > > >> Eddie > > > > >> Who came to magic late in life? Did I miss it? > > > > > > > > > > > > dkewpie: > > > > > that person is Merope. It just seems so obvious to me when > JKR > > mention that prior the release of HBP she's referring to Merope. > > > > > > > > > It's MEROPE, people just accept that and leave it at that! > > > > > > > > > > Jo > > > > > > > > > > Shelley: > > > > > > it's pretty clear to me that a LOT of people > > > > expected her to answer that question in Book 7. > > > > You are the first person I've ever heard say Merope. That > doesn't > > > even fit > > > > canon- We see Dumbledore saying "she wasn't at her best" when > her > > > dad was belittling her in every way, but once he > > > > lands in jail, she is free to "be herself" and relax. That > isn't > > anywhere near "learning to use magic LATE in life". > > > > > > > Brothergib now: > > She was regarded as a squib, and > > > only really managed to perform any magic after her father was > taken > > > from her. However, I seem to remember the quote from JKR stated > > that someone would perform magic late in life under desperate > > > circumstances. Anyway, if it wasn't Merope, I think JKR simply > > forgot to add this to the story > > > > > > JW: > > Apologies if the following is redundant - I have over 500 unread > > messages, and as a first review I am sampling a few from different > > threads. > > > > I do not see how it could POSSIBLY be Merope! She was young, NOT > > late in life. She was NOT a squib. My position is that insults > > thrown at her by her deranged father should NOT be taken as > truth. > > After all, he thought muggles, muggleborns and half-bloods were > > worthless. Does anybody except THOSE statements as truth? If > those > > insults are not taken seriously, why treat the insults thrown at > his > > daughter seriously? > > > > As for "late in life" and "under desperate circumstances," she was > > young, and the most desperate circumstances she faced were when > she > > lay dying after her son's birth. At that time, pregnant, sick, > > destitute, dying, she chose NOT to use her capabilities. > Therefore, > > Merope is the OPPOSITE of the character that JKR described. > > > > Similarly, it could not be Neville. Honing magical skills (while > > acquiring the special ingredients of self-confidence and FOCUS) at > > ages 15 thru 17 does not qualify as "late in life." > > > > So, who could it be? > > > > My conclusion is that, *if the character exists at all*, it is her > > Molliness. Mrs. Weasley was certainly magical throughout her > life; > > however, the only magic she practiced was in the course of old- > > fashioned motherly duties. She cooked meals; she laundered > clothes; > > she cleaned her home; she cared for her family... And then,after > > nearly losing Ginny, Arthur, Ron, Bill, George, Harry, and > actually > > losing Fred, Tonks and Remus (the last two I assume by Bellatrix, > who > > had put them on her to-do list at the beginning of the book) Molly > > sees Bella trying to crush Ginny. What does she do? Does she > call > > for help? Molly, who has never dueled anything more vicious than > > doxies (and lost to a boggart) takes on one of the most deranged > and > > successful fighters in the series, and kicks her cruel and > demented > > LV-loving butt. > > > > I think it fits better than Nevvy and Merry. She is middle-aged > (not > > old - she would be younger than I am, and I am CERTAINLY not old!) > > and we witness her doing something we should consider far outside > her > > previously demonstrated capabilities, under VERY desperate > conditions. > > > > It works for ME! > > Madeyesgal: > > Well if we follow your train of thought, which I like, by the way, > how about Meville's grandmother? She joined the fight VERY late in > life. Anyone else like this idea? > > > From verosomm at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 16:00:56 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:00:56 -0000 Subject: Our Own Epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172730 Katie wrote: > Hagrid marries Madame Maxime, and together they teach > Care of Magical Creatures, while raising Grawp. Obviously, > Beauxbatons has to get a new headmistress. Veronica: Definitely agree with you re: Hagrid and Maxime Katie wrote: > George eventually gets married and has just one son - > Fred, of course, who grows up to run his father and uncle's > business. Veronica: My vote on the wife of George: one of Fleur's veela cousins or Alicia or Katie. Katie wrote: > Luna: Leaving her creepy and weak father behind, Luna becomes > the astrology teacher at Hogwarts after her 7th year is complete. > She and Neville realize they are in love, and they remain at > Hogwarts to get married, since Neville is the Herbology prof. Veronica: Here's where I disagree: didn't JKR say Neville and Luna would NOT end up together? I'd have to say she ends up with Dean. And I think Astrology is no longer taught, as an homage to Dumbledore not wanting it to... but ancient runes would be good. I think Neville, since for most of his life seems to have suffered lack of physical affection, due to Gran being so cranky all those years, needs someone very coddly and sexually-charged... Lavender. Katie wrote: > Percy: Realizing what a mess he's made of his life, especially > in the wake of Fred's death, Percy decides to travel the globe, > seeking answers about the nature of good and evil and the > meaning of family. After a ten-year wandering, and a true change > of heart, Percy returns to England and overhauls the MoM, ridding > it of corruption and becoming the first truly good Minister of > Magic. He never marries, but remains living at the Burrow to take > care of his parents as they age. Veronica: Pretty good. Katie wrote: > Flitwick: Becomes the Headmaster, since McGonagall is too elderly > and exhausted to take on the job, and eventually (obviously more > than 19 years in the furture) eliminates the House system from > Hogwarts. He rids Hogwarts of prejudice and creates a more loving > and inclusive learning environment, free of classification and > stigma. Veronica: I don't think they'll get rid of the sorting system, but rather sort in the third year when the students' have had time to make choices (and the sorting hat will be privy to this) as well as hone abilities. Katie wrote: > Kreacher: While too old to feel that he can lead a political > rebellion, he is nevertheless the de facto leader of the House > Elf Liberation Front, and works closely with Hermione Weasley to > gain political and social rights for House Elves. His years of > calling her a "Mudblood" over, Kreacher becomes Hermione's closest > elf friend, and they celebrate together when the WW finally > recognizes the rights of elves and allows them to practice magic > and carry wands. Veronica: Love this! And I'd like him to convince Winky as well, and maybe have her bear some little FREE house-elves. Great job, Katie! See my notes above. Veronica From hfolvik at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:25:51 2007 From: hfolvik at yahoo.com (hfolvik) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:25:51 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172731 The elder wand goes to the witch or wizard that defeats the wand - it doesn't need to result in death of the witch or wizard with he wand. This is a quote from a dissendium forum - to quote ginnyrox: "Draco got the ownership of the wand because he disarmed Dumbledore. However, Draco's wand didn't become the Elder wand, and Draco didn't have any more power. If he had used the Elder wand, Draco would have had more power. There is still something special about the actual wand. Also, the wand's ownership passes to whoever defeats the previous owner. If Dumbledore's death had not been prearranged by Snape and Dumbledore, Snape would have been the master. As it happens, Snape didn't defeat Dumbledore - he killed him. There is a difference. So the person who the wand's mastership must pass to is Draco, as he "defeated" Dumbledore last, by taking his wand. Harry disarmed Draco at "Malfoy Manor" and kept his wand, which is, I'm presuming, how mastership passed from Draco to Harry. I think that it should have been done a different way, as Draco isn't really defeated. His wand has been taken, but he can easily get another one. Eventually, he could end up another Voldemort and defeat them all (not going to happen - merely said theoretically to prove a point). That's what I think, anyway." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And when you thinkg about it - it makes sense. hfolvik From courtaud2002 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 17:19:17 2007 From: courtaud2002 at hotmail.com (silvialaura2002) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:19:17 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172732 UNIX4EVR wrote: > Nope. Snape wasn't set up to be slaughtered. > > As far as Voldemort knew Snape killed Dumbledore when he > (Dumbledore) was defenseless (didn't have his wand). Since Snape > didn't disarm > Dumbledore (and Voldemort knew this even though he didn't know that > Draco had disarmed Dumbledore) Snape had no claim to the elder > wand. > > You have to disarm the owner. silvialaura: But Voldemort got it wrong. He believed that you have 'to kill the master', he told Snape so. That was stupid of him, since Dumbledore was master of the wand and he spared Grindelwald. Neri wrote: > > As much as I can make sense of Dumbledore's original plan, Snape > > was to be killed by Voldemort and the Elder Wand end with no > > master. rowena_grunnionffitch wrote: > I don't think that's quite right. DD himself says he intended > Snape to have the Elder Wand, and is disapointed it didn't work > out that way, (Kings Cross Station chatper). Personally I find > this rather touching evidence both of DD's trust in Snape, leaving > him something so powerful and perilous, and his concern for him. > Maybe he hoped with the Elderwand Snape might manage to survive > the War. silvialaura: The Elder Wand was buried with Dumbledore, so he left Snape with nothing. silvialaura From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:38:44 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:38:44 -0000 Subject: Snapes love for Lily (Was: DH rambles and crows eating) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172733 John wrote: > > This more of an idea post than a reply to any particular post. I think the irony of Snape's death is that he was the head of Slytherin house and he was eaten by a Snake (Slytherin's house mascot). f Carol: He was bitten by Nagini, but not eaten by her. She followed Voldemort out (Voldie thought he was safe from death after killing Snape), and she was killed by Neville before she could eat anybody else. In any case, Harry could not have exchanged those last few words or obtained the memories if he'd been eaten. The scene is fraught with irony, I agree. Voldemort kills the wrong man; Snape was trying to rush out to find Harry but would not have found him because he's already in the shack; Harry probably would not have listened to him in any case. Snape had to die as he did, killed (but not eaten!) by the symbol of his own house, or he could not have had that last moment with Harry, that last look in "Lily's" eyes but also a moment of something like understanding. Harry feels no joy in seeing the hated Snape die. he's in shock, but he's also drawn to him. Understanding arrives too late, but Snape has done what he was trying to do, communicating to Harry that he, too, has to die, willingly sacrificing himself. The final irony is that Harry, unlike snape, only thinks he has to die. Carol, who would never have anticipated this scene and hates Nagini but wonders how anyone can fail to see that he's a better man than Dumbledore From tsukata at tsukata.org Wed Jul 25 17:30:21 2007 From: tsukata at tsukata.org (JC/TsuKata) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:30:21 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <789950.79966.qm@web62403.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <789950.79966.qm@web62403.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <34386.129.188.69.145.1185384621.squirrel@www.tsukata.org> No: HPFGUIDX 172734 Erin wrote: > Ulterior motives are the hallmark of a Slytherin. ... > given what we know now, we can see that selfishness is the greatest > sin in JKRs world. You put your finger on something that I've been trying to figure out in my head for awhile. I don't equate putting self first with evil, but it does seem like JKR/HPverse does. Thus, while I don't view Snape as inherently good or pure in any way (and am horribly bothered when people do), I don't view him as evil either. It feels like JKR could have written or implied positive qualities from the Slytherin house, but she made them all seem pathetic or worthless in the end, even Snape and Draco. I guess maybe JKR thinks of herself as a Gryffindor, with all the prejudices therein. Erin also wrote: > On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of Ariana > as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted as possible? That's how I read it as well. I assumed a group rape scene, but I think JKR was intentionally vague, to avoid an outcry over rape showing up in a "children's book." I also speculated something similar going on with Hermione, although that was far more of my twisted imagination at work. Full disclosure: I'm in the camp that thinks shielding kids from the notion of rape (but showing them tons of murder and other violent crimes) makes rape seem so hush-hush that it leads to people being ashamed to admit victimhood. I know not everyone is. Still, even with my own views on such things, being a Slytherin at heart, I can't blame JKR for leaving it vague. Having a clear rape scene or even any more detail on Hermione's torture likely would have hurt sales, as bookstores would have had to deal with groups saying that it was inappropriate for the under-18 crowd. It also would have shifted the focus of the book to this one relatively minor scene instead of to the whole. IMO, it's ridiculous enough how much attention the word "bitch" has garnered, especially given that there was a song on the public radio for more than a year called "bitch", not to mention more than a few primetime shows tossing it in. (One of my favorite scenes from The Simpsons is Bart saying "bitch" in the context of a female dog, and Marge hesitating as to whether that was okay.) It's barely even a "bad word" at this point, but it has gotten far more focus than the line/scene deserves because some folks jump on it as inappropriate for kids. Ah well. --TsuKata (first post! newbie de-lurking!) From annemehr at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:42:41 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:42:41 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172735 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > Carodave: > > I believe this means Merope. She began to do magic late in *her* > life (she died only a year or two later) and the desperate > circumstances refer to her desperate love for someone who didn't > return her feelings. > > Carodave Nuts. The first bit of magic we see her do is shooting a cooking pot across the room with her wand. And being embarrased by her father in front of Bob Ogden hardly counts as "desperate circumstances." Annemehr From sonjaaiston at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:35:47 2007 From: sonjaaiston at yahoo.com (sonjaaiston) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:35:47 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: <39EB1E49.19C3C2AF@swbell.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172736 Penny Linsenmayer wrote: > > I think I'll ask the how old were James & Lily when Harry was born > question as that's short & easy phrasing & can be answered very > easily. They were 20. According to their tombstones, James was born March 27, 1960 and Lily was born January 30, 1960. They were 21 when they died on October 31, 1981. Since Harry was 1 at the time, I assume they were 20 when he was born (much younger then how they look in the movies). I had thought for some reason that Harry was born July 31, 1981, but I guess it had to have been 1980. I can't remember if the year of his birth was mentioned in any of the books. Was it? sonjaaiston From redeyedwings at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:54:11 2007 From: redeyedwings at yahoo.com (redeyedwings) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:54:11 -0000 Subject: The perfect ending of my favorite book In-Reply-To: <007e01c7ce3b$664b6d40$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172737 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ricky & LeAnn" wrote: > > > For me the best thing (since I'm a Christian) was the way I could see the > Christ story in the ending. In my thoughts, who else could Jo have been > thinking of when she gave us a hero who never killed, offered aid even to > his enemies, and willingly allowed himself to walk to certain death in order > to save the world by his sacrifice? Superman? Frodo? Aslan?Paul Atreides? Optimus Prime? I'm just saying, half-jokingly, that it's not exactly unheard of in popular fiction to imbue a character with those qualities, whether they are done in direct homage to Christ (Aslan) or as part of a story written by someone who has never been Christian. But maybe some of the less-tolerant Christians (obviously not including any who post here) will be able to accept the ending of the series as at least partial proof that JKR is a Christian as she's always claimed and that the nod that Harry exchanges with Draco and the name he gives his child in the epilogue illustrates his capacity for forgivenesss, even with someone who is likely doesn't deserve it. From randomfrog26 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:51:20 2007 From: randomfrog26 at yahoo.com (randomfrog26) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:51:20 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <33354519.1185381527789.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172738 > Bart: > Well, we actually know of 3 "good" Slytherins: Snape, Slug, and Phin. Based on what we've learned from them, a major trait they have is a belief that the end justifies the means. Consider that, with only a few exceptions, none of the Slytherins fought on the side of the DE's, either. It wasn't whether they were good or evil, it was that they figured that whichever side came out on top, they would ally themselves with it. Gryffindors fight for their goals, Hufflepuffs work for them, Ravenclaws think their way through, and Slytherins look for a shortcut. > randomfrog26: Also, we know of Regulus Black (pointed out by others) and Andromeda Tonks nee Black (the latter isn't directly stated, but Slughorn in HBP tells us that all the other Blacks were in Slytherin) - both of whom are definitely good. I think your post hit the nail on the head. Slyths are not defined by cowardice and cruelty, but by cunning, (usually) self-interest or at least personal motivations, and (usually) pure-blood bias. Sure, the Malfoys, Slughorn, and Phineas Nigellus are not "brave" or chivalrous - but neither is the Ravenclaw Marietta or the Hufflepuff Zacharias Smith. Regulus, Phin, and (to a milder extent) Slughorn buy into blood prejudice, but aren't whole-hearted Death Eaters determined to kill for their cause. In general, the "good" Slyths were probably motivated by personal reasons to choose the side of good - Snape by his love for Lily, Regulus by personal horror at the evil of Voldemort and affection for Kreacher, (possibly) Andromeda overcoming her family's ingrained pure- blood prejudice because her love for Ted, Phineas's horror at the death of Sirius Black, his last living descendant, Slughorn's affection for Lily persuading him to give Harry the memory. But so what? They may not be as "noble" as Gryffs in the reasons for their choices, but their choices to work for good were theirs to make and should reflect positively on them. I would understand belittling someone who chose the side of Good for an *evil* personal reason - e.g., somebody bullied by Draco who wanted the chance to torture the Malfoy family SHOULD be looked down on. But if you look at the personal reasons for the good Slyths to turn, they are love, friendship, affection, and a sense of decency/horror at what Lord Voldemort is doing -- and I don't think that's a reason to diminish their contributions. This isn't incompatible with bravery. Snape, Regulus, and even Bellatrix are incredibly brave and put their lives on the line for a cause -- but a different cause than "I want to save the world from evil!" Additionally, the Malfoys, while nasty, prejudiced, elitist, and cruel, do play an essential role in the downfall of Voldemort motivated by their love for one another (which Voldie never understood. I thought it was great that love of all kinds brings him down - Lily's sacrificial love, the Malfoys' selfish love, Snape's unrequited love for Lily, the Trio's platonic love for each other). I honestly think the Malfoys embody the "ends justify the means" belief of many Slyths - as long as their family was safe, they didn't care about who they betrayed or who suffered from their actions. Nor were they wholly, irredeemably evil - Draco has twinges of conscience when he spares Dumbledore, and we see how sickening it is for him to be forced to torture people on Voldemort's orders. (Of course, if he were less of a coward, he might have out-and-out defied the orders to use Crucio, like Neville. Draco is definitely a coward, but not rotten to the core.) From leahstill at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 17:57:27 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:57:27 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry/Our epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172739 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohnooboe" wrote: > > > I think you've all missed the boat completely. JK makes a good point > here. All is not happy and puppy dogs and I think it would be a > disservice to a series whose morality so closely mirrors the "real > world." All cannot be "happily ever after," rather it's > just "well." destroying Voldemort simply meant ridding the world of > that one evil. The end of WWII did not bring happiness and > perfection to the world...it simply eliminated an evil and returned > things to the way they were. Leah It would have been quite possible to have addressed the issues of social justice and the unity of the Houses, without creating a "Hello trees, hello clouds, hello sky" kind of world. As I have said earlier, if the book were just about ridding the world of Voldemort then DH is fine. But Rowling throughout the series raised questions of social justice. I always found these slightly clunky myself- ok it's not ok to enslave house elves, but why it is ok to hiss and boo eleven year olds when they're sorted into Slytherin. I always preferred the quest/mythic elements of the book, and now I find that in effect that's all there was. All those social justice questions need not have been raised. The end of WWII did not make the world a fairy tale place, but that war did have an effect. In the UK the votes of service personnel who had fought in that war brought in a government with a radical agenda of social justice (the US feared it was almost communist). Some things were not returned to the way they were. Racism would not disappear but the acceptable public face it once had has gone. > She was never making the statement that ONLY Gryffindors are good and > ONLY Slytherins are evil...we know that is not true. Not all > Gryffindors are without fault and not all Slytherins are evil. > That's a rather narrow view of the books. Leah But it is the view we end up with. Yes, we've seen flawed Gryffindors but in the end Gryffindor is the place to be (with Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff ok if you're that way inclined). Do we have Harry saying "Not all Gryffindors are without fault and not all Slytherins are evil" to his children? No, we don't, we get a reference (and it's a moving reference) to the behaviour of one man. But since DD has already suggested to that man that he should have been in another House that's not much help. Harry's view of Snape hasn't prevented the anti-Slytherin taunting that's been going on in Harry's home. > > Thinking the houses to be reunited and the MoM to be cleaned up is > completely unbelievable. This is not a fairy tale. It may be > fantasy, but it's based in a world that very closely mirrors our > own...and in our own nothing is every perfectly happy and ending the > books that way would be completely contrary to the rest of the > books. That doesn't make it "ugly," it just makes it more believable. Leah I think it would take a while for the MOM to be cleaned up, but after 19 years it wouldn't have been impossible. Perhaps the Houses couldn't be reunited with ice-cream and balloons, but the Slytherin problem could have been tackled. It's a school, not the Middle East. Abolish the house system, abolish Slytherin as a house. It could be done without any one falling over in amazement. If the whole thing was so very very unbelievable why did JKR waste so much print suggesting it ought to happen? Leah, who thought Katie's suggested epilogue was pretty much what should have been written From guzuguzu at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:57:58 2007 From: guzuguzu at yahoo.com (guzuguzu) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:57:58 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172740 Quoth Nightmasque: >It has been pointed out elsewhere that all the Slytherins who were on the 'good side' so to speak were given ulterior motives or doing so, i.e. Snape's was Lily. Then Magpie: > [Snape's] not the only Slytherin to sacrifice himself--they > just sacrifice for reasons that mean something to them even when > they're doing the sacrificing. So even Snape's redemptive sacrifice > was, imo, a personal one that didn't go beyond himself as it could > have. Now guzu: While I don't disagree with what is written above, I think a little too much credit is given to the non-Slytherins. I'm sure plenty of them were fighting, not to help Muggles and Muggleborns in general, but because their personal friends and family were in danger. To put it another way, if Hermione had been pureblood, do you think Ron would have been just as willing to sacrifice all he did? From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 17:49:38 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:49:38 -0500 Subject: lucky for Harry Message-ID: <8ee758b40707251049j6dea2555g8cd6b8edefbeefc0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172741 that he was there when Snape was breathing his last. I can understand Snape's desperation to get to Harry to transmit the memories and DD's messages (and I agree with Carol that Snape has proved himself nobler and consistently braver than Dumbledore) but if Harry hadn't been in the shack at just the right time, with nobody else around, how on earth would he have learned the truth? montims [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kimbroughr at verizon.net Wed Jul 25 18:01:37 2007 From: kimbroughr at verizon.net (Kim) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:01:37 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: inconsistency? References: Message-ID: <00ea01c7cee5$d958b310$2f01a8c0@kim> No: HPFGUIDX 172742 Lindsay" wrote: > > Still catching up on all posts-- forgive if this is a repeat, > but how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had > an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point > was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? Kim: Grindelwald was not the true master of the Elder wand, because he did not win it, he stole it. So, it was not all powerful for him. Just like it was not all powerful for Voldemort. I'm still trying to figure out how it became Dumbledore's true wand. I'm sure he won it from Grindelwald, but since Grindelwald stole it, things can't be that simple. Kim From mferi_di at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 17:54:06 2007 From: mferi_di at yahoo.com (mferi_di) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:54:06 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172743 I don't think it is Merope. The only character that fits this description is Trelawney. If you recall it has always been said that the wizarding world does not believe in clairvoyance. DD even said that he thought she was her prophecy was only made true because LV chose to do so. In going after Harry he made the Prophecy true. Had Snape never told him about it it would not have happened. The fight scene in Hogwarts is the only time we have seen her use actual magic. Plus I would think that late in life means her. mferi_di From deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:27:45 2007 From: deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com (Deborah Krupp) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:27:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why the wand worked for Dumbledore (was:Re: inconsistency?) In-Reply-To: <00ea01c7cee5$d958b310$2f01a8c0@kim> Message-ID: <527893.70131.qm@web35002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172744 Lindsay" wrote: > > Still catching up on all posts-- forgive if this is a repeat, > but how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had > an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point > was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? Kim: Grindelwald was not the true master of the Elder wand, because he did not win it, he stole it. So, it was not all powerful for him. Just like it was not all powerful for Voldemort. I'm still trying to figure out how it became Dumbledore's true wand. I'm sure he won it from Grindelwald, but since Grindelwald stole it, things can't be that simple. Deborah: Dumbledore tells Harry at King's Cross: "I was fit to own the Elder Wand, and not to boast of it, and not to kill with it. I was permitted to tame and to use it, because I took it, not for gain, but to save others from it." Reminiscent of how Harry got the stone from the Mirror of Erised, no? Dumbledore goes on to tell Harry that the cloak never worked properly for Dumbledore, as it does for Harry, because in his possession, it was ill-begotten. --------------------------------- Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 18:31:36 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:31:36 -0400 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <1185381552.3936.93814.m56@yahoogroups.com> References: <1185381552.3936.93814.m56@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C99D012B2C9B7B-F58-A277@webmail-db05.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172745 Erin: > Ah, precisely. Ulterior motives are the hallmark of a Slytherin. We sometimes forget that students aren't Sorted based upon their family background, or what they're wearing that day, or whatever. They're Sorted based upon what is at the core of their personalities. The criteria for being Sorted into Slytherin (as best I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) is to put self first. To look out for number one. And given what we know now, we can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in JKR's world. Magpie: Exactly. Though I don't think Snape's quite so much a success story as you say. He's not the only Slytherin to sacrifice himself--they just sacrifice for reasons that mean something to them even when they're doing the sacrificing. So even Snape's redemptive sacrifice was, imo, a personal one that didn't go beyond himself as it could have. He sacrificed himself and saved himself. I don't happen to find the "it takes all kinds so learn to live with the assholes" all that inspiring myself, but that definitely seems to be the message of JKR's Christ-figure. Julie: I think this is an unfair assessment though. In reality there is some measure of self-interest in *everything* we do. We give to a cause or help build a house with Habitat-For-Humanity partly because the act makes us feel good about ourselves. Snape's sacrifices were in part motivated by selfishness (assuaging his guilt over Lily's death) but especially as time went by, he acted selflessly on numerous occasions. It didn't benefit him in any way whatsoever to keep helping Dumbledore defeat Voldemort once he knew Harry would be sacrificed--*saving* Harry to honor Lily was his original "selfish" motive. It didn't benefit him to save a man he truly despised (Lupin). Too many things Snape did were not motivated by pure self-interest, as supposedly befits a Slytherin, IMO. Julie, who thinks the whole concept of Sorting is directly opposed to Dumbledore's belief that it is our choices which define us. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:22:34 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:22:34 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172746 rowena_grunnionffitch wrote: > I don't think that's quite right. DD himself says he intended Snape > to have the Elder Wand, and is disapointed it didn't work out that way, > (Kings Cross Station chatper). Personally I find this rather touching > evidence both of DD's trust in Snape, leaving him something so powerful > and perilous, and his concern for him. Maybe he hoped with the Elder > wand Snape might manage to survive the War. > Neri: That may have been Dumbledore's original intention (although he may be lying about it. We no longer have any guarantees that Dumbledore isn't lying to Harry). But that apparently had changed because Dumbledore's portrait didn't warn Snape that he was not the owner of the wand, nor that Voldemort was after it. This makes me realize about another gaping hole in the DH plot: Apparently it had never occurred to Dumbledore's portrait, despite knowing all about the Hallows and owning the Elder Wand for many years, that Draco disarming him on the tower means that Draco is now the true owner of the Wand. The dangers as well as the chances in this were stupendous: if at any point during the year Voldy would decide to kill Draco, or even just to disarm him, he would have become the true owner of the Elder Wand. If someone else had disarmed Draco, say Crabbe or Goyle or Bellatrix, that someone would have become the true owner. OTOH, Draco was at Hogwarts most of the year, under Snape's full control as a headmaster and Voldemort's right hand. So all the portrait had to do was telling Snape to disarm Draco. If the portrait wanted the wand passed to Harry rather than Snape it would have been a bit more complicated than that, but still quite doable. But apparently Dumbledore's portrait hadn't realized in almost a year what Harry realized in just an hour or two. Of course, we may suppose that the memory or brain power of the portrait wasn't equal to that of the original, but that just makes Snape taking orders from him even more chilling. Neri From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:36:28 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:36:28 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? The Wand! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172747 --- "chuck.han" wrote: > > > Chuck wrote earlier: > >> > >> The biggest problem I have with the Deathly Hallows > >> theme is that it seems that Dumbledore never > >> intended Harry to garner all three objects and > >> become the Master of Death: ... > >> > > > > > > andy_mycrib_1987: > > > > Well Dumbledore did give Harry two of the Deathly > > Hallow items. He > gave him the Invisibility Cloak > > during his 1st year at Hogwarts and he gave him the > > Resurrection Stone in this book. > > > > As for the Elder Wand, the only way that Harry could > > have gotten it from Dumbledore was if Harry defeated > > Dumbledore (and we all know > > that was never going to happen). > > > > Perhaps Dumbledore knew that if Draco was the one to > > disarm him ..., then Draco would be master of the > > Elder Wand instead of Snape. > > > > I have no idea how he thought this would help Harry > > get the Elder Wand, .... > > > Chuck Han: > > Actually, after re-reading the Kings Cross chapter, > Dumbledore confirms that he had intended Snape to take > possession of the Elder Wand. That means that Harry > would have to defeat Snape in order to possess all > three Hallows. Dumbledore must have had faith in Harry > that he would defeat Snape ... > > Chuck Han > bboyminn: Let's clear up, or at least make only partly cloudy, the issue of the Elder Wand. According to Luna's Father - "The Elder Wand is the Hallow that is most easily traced, because of the way in which it passes from hand to hand." "Which is that the possessor of the wand must **capture** it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly the Master of it,..." It's "Capture", not kill or murder or defeat. So, when Griddelwald 'captured' the Elder Wand from Gregorovitch, in a sense this was a defeat; he defeated Gregorovitch by outwitting him, not out dueling him. Next, even Ollivander, whose family has been making wands since before 750BC, doesn't fully understand the nature of the transfer of allegiance of a wand. There is an internal magic to it that only wands themselves understand, and which defies human logic, reason, and understanding. Harry 'defeated' Draco and captured Draco's wand, but the wand he 'captured' was not the Elder Wand, yet Harry still outsmarted Draco, he showed, to a degree, his mastery over Draco, and I believe that is what caused the transfer of allegiance of both the Elder and Hawthorn wands. Note also, that Harry may not have been right. The allegiance may not have transferred to Harry. That is not important, what is important is that the Idea cast some degree of doubt in Voldemort. The Elder Wand was returned to Dumbledore's grave where it will likely stay until, regardless of who its true Master is, the current Master passes from earthly life without a new Master being created. I think it likely DID transfer to Harry, but it is not really necessary. What is necessary is for Voldemort NOT to be its Master. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From persimmon76 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:36:26 2007 From: persimmon76 at yahoo.com (persimmon76) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:36:26 -0000 Subject: Initial critique of DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172748 Whew! First off, I'm sure many of my comments will be redundant. I've fallen woefully behind in reading everyone's reviews and comments, but want to post a message with some initial thoughts on DH myself. For the time being, I'll limit myself to disappointments and regrets in this last installment of the series. NB, in the main, I found it a very satisfying read. Several people have given JKR accolades for her character development and depictions of relationships between and among characters. I certainly agree this praise is warranted, for the most part, but what on earth happened to Lupin in DH? Lupin has been one of my favorite characters since he was introduced to the narrative. I always understood him as a thoughtful person, though too eager-to-please with respect to his friends. I perceived him as a calming force among the Marauders, and in OoP he seems to exert a similar influence over Sirius. Lupin seemed to be the conservative one (in action, not thought) - the nay-sayer whose reluctance to commit to foolhardy plans showed insight and forethought. I was frankly shocked by his whole "Shall the three become four?" speech to HRH. It seems so reckless, so cavalier; do you think Harry read him right, that he was feeling "a bit of a daredevil" (paraphrase)? I'm willing to extend only so far the notion of "well, but it's a time of war and people aren't at their best." Did Lupin's behavior in DH strike anyone else as odd? A Lupin "deranged" is such a hard image to shake. Another disappointment relates to Peter Pettigrew, though I suppose it has as much to do with my desire to see Peter redeemed in some way. Someone (I'm sorry, I can't recall who) on this list made some excellent comments about choice and the theme of choice defining who we are. I really looked forward (probably unreasonably) to seeing Peter make a *choice* to honor his wizard's debt to Harry. I suppose he did - he stayed his hand when prompted - but only for a moment, and then his hand goes all Evil Dead II on him and chokes him to death. What can I say? I hoped for more. Some folks seem to have really liked the scene in which Molly kills Bellatrix. I did not. I thought it was cheap and hollow; I didn't like glancing at the page and seeing the word "bitch" in all caps, not because I object to the word or think it doesn't apply to Bellatrix, but just because it seemed so trite. In a parallel world, all the male Death Eaters might wolf-whistle and start cheering for a "cat fight." Yuck. The camping scenes, it goes without saying, needed to be seriously pared down. And lastly: JKR proves once again she is the queen of the deus ex machina! I'm referring to the cloak, the yes-it's-rare-but-hello!- it's- unique-in-the-world cloak: "Gee, now you mention it, the spells never wore off. And huh, look at that, no rips in the magical fabric! Wow, this really *is* rare!" OK, it's not the first time that's happened, but I still smacked my forehead in a classic gesture of "DOH!" That's all for now -- like lots of other readers, I was confused by the elder wand. Actually, the confusion extends to all wand-related subject matter. I couldn't keep the rules straight - it was like playing "Button, Button, Who's Got the Button", "Musical Chairs", and "Farmer in the Dell" simultaneously. I think charts and timelines are in order here, maybe with stick figures and speech bubbles. Dim Gat From hfolvik at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:27:47 2007 From: hfolvik at yahoo.com (hfolvik) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:27:47 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172749 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mferi_di" wrote: > > I don't think it is Merope. The only character that fits this > description is Trelawney. If you recall it has always been said that > the wizarding world does not believe in clairvoyance. DD even said > that he thought she was her prophecy was only made true because LV > chose to do so. In going after Harry he made the Prophecy true. Had > Snape never told him about it it would not have happened. The fight > scene in Hogwarts is the only time we have seen her use actual magic. > Plus I would think that late in life means her. > > mferi_di > hfolvik: That is a good point - Merope was a witch and I believe that it wasn't said that she didn't use magic until later in life, it was said that after Tom Riddle left her she chose not to use magic anymore. And in the memory she was using magic. I agree that it could be Trelawney - as you never see her using magic - does the prophecy really count as magic?? hfolvik From mindycl at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 18:38:53 2007 From: mindycl at gmail.com (Mindy) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:38:53 -0400 Subject: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle Message-ID: <2155A7BA65BC4A9183B07839DC5D32A1@ShimonMoshesPC> No: HPFGUIDX 172750 I'd like to thank everyone who responded so kindly to my questions, whether on the board or in private. Some of the questions are still unanswered and pretty burning, so if you have a chance please check it at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172234 . I have a ton more questions, but I know that people find loooong lists of questions pretty intimidating, so I will divide up my questions into several posts to give people a chance to respond. It's possible that some of these have already been answered, but there are several 100 messages in the past 24 hours, which I can't all read. So thanks in advance. Here are some of my additional burning questions: 1) We never find out the theory or background behind the veil that Sirius falls through, and his body is never recovered. was JK ever planning to address that? 2) How did Gryffindor's sword find its way from Griphook to the Sorting Hat? 3) We never revisit Grimmauld Place; how did Kreacher get to Hogwarts? did he realized his master wasnt coming back, and therefore went back to his old job? 4) Griphook was on the run because he was given an assignment that was demeaning to his race... what was that assignment? 5) Why didn't Lord Voldemort feel that his horcruxes were being destroyed... you would've thought he would feel some pain, this is his soul we're talking about? 6) How did Tom Riddle's soul in the locket know all those mistruths about Ron's mother wanting a girl, hermione wanting Harry etc. - is this some form of dark eerie magic? 7) How did draco, crabbe and goyle get into the room of requirement if it was taken by Dumbledore's army for the past 2 weeks? I thought the room of requirement can only be one thing at a time? Can it be several concurrent rooms? 8) How did Voldemort manage to leave the Shrieking Shack without coming near Harry? Is there another way in besides for the Whomping Willow? 9) Was Snape's body was ever recovered from teh Shrieking Shack and given a proper burial? I guess we'll just have to imagine that. 9 questions for now is just enough... I have 9 more to ask, but those will wait for later. If someone can take a stab at trying to answer these, I'd appreciate it. Mindy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ida3 at planet.nl Wed Jul 25 18:44:43 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:44:43 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172751 Carol responds: > We see that he and Lily are really friends, that he's different from > the boys he runs around with (and blind to their faults). Oddly, as > Valky also noticed, the worst memory comes *after* the so-called > Prank, which means that James did not suddenly become noble and > heroic. He's still willing to ambush Severus and publicly humiliate > him. We're given no alternate version, so Severus's idea that James > saved him because he got cold feet must be right. Dana: I think you should read it again. (Sorry to lazy to quote) Snape tries to excuse Mulciber using Dark Magic on a girl and when he fails, he pulls in James Potter and his nightly activities. Snape already knew what Lupin was and not just from glimpsing him just that night. Lily specifically states that she knows his theories about Lupin, while she clearly had not talked to Snape after the ordeal happened. She goes on about Snape sneaking into the tunnel behind the Willow and that James saved him. Snape tries to make her see that James did not do it to be heroic but that he only wanted to safe his friends but never accuses him of trying to kill him. He just says that he doesn't want Lily to be fooled by him. Lily then goes on to say that Snape's friend's humor is just evil. Still Snape is not claiming that James and his friends tried to kill him for their amusement which would classify as evil. Lily was still his friend at this time and this would have been a good opportunity to discredit James but he doesn't. Lily knows something in the tunnel is dangerous or else she would not state that he was saved by James so Snape promising DD not to reveal Lupin's secret is not playing any part in why Snape would not use it against James. Snape does not even claim he was played a trick on and does not dispute he sneaked into the tunnel on his own accord. Snape lied to DD about why he was in the tunnel and tried to use it to get the Marauders expelled but his plan failed. And DD, 20 years after the fact, is still not buying. Lily writing Sirius a letter is also clearly evidence that she loved him on her own and not just condoned him as a friend of her husband and even though we have seen very little of Lily, I have to seriously doubt that she would except his friendship if he truly had set up Snape to meet his death. The scene actually says several things. Snape was not continuously bullied by the Marauders and the attack on Snape in SWM did not come totally out of the blue. Snape was as Sirius stated always sneaking around them, trying to find out what they where up to, trying to get them expelled. Snape was not always alone but hanging around with people Lily did not like and they indeed did things that made Snape unpopular by association. Lily states this when she says that people wonder why she is still even talking to him. Only JKR can resolve the issue of how Sirius played the trick on Snape but Snape did not go in unknowing. He took the bait in an attempt to get rid of the Marauders and in particularly James. He tried to play it for all it was worth with DD and later Harry but did not dare to do that with Lily. JMHO Dana From bowie_alicat at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:41:40 2007 From: bowie_alicat at yahoo.com (bowie_alicat) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:41:40 -0000 Subject: Dedication/Ice Cream Vendor Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172752 Personally, JKR had me at the book dedication. I knew that I was going to love this book, no matter what. Even if there was a "Dallas" type ending, with Harry waking up, still 11 years old, and living in the cupboard - it was all a dream! Congrats to all the people who predicted Snape as Hogwarts Headmaster - that blew me away, as well as the loss of Hedwig and Fred. And the defection of Ron. Wow. Not to mention a hundred other details! My only disappoinment was not finding out what happened to Fortescue, the ice cream vendor. alison From nadiya_iman at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:33:02 2007 From: nadiya_iman at yahoo.com (nadiya_iman) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:33:02 -0000 Subject: Ted Tonks was always muggle-born - In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172753 > > > Valerie Frankel wrote: > > Others noticed Ted Tonks, who heals Harry but started as a > > muggle. > > > > Aida: > > > > I thought that was odd too, but I looked it up: > > page 50 in OOTP, Raincoast Canadian Edition: > > 'My dad's Muggle-born and he's a right old slob. I suppose it > varies, just like it does with wizards?' > > (Tonks to Harry, at the Dursley's) > > > > Cindi: > Being muggle-born doesn't make you a muggle, does it? Wasn't > Hermione muggle-born? I thought you were either a witch/wizard or a > muggle at birth, regardless of your parentage. > Nadiya: I think the reason why people tend to think Ted Tonks is a Mugggle, is because we are introduced to him through the viewpoint of pureblood supremacist. Remember, to people like the Blacks and the Malfoys, a Muggleborn is just as bad, maybe even worse than a Muggle. Nadiya From gartzen at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 18:48:37 2007 From: gartzen at gmail.com (gartzen88) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:48:37 -0000 Subject: lucky for Harry In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707251049j6dea2555g8cd6b8edefbeefc0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172754 > if Harry hadn't been in the shack > at just the right time, with nobody else around, how on earth would he have > learned the truth? > > montims > gatzen88: He might have written a letter which Harry somehow would be able to get his hands on upon Severus's death? Maybe a kind of magical will? Any ideas..? gatzen88 From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:57:04 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:57:04 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172755 --- "chuck.han" wrote: > > ... > > The biggest problem ... with the Deathly Hallows theme > ... it seems that Dumbledore never intended Harry to > garner all three objects and become the Master of Death: > ... Dumbledore intended to die as the final owner of the > Elder Wand, and it was only by accident that Harry (via > Draco) becomes its owner. Yet he wills the Resurrection > Stone to Harry and the "The Tales of Beedle the Bard" to > Hermione. ... Could Dumbledore have known that > Voldemort would pursue the Elder Wand ..? > > Chuck Han > bboyminn: I've been waiting for some place to jump into this discussion. What purpose do The Deathly Hallows serve in this story? Harry never really uses them in any significant way. I think the Hallows are there because at some point Harry has to make a choice. He must choose between Power and Weakness. He must choose whether to make himself stronger, near undefeatable, or he must choose to concentrate on making Voldemort weak. It is a test of wills and conscience. How many of us would have chosen Power? We see hints that both Ron and Hermione covet the Wand; they desire it. Its power draws them. So, at some point, Dumbledore knew Harry would have to make a choice between Hallow or Horcruxes, and that choice would determine whether he was more interested in himself, or whether he was more interested in Voldemort's defeat. This is part of the same choice to go willingly and comfortably to his own death at Voldemort's hand. If Harry had chosen the path of Power, he could not have gone so willingly, he could not have gone without a fight, and that would have been his defeat. This story is about Choices; choosing what is difficult but necessary over what is easy. Harry made the difficult choice, a choice that very few people would have had the courage to make, and ultimately, that choice was his victory. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From tmarends at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:13:29 2007 From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:13:29 -0000 Subject: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle In-Reply-To: <2155A7BA65BC4A9183B07839DC5D32A1@ShimonMoshesPC> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172756 I'll try my best to answer a couple, and leave the rest to others... --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mindy" wrote: > >> > 2) How did Gryffindor's sword find its way from Griphook to the Sorting Hat? The same way the sword appeared in the Hat during CoS... it was needed by a true Griffindor. > >> > 5) Why didn't Lord Voldemort feel that his horcruxes were being destroyed... you would've thought he would feel some pain, this is his soul we're talking about? His soul was so fragmented, so corrupted, that one bit wouldn't be missed, or felt. I thought this was explained in HBP. > > 7) How did draco, crabbe and goyle get into the room of requirement if it was taken by Dumbledore's army for the past 2 weeks? I thought the room of requirement can only be one thing at a time? Can it be several concurrent rooms? Harry had Ginny leave the room so he could get it to change to the one he needed. Draco was in the room Harry wanted for most of HBP, so he knew how to get that room. > > 8) How did Voldemort manage to leave the Shrieking Shack without coming near Harry? Is there another way in besides for the Whomping Willow? > > I just assumed that he blew open the front door. Much easier going through the door than trying to crawl through a tunnel. Honestly, can you imagine V crawling to get anywhere?? Tim A From siskiou at peak.org Wed Jul 25 19:17:57 2007 From: siskiou at peak.org (Susanne) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:17:57 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: References: <112941.54917.qm@web84102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <739055752.20070725121757@peak.org> No: HPFGUIDX 172757 Hi, Wednesday, July 25, 2007, 7:01:06 AM, Sandra wrote: > That's my whinge about R > and H, there's just no affection there, and nothing is ever shown. Frankly, this claim astonishes me. It shows how differently we all read the same text. To me, the Ron and Hermione romance was *the* most developed romance in the 7 books, starting very subtly in book one, with many little moments that could have been just friendship in the next couple of books, and becoming more clear in GoF. In HBP I almost had the impression that JK Rowling thought she had been too subtle before and went all out to really make clear that Ron and Hermione liked each other as more than frieds. In DH I though the interaction between Ron and Hermione was lovely, with many tender moments. Ron learned a few things about how to please girls from a book! :D But you could tell that he had matured a great deal, even though he was still the old Ron, volatile, but with his heart in the right place, wanting to come back the minute he ran off, offering himself to spare Hermione, taking over when Harry was drawing back etc. I was very, very happy with the way Ron and Hermione were portrayed in DH. No, they weren't perfect, but neither was anybody else. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at peak.org From aggieraggie at ntlworld.com Wed Jul 25 19:22:29 2007 From: aggieraggie at ntlworld.com (Jo R) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:22:29 -0000 Subject: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle In-Reply-To: <2155A7BA65BC4A9183B07839DC5D32A1@ShimonMoshesPC> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172758 > Mindy: > Here are some of my additional burning questions: I will try to answer some for you > 1) We never find out the theory or background behind the veil that >Sirius falls through, and his body is never recovered. was JK ever >planning to address that? I always assumed that it was the Room of Death - one of the things the MOM was investigating and that the veil was just a doorway to death. End of. No body, no reprieve, just death. > 2) How did Gryffindor's sword find its way from Griphook to the >Sorting Hat? As stated in COS if someone who has the hat shows true courage then the sword will appear! It is Griffindor's hat as well as his sword! As soon as the hat appeared I yelled 'YAY' Neville's going to get the sword!!! I actually thought he had inadvertently summoned the hat with his immense courage. Had to re-read that part when Mouldy Voldy was saying about the sorting. > 3) We never revisit Grimmauld Place; how did Kreacher get to >Hogwarts? did he realized his master wasnt coming back, and >therefore went back to his old job? As previous posters have said, I would assume when HRH didn't appear for their steak pie(?) and a death eater possibly turned up instead I guess Kreacher would have realised that HRH were on the run and would have disapparated back to his job at Hogwarts. > 4) Griphook was on the run because he was given an assignment that >was demeaning to his race... what was that assignment? Can't remember! > 5) Why didn't Lord Voldemort feel that his horcruxes were being >destroyed... you would've thought he would feel some pain, this is >his soul we're talking about? Think DD covered this in HBP as Harry asked the same question. > 6) How did Tom Riddle's soul in the locket know all those >mistruths about Ron's mother wanting a girl, hermione wanting Harry >etc. - is this some form of dark eerie magic? Maybe it could 'hear' things going on around it. Don't know that one but good point. > 7) How did draco, crabbe and goyle get into the room of >requirement if it was taken by Dumbledore's army for the past 2 >weeks? I thought the room of requirement can only be one thing at a >time? Can it be several concurrent rooms? Were they at school that year? If not they could have got in through the vanishing cabinet in Borgin and Burkes and thus would have ended up in the ROR, more importantly in the 'Hidden place' room. And possibly just waited in there for Harry et al to turn up. > 8) How did Voldemort manage to leave the Shrieking Shack without >coming near Harry? Is there another way in besides for the Whomping >Willow? How about the front door!!! Lol!!!! > 9) Was Snape's body was ever recovered from teh Shrieking Shack >and given a proper burial? I guess we'll just have to imagine that. I sincerely hope so. Should have been with honours too! And a monument erected for him!! Hope this helped a little! AggiePaddy From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:28:55 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:28:55 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172759 Before I start let me preface by saying that, save for Pettigrew, I don't dislike the Marauders. I actually like Sirius and Remus, and as Lily married James I'm sure that there was some sort of personality renovation going on there, "toerag" though he was at 16. But I think it's one of the lessons of the series that Harry must evolve beyond his romanticized view of the Marauders, his idealization of his father and his father's friends, in favor of the wisdom and circumspection he achieves at the end of the books. Some of what we know about the Marauders is revealed by the pensieve, and often the pensieve itself is a topic of debate, since some might suggest that the memories in the pensieve are subjective. That's another argument, but I think the pensieve is rather more objective than subjective, since from what I understand nothing ever shown in the pensieve is contradicted. It seems to be Rowling's way of offering a particularly vivid and effective exposition. At any rate, everything that we factually know about the Marauders is very much in line with what Snape remembers. And again, I don't hate the Marauders. Save for Pettigrew, I see them as irresponsible, not evil. What I don't like is the glorification of the Marauders by those that would condemn Snape, when it seems obvious to me that via the Marauders and Snape Rowling is offering us a lesson on discernment, on being careful not to make snap judgments about people, especially based on their perceived "popularity" or their looks. Those that admire the Marauders and loathe Snape, and relish in Snape's demise, are certainly entitled to do so, but I think that, unfortunately, they are clearly misinterpreting the books, and also missing the point. As for Pettigrew, well he's debunked by the end of PoA. Pathetic little wanna-be. Betrays the Potters. That's easy. James is the only one we don't really get to meet as an adult. He's the real cipher. I have no reason to believe that Lily's impression of him isn't precisely true: that is, he's a toerag. A stuck-up, pampered, overrated toerag (which is of course Snape's opinion as well). But Lily did fall in love with him, and marry him, and thus by that virtue alone I am sure that he changed and there was a great deal of value in him, even before he became a member of the Order. To my mind, considering the way Rowling has defined Lily as a character, her affection and respect for James proves alone that he is worthy, much as (in my mind) Dumbledore's unwavering trust for Snape was the best evidence that he was not a traitor. Sirius is more difficult. Harry certainly never stops loving him or admiring him. But, er his personality is also debunked beginning in PoA Prank, anyone? Using a friend to lure an enemy into his possible death is...er...not very nice, no matter how curious your enemy is about your doings. And as long as he lives, he is never shown to repent of that, ever. He does go to Azkaban for the crime of another, but then he escapes and pretty much scares the snot out of everyone (mostly kids, btw) before he's found in the Shrieking Shack. But even after that, though Sirius most obviously loves Harry and Harry does likewise, we are still shown the deeply limiting aspects of Sirius' personality. A case in point there is Kreacher. Until DH, though Dumbledore tells Harry that Sirius treated Kreacher badly, we were tempted to sympathize with Sirius. Kreacher is, well, loathsome. And though Sirius cannot see him as a being worthy of any care or decent treatment, it's hard for us to see that either. But Harry sees that. House-elves are obviously not morally evolved creatures. They are, fundamentally, like pets, responding positively and supporting those that treat them well. It takes the kindness of the Trio to show that Sirius could have made a difference if he had chosen to. But he was arrogant. He did not. It's Lupin here that disappoints the most (at least at first), because I think it's Lupin that we liked best. By his own admission in PoA, Snape is right about him. Because he did not want Dumbledore to be disappointed in him, he does not reveal that Sirius is an animagus. In the Shrieking Shack, he (and Sirius) are about to out and out murder Pettigrew until Harry stops them. It comes out that Lupin (and the rest of the Marauders) betrayed Dumbledore's trust, endangering Hogwarts and Hogsmeade month after month by roaming about on the grounds while he was a werewolf. Lupin himself admits that there were many close calls and that the only reason someone wasn't killed or turned into a werewolf is pure luck. Meaning, in keeping with Lupin's "woe-is-me-oh-look-here-I-go-again" behavior, that one close call didn't stop him from going out and taking that risk again. Is it any wonder, then, that he marries Tonks in the middle of a firestorm, gets her pregnant, and then complains about it? Geez. Lupin. All. Over. Lupin cites all the reasons why he should never have married her, but he cites them after they're married and she's carrying his child. Lupin marries her. He knocks her up. And then he's sorry, on both counts. Don't take the vow, Moony, or if you do use a condom, you git. Use ten condoms. And believe me, I like the guy. But he has a long history of doing very stupid, irresponsible things and then beating himself up about it. Then he goes out and does stupid, irresponsible things again. Lather, rinse, repeat. At the beginning of the novel, he's still that same teenaged werewolf, roaming the grounds of Hogwarts with his friends, willfully shutting his eyes to the dangers, and his responsibilities. Harry is fed up with him and who can blame him? Harry took the responsible road, distancing himself from Ginny, and certainly not doing anything like knocking her up. Harry himself realizes that Lupin should be with Tonks. He calls him a coward for running off. And Harry is right. It's only after the baby is born that he seems to really have changed, to embrace the consequences of his choices. Shortly after that, he dies. I won't go into much further detail trying to defend Snape, as I've already done that here, and I personally think the truth about Snape is self-evident to anyone who isn't deluding themselves. DH is out, folks, and trying to twist Snape into a bad guy, or undermine his heroism, in the end will not wash with the text. Harry, who considered him his greatest enemy save Voldemort, publicly vindicates him and names his child after him. What further proof is needed? Those that would suggest that Harry named him that because he's "forgiving" and "Christlike" forget that Ginny (no shrinking violet) is the child's mother. She had some say as well, no doubt. Were Snape not to her mind every bit as worthy as Harry believes he is, she would not have allowed her child to be named Albus Severus. If there were any doubt at all in the Wizarding world about Snape's heroism, Harry would not have given Albus Severus the name, any more than one of us would name a child Osama. Through Harry, Rowling vindicates Snape, and by the end of DH, we see as well that Harry's grown up enough to understand what sort of behavior should be truly valued: that which selflessly provides the most good for all. There is no "Sirius Remus Potter." In one way or another, all of the Marauders turn out to be grave disappointments. Say what you like about the idea that Snape only does what he does for Lily?goodness, he might say that himself! However, unlike Remus Lupin (who much of the time utters words that belie his actions), Snape's actions belie his words, and the most arresting of those actions is that (at great risk) he chooses to save not only Lupin, but spends much of DH (and also HBP) attempting to keep people that have never even met Lily away from harm. Sigh. Probably a case of tl;dr, but there you have it. From lmkos at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 19:34:25 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:34:25 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172760 >Carodave: >THis has bothered me from SS/PS on! No one ever told Harry anything >about his parent's childhoods or pasts - he found out about Sirius >being his godfather and father's best friend by overhearing it in a >pub; Lupin never told Harry until he had to that he had been a close >family friend, and not one of Lily's friends ever contacted him to >say 'I knew your mother'. It seems natural that on the platform to >the Hogwarts Express, Harry would have been recognized and >approached by an old classmate of his parents, (the way that Harry >and Ron see Draco on the platform in the dreaded epilogue) but it >never happened. There were definitely old friends/classmates who >were tapped by Hagrid to donate photos to Harry's album, but none >ever contacted him. Maybe there was an unspoken understanding in >the WW that it would do cause pain to Harry to hear about his >parents? I don't see why. >Carodave Lenore: I've been bothered by the same kinds of missed opportunities, especially when Hagrid had been able to contact several of the old friends of Harry's parents, yet there was no followup at all. I wish Harry had been invited to contact some of them, or that Harry had simply had enough curiosity to ask Hagrid for specific details about those friends so he could talk to them. One reason that Harry became obsessed with the Mirror was because he did not have enough information about his parents. But their friends could have been enormously helpful to him, just in sharing what his parents were like, interesting experiences which they and their friends had had, etc. Lenore From aidil7lls at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 18:54:09 2007 From: aidil7lls at yahoo.com (lady_aidil) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:54:09 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172761 Maybe she didn`t make the statement,but give me the proof it is otherwise. Simply considering matter of numbers:the only Slytherin without visible evil is snobish Slughorn,the second one is questionably good Snape and the third is long ago deceased Phineas Nigellus,however probably his "goodness" as well doubtful as Snape`s . On the other hand we have only one evidently evil Gryffindor,Peter Pettigrew. The worse message from DH is the lack of good characters in the young generation in Hogwarts, Slytherin was the only house who didn't join in the fight and Pansy tried to sell-out Harry to Voldemort. Tha next thing is characterisation.Do you remember how Slytherins were described? They are ugly(pugfaced,fat),stupid(Goyle,Grabbe),malicious,cowardly(most of them in all books),at the best selfish(Snape) or pathetically weak(Malfoys). Even the Dumbledore`s remark he always thought they sorted the kids too early when I understand the implication was that Snape is so brave he should have been a Gryffindor, but it still makes it seem like nothing could be worse than being a Slytherin. lady_aidil From irenetsui at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:36:22 2007 From: irenetsui at yahoo.com (irenetsui) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:36:22 -0000 Subject: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172762 Mindy: > > 6) How did Tom Riddle's soul in the locket know all those > >mistruths about Ron's mother wanting a girl, hermione wanting Harry > >etc. - is this some form of dark eerie magic? > > Maybe it could 'hear' things going on around it. Don't know that one > but good point. > Irene: I think that during all that time the Trio had taken turn wearing the locket, the soul inside it gathered that those are the hidden fears of Ron, and used them to taunt him. We saw that after wearing the locket for an extended period of time, the wearer exhibited a darker change in character. As the locket ate them away, more secrets of the wearer would surface. The wearer might not had said those things out loud, but probably spent more time brooding on those dark thoughts. That's how Tom's soul in the locket came up with those information. From verosomm at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:28:07 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:28:07 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172763 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo R" wrote: > > Someone posted that JKR was having a live web chat on 30th July. What > would you want to ask her, given the opportunity? SNIP > 2) Why was Dean on the run from the Muggle-Catchers and not his > siblings? Was he like Lily and Tuney? JKR says he has an interesting > back story and I HOPE SOOOOOO MUCH that she does the encyclopedia!! SNIP Hi, there, don't know the answers to 1 and 3, but on JKR's website, she has Dean's background, I believe in the edits/ characters section... he is the oldest child in his family; his mother is a muggle and his biological dad was a wizard who left the family when he was just a baby... before coming to Hogwarts, he lived with his mom, step-dad and a bunch of younger half-siblings. This was all supposed to be in Chamber of Secrets (muggle-borns being attacked) but didn't fit, apparently. I don't think his mother ever definitely knew his dad was a wizard, either. And while he's friends with Harry, since he's not in the inner circle, his family probably didn't have to disappear to be safe, but who knows? Veronica From aggieraggie at ntlworld.com Wed Jul 25 19:46:07 2007 From: aggieraggie at ntlworld.com (Jo R) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:46:07 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172764 "lady_aidil" wrote: > Even the Dumbledore`s remark he always thought they sorted the kids > too early when I understand the implication was that Snape is so brave > he should have been a Gryffindor, but it still makes it seem like > nothing could be worse than being a Slytherin. Hi! I think that DD's statement could have meant something else as well. That had Snape been sorted into Griffindor then he might have ended up with Lily and possibly even friends with James, Sirius and Remus as he would have been intelligent and humourous enough to have fitted in quite well with them. Personally I think it was this thought that gave Snape the reaction he had. Just my 2 knuts worth AggiePaddy From heiloo at aol.com Wed Jul 25 19:20:41 2007 From: heiloo at aol.com (susan4508) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:20:41 -0000 Subject: Another reason for Ron/Parseltongue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172765 Doddie wrote: > > I think Ron speaking one word of parseltongue to open the chamber is > not such a massive leap for one reason alone. > > I think he may have picked up quite a bit of parseltonuge when he > wore the Locket. > > Ron did seem to hesitate a great deal before destroying the Horcrux > which I had assumed(given all the italics) was spewing a great deal > of parseltongue before its demise. > > Also Ron had heard Harry open not only the locket, but the chamber > (by the faucet at least) years before. And it's not that Ron can suddenly "speak" Parseltongue. But if you hear someone say a word a few times in a foreign language, you can repeat it. That's all Ron did. He had heard Harry say "Open" in Parseltongue and just mimicked it. Susan From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:47:47 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:47:47 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <34386.129.188.69.145.1185384621.squirrel@www.tsukata.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172766 I think it was definitely implied that Ariana was gang raped and went mad after the experience. Her father went vigilante and killed the rapists, but kept silent about why he killed them out of concern for Ariana. From graynavarre at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:13:07 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:13:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil In-Reply-To: <8C99D012B2C9B7B-F58-A277@webmail-db05.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <308531.57188.qm@web30106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172767 > Erin: > > Ah, precisely. Ulterior motives are the hallmark > of a Slytherin. > We sometimes forget that students aren't Sorted > based upon their > family background, or what they're wearing that day, > or whatever. > They're Sorted based upon what is at the core of > their > personalities. The criteria for being Sorted into > Slytherin (as best > I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) > is to put self > first. To look out for number one. And given what we > know now, we > can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in > JKR's world. This my second post, so it might make it in. Slytherins have their own type of courage. Phineas Black says in OotP, "Slytherins have courage, they just know when to run." I look at Slytherins as looking out for their interests, cleverly and with brains working to get their own way. That could be for good or evil. Slytherins don't believe in "last stands." There would be no Slytherins at the Alamo or in the Charge of the Light Brigade. Griffindors would be at both. If they were in a conflict for a good cause in which they had to fight, I would see them as the Minute Men in the Revolutionary War - they would hit the enemy, fade away, hit the enemy, run away. If they were captured by the enemy, they would deny all involvement. Then, if released, would hit the enemy again. On the other hand, there were Slytherin children in Hogwarts when it was attacked, so I would imagine that their parents would not have been happy with any Death Eaters that harmed their children. I also agree with whoever said that the first year students shouldn't sorted into houses. It divides them immediately and doesn't help them get to know or respect the others. Barbara From erinridgeway at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:22:02 2007 From: erinridgeway at yahoo.com (Erin Ridgeway) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil Message-ID: <441688.52194.qm@web62404.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172768 Julie said: < Snape's sacrifices were in part motivated by selfishness (assuaging his guilt over Lily's death) but especially as time went by, he acted selflessly on numerous occasions. Too many things Snape did were not motivated by pure self-interest, as supposedly befits a Slytherin, IMO.>> Right-o, Julie. I think the point I was trying to make was that self-interest is the *dominant* trait that defines a Slytherin, not the only one. All of their actions are colored by that trait, but that alone doesn't make them evil. Just selfish. Fiercely individualistic. Machiavellian. And those are traits that can easily be preyed upon by Evil. They leave Slytherins more susceptible to Dark, IMO, than the others, who value other things more highly than self. My thesis is that not all Slytherins are bad, but all are more self-interested than Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs or Ravenclaws. Students Sorted into the other houses are certainly self-interested as well, it's just not their most dominant characteristic. I think Snape is an example of a Slytherin who transcends the basic self-interest that dominates his personality and his value system to take the well-being of others into account. He's not the only one, just the best example. I might even argue, just for kicks, that the Slytherin good guys (Snape, Slughorn, Phineas Nigellus, Regulus, even Narcissa Malfoy for a minute there at the end), have stronger characters than the other good guys because their natures leave them so susceptible to the temptation of evil, yet they resist or overcome their selfish desires and do what's right. Erin --------------------------------- Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Wed Jul 25 20:04:17 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:04:17 -0000 Subject: On Portraits, Patronus and Animagus - OH MY!! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172769 > guzu wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172597 >Maybe. Snape was a Ministry-appointed Headmaster, right? Is there a portrait of >Umbridge in the Headmaster's office? It's not mentioned either way, but when Harry walks in >to all the applause and tears of the portraits at the end, I think Umbridge's would have >stood out, had it been there; it wouldn't have been too happy. colebiancardi: Doesn't DD state that the portraits respond only to a true *headmaster*? As Snape is carrying on conversations and having at least one portrait, other than Dumbledore's, report to him and do his bidding, I believe Snape is a *true* headmaster of Hogwarts. I don't know if Snape was Ministry appointed and even if he was, I don't know *how* Headmasters are picked anyway. Is there a vote? Or does the MoM appoint them all to begin with? The lack of Snape's portrait in the Headmaster's office is a thin clue for me to theorize that Snape *didn't* really die. Hope against hope. He went underground and move to America :) In post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172563 > Shelley > > I would disagree- we have no proof that James made his Stag first, and then > Lilly got subservient with a Doe Patronus! > Rather, I think it's much more likely that Lilly first produced her Doe, and > then James, wanting to be the one to "get her", made his the handsome Stag. > After all, we have proof from earlier memories seen in the Pensieve that > James adored Lilly long before they developed a relationship. > Diana wrote: >To me, Lily's patronus being a doe while her husband's was a stag >just symbolized how well suited they were to each other as a couple. >After all, your patronus repreents your true inner self. colebiancardi: I don't think and I could be wrong, that a wizard has a choice over his/her animagus shape. Now, on to the who got it first: Lily or James? Well, as I stated, I don't think James had any choice over his Stag form. We do know that he was an animagus by the fourth year, as in The Prince's Tale, the prank happened the year before Snape's worst memory, which was set in the 5th year. As all the Wizards/Witches giving the fifth year OWLS were impressed and amazed that Harry could produce a fully-formed patronus (and he is now in his 5th year), I would go out on a limb and state that Lily did not have a patronus before James had an animagus form. I think once they fell in love, snogged, shagged, whatever, that was *her* happy moment and her patronus took on the fitting female counterpart to James' animagus form. Also, I don't think James *adored* Lily right off the bat. The scene in the train when they first met, James ignores Lily & Snape until the word Slytherin is mentioned. When James & Sirius leave the compartment, James mimics her attitude. > Diana wrote: >Snape's patronus was most likely a bat originally, IMO. Did anyone >else think that the large bat-shaped object flying away from the >castle after Snape jumped out the window was Snape in his animagus bat form? colebiancardi: I thought that at first, but then McGonagall stated the following: "No, he is not dead," said McGonagall bitterly. "Unlike Dumbledore, he was still carrying his wand...and he seems to have learned a few tricks from his master" With a tingle of horror, Harry saw in the distance a huge, batlike shape flying through the darkness toward the perimeter wall. US ed, p 599 Why would McGonagall state that if it was just an animagus? She has one herself - why would she call it a *trick*? I agree with Aida in post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172446 who stated: >I think the 'trick' he learned from Voldie was how to fly w/out a >broom - remember the Order members were horrified that he could fly >when the 7 Harry's were being chased? colebiancardi: I think he just transformed himself into a bat, as Krum did as a shark in GoF. This enabled Snape to fly. But that doesn't mean that is his animagus, just that Snape knows his transfigurations :) >pforparvati wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172620 >I was surprised to find that DD didn't know about Snape's >patronus until Snape himself showed him. After all the years working >for order,especially after GoF when Order was recalled and started >working, how it was possible that DD never got a message in the form of >Snape's patronus until HBP. colebiancardi: I think DD was just surprised that Snape still had that devotion to Lily after all of these years; or maybe Snape can change his patronus; or maybe Snape *never* used his patronus. At any rate, if Snape used his doe patronus, perhaps the other members didn't quite get the connection. After all, there is a finite number of animals to choose from :) In post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172635 >Marika wrote: > think you're absolutely right about them not being secret friends. >She told him that her friends did not understand why she was his >friend, and he also said he was going to sleep outside the Gryffindor >entrance if she did not talk to him. >I'm just as confused myself why Lupin never told Harry.(Black disliked >Snape so much that I doubt he would ever say anything "good" about >him.) The only thing I can come up with is that Snape told Lupin not >to tell (like he one had asked Dumbledore), and that Lupin agreed >because he thought that Harry didn't need to know... colebiancardi: I agree. I never understood why Lupin didn't tell Harry that Lily was friends with Snape. Or that Lupin would believe the lame story that Harry told the order at the end of HBP in the hospital wing. Or even Hagrid, who can't keep a secret to save his life. Even if DD ordered Hagrid not to say anything, well, it wouldn't be the first time that Hagrid *accidentally* spilled the beans. > PM wrote in post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172643: >She was never making the statement that ONLY Gryffindors are good and >ONLY Slytherins are evil...we know that is not true. Not all >Gryffindors are without fault and not all Slytherins are evil. >That's a rather narrow view of the books. colebiancardi: really, she isn't? Doesn't she make DD say to Snape, when Snape states he will not run off like Karkaloff, that Snape was *sorted too soon*? What was that ALL about? That a Slytherin cannot be brave & loyal; that only belongs to the Gryf's? Even Snape was taken aback by that comment. And although Harry tells his kid that the bravest person he ever knew was Slytherin Snape, he whispers it. Harry's other kid, James, teases Al about sorting into Slytherin; Ron tells his child you better not be sorted into Slytherin. So, the old biases still remain in the Potter & Weasley household, despite what Harry told his youngest son. >UNIX4EVR wrote in post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172671 >But they were NOT friends at school. JKR makes it clear that after the >sorting Lily goes to Gryfindor and Snape to Slytherin. When they met >after that it was one on one. People might have known they knew each >other before school but they were NOT friends in school. colebiancardi: nope, not quite true. They were friends, as Snape asks Lily if they were best friends and she replies yes. This is when they were at Hogwarts, BTW. Was it a big, dark secret? Nope, because Lily's friends tease her about her friendship with Snape. > Bart wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172705: >Well, we actually know of 3 "good" Slytherins: Snape, Slug, and Phin. Based on >what we've learned from them, a major trait they have is a belief that the end >justifies the means. colebiancardi: Not true, not true. Don't forget poor Regulus. He was a Slytherin and in the bittersweet end, he did the right thing. He actually sacrificed himself for trying to defeat LV. And what was his belief? It doesn't seem to be the same as Slughorn or Phinellis. Snape is a different story all together. Also, I am still perplexed by the conversation that DD had with Draco at the end of Half-Blood Prince. You know, the infamous "They cannot kill you if you are already dead" speech that was in the Hardcover US editions, but not in the UK or the paperback US editions. Was that just a FLINT? A tease? A big-old major mistake on the editors part? From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 20:09:27 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:09:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle In-Reply-To: References: <2155A7BA65BC4A9183B07839DC5D32A1@ShimonMoshesPC> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707251309v297a195oceb7268dbeb6891e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172770 > > > 3) We never revisit Grimmauld Place; how did Kreacher get to > >Hogwarts? did he realized his master wasnt coming back, and > >therefore went back to his old job? > > mindy: As previous posters have said, I would assume when HRH didn't > appear > for their steak pie(?) and a death eater possibly turned up instead > I guess Kreacher would have realised that HRH were on the run and > would have disapparated back to his job at Hogwarts. montims: I was more curious as to why Kreacher was in Grimmauld Place anyway - hadn't Harry sent him to Hogwats the last time we saw him, or did I miss something? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Steve.Kimmel at fluor.com Wed Jul 25 19:30:50 2007 From: Steve.Kimmel at fluor.com (Stephen Kimmel) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:30:50 -0000 Subject: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle -- the Veil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172771 > > Mindy: > > 1) We never find out the theory or background behind > > the veil that Sirius falls through, and his body is > > never recovered. was JK ever planning to address that? > AggiePaddy: > I always assumed that it was the Room of Death - one of > the things the MOM was investigating and that the veil > was just a doorway to death. End of. No body, no reprieve, > just death. "Beyond the Veil" is a fairly common phrase referring simply to death. Thus when Sirius dies and falls beyond the veil, JK is doing an elaborate pun. Nothing more. Stephen From bowie_alicat at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 20:05:36 2007 From: bowie_alicat at yahoo.com (bowie_alicat) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:05:36 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <739055752.20070725121757@peak.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172772 I am surprised to see this thread - without a doubt, the relationship between Ron and Hermione was established early on, it was about the only 'given' in the whole series. It may have been a bit subtle, but even Harry knew what was going on, especially when he kept asking them 'to stop bickering, it was driving him mad.' Ron had to grow up and relinquish his insecurities, and Hermione was determined not to settle for less than she deserved. The scene where they finally embrace is when Ron displays his new attitude and concern for the house elves; basically, without using tips from the book on how to charm witches, displays that his conscience has been raised, and his emotional range of a teaspoon has expanded. I totally enjoyed reading their relationship, and was just surprised it took SO long for the big embrace. Handled with great humor tho - I actually laughed out loud at Harry's observation - 'so this is the moment?'. Harry and Ginny where also a given from the start, and I can't think of a better way to let someone know they care than by trying to protect them from danger (not taking Ginny on the quest, shaking his head no to her desire to join the battle at Hogwarts). alison From pjarrett at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 20:12:24 2007 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (patrick.jarrett) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:12:24 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <789950.79966.qm@web62403.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172773 Erin: ...Snip... > The criteria for being Sorted into Slytherin (as best I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) is to put self first. To look out for number one. And given what we know now, we can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in JKR's world. ...Snip... Patrick: I completely agree, but I think many of us are overlooking the most obvious place to check this. Harry. It always vexed me why Harry would be put into Slytherin, yes we're given the obvious "seek power" as a response from Harry for his upbringing, but it seems quite obvious through every book all he wants to do is shed this title as "special" and lead a normal WW life. So if, rather than saying Slytherins seek power, we instead say that Slytherins are not seeking power, but are instead putting themselves forward, we're now facing a paradox for someone to both be possibly Gryffindor and Slytherin. Gryffindors are brave, yes, but their bravery seems largely motivated by putting others before themselves. So how can someone, Harry in this case, be both self-centered and selfless? Harry's only real contact with the world before he entered the WW was with the Dursley family. He's using Uncle Vernon, Dudley and Petunia as his models for people in the world around him. He's been the only selfless person in the house, trying to make others happy - not by choice, but by requirement. So when he is pulled from that world and given freedom, his soul is given a very real tug - does he do for himself or for others? Given that it was the first book, JKR drew the line in an "evil" and "not evil" sort of way for children to more easily understand; a lesson in sharing would be a bit out of place I suppose; but obviously the evil and not evil monikers are meant to blur and fade away as the story progresses. Something she shows us in the epilogue where Harry tells his son that it is okay to be in Slytherin. So we see Harry make the choice to do for others through the simplified view of being good or evil. I'm struck by the darkness of the alternative. That if he had chosen selfishly the WW would have been doomed and he would have fallen into league with the Malfoys and possibly (or likely) with LV. But then, would Neville, the alternative have risen to stardom as the savior? We'll perhaps never know, but it is interesting to consider. -- Patrick From guzuguzu at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 20:25:27 2007 From: guzuguzu at yahoo.com (guzuguzu) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:25:27 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks characterization in HD --- Was: Initial critique of DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172774 persimmon76 wrote: > Did Lupin's behavior in DH strike anyone else as odd? A Lupin "deranged" is such > a hard image to shake. YES-- I was extremely disappointed by the way Lupin (and Tonks) were written in DH. First we had "deranged," irrational Lupin (would he actually think that ditching his kid would make the kid *less* ashamed of him?). He wants to leave Tonks because she's become an outcast?-- she seemed quite happy from the tiny glimpses we saw of her. Lupin freaking out about a new wife and kid (who he is positive will be a werewolf-- but more on that later*) could have been a realistic minor subplot, but apparently it wasn't too much for him to overcome, since all he needed to get over it was to have his friend's 17-year-old son call him a coward. That was the end of that. The Pottercast and the battle were fine, as was his death (though I cannot believe it was off-page), but when he comes back with James and Sirius, it seemed that he was a lot happier dead than he was alive. He also does not mention anything about Harry raising Teddy, which makes me think Tonks's death was a last-minute add on. Which brings me to... Tonks: This actually got me angry. Glad to know that the newly qualified Auror who trained to be part of an elite force to take down dark wizards and who is also a member of the ever-shrinking Order of the Phoenix decided to sit the war out to have a baby. What a noble thing to do. Especially with a husband who, until Harry gives him a tongue-lashing, is not particularly keen on reproducing. What kills me is that she could have had a redeeming scene at the last battle, but no, she wasn't there to fight-- she was there to see if Lupin was alright. *gag* Oh, and by the way, she died somehow, and Harry off-handedly noticed her body lying on the floor among some others. Was I supposed to feel sad? How completely disrespectful to the strong, competent character she was in the fifth book, reduced to plot devices: a weepy one in the sixth book and a pregnant one in the seventh book. I honestly think I would have preferred it if Rowling had killed Tonks and Lupin in the beginning of HB, instead of Mad-Eye and Hedwig. I know they were third-tier characters, but come on-- we know how the Bloody Baron died and not them? The Tonks's: I was absolutely shocked when Lupin said that Tonks's parents (a muggleborn who didn't grow up with werewolf prejudices and a pureblood who was disowned from her family for marrying down) were disgusted by him. I could understand fearing the idea of a werewolf son-in-law, but after they actually met him, they were still disgusted? Was he in his "deranged" phase then and blasted them against the wall? Anyway, the effect that piece of information had on me as I read the book was that I was *glad* when Ted Tonks got killed. Karmic justice for his bigotry. *JK Rowling's Werewolf Babies: according to Lupin, there's a good chance his kid would also be a werewolf. Wasn't Greyback trying most of his life to raise a werewolf army to outnumber wizards? Wouldn't that mean that he and his loyal werewolf buddies should be out impregnating as many women as possible, or is that too twisted to think about? Last point: am I the only one who, when they heard Lupin's kid's name, immediately thought of Teddy Ruxpin? guzu From lmkos at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 20:26:15 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:26:15 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <8C99D012B2C9B7B-F58-A277@webmail-db05.sysops.aol.com> References: <1185381552.3936.93814.m56@yahoogroups.com> <8C99D012B2C9B7B-F58-A277@webmail-db05.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172775 >Erin: > > Ah, precisely. Ulterior motives are the hallmark of a Slytherin. >We sometimes forget that students aren't Sorted based upon their >family background, or what they're wearing that day, or whatever. >They're Sorted based upon what is at the core of their >personalities. The criteria for being Sorted into Slytherin (as best >I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) is to put self >first. To look out for number one. And given what we know now, we >can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in JKR's world. > >Magpie: >Exactly. Though I don't think Snape's quite so much a success story >as you say. He's not the only Slytherin to sacrifice himself--they >just sacrifice for reasons that mean something to them even when >they're doing the sacrificing. So even Snape's redemptive sacrifice >was, imo, a personal one that didn't go beyond himself as it could >have. He sacrificed himself and saved himself. I don't happen to >find the "it takes all kinds so learn to live with the assholes" all >that inspiring myself, but that definitely seems to be the message >of JKR's Christ-figure. > >Julie: >I think this is an unfair assessment though. In reality there is some >measure of self-interest in *everything* we do. We give to a cause >or help build a house with Habitat-For-Humanity partly because the act >makes us feel good about ourselves. Snape's sacrifices were in part >motivated by selfishness (assuaging his guilt over Lily's death) but >especially as time went by, he acted selflessly on numerous occasions. >It didn't benefit him in any way whatsoever to keep helping Dumbledore >defeat Voldemort once he knew Harry would be sacrificed--*saving* Harry >to honor Lily was his original "selfish" motive. It didn't benefit him >to save a man he truly despised (Lupin). Too many things Snape did were >not motivated by pure self-interest, as supposedly befits a Slytherin, >IMO. > >Julie, who thinks the whole concept of Sorting is directly opposed to >Dumbledore's belief that it is our choices which define us. Lenore: Exactly! Thank you Julie for bringing a bit more balance into the discussion. The qualities of the four houses *must* be in all of us; the problem is how do we harmonize and integrate them. But if we demonize one-fourth of the entire human population and give them a label to keep them separate and different from ourselves, what kind of message is that? This was probably the most important aspect of the books which I'd hoped to see resolved and it was not handled at all! "That's just the way the world is" is not good enough for me. The one-fourth of the world that is "bad" or "most likely to go bad" is countered by one-fourth of the world which is "extra special". To just leave it that way at the end of the books just doesn't make any sense to me. The deeper problem of both Muggle world and WW is this very unresolved issue. Yes, I know Harry said it was okay with him for one of his kids to be in Slytherin if he chose, but it seemed kind of lame. It would have had more punch if he and Draco had been able to truly narrow the distance between them. After all, they had both suffered terribly, and they had had 19 years in which to heal some of it. IMO, they will have to do it eventually. Conflict and prejudice and inequality-perception have at their root our insistence on seeing others as different and "other" than ourselves--not a part of us. That makes it easier to scapegoat them and project our own failings onto them. In PS/SS, we see a lot of that in the Dursley household. Then Harry is so happy because at Hogwarts he's free of them, yet he doesn't notice that the same kinds of perceptual distortions, conflicts, judgments, attacks, et al. are constantly going on between himself and the Slytherins? It's just the Dursleys all over again, amplified by a large factor. Snape is the only character I have seen who has been able to integrate the qualities of all four of the houses in himself, to a large extent. Lenore, has more thoughts on this but will withdraw for now to collect them... From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jul 25 20:30:48 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:30:48 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? A few extra thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172776 One of the problems of being a UK member of the group is that things sometimes go into overdrive while I am asleep. Last night, I left the group at 22:27 BST to see to other more mundane matters when the newest message was 172288. When I came back on at about 06:50, 172577 had just hit the board! I've now just managed to catch up on almost 500 messages by dint of skipping threads which don't grab me. I got off smartly with a message 15 minutes after the floodgates opened on the subject of whose loss had affected members most. I have been quite intrigued by the fact that so many people share my view with the loss of Hedwig. Why? Perhaps because she was the first victim in the book. Perhaps because she was an innocent caught up in the events. Perhaps because she had been a faithful and supportive companion for Harry for six years; she had been locked in her cage, thrown around in the Anglia in COS and injured by the Ministry in OOTP. Slaughter of the innocent? A second thought comes to me and that is: Which character or characters surprised you most in the book ? perhaps because of a change in attitude or direction? Allow me to suggest some to get the ball rolling. Perhaps the most surprising for me was Kreacher. Here we had a surly, ancient pro-pureblood and insubordinate elf who often had to be dragged kicking and screaming to do what was wanted, who openly insulted half-bloods and Muggle-borns. With a little thought on Harry's part, he becomes a new person. Or Grindelwald. Perhaps not changed but converted from a shadowy figure of history into a living person ? not necessarily nice but imaginable. And Dumbledore. I have never subscribed to the Puppetmaster! or ESE! ideas but I have occasionally suspected a measure of manipulation on his part but here we see him ? warts and all ? revealed as a man with hidden flaws and weaknesses. But, strangely, one passage which leapt off the page at me was: `Hands, softer than he had been expecting, touched Harry's face, pulled back an eyelid, crept beneath his shirt, down to his chest and felt his heart. He could hear the woman's fast breathing, her long hair tickled his face. He knew hat she could feel the steady pounding of life against his ribs. "Is Draco alive? Is he in the castle?" The whisper was barely audible; her lips were an inch from his ear, her head bent so low that her long hair shielded his face from the onlookers. "Yes," he breathed back. He felt the hand on his chest contract; her nails pierced him. Then it was withdrawn. She had sat up. "He is dead!" Narcissa Malfoy called to the watchers.' (DH "The Flaw in the Plan" p.581 UK edition) After the confrontation between Narcissa and Harry in HBP, this really stood out. OK, we know from the "Spinners End" chapter of HBP that Narcissa was close ? obsessively close ? to her son and, as JKR goes on to remark: `Narcissa knew that the only way she would be permitted to enter Hogwarts, and find her son, was as part of the conquering army. She no longer cared whether Voldemort won.' (ibid. p.582) I had always hoped that we might see some coming together of Draco and Harry, probably not buddies but at least acknowledging each other. We had seen the doubts in Draco's mind on the Tower in HBP and on a number of occasions in DH, he saw Draco apparently uneasy and unhappy when he was in Voldemort's mind. And Harry rescues him twice during the battle ? as Ron forcibly reminds him. There is also the interesting sighting of Lucius; Lucius, who has never seemed to have a great love for his son. What do we see: `He (Harry) saw Ron and Neville bringing down Fenrir Greyback, Aberforth stunning Rookwood, Arthur and Percy flooring Thicknesse and Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy running through the crowd, not even attempting to fight, screaming for their son. (ibid. p.589) Obviously, Draco gets through as confirmed by the epilogue. I wonder what happens to his parents. Another unanswered question? What about your surprise over certain characters? Just to finish totally OT. I wonder how the film makers will handle this book? Could be fun. Geoff (swinging between sadness and gladness; sad that the story's finished, glad that Harry's alive.) From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 20:33:50 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:33:50 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172777 > >Magpie: > >Exactly. Though I don't think Snape's quite so much a success story > >as you say. He's not the only Slytherin to sacrifice himself--they > >just sacrifice for reasons that mean something to them even when > >they're doing the sacrificing. So even Snape's redemptive sacrifice > >was, imo, a personal one that didn't go beyond himself as it could > >have. He sacrificed himself and saved himself. I don't happen to > >find the "it takes all kinds so learn to live with the assholes" all > >that inspiring myself, but that definitely seems to be the message > >of JKR's Christ-figure. > > > >Julie: > >I think this is an unfair assessment though. In reality there is some > >measure of self-interest in *everything* we do. We give to a cause > >or help build a house with Habitat-For-Humanity partly because the act > >makes us feel good about ourselves. Snape's sacrifices were in part > >motivated by selfishness (assuaging his guilt over Lily's death) but > >especially as time went by, he acted selflessly on numerous occasions. > >It didn't benefit him in any way whatsoever to keep helping Dumbledore > >defeat Voldemort once he knew Harry would be sacrificed--*saving* Harry > >to honor Lily was his original "selfish" motive. It didn't benefit him > >to save a man he truly despised (Lupin). Too many things Snape did were > >not motivated by pure self-interest, as supposedly befits a Slytherin, > >IMO. > > > >Julie, who thinks the whole concept of Sorting is directly opposed to > >Dumbledore's belief that it is our choices which define us. > > Lenore: > Exactly! Thank you Julie for bringing a bit more balance into the discussion. > The qualities of the four houses *must* be in all of us; the problem is how do > we harmonize and integrate them. Magpie: I'm not sure if I'm one of the ones considered to be imbalancing the conversation--I agree with you here, but I'm calling it the way I see it in canon. I don't think anything was integrated, the personal redemption of brave Snape notwithstanding. I was just agreeing with you (before you actually said it) that I didn't think this was resolved. I guess to me, as soon as Slytherin was introduced the way it was, that was obviously the problem that needed to be solved, the one Voldemort was just a symptom of. I felt the book did it backwards, getting rid of the metaphor without ever much considering the way I expected them to handle it. And looking at interviews after the fact, JKR never seemed to expect them to. I don't have a problem with self-interest, myself, but I wasn't on the same page about Slytherin either. -m From bartl at sprynet.com Wed Jul 25 20:35:18 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:35:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? Message-ID: <12086145.1185395718161.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172778 From: Erin Ridgeway >On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of >Ariana as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted >as possible? Bart: A better question: did anybody NOT read it that way? As adults (note the name of the group), we are much more knowledgeable about what sort of attack some adults are capable of on children. And we know, from news accounts and otherwise, how children react to certain kinds of attacks. For years, I wondered what made rape such an especially bad attack (as opposed to, for example, having a knife stuck in you). In particular, I was of the opinion that it was bad because it was societally bad, and it was society's attitude that made it so especially traumatic for the victim. However, having read books like THE BLANK SLATE and AS NATURE MADE HIM, I have come to realize that there is a strong evolutionarily based need in most (but not all) women to control who has sex with them, making a loss of that control a shattering experience (it is, however, that part of us which can be called our "soul" that keeps us from being enslaved by our instincts). For a child, it can take a LOT of effort to help her overcome such an experience, where her trust in the world has been irrevocably broken. And, in the WW, it is clear that their Healers are behind the Muggles on that score (and I don't think I need to point out the canon that shows that their justice system is horribly flawed, and it is understandable why DD Sr. went after the Muggles, and why people are sent to a possible death sentence in Azkaban even if they're only suspected of committing a crime, like Hagrid was in COS). So, Ariana was not only left with the trauma, her support system was torn out from under her at the same time. Bart From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 20:37:54 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:37:54 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry/ Slytherins portrayal In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707250516h177ddcb9o14ec1563c1c9fcad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172779 > montims: > Anne Frank wrote that, perforce, while she was still in hiding, hoping for > an Allied victory and expecting to become a great writer and have a family > of her own. She was betrayed, and all the members of her family, except for > her father, died in circumstances of misery and torture and brutality. How > many Annexe members survived? And they wouldn't have been discovered if > they hadn't been betrayed by somebody. Some people still have a problem > with Germans today, 63 years after WW2 ended. And after WW2, nothing really > changed, any more than it did after WW1. People just got on with their same > lives and opinions. Why should the Potterverse be any different? THAT > would have been unrealistic, IMO. > > And look at the world around you now. I mean the world, not just your own > little part of it (that "your" directed generally at everybody now - not > Betsy - I've opened this out). People are being tortured and slaughtered in > large numbers because they are different. And this is condoned officially > and enthusiastically carried out. Look at JKR's affiliations. Look at what > Amnesty International works against. Look at the caged children she drew > attention to a couple of years ago. > > I like JKR's cleareyed picture of the world. I don't want to read > that everybody really is nice deepdown, because that isn't true - life is > not as written by Disney. The point, surely, is to face it, acknowledge it, > and then battle it. Alla: Let me put it this way. I am not and had NEVER been the fan of what Slytherin house stands for. I argued for years on this list that in JKR' story Slytherin house stands for evil, for very real evil and when many good people take a stand against what Slytherin stands for, they are not prejudicing Slytherins, but fight against very real, very chilling evil. Am I pleased to be right? Sure I do, but at the same time while within the story I have no major problems with Slytherin being a house of evil ideology, I do have some disappointments, minor ones to be sure. I mean, sure there are bad kids in RL at eleven, very bad, kids who commit very real crimes, etc. But that many? I mean, really *** that** many? Quarter of WW every year basically gets marked, does it not? I mean, they are kiddos after all; they are little ones who want to enjoy Hogwarts just as much as every other boy or girl who gets sorted to another house wants to, no? Again, let me be clear, I have no problem with House of Slytherin being judged by what values it stands for. The chapter about muggle borns registration gave me very real chills of registrating jews in WWII. I am guessing those associations were very deliberate. I have zero problem with House who approves of this being put down as House of Evil. What I do have some sort of problem with is the fact that there is still a Slytherin house at the end, and Hogwarts continues to supply new kids to be swallowed in this evil ideology every year. That to me is just **bizarre**. Okay, House is evil, so be done with it if you do not want to redeem it (and again, I am fine with likes of Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle not being redeemed, oh and can please somebody strangle Pansy?), BUT to let new eleven year olds be gone there as it there is no hope for them? I mean, had we even been told that Slytherin consists only of DE kids? Because if we are, then okay, I can buy that they are conditioned to follow the steps of their fathers from the early years, but what if somebody whose parents are not DE gets in Slytherin? I mean, what if some little one is just very ambitious? That is it? All hope is gone for him or her? We had not been told that all kids who are in Slytherins get sorted for blood and ambition, right? It could be one or another, no? And even if they are sons and daughters of DE, why not to try to make them see that ideology is evil? All hope is gone for them? For all of them? At eleven years of age? I mean do not get me wrong, all of this does not take me from major enjoyment of the story. My heart had always been with Harry and his friends and I enjoyed their triumphs. But I am scratching my head over it, not as much as people who were hoping for full blown redemption of Slytherin house, since I always despised those Slytherins we had been shown for the most part, but it makes me wonder why JKR made the choice she did. I mean she showed us **some** good Slytherins of the sort, but isn't that more in line with DD remark of "we sort too early"? Since they turn out to have courage that their house not supposed to? Erin: > Ah, precisely. Ulterior motives are the hallmark of a Slytherin. We sometimes forget that students aren't Sorted based upon their family background, or what they're wearing that day, or whatever. They're Sorted based upon what is at the core of their personalities. The criteria for being Sorted into Slytherin (as best I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) is to put self first. To look out for number one. And given what we know now, we can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in JKR's world. Alla: Well, yeah and I have no problem with selfishness being a greatest sin in her world. I like that. I adore and cried over Harry agonizing over his death and still doing it. But that just takes us back to the discussion of predetermination in Potterverse. And I think Nora was so right when she was stressing that at first JKR's quote said " our choices **show**, not **determine** who we are. I mean, on the other hand, can't you be taught something differently at eleven? Again all hope is gone? Why should you if you are candidate for evil path to hang out with others? Shouldn't they spread out in good houses then? From tmarends at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 20:39:04 2007 From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:39:04 -0000 Subject: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707251309v297a195oceb7268dbeb6891e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172780 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Janette wrote: > > > > > > 3) We never revisit Grimmauld Place; how did Kreacher get to > > >Hogwarts? did he realized his master wasnt coming back, and > > >therefore went back to his old job? > > > > mindy: As previous posters have said, I would assume when HRH didn't > > appear > > for their steak pie(?) and a death eater possibly turned up instead > > I guess Kreacher would have realised that HRH were on the run and > > would have disapparated back to his job at Hogwarts. > > > montims: > I was more curious as to why Kreacher was in Grimmauld Place anyway - hadn't > Harry sent him to Hogwats the last time we saw him, or did I miss something? > > Harry called for him when they got to GP and couldn't find any of the "treasures" he had taken to try and save from the clean up in OotP. Tim From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Wed Jul 25 20:41:21 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:41:21 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "silvialaura2002" wrote: > The Elder Wand was buried with Dumbledore, so he left Snape with > nothing. That's how it turned out but apparently was not what DD had intended. He probably hoped not to killed in front Harry like that or Snape having to flee with the DEs. Nor, I imagine, did he expect to have been disarmed by another. Best laid plans and all that.... From camckenzie at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 20:31:08 2007 From: camckenzie at yahoo.com (saxifrage_) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:31:08 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <771932.76330.qm@web50409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172782 >Goddlefrood says: Dumbledore's back story I did like, it made a great > deal of sense. He could quite easily have mentioned > that Horcruxes are not too difficult to destroy, as > they ultimately proved. That information seemed to me > to have been withheld for no especially good reason > before its revelation from the book Hermione had > summoned. As I was reading your post, this just occurred to me. The whole "horcruxes are difficult to destroy" is a giant red herring laid temptingly in our paths. After HBP, most of us think that DD's blackened, dead hand came from destroying the Horcrux. Actually, it was from his lapse in judgement in trying to use the resurrection stone. Much of the fun of good fiction is that we don't see everything coming and we are led to misinterpret things. -WeasleyWannaB From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Wed Jul 25 20:53:56 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:53:56 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172783 Poor Harry, 'excuse me, remember the horcrux? Voldemort? could we save the snogging for later please?' Hero Rule # 2094: Save the world, *then* kiss the girl! :D Am I the only one who thinks Ron got a lot stronger after he destroyed the locket? He didn't just kill that fragment of Voldy's soul I think he also killed the insecurities that had been holding him back all these years. From ericwackwitz at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 19:32:18 2007 From: ericwackwitz at yahoo.com (ericwackwitz) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:32:18 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: <4231904D-5D29-4603-9F3B-5F92C1D73B9D@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172784 > doug: > It would seem there was a fifty / fifty chance of the > Avada Kedavra taking one or the other soul. Same pretty > much with the Veil or a Dementor. Obviously the difference > is that the "soul" has to be willing to die for the Avada > Kedavra to rebound. It is effective, but it's the sacrifice > which "comes back" on the caster. (?) > > So, as Voldemort's soul was unwilling to die, *it* was the > one which was killed. > > I would as yet like to see Rowling's explanation of the > mechanics here, because, as I understand it, it was Lily's > sacrifice which caused the rebound, but presumably the spell > which killed Voldemort was the one which he cast at Harry. > > Nope, nope. I think I see. > > Avada Kadavra takes the Life, not the Soul. So it was > Harry's sacrificial state of mind - for the sake of others. > So as Lily's sacrifice protected Harry, and Harry's > sacrifice protected others... his Death separated the two > souls he harboured, and it was because he was Master of Death, > that he didn't actually die...(?) > > So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time and not > the second? Why was the house at Godric's Hollow destroyed but > nothing in the Forbidden Forest? Eric: I read it this way: In order to destroy a Horcrux, you need to magically destroy its container. When Voldemort AK'd Harry in the Forest, he destroyed the container of the Horcrux (Harry's body). Much in the same way that killing Nagini destroyed the last Horcrux. As far as Voldemort getting blasted the first time, I believe that was due to Lily's blood protection that he was able to bypass after GOF. My take is that in the King's Cross chapter, both Harry's and Voldemort's souls were present. That is why the death eaters were very worried and huddled around Voldemort - who was just getting up - when Harry 'returned'. Voldemort was 'killed' also. However, he still had Nagini, the last Horcrux, that enabled him to 'go back'. I wonder if his AK rebounded on him at that time as well like it does at the end of the book? Anyway, that is my opinion. Feel free to disagree! Eric From glpm93 at adelphia.net Wed Jul 25 19:45:03 2007 From: glpm93 at adelphia.net (G Miller) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:45:03 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172785 > bboyminn: > > > > This is part of the same choice to go willingly and > comfortably to his own death at Voldemort's hand. If > Harry had chosen the path of Power, he could not have > gone so willingly, he could not have gone without a > fight, and that would have been his defeat. > > This story is about Choices; choosing what is difficult > but necessary over what is easy. Harry made the difficult > choice, a choice that very few people would have had > the courage to make, and ultimately, that choice was his > victory. I completely agree with the Choices being a central theme. I have always felt that this is one of Harry's strongest attributes. When it comes down to what is right v. what is easy, he always makes the correct choice. Plus, his choice is personal to him alone. This is where the argument that he is not that great of a wizard because he always needs the help of others falls apart. He might need help to attain an objective, but he has selected the correct objective to focus on. GJM From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 20:57:46 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:57:46 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172786 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bowie_alicat" wrote: > > the relationship between Ron and Hermione was established early on, it was about the only 'given' in the whole series. > Harry and Ginny where also a given from the start. > > alison > Hello Alison! You're right, they were all "a given" right at the start or at least very early on (I always wanted Hermione to be with Harry, and still did right till the end!) but my point is that there's no tenderness shown between any of them. I can't think of any warm moments between R and H, no stumbled honest expressions of their feelings, no first time they held hands (or were seen to hold hands) and generally it's just one bickering session agter another through all seven books. Would it have hurt JKR to give us something special to feel nice with once in a while? Just a line here or there, a moment shared between any of the couples, a confession to a friend, or just something that didn't involve flying into a bad mood? Considering the length of the last three books, there was ample time and opportunity to create a few pointers that would have shown how things were developing. I felt nothing even though the characters were individually likeable. I would have thought that Ron, who was never the most poetic or literate of characters, to have confided with Harry or at least sought his opinion as a friend regarding Hermione and how he was feeling, wouldn't you? They were best friends who had faced some pretty difficult times together and didn't have too many other people to turn to. I wouldn't expect the same of Hermione which is why I only mention Ron, because we never actually hear about her friends beyond Ron and Harry. And if she was short of other friends for all 7 years, shame on JKR of course, but also wouldn't it stand to reason that Hermione would have opened her heart to Harry at some stage? He became a brother to her, and would have been treated like one. I remember when I was at school and how I felt every time certain friends began sharing looks, or when their friendships became 'touchy' as well as 'talky' , or being together when they needn't, and all the other hundreds of ways which don't need listing, but all that was missing from TDH just like it was from all the other books. So I feel unmoved and genuinely let down. That's why I feel JKR isn't a romantic writer at all. She tells a story, dresses the facts up (overlooks many) and invents solutions as and when needed, but skates well clear of the joy of blossoming romances. Sandra, still feeling disappointed. From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 20:59:48 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:59:48 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172787 > > JW: > > Merope is the OPPOSITE of the character that JKR described. > > > > Similarly, it could not be Neville. Honing magical skills (while > > acquiring the special ingredients of self-confidence and FOCUS) at > > ages 15 thru 17 does not qualify as "late in life." > > > > So, who could it be? > > > > My conclusion is that, *if the character exists at all*, it is her > > Molliness. The only magic she practiced was in the course of old- > > fashioned motherly duties. She cooked meals; she laundered > clothes; > > she cleaned her home; she cared for her family... And then,after > > nearly losing Ginny, Arthur, Ron, Bill, George, Harry, and > actually > > losing Fred, Tonks and Remus (the last two I assume by Bellatrix, > who > > had put them on her to-do list at the beginning of the book) Molly > > sees Bella trying to crush Ginny. What does she do? Does she > call > > for help? Molly, who has never dueled anything more vicious than > > doxies (and lost to a boggart) takes on one of the most deranged > and > > successful fighters in the series, and kicks her cruel and > demented > > LV-loving butt. > > > > She is middle-aged (not old - she would be younger than I am, and I am CERTAINLY not old!) and we witness her doing something we should consider far outside her > > previously demonstrated capabilities, under VERY desperate > conditions. > > > > It works for ME! > > Madeyesgal: > > Well if we follow your train of thought, which I like, by the way, > how about Meville's grandmother? She joined the fight VERY late in > life. Anyone else like this idea? JW: An interesting idea! Granny Longbottom is "late in life." However, IIRC we do not witness her actually partaking in battle. It is possible that she merely assisted Madam Pomfrey with the wounded, or provided some other non-combative but valuable service. Clearly I do not recall her eliminating an adversary as talented and ruthless as Bella. From ida3 at planet.nl Wed Jul 25 21:00:09 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:00:09 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172788 leslie41: > I won't go into much further detail trying to defend Snape, as I've > already done that here, and I personally think the truth about > Snape is self-evident to anyone who isn't deluding themselves. DH > is out, folks, and trying to twist Snape into a bad guy, or > undermine his heroism, in the end will not wash with the text. > Through Harry, Rowling vindicates Snape, and by the end of DH, we > see as well that Harry's grown up enough to understand what sort of > behavior should be truly valued: that which selflessly provides the > most good for all. There is no "Sirius Remus Potter." In one way or > another, all of the Marauders turn out to be grave > disappointments. Say what you like about the idea that Snape only > does what he does for Lily?goodness, he might say that himself! > However, unlike Remus Lupin (who much of the time utters words that > belie his actions), Snape's actions belie his words, and the most > arresting of those actions is that (at great risk) he chooses to > save not only Lupin, but spends much of DH (and also HBP) > attempting to keep people that have never even met Lily away from > harm. Dana: Although I have no problem to admit that I was wrong on many expects about Snape (mainly that he did not betray DD and did kill him on his orders), one thing I was not wrong about was Snape's characterization. He was driven by his emotions and you might clarify them as love but I would classify them as bitterness and hatred caused by intense sorrow. Snape's actions in the shack for instance where out of revenge and he did want to have Sirius soul sucked. Not because of a schoolboy grudge as I thought but because he wanted to make Sirius pay for Lily's death. He did not want to listen to reason because he wanted his revenge so badly that he did not want to be proven wrong about Sirius. Personally I never stated Snape was LVM as I had seen evidence in canon that he was not but I did feel that Snape was capable of doing evil deeds if it served his cause. I do have to say that I understand your euphoric feeling about Snape not being ever-so-evil but to me the text is not so clear that no other interpretation of said text is possible. So therefore I share mine and respect that you will probably disagree. Snape is not selfless in what he did. He did not do it for Harry. He never grown to care for Harry and he truly hated Harry as he was a constant reminder that Lily was never his because she chose James Potter. His treatment of Neville was personal because if LV had chosen him instead of Harry then Lily would have been alive. Snape not wanting Phineas to use the term mudblood is not because Snape had a change of heart about the phrase in classifying people like that but because the phrase was a personal reminder of why he lost his friendship to Lily. This memory was still very much alive in him as he even stopped occlumency lessons because of it. Snape risked his life not for the cause or for Harry but to keep Lily's memory and sacrifice alive. He tried to safe Lupin but you also have to remember that it was because of Snape that Lupin was in danger in the first place. Snape not wanting to be responsible for anymore deaths because of what he had to do to keep Lily's sacrifice from being in vain is not a clear sign that he developed a sense of empathy or respect for people's life. He was still more then willing to betray them if it was needed. Snape was still more then capable to compartmentalize any urge to safe a human being from LV's clutches to keep his cover. He still let kids at Hogwarts get hurt to keep his cover even if he himself did not hurt those kids. Maybe you hadn't noticed but the RoR was pretty full with kids trying to get away. He did not protect Neville who was pretty beat up. So Snape's protection was relative. DD did not alow Umbridge to mishandle a student but Snape clearly does as long as students don't get killed. Snape protesting that DD was setting Harry up to be killed was not because he cared for Harry but because he felt betrayed that all his efforts, to keep Lily's sacrifice alive, was all for nothing and he still gave Harry the memory in which DD tells this to Snape. So in a sense he still brought the pig to the slaughter house as Snape did not know that Harry was going to survive. He probably thought that Harry facing LV would cause LV's downfall in some way. Snape did not know anything about the horcruxes. He was only told that in order to defeat LV Harry needed to die and he was willing to sacrifice Harry for it. So his last act before he died was actually to give his loyalty to Lily meaning and to use Harry to take the ultimate revenge on the man who killed the one he loved. Also DD never trusted Snape completely. He just trusted Snape would not do anything that would harm Lily's sacrifice and therefore not harm Harry and thus DD's cause but he certainly would not give Snape more information then he absolutely needed to know. Maybe if you remember the argument in the forest. Snape is saying that he might not be willing to do anything anymore if DD does not show him more trust. DD plays Snape like a violin because DD already knows that Snape had made a vow with Narcissa and therefore could not back out of the plan unless he wanted to die himself (again I was wrong eating humble pie as I type this) but essentially it doesn't change anything because DD was dying anyway and so if Snape still wanted to stay loyal to Lily then he needed to follow through. JKR did not vindicate Snape through Harry in the sense that Snape was truly a good man at heart. His redeeming quality was his extreme loyalty to Harry's mother not to Harry himself. Snape's bravery was directed by this same loyalty. Harry forgave Snape because of the extreme loyalty he showed to Harry's mother and what he was willing to do for her. I have to confess that naming his kid after Snape is slightly creepy as Snape pretty much did everything to make Harry's live uncomfortable and he surely truly was not sorry that James Potter died but apparently Harry found it enough to give him a tribute for what he did in service of his mother. JMHO Dana PS: I just want to suggest to you when you accuse people of being bias against Snape when they reflect the marauders vs Snape that you should not do the same yourself. And although not canon I'm pretty sure that James second name is Sirius and Teddy already carried Remus as a second name. Also I did not see Snape showing up in the scene where Harry calls upon his loved ones to help him go through with his sacrifice, I did see Sirius and Lupin. From ackopecky at ucdavis.edu Wed Jul 25 20:31:01 2007 From: ackopecky at ucdavis.edu (elmntrymdr) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:31:01 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172789 > Leah: > > I found that a rather odd critique of Austen actually; Pride and > Prejudice is a comedy of manners. I've certainly never read it in > the expectation that the union of Elizabeth and Darcy is going to > bring about profound, or indeed any, social change or that > individual behaviour will be altered by it. > These are my feelings exactly. > And then there's the whole Slytherin problem. From Hagrid in book > one onwards, Slytherin has been the despised, the evil house; it's > been reinforced in every book. Even in DH, DD doesn't say, "You've > been a brave chap,Severus, there must be good in Slytherin", > it's "we sort too soon", ie. you should have been a Gryffindor, mate > (and Pettigrew presumably in Slytherin). As others have pointed > out, no Slytherin student is named as fighting with Harry. If > Slytherin is indeed so corrupt and hopeless, why does it still > exist? Or why hasn't it been renamed Snape House and reformed? > We're talking about changing a school system here, not the world. > Harry's behaviour in the epilogue is totally inconsistent. He > whispers to Albus Severus that it won't matter to the Potters if > their son is in Slytherin. But if Slytherin is what it seems to be, > it should matter. On the other hand, if Harry believes that Snape's > life and death make Slytherin worthy of equal treatment, then why > does he whisper this, and not shout it out? Why has he allowed one > son to taunt the other all summer with the threat of being in > Slytherin, without apparently doing anything to stop him? However, here I disagree. I read the moment between Dumbledore and Snape, and the epilogue, quite differently. I think that Snape turned out the way he did as a young adult largely because of the the influences around him in Slytherin. Not everyone in Slytherin was evil, but if the protoDEs befriend you and help form your opinions from an early age, and most of the decent people either keep quiet or belong to other houses, the odds of you turning out rotten are pretty significant. Maybe thats a stretch, but I felt like Dumbledore was lamenting the "us vs. them" mentality that starts at such an early age at Hogwarts and produces a serious barrier between students. What would Snape have been like if he had avoided the influence of Malfoy for another year, if he had made friends who wound up in Gryffendor or Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? He didn't have to wind up in Gryffendor to be good, but being put into Malfoys path at such a young age didn't help him any. Also, I thought the quiet heart-to-heart between Harry and his son Albus was touching. Sometimes the things said to you mean more when they are for your ears only. And I took his lack of concern about James' antics as an admission that the "threat" of winding up in Slytherin wasn't really much of a threat. There will always be rivalries between schools, and its difficult to imagine that a several-hundred-year-old rivalry will disappear, but perhaps its turning into something more like UCLA/USC instead of Good/Evil. elmntrymdr From lmkos at earthlink.net Wed Jul 25 21:00:07 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:00:07 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172791 At 08:33 PM 7/25/07 +0000, you wrote: > > >Magpie: > > >Exactly. Though I don't think Snape's quite so much a success >story > > >as you say. He's not the only Slytherin to sacrifice himself--they > > >just sacrifice for reasons that mean something to them even when > > >they're doing the sacrificing. So even Snape's redemptive >sacrifice > > >was, imo, a personal one that didn't go beyond himself as it could > > >have. He sacrificed himself and saved himself. I don't happen to > > >find the "it takes all kinds so learn to live with the assholes" all > > >that inspiring myself, but that definitely seems to be the message > > >of JKR's Christ-figure. > > > > > >Julie: > > >I think this is an unfair assessment though. In reality there is >some > > >measure of self-interest in *everything* we do. We give to a cause > > >or help build a house with Habitat-For-Humanity partly because >the act > > >makes us feel good about ourselves. Snape's sacrifices were in >part > > >motivated by selfishness (assuaging his guilt over Lily's death) >but > > >especially as time went by, he acted selflessly on numerous >occasions. > > >It didn't benefit him in any way whatsoever to keep helping >Dumbledore > > >defeat Voldemort once he knew Harry would be sacrificed--*saving* >Harry > > >to honor Lily was his original "selfish" motive. It didn't >benefit him > > >to save a man he truly despised (Lupin). Too many things Snape >did were > > >not motivated by pure self-interest, as supposedly befits a >Slytherin, > > >IMO. > > > > > >Julie, who thinks the whole concept of Sorting is directly >opposed to > > >Dumbledore's belief that it is our choices which define us. > > > > Lenore: > > Exactly! Thank you Julie for bringing a bit more balance into the >discussion. > > The qualities of the four houses *must* be in all of us; the >problem is how do > > we harmonize and integrate them. > >Magpie: >I'm not sure if I'm one of the ones considered to be imbalancing the >conversation--I agree with you here, but I'm calling it the way I >see it in canon. I don't think anything was integrated, the personal >redemption of brave Snape notwithstanding. I was just agreeing with >you (before you actually said it) that I didn't think this was >resolved. I guess to me, as soon as Slytherin was introduced the way >it was, that was obviously the problem that needed to be solved, the >one Voldemort was just a symptom of. I felt the book did it >backwards, getting rid of the metaphor without ever much considering >the way I expected them to handle it. And looking at interviews >after the fact, JKR never seemed to expect them to. I don't have a >problem with self-interest, myself, but I wasn't on the same page >about Slytherin either. >-m Lenore: No, I wasn't impugning anyone at all; I just thought Julie had made a point I had not seen anyone else make. However, I'm way behind on reading posts so I could be mistaken. I agree with your point about LV being a symptom of this deeper problem, and it felt strange for me too, to have the "metaphor" of LV disposed of but nothing else was really resolved. I would argue that the LV metaphor (as I see it) cannot be disposed of unless the underlying issues are met honestly by all the houses. We are left with a situation where another perhaps even more terrible LV could easily arise. It's like so much in our world, where the symptoms of ills are treated and driven underground, while the causes remain to fester and proliferate. Lenore, who hasn't seen any of the new JKR interviews From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 20:56:19 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:56:19 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A7B8F3.70004@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172792 Steve blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 02:57: > I think the Hallows are there because at some point > Harry has to make a choice. He must choose between > Power and Weakness. Perhaps. Unfortunately, the Deathly Hallows storyline is weakly written and weakly integrated, to the point where their purposes in advancing the story is murky at best. What purpose is served to send Harry on a Horcrux quest, only to suddenly distract him with the Deathly Hallows? Seems unnecessarily cruel of Dumbledore. In any case, Harry didn't really choose between Horcrux and Hallow until after it became clear Voldemort would beat him to the wand. So ultimately, Harry didn't volitionally choose weakness over power; the choice was thrust upon him, diluting the moral victory of the choice. And in the result, we're forced to wade through several chapters of non-action while Harry vacillates between Horcrux and Hallow, which just served to drag the story down. If JKR had some point to make about the choice being essential to Harry's ultimate triumph, I'm afraid she muddled it badly. > So, at some point, Dumbledore knew Harry would have > to make a choice between Hallow or Horcruxes, and that > choice would determine whether he was more interested > in himself, or whether he was more interested in > Voldemort's defeat. OK, fine. But why keep the Hallows a secret, only to blindside Harry with them later? After all, Dumbledore told him all about the Horcruxes. Why not inform Harry of both options, then stand back and let him make his decision. In the event, a lot of time was wasted while Harry was making up his mind, time in which good people were dying. > This story is about Choices; choosing what is difficult > but necessary over what is easy. True, and it's a point JKR has made before. You may be right, but I think JKR loses points for confusing the point so badly. CJE Culver, Taiwan From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 21:05:28 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <239252.78334.qm@web30004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172793 carodave92: While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a middle initial of F...> My reply: Yeah that seemed odd to me..and no Sirius either??? I think that Albus Sirius sounds better than Albus Severus..which I'm sorry as much as Snape redeemed himself in Harry's eyes do you honestly think he would have named his son after a man he couldn't stand?? ~Melanie --------------------------------- Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From SnowyHome at aol.com Wed Jul 25 21:02:49 2007 From: SnowyHome at aol.com (Cathy) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:02:49 -0000 Subject: Why the very last chapter?!!!! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172794 I wish JKR had ended Book 7 with the chapter before the last chapter. I'm referring to the Chapter which took us to twenty years later. I could have done without that chapter. Hogwart's is still there; but Harry, Ron, Hermione and Ginny are not at Hogwart's. I hoped Harry would be Head Master. He is the greatest wizard alive; or at least I hoped he would have Hagrid's job. I thought Hermione could have replaced Prof. Mc Gonagol who in 20 years time might have resigned. But no..... we are left with Harry and Hermione waving to their children who go off to Hogwart's while they remain at home in suburbia. There is no meat in the chapter to tell us what they are doing with their lives besides raising children. Ron, who flew on a broom and in a flying car, now takes a driving test in Muggledom. Those magical people who lifted us from Muggledom are not living in Muggledom themselves. How depressing... not to mention boring. I think all of us wanted to be where the magic is ... at Hogwart's; but we are left with not even Harry or Hermione being still at Hogwart's. It just seemed a flat ending ... a chapter thrown in at the very end which could easily have been eliminated. It was unimaginative I thought. Even the names of Harry's children was predictable (and didn't Ginny get to name any of their children after her own Mom and Dad.) I'd like to be left thinking they are still all there at Hogwart's whether they are Professors or even if Hermione or someone with her ability could be heading up the Mystery of Magic. I'd like to think they all lived at Hogwart's as Professor Trawlawny did or at least had houses/cottages on the grounds at Hogwart's. It was hard for all of us to leave Hogwart's; but worse knowing Harry, Hermione and Ron had also left! The consolation is that Hogwart's is a state of consciousness, a state of mind and Heart and we can go there whenever we choose. And I will still remember Harry and Hermione at Hogwart's not living a muggle life in London. As JKR said, his scar no longer hurts... no, but I'll bet he is bored to death. Sorry. I just found that last chapter boring and bland. Cathy From elync at eclectic-egg.com Wed Jul 25 20:29:00 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:29:00 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows thoughts etc. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172795 Lyn: Wow, so many posts to catch up on - just going to throw some brief snips of several out there with replies for now and hope they are not too repetitive of things that I missed or have not caught up on yet. First off, I really enjoyed DH, no, it's not perfect, but it was a jolly good ride. :) Geoff Bannister wrote: "We lost a lot of good people... I wonder whose loss affected you most?" Lyn: For me, it was Dobby, partly because I was always fond of Dobby, and also because it happened at a point in the story where it was possible for the other characters (and the readers) to dwell on it more. Digging the grave, the funeral - putting clothes on him for burial, *sniff* - the epitaph... I found that all very moving. That was the first time I cried reading the book. And I'm sure having just watched CoS earlier that morning was a factor too. Mindy wrote: "Harry used so much relatively simply magic throughout the book to slip from the Death Eaters such as Accio, Expelliarmus, Stupefy, Imperio... I'm surprised none of the Death Eaters ever did that... a simple "accio harry" or disarming him would've helped their cause a lot" Lyn: I'm wondering if the "Accio" only works on things, not people... did we ever see anyone "Accio" another person to themselves? I would think that being able to use that spell to cause another person to fly right into your grasp would be akin to Apparating uninvited into someone else's house. It would be like a violation of another person's will/space/autonomy if you could just use a spell that simple to make them come to you whether they like it or not. I wonder about it too, because Harry tries it in desperation after Hagrid falls off the bike in the escape from Privet Drive, and it doesn't bring Hagrid to him. I also thought it was telling, I guess, that LV never thought to use a simple Expelliarmus on Harry before trying to kill him, I guess he was just so convinced of his own greatness that it never occurred to him. In retrospect, I'm not sure it would have made any difference in the final confrontation, since no matter what spell or curse he used he'd still be trying to make the Elder Wand work against its true master. eggplant107 wrote: "let me ask even the most loyal members of the I love Snape club something, wasn't there a time when reading the book you thought I must be wrong, Snape really is evil?" Lyn: I was always on the fence about Snape, never quite sure he was 100% DDM, altho I certainly wanted that to be the case - for one thing, it made things more interesting. After HBP, though, I was 99.99999999% sure that Dumbledore's "murder" was prearranged between the two of them if for no other reason than to protect Draco. That wouldn't have made it impossible for Snape to still be ESE, but I thought that would have made things far too convoluted plot-wise. Once I got into DH, though, I really started to think that Snape *was* ESE and became more and more sure that he was, right up until he kept asking LV to let go and find Harry for him. So I give major props to JKR for keeping me guessing and second-guessing for so long. clio44a wrote: "What happened to 'the power the dark Lord knows not'? Does Harry defeat L.V. with something unique in any way?" Lyn: Oh, absolutely, IMO. The power the dark lord knows not seems to me to be the power of voluntary self-sacrifice for something or someone you love more than you love your own life. It's what saved Harry as a baby, it's what allowed him to walk into the forest and get AKed in order to kill the bit of LV that was part of him, it's part of what made it impossible for LV to do any significant lasting harm to anyone other than Harry in the battle after "King's Cross." LV would never sacrifice himself in that way, and would think anyone who did so to be weak and foolish, so that kind of "magic" was unavailable to him. prep0strus wrote: "That's what I get from draco getting control of the wand from dumbledore, and then harry getting it from draco. But the part I have a difficult time with is... why didn't voldemorte gain control when he 'killed' harry?" Lyn: In the forest? Because Harry went there intending to die. He was going to his death voluntarily, not having his life taken from him against his will. Even if LV had succeeded in killing him there once and for all, he wouldn't have been defeating Harry by doing so - rather fulfilling Harry's own intention, in the same way that Snape was fulfilling DD's wishes by killing him in HBP. LV never actually defeated the master of Elder Wand - he never even knew who the true master was, until it was too late. "I also didn't like Dumbledore knowing to give ron his gift - i do think it shows a lack of faith in ron" Lyn: Hmm... I don't know. Maybe the Deluminator, the book, and the Snitch from Harry's first Quidditch match (hiding the stone) were the three most useful things he had to leave them. The Snitch had to go to Harry because of the "flesh memory" thing, and only Hermione would figure out how to make proper use of the book, so Ron got what was left over. :) k12listmomma wrote: "- Kreacher beating up Mungdungus with a sauce pan." Lyn: Perhaps just one more, Master Harry, for luck? Possibly the biggest laugh for me in the whole book. Especially with the visual of this gnarled old elf holding that pan high over Dung's head, his wizened arms shaking with the weight of it, his eyes imploring Harry to let him do it just one more time, "for luck." allies425 wrote: "But how did Portrait Dumbledore even **KNOW** the escape date? He was dead months before Harry's 17th birthday, and I doubt the Order had planned which particular Saturday they were going to take Harry so far in advance." Lyn: We don't know how many portraits of DD there are in other places in the WW. It seems likely that the one at Hogwarts is not the only one, given DD's many activities and achievements. If there are other portraits, DD can move between them and pick up information from elsewhere, just like Phineas Nigellus does, no matter how dead he is. I can't imagine the OotP would not have access to a portrait of DD somehwhere outside Hogwarts, I would think DD would have arranged for this all along since he was already planning to be dead by the end of Harry's sixth year. seanmulligan2000 wrote: "It seemed that Rowlings was confirming stereotypes of Slytherins as the Death Eater House, although I don't remember if she said that none of the Slytherins fought for Hogwarts. Some of them might have fought for the light and were but they were just not mentioned." Lyn: She does say that all the Slytherin students evacuated the Great Hall before the battle started, even the older ones who were given the option to stay and fight for the school. The only Slytherin who is mentioned coming back to help is Slughorn, the head of the house. Since it would have been a big deal if Slytherin students had actually stayed or come back to fight the "good fight," I have to believe they also would have been mentioned by name, or at least as a group, i.e., "Much to Harry's surprise, a small group of Slytherin students had returned with the reinforcements from Hogsmeade." Or something to that effect. sdeepthi wrote: "Yeah, the unforgivable curses from Harry were sad. Getting to Molly, how else was she supposed to get rid of Bellatrix?" Lyn: I'm not entirely sure Molly AKs Bella, I don't think the text specifies this, only that Molly's final spell hits Bella right over her heart (which she has left "open," like a martial artist not protecting his/her center-line). It could have been an extremely powerful Stunner or something else entirely. Lyn From jnferr at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 20:50:43 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:50:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <12086145.1185395718161.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <12086145.1185395718161.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707251350y3c609350h484b4a463e0a1590@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172796 > > From: Erin Ridgeway > >On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of > >Ariana as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted > >as possible? > > Bart: > A better question: did anybody NOT read it that way? montims: I didn't (though for a moment when reading it, I hesitated and had to think about it), because they were specifically described as muggle boys, not young men. I think they were young bullies, the likes of Dursley and his gang, nothing more (or less) sinister than that. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 21:10:53 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:10:53 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172797 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: Those that admire the Marauders and loathe Snape, and > relish in Snape's demise, are certainly entitled to do so, but I > think that, unfortunately, they are clearly misinterpreting the > books, and also missing the point. Alla: What's one has to do with another, I wonder? I admire Marauders, while seeing that they are flawed characters for very different reasons that I loathe Snape. It is not Marauders OR Snape for me, really. leslie41: But Lily did fall in love with him, and marry him, and thus > by that virtue alone I am sure that he changed and there was a great > deal of value in him, even before he became a member of the Order. To > my mind, considering the way Rowling has defined Lily as a character, > her affection and respect for James proves alone that he is worthy, > much as (in my mind) Dumbledore's unwavering trust for Snape was the > best evidence that he was not a traitor. > Sirius is more difficult. Harry certainly never stops loving him or > admiring him. But, er his personality is also debunked beginning in > PoA Prank, anyone? Using a friend to lure an enemy into his possible > death is...er...not very nice, no matter how curious your enemy is > about your doings. And as long as he lives, he is never shown to > repent of that, ever. He does go to Azkaban for the crime of another, > but then he escapes and pretty much scares the snot out of everyone > (mostly kids, btw) before he's found in the Shrieking Shack. But even > after that, though Sirius most obviously loves Harry and Harry does > likewise, we are still shown the deeply limiting aspects of Sirius' > personality. A case in point there is Kreacher. Alla: So, if Lily's affection for James is the proof for you that he was worthy, is Lily's loving letter to Sirius proof to you that he was worthy as well? Is the fact that she is not taking prank seriously proof that Snape made much bigger deal of it that it maybe really was? Oh, and of course Sirius had limiting aspects of his personality. leslie41: > I won't go into much further detail trying to defend Snape, as I've > already done that here, and I personally think the truth about Snape > is self-evident to anyone who isn't deluding themselves. DH is out, > folks, and trying to twist Snape into a bad guy, or undermine his > heroism, in the end will not wash with the text. Alla: Nobody is trying to twist Snape into **evil** guy anymore, if by evil we meant loyalty to Voldemort. I would love to, but how can I? But Snape who is loyal to Dumbledore did what he did out of his love or obsession for Lily. That I read differently from you. I think it was obsession, not love, or at least for the most part. Leslie41: Harry, who > considered him his greatest enemy save Voldemort, publicly vindicates > him and names his child after him. What further proof is needed? > Those that would suggest that Harry named him that because > he's "forgiving" and "Christlike" forget that Ginny (no shrinking > violet) is the child's mother. She had some say as well, no doubt. > Were Snape not to her mind every bit as worthy as Harry believes he > is, she would not have allowed her child to be named Albus Severus. > If there were any doubt at all in the Wizarding world about Snape's > heroism, Harry would not have given Albus Severus the name, any more > than one of us would name a child Osama. > Alla: Harry calls him a bravest person he ever knew, so he was brave, who can doubt that now? But if Harry thinks he loved his mother, I can **certainly** disagree with that interpretation, or at least think that this "love" was much more ambiguous that Harry, noble soul, chose to believe. As a reader I interpret it differently than Harry. Snape's bravery is being shown to me in new canon, so I do not see what is the relevance that Ginny would have objected if she doubted his bravery. I do not doubt his bravery, I doubt his motivations for it. > Dana > > And although not canon I'm pretty > sure that James second name is Sirius and Teddy already carried Remus > as a second name. Also I did not see Snape showing up in the scene > where Harry calls upon his loved ones to help him go through with his > sacrifice, I did see Sirius and Lupin. > Alla: Agreed and I am sure people will ask her about that in chat or she will clarify that in encyclopedia. She did cried over that scene after all :) From kkersey at swbell.net Wed Jul 25 21:19:00 2007 From: kkersey at swbell.net (kkersey_austin) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:19:00 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prince=92s_Tale?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172798 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "guzuguzu" wrote: > Maybe. Snape was a Ministry-appointed Headmaster, right? Is there a > portrait of Umbridge in the Headmaster's office? It's not mentioned > either way, but when Harry walks in to all the applause and tears of > the portraits at the end, I think Umbridge's would have stood out, > had it been there; it wouldn't have been too happy. Well, there's the issue of Umbridge still being alive, as well. All the other portraits are of DEAD former headmasters. Elisabet From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 21:20:05 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:20:05 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172799 > >>Lupinlore: > A large part (although not the whole) of justice is > inflicting pain on people who deserve it. And this is, I might > add, something that JKR seems to approve of broadly. Thus we have > Marietta, who pays a richly deserved price for her treachery and > whose comeuppance the heroes enjoy quite a bit. > Betsy Hp: Right, here's my very first helping of crow. You're absolutely right, Lupinlore. This is exactly what the books were saying and I assume what JKR believes herself. Justice is the smiting of those less pure. And yes, pain is a large part of it. I said the books were not built on that particular message and I was wrong, wrong, wrong. It's not my personal definition of justice, of course. I'd even go so far to say it's an anathema to me. But it is JKR's and I was seeing something that wasn't there when I suggested that there was deeper meaning to Marietta's facial scars than a good laugh at some righteous comeuppance. > >>Lupinlore: > Of course, much pain is not deserved. Fred and George and Remus > and Tonks and Hedwig and Dobby and others suffer injustly. Who > deserves pain and who doesn't? That is an irreducibly subjective > judgement, and is why we have politics. Betsy Hp: Well, in JKR's universe the Sorting Hat tells us who deserves pain and who doesn't. In RL some folks look at what church you go to. Others look at what country you're from. There's skin color and economic class and political affiliation and personal attractiveness. There's what music you listen to and grooming choices and what gender you're attracted to (or what gender you are for that matter). So there's all sorts of things traditionally used to separate the deserving from the not so much. Even without a magical hat. Some of the above have gone out of fashion of course. But people still have ways of spotting the unclean "other". > >>Lupinlore: > But I think it would be mealy mouthed and dishonest to claim that > each of us don't have opinions about who deserves to be punished > and who does not. Betsy Hp: Opinions? Certainly. It's why lawyers try and pick jury members who most match the above list to their defendent (or are most opposite, depending on desired outcome of course). Though, Judges routinely ask jurors to judge based on facts, not on personal opinion. And there's a reason the statue of Justice is shown wearing a blindfold. Is it a reality? No. But it's a goal. At least, for me it is. Not, apparently, for JKR who seems to rather like the "sheep go the heaven; goats go to hell" mind set. But I'd also say it's a goal we've come a long way towards achieving. I'm a bit of a cockeyed optimist, but I think history backs me up. > >>Lupinlore: > > At one time many posters claimed that a theme of the Potter series > would be that justice is not a matter for Harry and his friends to > give out by way of punishing the guilty. Exactly who IS supposed > to give out justice in the Potterverse is something I've never > understood, but the arguments were there. Well, that doesn't turn > out to be the case. The heros DO deal out "death and judgment" to > use a Gandalfian turn of phrase, and their right to do so, and the > justice of the pain they inflict, is rarely if ever questioned in > the story. Rather the attitude, by and large, is "Justice is > Served." Betsy Hp: Again, I eat some crow. You were right and I was wrong. Justice is what Harry and his friends say it is. By virtue of their being Gryffindors, by virtue of Harry being tagged by Dumbledore, they *are* the law. The WW runs under a cult of personality. It's how our heroes (and our author, presumably) like it. I kind of realized I was in for some crow eating when Hermione made that crack about not being a lawyer because she wanted to actually help people. She, and her fellow heroes, go for a more personal brand of "justice" wherein they determine who deserves pain for wrong doing and who deserves a pat on the back. So, no future Constitution or Bill of Rights for the WW. No system of checks and balances. The Hat will sort the good from the bad and the WW itself will worship whatever man (or woman, though this being JKR's world, I'm betting it'll always be a man) they think worthy of judging them. Based on quidditch scores if nothing else. I like neither this philosophy nor stories that promote it. I, unfortunately, saw something in the Potter series that simply wasn't there. My cold comfort is that others made the same mistake. I'll be a more careful reader in the future. Betsy Hp (finding the crow a bit of a palate cleanser after the giant poo-cake JKR served up) From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 21:16:00 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:16:00 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why the wand worked for Dumbledore In-Reply-To: <527893.70131.qm@web35002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <527893.70131.qm@web35002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <46A7BD90.4080105@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172800 Deborah Krupp blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 02:27: > Grindelwald was not the true master of the Elder wand, because he did > not win it, he stole it. I believe what JKR wrote was that the wand must be "captured" from its previous owner. Whether "capture" is limited to defeat in battle, or extends to theft is left as an exercise for the reader. CJE Culver, Taiwan From ambogorman at eircom.net Wed Jul 25 21:10:55 2007 From: ambogorman at eircom.net (ballycrehane) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:10:55 -0000 Subject: DH:Harry/Lily's Eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172801 Julie: > Yes, Snape did it all for Lily, and every time he had to remember why > he was doing what he was doing, he could find Lily's eyes in Harry. > > And on his death bed, he wasn't looking at Harry's eyes, he was > looking at Lily's eyes. Sorry but i'm pretty sure that every time snape looked at harry he saw james and thats why he hated him. it was only when snape was dying that he looked at him and agknowleged lilys eyes properly. lala From ambogorman at eircom.net Wed Jul 25 21:29:40 2007 From: ambogorman at eircom.net (ballycrehane) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:29:40 -0000 Subject: About Potterwatch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172802 bamf: > > I also thought it was odd that Ron, who had listened > > to the show previously, was finally figuring out who > > was who on the show. It really seemed like a light > > bulb was going on over his head as he listened to > > it... Valky: > Hmm good questions. Perhaps they were going through the alphabet with > different letters each broadcast as extra security for the > participants. Wizards are not known for their logic, so strange as it > seems it may have been a practical security measure in their > estimation. It would also explain why Ron was guessing who was who > even though he had listened before. Ron wasn't guessing. he was just telling Harry and Hermione who was speaking. he was surprised at Fred though. lala From kimbroughr at verizon.net Wed Jul 25 21:28:43 2007 From: kimbroughr at verizon.net (Kimbrough) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:28:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ted Tonks was always muggle-born - References: Message-ID: <016301c7cf02$cef42720$2f01a8c0@kim> No: HPFGUIDX 172803 > Cindi: > Being muggle-born doesn't make you a muggle, does it? Wasn't > Hermione muggle-born? I thought you were either a witch/wizard or a > muggle at birth, regardless of your parentage. > Nadiya: I think the reason why people tend to think Ted Tonks is a Mugggle, is because we are introduced to him through the viewpoint of pureblood supremacist. Remember, to people like the Blacks and the Malfoys, a Muggleborn is just as bad, maybe even worse than a Muggle. Nadiya Kim: Actually, I think a lot of people think Ted Tonks was a Muggle, because of a long forgotten theory. There was a television newscaster named Ted in one of the books. The theory going around was that Ted the newscaster must be Ted Tonks, Nymphadora's father. Boy, I like the nickname Dora a lot. It's so cute.:) Kim From casmir2012 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 21:43:19 2007 From: casmir2012 at yahoo.com (casmir2012) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:43:19 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172804 Rowena: "Poor Harry, 'excuse me, remember the horcrux? Voldemort? could we save the snogging for later please?' Hero Rule # 2094: Save the world, *then* kiss the girl! :D" Cas: Yes, but he never kissed the girl afterward! (well, they got married, but I didn't get to see it! :) I totally thought that at the end as he's ducking out under the invisibility cloak and then sees Ginny there, he'd pull her under the cloak with him and plant one on her. When it didn't happen, I really didn't care that he felt he needed to fill Ron and Hermione in on every detail before the show down with Moldybutt. Where was the Conquering Hero's kiss??? lol From blg200 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 21:15:13 2007 From: blg200 at hotmail.com (ishalou2000) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:15:13 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: <239252.78334.qm@web30004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172805 Why not have "Victoire" (assume Bill and Fluer's child) called Fredrica? That would have tied up at least one loose end. ishalou2000 From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 21:37:22 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:37:22 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172806 > Lupinlore: > Hmmm. I wonder to what extent the wand can be used by someone who > isn't its master? Obviously to a certain extent, but does it have > crippling deficiencies when used by someone to whom it is not bonded? > Also, what about the strange immunities Harry seemed to have on > resurrection (no effect from Crucio, etc?) Are these because he is > the master of the hallows, or because he is a Resurrected Savior > Being? Maybe that is what DD was getting at, to wit: > > 1) DD willingly killed by Snape, leaving wand without a master; > 2) Snape killed by Voldy, leaving Voldy with wand but not as master; > 3) Harry sacrifices self, getting rid of disgusting mewling soul- > fragment thing; > 4) Harry resurrected; now has immunities to some of Voldy's spells > 5) Harry faces Voldy. Voldy weakened by using wand that is not bound > to him. Harry has advantage of immunities to UCs. > 6) Harry defeats Voldy. Has Kreacher fetch sandwich. Takes nap. zgirnius: I have been following this thread with some interest. It seems to me there is a as-yet undiscussed big flaw in the plan as outlined above. You are missing a step: Snape tells Harry that he is a Horcrux and must allow himself to be killed by Voldemort. As things worked out, this could be placed in the list as item 1.5, between the seeming murder of Dumbledore and the actual murder of Snape. However, the condition for this step taking place was for Voldemort to become sufficiently concerned about the possibility that Harry is hunting down his Horcruxes that he started to protect Nagini magically. If Harry had better luck keeping the hunt secret, or Voldemort had better luck tracking down the Elder Wand and realizing it was not serving him well, Snape would have been killed before the condition under which he was to seek out Harry and tell him was even fulfilled. For this reason, I do not believe that Step 2), Voldemort kills Snape to become (he thinks, HAH) Master of the Elder Wand, was a part of Dumbledore's plan. Snape's death is in no way necessary to render the wand masterless - this should have happened the moment Snape killed Dumbledore. (The plan, of course, was thrown awry by the interference of Draco Malfoy). I think Step 2 was just, Voldemort takes possession of the Elder Wand. I can hear you object that OF COURSE Voldemort would decide to kill Snape in order to master the wand. Well, yes, if he thought that is what it took. But I am not sure that is a foregone conclusion. After all, Gellert Grindelwald, in his pre-remorse days of Dark Lording, stole the wand from Gregorovich and was content to use it so, without killing Gregorovich. Did he think he was its master? Was he? Voldemort might have had reason to think stealing the wand from the tomb was all it took. From seusilva at uol.com.br Wed Jul 25 02:27:00 2007 From: seusilva at uol.com.br (james black potter) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:27:00 -0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Answers and Questions In-Reply-To: References: <20070724203348.0185131B8@socom1.uol.com.br> Message-ID: <20070725022701.DAD54AF5@socom11.uol.com.br> No: HPFGUIDX 172807 james black potter: >> A. Godric owned Griphook. That, and the goblin lost any right over >> the sword when he betrayed the trio. >> Q. How did Neville got Gryffindor's Sword out of the hat? Kim >I've been wondering how Neville got the sword. Is the above >statement true? Or was it because the sorting hat can access >certain things in times of need? Or something else? >Any ideas? I believe one must be worth the sword to claim it. (Dumbledore makes this clear to Snape) If Griphook had keeped his word to the trio, then (perhaps) the sorting hat would not be able to 'apparate/portkey' it. james black potter From ambogorman at eircom.net Wed Jul 25 21:36:18 2007 From: ambogorman at eircom.net (ballycrehane) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:36:18 -0000 Subject: inconsistency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172808 Laura Lindsay: > > Still catching up on all posts-- forgive if this is a repeat, > > but how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had > > an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point > > was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? Valky: > Yep you're right, but I don't think there can be any question that > if anyone could figure out a way *around* an unbeatable wand it > would be Dumbledore. I figure he didn't try to beat the wand at all > and cleverly figured a way to bypass the wand and overcome > Grindelwald himself by some means during the battle. Just thinking. Maybe DD used expelliarmus? It's what Draco used to get the wand and then it would have been easy for DD to finish Grindelwald off. Auntie Muriel, unreliable gossip though she may be, did say that Grindelwald surrendered easily. lala From juli17 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 21:53:40 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:53:40 -0400 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry/ Slytherins po In-Reply-To: <1185395963.1889.19554.m56@yahoogroups.com> References: <1185395963.1889.19554.m56@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C99D1D656AC433-10B0-4958@FWM-D15.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172809 Alla: What I do have some sort of problem with is the fact that there is still a Slytherin house at the end, and Hogwarts continues to supply new kids to be swallowed in this evil ideology every year. That to me is just **bizarre**. Okay, House is evil, so be done with it if you do not want to redeem it (and again, I am fine with likes of Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle not being redeemed, oh and can please somebody strangle Pansy?), BUT to let new eleven year olds be gone there as it there is no hope for them? I mean, had we even been told that Slytherin consists only of DE kids? Because if we are, then okay, I can buy that they are conditioned to follow the steps of their fathers from the early years, but what if somebody whose parents are not DE gets in Slytherin? I mean, what if some little one is just very ambitious? That is it? All hope is gone for him or her? We had not been told that all kids who are in Slytherins get sorted for blood and ambition, right? It could be one or another, no? And even if they are sons and daughters of DE, why not to try to make them see that ideology is evil? All hope is gone for them? For all of them? At eleven years of age? Julie: Exactly. In another thread somoeone asked what questions we would put to JKR during the interview she's doing on the 30th(?). This is far and away the most important question to me, given I consider the way she handled--or did not handle--this issue to be the only serious flaw in the book. Why, Jo, why do you think its acceptable to judge 11 year old children as too far gone to do anything but toss them together in the dungeons and let their selfish, hateful traits fester into full-blown evil? Heck, why not just follow the example of the movie "Minority Report" and toss them into Azkaban now, thus avoiding their bad (and for some ultimately evil) traits from eventually staining the other more noble denizens of the WW? And yes, I do realize we're talking about a story, which doesn't reflect Jo's feelings about real schools in the real world, but given that she hinted so often *in* the story that the Houses needed to join together to resolve their differences, and to ultimately defeat Voldemort, it's a real mystery why it so blatantly DIDN'T happen in DH. Julie ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:05:50 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:05:50 -0000 Subject: DH rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172810 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Neri" wrote: > And what about an explanation for "in > essence divided"? Or did I miss that? Gee, if you have a Harrycrux > that is a mere plot device, then at least get the plot to make sense. Lisa: Okay, I loved DH, so I disagree with nearly all of your post, but this part most of all. Just because you didn't understand something doesn't make it impossible to understand. It made complete sense to me. I was of the Harry-is-not-a-Horcrux camp; I guess if I believed that he was, then I'd've understood immediately that Dumbledore was working out for himself that Harry was a Horcrux, and that, though Voldemort's soul resided in Harry, they were "in essence, divided," meaning they could be killed separately. So, Harry could go into battle with Voldemort, sacrifice himself, and yet still live through it. Since I stubbornly clung to my Harry-is-not-a-Horcrux theory, though, I didn't "get it" until the very end. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:07:59 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:07:59 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172811 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo R" wrote: > > Someone posted that JKR was having a live web chat on 30th July. What Lisa: I've submitted my question, actually! I want to know if Lily ever forgave Snape and cleared the air before her death. After that huge rift between them, I'm certain that they never went back to being friends, much less "best friends," but I do wonder if Lily ever forgave him for hurting her so deeply, or if she died and left Snape with the legacy of not only having lead to her murder, but with the knowledge that she had never forgiven him, as well. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:09:53 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:09:53 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172812 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Some of what we know about the Marauders is revealed by the pensieve, and often the pensieve itself is a topic of debate, since some might suggest that the memories in the pensieve are subjective. That's another argument, but I think the pensieve is rather more objective than subjective, since from what I understand nothing ever shown in the pensieve is contradicted. Lisa: Actually, there's no argument here. JKR answered this very question in her interview with Emerson & Melissa of Mugglenet & The Leaky Cauldron. The pensieve memories are completely objective -- we see what really happened, not the individual's possibly skewed version of what s/he remembers. That's what makes a pensieve such a valuable instrument. Leslie: Sirius is more difficult. Harry certainly never stops loving him or admiring him. But, er his personality is also debunked beginning in PoA Prank, anyone? Using a friend to lure an enemy into his possible death is...er...not very nice, no matter how curious your enemy is about your doings. And as long as he lives, he is never shown to repent of that, ever. He does go to Azkaban for the crime of another, but then he escapes and pretty much scares the snot out of everyone (mostly kids, btw) before he's found in the Shrieking Shack. But even after that, though Sirius most obviously loves Harry and Harry does likewise, we are still shown the deeply limiting aspects of Sirius' personality. A case in point there is Kreacher. Until DH, though Dumbledore tells Harry that Sirius treated Kreacher badly, we were tempted to sympathize with Sirius. Kreacher is, well, loathsome. And though Sirius cannot see him as a being worthy of any care or decent treatment, it's hard for us to see that either. Lisa: I've never understood anyone's sentimentality toward Sirius. If anyone deserved Snape's (and anyone else's) contempt, it was Sirius. So he was sorted into Gryffindor rather than Slytherin? So was Peter. So he disliked his family's involvement with the Dark Arts? Really? But what did he do, when faced presented with the opportunity to harm someone he found annoying? He attempted murder- by-Lupin. Not only was he willing to facilitate a murder, but he was willing to set up one of his alleged best friends to unwittingly commit said murder and pay the consequences and live with that knowledge for the rest of his life. Even if Lupin-as-werewolf didn't kill teen-Snape, at the very least, he'd've bitten him, and the outcome would've been the same: Sirius would've been "innocent" of actually doing anything; Snape would've been dead or a werewolf; and Lupin would've had to live with the consequences of his own actions, even though they were committed unknowingly. Boy, with friends like Sirius ... I'm not sure Sirius "loved" Harry, either. He certainly loved the IDEA of Harry, of having James back in some kind of way. But Harry himself? Well, he didn't really KNOW Harry himself, did he? From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:11:11 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:11:11 -0000 Subject: Why the very last chapter?!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172813 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy" wrote: > It was hard > for all of us to leave Hogwart's; but worse knowing Harry, Hermione > and Ron had also left! Lisa: Ugh. I think if it had ended with the trio at Hogwarts, I'd've been really disgusted, thinking, "Grow up and move on, already!" While I REALLY wanted to know what the trio ended up doing for their careers, I'm fine with imagining for myself what they're doing. And since Ron married Muggle-born Hermione, I would assume he'd wanted to be able to visit his in-laws with the kids without causing undue attention with more magical ways of transportation. And Mr. Weasley drove -- not only his magically-enhanced Anglia, but the Ministry-provided car, as well. I don't see the ability to drive as definitive proof that they lived in boring Muggledom. Cathy: As JKR said, his scar no longer hurts... no, > but I'll bet he is bored to death. Lisa: I'll bet Harry has had enough excitement to last a lifetime, and is embracing his "boring" family life ... which is all he ever wanted to begin with: a family. From ckc at rochester.rr.com Wed Jul 25 21:19:09 2007 From: ckc at rochester.rr.com (CK Campbell) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:19:09 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DH rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c7cf01$70ea7900$6701a8c0@CKC> No: HPFGUIDX 172814 >Neri: Heck, Voldemort never even learns before he dies that Snape wasn't his man after all. Actually, as Harry and Voldemort circle one another, Harry tells Voldemort that Snape wasn't his. There were several things I wasn't thrilled about in the last few chapters of the book. I wish JKR had told us what happened to people like George and Luna and Percy (what was he doing at the train station shouting about broom rules?). I also wish there had been more interaction between Snape and Harry, and I do wonder why Snape was so mean to him all those years when it would have been more revenge on James to have had Harry for a surrogate son. I would have liked to see more of Harry's godfatherly relationship with Teddy. But that said, I really enjoyed the book, and I know I read the last few chapters with a smile permanently on my face. Then I went back and re-read the last few chapters, because I'd read them the first time through so quickly I knew I had missed things (and I had). I'm going to wait a while and then read the entire series again. I think some things will make far more sense now. CK From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 22:17:14 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:17:14 -0000 Subject: Nagini and the Invisibililty Cloak - thoughts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172815 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "irenetsui" wrote: > > On 7/25/07, doppioprego wrote: > > In Godric's Hollow, Nagini (as Bathilda) was able to see, > recognise and > > > beckon Harry to come into the house, despite the fact he and Hermione > > > were under the cloak AND disguised as a middle-aged couple. In the > > > Shrieking Shack during the Voldemort/Snape showdown she is shown is > > > floating around in the bubble whilst Snape repeatedly asks Voldy > > > to 'let me bring you the boy'. Why would Nagini not have spotted > Harry > > > hiding under the cloak and told Voldy of this? Would have spared an > > > awful lot of time and magical effort in destroying the Hogwarts > castle > > > to root him out. > > > > Irene: > > At that time, Harry was still inside the tunnel, underneath a crate. > He was not standing blatantly in the room, under the cloak. Nagini did > not see him. > You're reading way more into this than necessary. Point is: Nagini could NOT see them. All references to US DH edition: p330-331 "But then he heard a rustle and saw a little eddy of dislodged snow in the bush to which Hermione had pointed. Ghosts could not move snow." Nagini had just spotted an old couple putting a rose wreath on the Potter's grave. It's only after they saw the snow scene I mentioned about that they put the invisibility cloak on. Nagini probably figured they'd go look at the house next. The house appears to bring forth a sign when it knows someone is there. p332: "His touch on the gate seemed to have done it. A sign had risen out of the ground in front of them," Not to mention a hand must have appeared out of nowhere for Nagini: p332: "He slipped a hand from beneath the Cloak and grasped the snowy and thickly rusted gate" Now on p334, Harry makes some assumptions: "She was standing there gazing at a house that ought to have been completely invisible to her, if she was not a witch. Even assuming that she was a witch, however, it was odd behavior to come out on a night this cold, simply to look at an old ruin. By all the rules of normal magic, meanwhile, she ought not to be able to see Hermione and him at all. Nevertheless, Harry had the strangest feeling that she knew that they were there, and also who they were." Yes, she saw the hand, followed from the graveyard. Knew which direction to look because there was a sign right in front of them, he had just touched the gate. She doesn't speak until she is in another room. p336: ""Come!" called Bathilda from the next room. Hermione jumped and clutchd Harry's arm. "It's okay," said Harry reassuringly, and he led the way into the sitting room." Now, if Hermione had said, "what's that hissing noise" instead of just jumping, Harry might have had a clue that he had just heard more parseltongue. It was probably another way to test that it was Harry Potter (seeing as he could recognize the parseltongue) instead of just some old couple. Remember, they're still looking like an old couple. If Hermione is around, Nagini doesn't speak, just nods, gestures, or looks stupid. It's not until she's upstairs that she asks p339 "You are Potter?" she whispered. "Yes, I am." So no, I do not believe that Nagini can see through the cloak. Just a lucky set of circumstances, and a little bit of knowledge that Harry might just come looking for his parents graves and the house. Julie From sydpad at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:20:45 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:20:45 -0000 Subject: Crow With a Side of Crow (LOOONG) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172816 Gha! I better jump on this merry-go-round before everything starts coming up for the third time. If I'm going to write something it's just going to have to be rambling and not immediately responding to the board as it is because I don't have two weeks to organize my thoughts. Reading experience: As a read I enjoyed this book more than any of the others, right up until the last five chapters which is when I started to realize the HP series I had been reading for the last few years was actually in a parallel universe. That said there are many ways in which this might be my favorite book of the series. Am I insane? Quite possibly. First words on finishing: Oh my god, it's the hyper-Calvinist Narnia! To everyone I mocked for thinking the series would end with all the sins sliding off the heroes Grace-coated nonstick souls, while the Unelect were cast into outer darkness from childhood if not earlier.. wow, I'm so sorry. You guys were totally right! When JKR said these were Christian books I assumed it was the part about humility, let-he-who-is-without-sin, and love-thy-enemy. Instead it's the part of that's about smug, exclusionary clubbiness, 'hugging the promises to him, and hurling the curses at his enemies'. Holy crap. Did not see that coming AT ALL. Do I sound bitter? LOL.. I didn't realize how far off I was until Voldemort started to light the Sorting Hat on fire and I was going 'Yay!' and then Harry saves the Hat and everyone cheers and I was like, Oh. My God. Overall: I'm weirded out by everything, because I wasn't far off prediction-wise, or even not cool with any of the actual stuff that happened. But Someone was following me around telling me what to feel about everything, that Someone was the writer, and that Someone I am seriously uncomfortable with and would avoid at cocktail parties. And yet it's not like she arranged her universe in a way either of us found inconsistent. We just had wildly different opinions about it, as though she hadn't made it up and we'd both happened across it. This is, and always has been, her crazy genius as a writer. Snape: Guys, I'm sorry. I was so totally, totally wrong. Crow flambe, right here. I said Snape-loved-Lily would not be horrible, and it so, SO was. I just about crawled under the couch reading those bits. That said, I was so totally right about one thing, and that was that once everyone finished the book they would come here and say, "See! I was right all along!" At least about Snape. If the Authorial Voice would shut up for half a second I actually enjoyed the Snape stuff (what there was of it). Every book has layered something onto this guy. HBP gave us kick-ass, smooth, super-healer fanfic Snape; DH gives us this shattered, desperately lonely person who simply has no hope of any real human contact, ever, seeing as Dumbledore is the only person on the face of the earth he could be honest with, and he's... well, more on that later. My heart just bled and bled for Snape in those memories. I'm going to knit him a six-foot afghan. And then run away! Because he would devote his life to anyone who gave him the time of day without spitting in his face. If someone knit him something he'd, I dunno, paint them on the ceiling with golden chains linking them together. Oh, wait, that was Luna. Harry's a more open-minded guy than me, because if I came into an aquaintance's room and saw that I would back out slowly before they could complete the tableau with my mummified head. Hang on, I was supposed to find that heart-warming? There's an Author at my elbow and I think she's a little bit crazy. Hey, there seems to be a little goal-post moving on whether Snape was DDM or not. Play fair, people, Harry practically gave a shout-out to HPforGrownups. "He was Dumbledore's [man]!" Whatever his messed-up psychology was, he followed Dumbledore's orders to the letter from event X, so we win. In exchange, our baby gets his throat ripped out by a snake. Everyone wins! I was *staggered* at the lack of a Harry/Snape scene. There must have been a crazy scene where Harry went from "I hate Snape FOREVER!!" to the final shot of the entire series being Harry naming a kid after him. For some reason JKR didn't think that was interesting enough to put in the book. What??! I mean, what???!?! Actually, I missed scenery-chewing in general in the book, there was a hell of a lot of explaining and summarizing and convenient flashbacks. One of JKR's greatest strengths had been her ability to sell plot with scenes, but there was nowhere near enough of that here. I just about dropped the book when Dumbledore said, "Sometimes I think we sort too soon." Because, he might as well have said, "Sometimes I think it's a bit off to decide who goes to hell when they're small children. And then I think, 'nah.' Or, "You almost had a chance at having human worth. Oh well!" He couldn't have thought of a fouler thing to say if he'd thought about it for three months, which, knowing Dumbledore now, he probably did. Emo!Snape probably crawled into the dungeons and punished himself with Sectusempra for his crime of existing (now confirmed!). I honestly have absolutely no idea how JKR intended an audience to take that, and I don't have any intention of asking her. She kind of scares me now. Dumbledore: While the House thing hit me silently from behind like an electric bus, Dumbledore's true character's totally unexpected reveal had a great rumbling buildup and was one of my favorite shockers in the series. The smug, icy-cold Machiavellian liar both seemed to come out of nowhere, and make perfect sense of everything that came before. What a fascinating monster he is! I'm not usually a hater, but if I wasn't such a chicken I would totally haunt Dumbledore threads with spittle-flecked posts about how much I hate him. Oh, wait, I wasn't supposed to feel that way? There's me, and then there's the author, and then there's a whole universe of WTF in between? I got a lot of that in this book. I'd pictured the scene where Dumbledore has to ask Snape to kill him a lot of different ways. I hope to heaven I never have to ask that of someone, but if I do, I hope I won't do it like this: ME: So, when the time comes, you'll blow my brains out. Of course we can't tell anyone that it's consensual, so everyone will think you're a loathsome murderer and you'll probably get thrown in prison. VOLUNTEER: I'm kind of uncomfor... ME: *Christ*, so I guess what you want is to watch me die a horribly painful death, is THAT IT?!? God, you're so selfish. He's like a passive-aggressive mother in a Sam Shepard play! OMG, remember in Book 1 when he said he wasn't sure if Abeforth could read? I want to beat him to death with a shovel. Harry: is a Horcrux! I predicted that, but I wasn't sure because I thought, surely Dumbledore would have figured out, and there's no way he'd lie in that effortless, remorseless way that he would have to have done at the end of HBP. I mean, he'd have to be some kind of frigid manipulator. Well GUESS WHAT! Your epitome of goodness, right here folks. JK ROWLING ARE YOU ON CRACK??! Random things I didn't like: -- Nothing making sense. Seriously, the whole wand thing? I was drawing diagrams in the margins and I'm not quite sure it works. Was this a first draft??! Up till now what I've loved about the series is that it never seemed to give a fig for the usual fantasy-world-building magical structure, it just did what worked for the story. The tail started wagging the dog in this book, and it was a broken, mutant tail. If you find yourself typing, "Draco Malfoy was the master of the Elder Wand!!" you should realize something's gone horribly wrong. -- insufficient Draco, and payoff? what payoff? Magpie turned me into a Draco fan just in time to be disappointed. -- the heavy-handed Nazi thing. I thought that was kind of in poor taste, but maybe that's just me. Of course if they'd been fighting anything short of Nazis it would be hard to tell our heroes were heroes. -- so, Crucio proves you're evil if you're in Slytherin, but kind of cute if you're in Gryffindor. If you're the other two houses, please fill in a questionaire and we'll get back to you. What. The. Hell? Random Things I Dug, of Which There Was a Surprising Amount Considering I Think This Series Is Evil: -- Harry polyjuicing himself into a little bald man for the visit to the graveyard. That was a weird and fabulous image. Doesn't he polyjuice himself into a younger kid for the wedding at the start of the book? That was some very nice imagery compressing a human life. Props. And then the old lady with the Alien!snake moment was every kind of cool. -- LOL old lady at Bill and Fleur's wedding. I think she was at my wedding. She's at every wedding. -- I liked the scene with bambi!patronus and the sword and everything, for bits it was the nicest writing in the series, even though my soul died in me as I recognized that that must be Snape's. Dude, laaaaaame patronus. -- Ahahaha, Harry yelled at Lupin for being a coward. -- Ron/Hermione, while cheesy, worked for me. (Absence of ginny's personality gratefully received) -- I was actually interested in Harry for the first time. Ever. -- *crawls out of woodwork* I liked the epilogue. I just like epilogues. *crawls back into woodwork* -- there was some sort of bit Alchemical structure going on (let me guess: there's some kind of Deep Meaning to a snake in a ball, right?). You could feel it going on and it was kind of cool. -- The Hallows fairy tale. I wish there's been a wizarding fairy tale for every book. Although, it would have been even better if it was earlier in the book and not about some randomly introduced plot element that ate the story. So, yeah... head spinning a bit. Why was this my favorite book in a way? Because it's so many kinds of messed up, but in such a vivid, brain-eating way, we'll be talking about it for YEARS!! Its philosophy is downright ugly. I don't know, maybe she's right, and people's personalities do get fixed that early and it would be great if there was a magic hat so we could segregate out the Bad Children. What am I talking about, that's just evil. I actually think this book could do a lot of harm, if its poisonous lessons are absorbed by a generation of children. Still, fanfic playground!! Evil!Dumbledore, my favorite character ever! -- Sydney, who has heard that Rowling is a friend of Gordon Brown... *sidles out of country before the Crucio for Slytherins bill gets through parliament* From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:21:30 2007 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:21:30 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry/ Slytherins po In-Reply-To: <8C99D1D656AC433-10B0-4958@FWM-D15.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172817 Alla: > > What I do have some sort of problem with is the fact that there is > still a Slytherin house at the end, and Hogwarts continues to supply > new kids to be swallowed in this evil ideology every year. > > Julie: > > Exactly. In another thread somoeone asked what questions we would put > to JKR during the interview she's doing on the 30th(?). This is far > and away the most important question to me, given I consider the way > she handled--or did not handle--this issue to be the only serious flaw > in the book. Nick: Wait one second... Let's not overlook the following fact: without Slytherin product Severus Snape, armed with all the trappings and tools of Slytherin House, Voldemort would not have been defeated. In order to defeat evil, you MUST, to some extent, have its skills at your disposal. Tom Riddle would have become the Dark Lord with or without Slytherin House, but would Severus Snape have become Severus Snape? I don't think so... Nick From ambogorman at eircom.net Wed Jul 25 21:58:57 2007 From: ambogorman at eircom.net (ballycrehane) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:58:57 -0000 Subject: my incoherent rambles on DH - MAJOR SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172818 Susan McGee: > Why didn't Dobby show up when Harry's parents, Sirius and Remus did? > Do house elves go to a different afterlife? I'm not sure about house-elves afterlife but loads of people with whom harry had a relationship didn't turn up when harry used the ressurection stone!! Tonks, Fred ,Mad-Eye ... The list goes on. Lala From k12listmomma at comcast.net Wed Jul 25 21:30:39 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:30:39 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape still gives off that stalker vibe to me References: <688756.96199.qm@web31814.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00b701c7cf03$0c865450$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172820 >> Alla: >> > >> > True, he is ten and he is not a stalker at that time, but we already >> > hear the word watches **greedily**, that gives me stalkering vibe. Shelley: Ok, we keep hearing about Lilly's eyes, and how it might have held a power for Snape to be reminded of Lilly- a girl who's friendship he drove away. And then we hear of Severus's loathing of James, and that's why he treated Harry so badly. I still get the stalker vive from Snape, and it makes me think of what might have been different if Harry had been different- just imagine how Snape would have looked at Harry "greedily" if Harry not only had Lilly's eyes, but also her coloring and face and over all looks. No loathing needed then, eh? Ewww! Then I imagine what would have happened if Harry had been a Harriet- a girl with all of Lilly's good looks- if "she" had been a spitting image of her mum, and I could just image Stalker Snape doing things that would have disgusted all of us- things that would not have been fit for any child's book. Maybe that was a good thing that Harry looked like James, so that Snape stayed away from him? From chell_e_bean at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 21:57:51 2007 From: chell_e_bean at hotmail.com (Michelle Flannigan) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:57:51 -0500 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172821 SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER Just wanted to let ya'll know...my mom just finished DH and called me. The first thing she said was, "What happened to Harry? Did he die or not?" I had to explain, to the best of my abilities, what I thought happened when LV AK'd Harry. That was only possible through my reading and participating in some of these little chats. Thanks for your insight, guys; it really helped me keep up my family-renowned Potter knowledge! Michelle From kimenm at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 22:08:28 2007 From: kimenm at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:08:28 -0000 Subject: House Sorting in Epilogue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172822 I think the fact that there is still house sorting going on, is an opening that JKR has left herself for future books. I know all about her saying she wasn't going to write antmore, then saying maybe, but probably not... I know she has left herself several openings. As I said, the house sorting is the first opening that the WW is not "fixed". Secondly, the statement that Harry makes to Dumbledore about how the Elder Wand will just cease in existence unless he is defeated in the future - that is a big opening. Kim From ambogorman at eircom.net Wed Jul 25 22:20:24 2007 From: ambogorman at eircom.net (ballycrehane) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:20:24 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172823 > Ali wrote: > > I felt like killing Lupin AND Tonks was unnecessary, I disagree. It confirmed Tonks' unending love for Lupin (She died at his side.) Also - Why are there no Godmothers in the WW? ballycrehane From mac_tire at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 22:18:23 2007 From: mac_tire at hotmail.com (pattiemgsybb) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:18:23 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: <32768569.1185372773201.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172824 > Debbie Grosskopf: > Isn't the Patronus supposed to be a unique creation for > everyone? How can Snape and Lily have had the same Patronus? > Isn't is supposed to be so unique that it is a secure form of > messenger? I wondered the same thing -- and then I was thinking, well, how many different species of animals are there? Enough to give every human being a unique patronus? Even if if you factor in every breed of dog or cat! Re. uniqueness, is it "okay" for Snape to take Lily's because she's died? (Assuming his was different before her death, which seems to be implied.) > Bart: > 1) Where was it ever established that James' Patronus was a stag? I wondered why this point wasn't being raised! I don't believe it ever has been explicitly established. We know James's animagus was a stag, obviously, and we know McGonagall has a patronus which matches her animagus form, so there's some support for the idea. But if one's patronus changes, does the animagus form change? And then if James's was a stag, that would mean Harry simply inherited James's patronus...yet every one is supposed to be unique.... > 2) I suspect that Lily's patronus WAS a doe, in that she was in love with an animagus stag. But what was Lily's patronus before she fell in love? Of, if Lily always had a doe patronus -- did James then change his own to become a stag? (Or did each just happen to have a patronus of "matching" species -- who knows, maybe that hints at why they were so compatible.) If all these patronuses are changing left and right (Tonks, Snape, possibly Lily or James), it does seem as though reliable confidential communication could be impaired. > 3) As I've stated before, the moment that I saw the doe Patronus, the very first thing I thought of was "Snape!" I was dead certain that was Snape's Patronus, yet as near as I can tell, there was nothing in the canon to explain this. Can anybody here think of where I might have gotten the idea? I don't recall any previous suggestion of that, but my memory isn't the greatest. > 4) Be that as it may, it is clear that Snape associated the doe with Lily. Yes, I agree, it seems certain. ~ Kit From coriandra2002 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:23:28 2007 From: coriandra2002 at yahoo.com (coriandra2002) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:23:28 -0000 Subject: My thoughts on the book (obviously this contains spoilers) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172825 This is not a comprehensive review, just my thoughts on the book. It wasn't difficult reading it from start to finish. I loved how fast paced it was. That made it hard to put down. I enjoyed most of it, but not quite all. To be expected, of course, nothing's perfect but that's all right. Perfect can be boring. The death of Remus and Tonks, right after the birth of their baby really depressed me and it seemed totally unnecessary, but I wasn't about to let that turn off the book completely. Incidentally, what happened to their baby? Who took care of him when Tonks' parents were killed and how did he escape being killed? And what provisions did Harry, his godfather, make for him when he learned he was expecting to die and stay dead? The death of Fred really hit me too, but I could sort understand it, assuming one of Ron's brothers had to die. If it had been Percy or Bill or Charlie the deaths wouldn't have sparked the same emotional response. Anyway, it was great to see Percy finally reconcilled to his family. I was thought he was just a half step away from becoming totally evil and was going to be cut off from them forever. I would have liked to know too, what Kreacher was doing while Ron, Harry and Hermione were off hunting for the Horcruxes. It sorted of bothered how they disappear like that without any notice or warning. Another unanswered question: Hermione mentioned that Kreacher behaviour was simply reflective the belief of the people that were kind to him. What kindness did the Black family show him and why? Somehow I have trouble imagining those people, especially "Miss Bella" being kind to anyone for their own sake, let alone a non-human whose race is looked down on by most wizards. Hermione's reaction to Ron's leaving was great, hard hitting and realistic. It was one of the most memorable parts of the book for me. Another one of my favourite parts was Neville killing Nagini, the last Horcrux. I thought he was going to kill Bellatrix but I can see how killing the Horcrux was even more important. I noticed he acting more like a Gryffindor in every book and he certainly developed into an amazing character. Like most people, I thought the epilogue left a lot to be desired. I rather like the bit of fluffiness after all the doom and gloom, but really didn't tell us anything, other than who married whom and the names of their children. It was set nineteen years later. What were Ron, Harry, Hermione and Neville doing during that time. What happened to other students and teachers? And what happened to the Sorting Hat? Voldemort set it on fire near the end of the book, but in the epilogue there's still the reference to sorting. So did they save the Hat or find another way of doing it? And did Marietta Edgecomb ever get healed of her disfigurement? I don't think what happened to her was cruel or unjustified at the time. She deserved what she got. Mind you, if she still has that word across her face twenty years after leaving Hogswart, then I might consider it that. Not to be overly negative. Aside from the unanswered questions it was a great book. And I suppose the question make interesting writing and reading for people who like gap fillers. I'd encourage everyone to read it, the few who haven't already. coriandra2002 From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 22:33:53 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (Dracojadon) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:33:53 +0100 Subject: Mostly on Slytherin Message-ID: <2821DCDC-B176-4A5F-AD96-BE932F5087C5@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 172826 This is _just_ in response to things people have mentioned (or I'll get carried away): Slytherin is revealed to be the worst anyone had ever thought of them; they are _all_ DE sympathisers, rather than a minority clique. I'd become rather attached to this house, thinking we were being shown the worst of it, not, apparently, the best. Slytherin's behaviour at the defeat of LV certainly sets the scene for the prejudice in the epilogue, but -- I didn't believe they'd do that. Instead we're told, everything ever rumoured about Slytherin was true. It's not even possible to make excuses for them, after Pansy screeched that they should hand over Potter, and the entire house deserted the school. We've been told Slytherin is a nasty bunch of evil-minded cowards -- if they weren't in some agreement with LV they'd stay, because it doesn't get much more obvious that Harry's going to win than this. Snape has a different opinion of his house (reacting to Dumbledore's saying he could almost have been in Gryffindor), but we are shown _nothing_ to back it up. What can we believe? We are drenched in the relentless glorification of Gryffindor. There's no way out. And then James and Sirius are revealed to be 'Draco-ish', as someone else put it, from their first day up until at least the end of their fifth year. Lily objects (Bloomsbury p.540) to something Mulciber tried to do to Mary McDonald (Snape, not at all to his credit, calls it 'a laugh'), but lets off the Marauders (who aren't very nice people to be around, especially if you're Snape) by saying at least they're not using Dark Magic. In JKR's world there is something intrinsic in certain spells that makes them evil in themselves (*accepts this*), but doesn't the way you use them count for anything at all? The behaviour of the Marauders isn't okay just because they aren't using spells classified as dark: it's okay, in JKR's head, because they're in Gryffindor. And I didn't think she was going to do that to her world. ------ Question: Did Xenophilius Lovegood blast the Erumpent horn intentionally? Jadon From smartone56441070 at aol.com Wed Jul 25 22:36:04 2007 From: smartone56441070 at aol.com (smartone564) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:36:04 -0000 Subject: Another inconsistency? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172827 I thought Fenrir had a dark mark? During the tower scene at the end of HBP, a group of DEs join DD, Harry and Draco up on the top of the tower, and the rest of the OotP can't get up the stairs due to some magical wall except for Snape. At the time, the reasoning for this was that only people with Dark Marks could go through the invisible wall. However, in DH, Fenrir cannot enter the Malfoy Manor, even though it appeared you needed a Dark Mark to go through the gate (like Snape and Amycus in the first chapter). Also, he couldn't summon LV because he didn't have a Dark Mark and was relying on one of the Malfoys or Bellatrix to call him. From the situation and Fenrir's attitude, he certainly would've called LV if he could. I guess you just explain away the magical wall in the tower under some other context, but I'd thought I'd bring it up anyway. Toner From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Jul 25 22:39:14 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:39:14 -0000 Subject: The epilogue again... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172828 I have to say that I tend to agree with those who disliked the epilogue. I had hoped, knowing that the last chapter was going along this line, that it might be something like a mini version of the Appendix B "The Tale of Years" in Tolkien's "Return of the King" where he gives a potted summary of what happens to the main characters after Frodo sails from the Havens. Over the last year, to get away from the diet of everlasting threads about Snape and about Horcruxes, I've spent some time with fan fiction. Some is awful beyond belief but there is some very good stuff out there. I have read one with a Battle of Hogwarts very like the one in DH. However, another one I read imagined an ending of the intense rivalry between Harry and Draco. After a good story, it went to an epilogue where we saw their two families at intervals over about fifteen years and the friendly rivalry at Hogwarts. It was just as sappy and unconvincing as JKR's own home-grown version. I wrote a few months ago that I am not a Ginny fan. I didn't really want to see Harry end up with her because I feel she has the potential to become like Molly who has Arthur under her thumb; mark you, I think Harry has probably more ability to stand up to this. On the question of ages, I did write again recently that many young people don't get married until their late twenties. It does give them a bit of time to enjoy some freedom before the responsibilities of marriage and family and work gradually squeeze the boundaries of choice. Looking at our epilogue, Harry is 36, approaching 37. Albus is 11, Lily is 9 so I presume James is maybe 13. This would suggest that they had been married about 14 years ? Harry would have been 22 approaching 23. So he would have had 5 years or so of freedom. I know it sounds silly but I would have liked to see Harry as a mysterious, deep bachelor, a magnet to all the girls but who keeps himself as a free spirit, someone I could envy as having the charisma which I ain't got. :-( I suppose there is wiggle room for people to imagine what Harry and the others had been up to in the intervening years: teaching at Hogwarts or with adults, maybe an Auror, maybe some Quidditch. And there is also room to speculate beyond 2017 . So the fan fiction mill could provide something. Perhaps JKR may pick up on the disappointment which has been expressed about the epilogue and might even re-draft it. it is only the last chapter after all. Tolkien rewrote part of "The Hobbit" and Conan Doyle got back into Sherlock Holmes. For the moment, let us hope for the suggested encyclopaedia: that could provide a lot of talking points. From leahstill at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 22:47:01 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:47:01 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172829 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elmntrymdr" wrote: >> However, here I disagree. I read the moment between Dumbledore and > Snape, and the epilogue, quite differently. I think that Snape turned > out the way he did as a young adult largely because of the the > influences around him in Slytherin. Not everyone in Slytherin was > evil, but if the protoDEs befriend you and help form your opinions > from an early age, and most of the decent people either keep quiet or > belong to other houses, the odds of you turning out rotten are pretty > significant. Maybe thats a stretch, but I felt like Dumbledore was > lamenting the "us vs. them" mentality that starts at such an early age > at Hogwarts and produces a serious barrier between students. What > would Snape have been like if he had avoided the influence of Malfoy > for another year, if he had made friends who wound up in Gryffendor or > Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? He didn't have to wind up in Gryffendor to > be good, but being put into Malfoys path at such a young age didn't > help him any. Leah: That's a very interesting interpretation of Dumbledore's words, which obviously hadn't occured to me. Whichever one of us is right doesn't matter too much, I think, because sorting is still done at 11 in the Epilogue, so the possible reform doesn't happen. > Also, I thought the quiet heart-to-heart between Harry and his son > Albus was touching. Sometimes the things said to you mean more when > they are for your ears only. And I took his lack of concern about > James' antics as an admission that the "threat" of winding up in > Slytherin wasn't really much of a threat. There will always be > rivalries between schools, and its difficult to imagine that a > several-hundred-year-old rivalry will disappear, but perhaps its > turning into something more like UCLA/USC instead of Good/Evil. > > elmntrymdr > Leah: I thought the heart to heart was touching too in as much as it referred to Snape and showed Harry as a loving parent his children weren't afraid to question. However, after all the nastiness of Slytherin and all the anti-Slytherin feelings we have seen, I think we needed something more to make the interpretation of 'friendly rivalry' sustainable. What we got was on the one hand the same 'don't want to be in Slytherin' we have always seen, and a response 'well, the bravest man I knew was in Slytherin, but, you know what, you can choose to be in Gryffindor', and relief all round. We could for example have a wink between Ginny and Harry while some of the anti-Slytherin stuff was going on, and Harry could have said, "Slytherin is just another house. It's your choices which determine the person you will become, not your house. The bravest man I ever knew was in Slytherin and I hope you'll make the right choices whatever house you are in. I would have been a bit more convinced that something had changed. Leah From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:47:56 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:47:56 -0000 Subject: DH rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172830 Neri: > And what about an explanation for "in > > essence divided"? Lisa: >Dumbledore was working out for himself that Harry was a Horcrux, and > that, though Voldemort's soul > resided in Harry, they were "in essence, divided," meaning they could > be killed separately. Since I stubbornly > clung to my Harry-is-not-a-Horcrux theory, though, I didn't "get it" > until the very end. JW: Around the fourth or fifth time I read the book, I thought I realized what it meant. However, I interpreted "in essence divided" to mean that a soul-piece existed in Harry, but that it was NOT a horcrux. I just assumed that some magical ritual had to take place in order to properly esconce the soul-piece in the designated container. LV clearly did not so designate baby Harry, and to me the concept of an accidental horcrux seems quite contradictory - and it still seems so (to me). After all, with all the soul-pieces flying around during the blood bath, you might think (or I might think) there would be a virtual game of musical chairs, errr... soul-pieces. If someone had just said the magic word, there could have been dozens of accidental horcruxes made at the Battle of Hogwarts. From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Wed Jul 25 22:56:11 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:56:11 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172831 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmwcfo" wrote: > > > Madeyesgal: > > > > Well if we follow your train of thought, which I like, by the way, > > how about Meville's grandmother? She joined the fight VERY late in > > life. Anyone else like this idea? > > > JW: > An interesting idea! Granny Longbottom is "late in life." However, > IIRC we do not witness her actually partaking in battle. It is > possible that she merely assisted Madam Pomfrey with the wounded, or > provided some other non-combative but valuable service. Clearly I do > not recall her eliminating an adversary as talented and ruthless as > Bella. > SS p 125 US version: "Well, my gran brought me up and she's a witch," said Neville" nuff said? Julie From brokerageresource at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 22:43:05 2007 From: brokerageresource at yahoo.com (interestedbroker) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:43:05 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: <46A7B8F3.70004@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172832 > > Steve/bboyminn: > > I think the Hallows are there because at some point > > Harry has to make a choice. He must choose between > > Power and Weakness. I think the Hallows are there as a plot device to give Harry a reasonable way to win a duel he could have never won. He wasn't a great student, little knowledge, etc. What he had was a destiny. JKR needed a way to dig out of the literary hole ? V bested almost everyone easily. She set him up as too powerful, so she came up with the Hallows to make Harry the (kinda) winner. It was like a old Western showdown at high noon, but the bad guy's gun misfired. Also, were there any DE casualties? Lupin talked a good game when he told Harry to shoot to kill but I didn't read about any green light from his wand... brokerageresource From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 23:08:25 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:08:25 -0000 Subject: Crow With a Side of Crow (LOOONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172833 > >>Sydney: > > -- the heavy-handed Nazi thing. I thought that was kind of in poor > taste, but maybe that's just me. Of course if they'd been fighting > anything short of Nazis it would be hard to tell our heroes were > heroes. > Betsy Hp: I agree with everything you said here. (Um, except for the enjoying the reading thing. I had to grit my teeth to get through, but that's small potatoes.) But I want to have fun with Moments of Poor Taste. One that struck me was that thing with the war memorial in Godric's Hollow. Going by the description it was probably a WWI memorial, and going by my knowledge of that time period it's probably the only grave marker for a lot of the names on the memorial, and it's probably the names of just about every muggle boy of a certain age from that town. And the wizards steal it to stick in a statue of the Potter family. Blech. I honestly don't think the witches and the wizards of the WW consider themselves British. Or at least, their idea of Britain and a muggle's idea of Britain are two vastly different things. And I just had to highlight: > >>Sydney: > > I don't know, maybe she's right, and people's personalities do get > fixed that early and it would be great if there was a magic hat so > we could segregate out the Bad Children. > What am I talking about, that's just evil. I actually think this > book could do a lot of harm, if its poisonous lessons are absorbed > by a generation of children. > Betsy Hp: I'd worry about it a bit, but the prose was so clunky in this last one, and the plot thread so reliant on deus ex machina and things we didn't know but probably should have way back in book one but JKR will share them with us now, that I doubt it'll end up in anyone's canon. The Potter books are this era's pet rocks. Betsy Hp From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 23:11:11 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:11:11 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172834 Dana: I do have to say that I understand your euphoric feeling about Snape not being ever-so-evil but to me the text is not so clear that no other interpretation of said text is possible. So therefore I share mine and respect that you will probably disagree. Leslie41: Of course! But some interpretations hold more water than others. Dana: Snape is not selfless in what he did. He did not do it for Harry. He never grown to care for Harry and he truly hated Harry as he was a constant reminder that Lily was never his because she chose James Potter. Leslie41: I'm not understanding here if Snape did what he did purely for Harry, that would be okay but if he does it because of Harry's mom instead that somehow impugns his manifold acts of bravery? I'm not following that line of reason. Dana: He tried to safe Lupin but you also have to remember that it was because of Snape that Lupin was in danger in the first place. Snape not wanting to be responsible for anymore deaths because of what he had to do to keep Lily's sacrifice from being in vain is not a clear sign that he developed a sense of empathy or respect for people's life. Leslie41: He didn't "try" to save Lupin. He actually *saved* Lupin. Deflected a curse that would have killed him. I think a clear sign that he developed "empathy and respect for people's lives" is when he tells Dumbledore that he has suffered through having to witness the deaths of people he was not able to save. People that have nothing to do with Lily Potter, like the Muggle Studies professor. Dana: JKR did not vindicate Snape through Harry in the sense that Snape was truly a good man at heart. His redeeming quality was his extreme loyalty to Harry's mother not to Harry himself. Leslie41: Actually, that's only partly so. What Harry says to Voldemort is not that Snape belonged to Harry's mother. He says that "Snape was Dumbledore's." His loyalty is to Dumbledore. I'm not saying that this wasn't because of Lily and his love for her (which Harry also acknowledges), but Rowling clearly marks Snape as Dumbledore's here, first and foremost. There are so many other ways that she could have done it to blur that. She makes it pretty clear. Dana: PS: I just want to suggest to you when you accuse people of being bias against Snape when they reflect the marauders vs Snape that you should not do the same yourself. And although not canon I'm pretty sure that James second name is Sirius and Teddy already carried Remus as a second name. Leslie41: It wouldn't surprise me! But as you say, at this point that is not canon. And in the epilogue we see that she doesn't want to muddy the waters by making it canon in the book. She wants the testament of "Albus Severus" to stand alone. And if James turns out to be James Sirius that certainly wouldn't do anything to change that, because it will, essentially, have the weight of an afterthought. Dana: Also I did not see Snape showing up in the scene where Harry calls upon his loved ones to help him go through with his sacrifice, I did see Sirius and Lupin. Leslie41: Of course! Because Snape is not his "loved one". And Harry is not Snape's "loved one." Alla: So, if Lily's affection for James is the proof for you that he was worthy, is Lily's loving letter to Sirius proof to you that he was worthy as well? Leslie41: I like Sirius myself! And I am willing to grant that perhaps he revealed some aspect of remorse about the prank to her. But he doesn't do it in the books. No remorse at all. We have to infer that. Alla: Nobody is trying to twist Snape into **evil** guy anymore, if by evil we meant loyalty to Voldemort. I would love to, but how can I? Leslie41: Actually, I see a lot of people on this board turning him into a potential sexual abuser of children, a stalker, etc. That's pretty "evil," and it's based on very little (or no) evidence, "evidence" easily refuted by even the tiniest knowledge of the way stalkers behave. As Snape has been proven loyal to Dumbledore, those that hate Snape are scrambling around, inventing scenarios, and seeing all sorts of nastiness that is absolutely not in the book. One board member posits that if Harry had been a girl, Snape would have sexually abused her. Oh really? Geez! Alla: But Snape who is loyal to Dumbledore did what he did out of his love or obsession for Lily. That I read differently from you. I think it was obsession, not love, or at least for the most part. Leslie41: To Voldemort, Harry says "he loved her for nearly all of his life, from the time that they were children." I would guess that if Harry, who has hated Snape for years, realizes the truth and the depth of that love (which he never sees as anything but the deepest and truest emotion), then certainly *we* should. But your mileage may vary. Alla: Harry calls him a bravest person he ever knew, so he was brave, who can doubt that now? But if Harry thinks he loved his mother, I can **certainly** disagree with that interpretation, or at least think that this "love" was much more ambiguous that Harry, noble soul, chose to believe. Leslie41: And I would say that to doubt Snape's love for Lily is to doubt every single credible sign in the text that presents Snape's love for her as so. From AgilitySibe at aol.com Wed Jul 25 23:07:12 2007 From: AgilitySibe at aol.com (Barrie McB) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:07:12 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172835 "carodave92" > wrote: > > > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > > FRED??? That was my initial reaction too - What about Fred? Then I started thinking about the names my own parents had chosen for us. We aren't named after anyone from my parents' generation, we are named after family members from the generation prior to them. Myself after my father's favorite Aunt and my sister after my maternal Grandmother. And this holds true for the choices that JKR made on behalf of Harry and Ginny. So perhaps one could argue that it's going to be up to George's children to use Fred. I'm fortunate that my family hasn't lost any family members to tragic, untimely deaths, but perhaps JKR feels it's too soon for the name to be used in this generation and more appropiate for it to be used in the next generation. BMcB from Minnesota From deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 23:17:50 2007 From: deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com (Deborah Krupp) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why the wand worked for Dumbledore In-Reply-To: <46A7BD90.4080105@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <239747.99593.qm@web35002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172836 Lee Kaiwen wrote: Deborah Krupp blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 02:27: > Grindelwald was not the true master of the Elder wand, because he did > not win it, he stole it. I believe what JKR wrote was that the wand must be "captured" from its previous owner. Whether "capture" is limited to defeat in battle, or extends to theft is left as an exercise for the reader. Deborah here: Sorry, Lee, you've given me credit for Kim's gem. Mine was further down the page in response to Kim's thought "I'm still trying to figure out how it became Dumbledore's true wand. I'm sure he won it from Grindelwald, but since Grindelwald stole it, things can't be that simple." I quoted canon, giving Dumbledore's explanation of why the wand did work for him, essentially, because he wanted it only to prevent others from using it wrongly and brought up the parallel with Harry and the philosopher's stone coming from the Mirror of Erised. As to whether stealing the wand works to transfer ownership of the wand, that seems to be relatively open and in some way up to the wand itself. The wand has a long history of owners, and presumably it was transferred at least some of the time through duels or having been stolen. It seems the more pure the reason to own it, the better it accepts the master, but maybe it is my deluded idealism still trying to believe this world is good. We know Dumbledore was the master of the wand, and it worked well for him, and his intent was pure - to save others from the wand. It also seems to work for Harry, who never wanted it, but only wanted Voldemort not to have it, and when given the option chose not to keep it for himself or allow anyone else to be corrupted by its power. --------------------------------- Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leahstill at hotmail.com Wed Jul 25 23:40:52 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:40:52 -0000 Subject: DH Thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172838 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > Betsy Hp: > Right, here's my very first helping of crow. You're absolutely > right, Lupinlore. This is exactly what the books were saying and I > assume what JKR believes herself. Justice is the smiting of those > less pure. And yes, pain is a large part of it. I said the books > were not built on that particular message and I was wrong, wrong, > wrong. > > It's not my personal definition of justice, of course. I'd even go > so far to say it's an anathema to me. But it is JKR's and I was > seeing something that wasn't there when I suggested that there was > deeper meaning to Marietta's facial scars than a good laugh at some > righteous comeuppance. Leah: I thought there was more to it than that as well (spitting out a few feathers). In fact I recently re-read Harry's conversation with Cho about Marietta, where Harry is speaking coldly and smirks, and I thought these words suggest we're going to have to come back and revisit Marietta, but we didn't. That brings me to another disappointment. I hoped that Harry would need people from other houses to destroy the horcruxes, and that Marietta might be needed for Ravenclaw. After all we had Zacharias Smith in Hufflepuff and Hepzibah Smith and her cup, it made sense and it would help bring about house unity. No to both of those. Apart from Crabbe's accidental destruction of the diadem,(he can't pronounce diadem, but boy can he conjure fyendfire), it's a Gryffindor job all along, (sometimes brilliant as with Neville, sometimes a bit lame- Ron and Hermione with the basilisk fang, been there, done that.) > Betsy Hp: (snip) >> I kind of realized I was in for some crow eating when Hermione made > that crack about not being a lawyer because she wanted to actually > help people. She, and her fellow heroes, go for a more personal > brand of "justice" wherein they determine who deserves pain for wrong > doing and who deserves a pat on the back. > As with the House-Elves, it's not just the black hats who suffer from Hermione's personal interpretation of doing the right thing. When I first read about her protection of her parents, I got misty over the fact that they no longer knew they had a daughter. But now I'm thinking, hang on, who is Hermione to do this to them? I have daughters, one of the reasons I misted up. If I think about anything happening to them, I crawl around on the floor. However, if one was going to die doing something valiant against evil, I think I'd want to know that. I think I'd want to hold that in my heart with all my memories of her, whatever it cost me. If I was going to be murdered by Deatheaters, I think I'd like to have memories of her in my last agonies. I think deep down that would be better than a barbie on Bondi Beach. I want that past, all of my past, good and bad, I don't want to become Mildred Watkins or whoever. Why couldn't Hermione just have 'encouraged' the move to Australia, or simply told them the truth? However good her motives she has no right to do this, anymore than Bellatrix Lestrange had to take away the Longbottoms' identities. > > I like neither this philosophy nor stories that promote it. I, > unfortunately, saw something in the Potter series that simply wasn't > there. My cold comfort is that others made the same mistake. I'll > be a more careful reader in the future. > > Betsy Hp (finding the crow a bit of a palate cleanser after the giant > poo-cake JKR served up) > I still see things in the Potter series. I still find them powerful when they deal with the symbolic/allegorical, mysterious aspects of the story. I enjoyed so much of DH. I just wish JKR had stayed away from 'social justice'. Leah From fmaneely at bellsouth.net Wed Jul 25 23:34:34 2007 From: fmaneely at bellsouth.net (fhmaneely) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:34:34 -0000 Subject: Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172839 carodave: > > While it's nice that Harry and Ginny named their children after > > Harry's parents and Dumbledore with a nod to Snape...what about > > FRED??? Her slain brother and his good friend? Not even a > > middle initial of F... Ginger: > That's a very good question. Of course it could be James Fred > (except that's my uncle's name), but I think James Sirius is more > likely. > > It could be Hugo Fred. Don't know why not. > > Several have thought that George would have been the most likely > to name a child after Fred.... Fran: I was a little disappointed there was no mention of George in the epilogue. Did he find and marry Girl!Fred? I imagined him having a daughter named Fredricka! Btw, whose daughter is Victoire? Bill and Fleur's? Fran From seusilva at uol.com.br Wed Jul 25 23:47:21 2007 From: seusilva at uol.com.br (james black potter) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:47:21 -0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] My Thoughts on Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070725234723.6CF0AE000410@socom4.uol.com.br> No: HPFGUIDX 172840 At 08:01 25/7/2007, vmonte wrote: >Albus Severus and Scorpius? LOL (Fans are already writing fanfic >for this ship. It's called the ASS ship.) Scorpius, I believe, is a reference to Crabbe -- both being named after crustaceans. Lobster, of course, would be of better taste. james black potter From ysuhistorygrad at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 23:48:35 2007 From: ysuhistorygrad at yahoo.com (ysuhistorygrad) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:48:35 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172841 It is a fine line between love and obsession. I beleve from reading all the varied opinions out there is that those that find Snape altogther creepy think his feelings for Lily part of a sick obsession. Those that like or feel sorry for Snape seem to find his unrequited love heart-warming. Perhaps when Lily ended their friendship, she saw not only his dark side but his obssesive side. I would like to add my thanks to JKR for the adventure, we might not all agree with how the story went but we all stayed on the ride! Thank you for an ending that I and many other couldn't put done. Thanks for allowing us to have Harry back from death! wolf From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 25 23:52:00 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:52:00 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172842 > pswannkcrrcom wrote: > > For me...Hedwig. This loss was totally unexpected and > > devastating. I mourn the people we lost but they had a choice > > about fighting. Hedwig was an innocent--just taking care of Harry. > > > Charles: > I might never forgive JKR for killing off Hedwig. There wasn't any > real point to it. It was just a matter of convenience for her. I can > see her right now, sitting down to write, thinking, "What'll I do > about that damn owl?" Jack-A-Roe The beginning of the book is all about Harry leaving his childhood behind him. He's leaving the protection of the Dursley's, he loses Hedwig, his one companion throughout the summer, and he loses his firebolt. These are all things that represent his youth. Now he is moving on as a man, undertaking a man's quest. Charles: >snip> > That being said, the death that really got to me emotionally was > Dobby. You can ask my wife, I was TORN UP! I always get emotionally > involved in a story, but that scene is where I had the most > emotional involvement in the book. By the time we got to the final > battle, I was fairly numb to the deaths. A little twinge, and I > moved on. Jack-A-Roe I think JKR showed that scene because she didn't have time to show all the deaths up close and the reactions to it. She picked one and Doby's was the best to show the effects on Harry. From dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jul 25 23:59:37 2007 From: dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk (Tim Regan) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:59:37 +0100 Subject: Why didn't the order assume Snape would side-apparate Death Eaters to Grimmauld Place? Message-ID: <01f701c7cf17$dc92e3c0$95b8ab40$@co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 172843 Hi All, In another list I'm "reading" (well struggling to keep up with like this one would be a more accurate phrase) Dung posed this question: >>> If Hermione was able to (effectively) side-along apparate Yaxley to Grimmauld Place, into the Fidelius Charm, why couldn't Snape side-along with a gang of DEs? Apparition doesn't require speaking, so the tongue-tying hex wouldn't have stopped him.<<< I'm captivated by this inconsistency. Many of the inconsistencies we fans have found rely on canon problems between the books, but this doesn't work even if you've only read Deathly Hallows. Help. Cheers, Dumbledad. ___________________________________________________________ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From prep0strus at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 00:00:36 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:00:36 -0000 Subject: Draco & Hagrid Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172844 I wanted to comment on two of the series most prominent characters being short shifted in this final volume. First, Draco... I know we learned reasons why Snape AK'd Dumbledore in HBP, but I feel one big reason was so that Draco wouldn't. So that he could remain innocent, at least from murder, so he could turn around and have a chance at a life, and... I just don't think he earned it in book 7. Draco's always been a nasty little pissant, but I thought we were shown how he could at least partially redeem himself. In 6 he started down the path, away from being nasty to being evil, and in 7... well, he comes across more like he's weak-willed than because he has had any change of heart. I can see how it can be read that he's simply not evil enough to be a true death eater, but he doesn't do anything worthwhile either. Goyle remains dull as a brick, while Crabbe seems to have truly embraced evil - and 'grown out' of Malfoy's leadership, but Draco... stagnates. Sure, it's a great comic relief moment when the trio saves him for the second time and he gets a fist in the face from Ron, but what has he done to deserve that reprieve? And what have his parents done? I've always hated Narcissa more than Belatrix - B is crazy, but Draco's Mom is cold as ice. And Lucius... at least Narcissa seems to care about her son. I still feel Lucius is more put out by his loss of standing. If Draco is going to move on and join society, he should have had some change of heart other than simple defeat and dishonor. Harry has had 4 main foils in the series as a whole (plus an extra foil or two in each individual book): Dudley, Draco, Snape, and Voldemorte. Voldemorte is pure evil. Snape is nasty, but we find that he is on the side of good. And his two child-foes... we see growth even in Dudley, who gets much less page time. But Draco... is draco. He's been a prominent presence in the book, but he gets no arc. He simply is. Dissatisfying. The other character similarly left out to dry is Hagrid. I've been put out ever since he didn't get a wand after he was exonerated in book 2 (you don't need to go to/graduate hogwarts to have a wand and be a wizard. let him buy a new one and be a real wizard!) And he gets treated not too nice pretty often by the trio (like the other sad, slightly annoying, but often loyal background characters - Dobby, Myrtle, Nick). But he did have a couple plotlines all his own - Grawp, which... I mean, it's nice he was at the battle, and on 'Hagger's' side, but was that really the payoff? Of Hagrid's treacherous journey, of being beaten up taming his brother, of the whole giant...everything? It feels like something is left out. And who was TOTALLY left out? Madame Maxime! We can love or hate the epilogue, but I think to leave out a character who has been in the forefront for so long - from Harry's first moments in the wizarding world, to the one who takes him on his final escape from his childhood home - was a mistake. I think Hagrid deserves not to be left hanging. From va32h at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 00:08:08 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:08:08 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172845 Ali wrote: I felt like killing Lupin AND Tonks was unnecessary, Then ballycrehane wrote: I disagree. It confirmed Tonks' unending love for Lupin (She died at his side.) Also - Why are there no Godmothers in the WW? Now va32h here: You know, at first I thought Tonks was overkill, but now I've decided that Teddy is, frankly, better off without either of his parents. Lupin has that perpetual self-loathing and defeatist attitude, and Tonks is sorely lacking in maternal instinct. As a mother - it simply horrified me that Tonks would abandon her child to go find her husband. She didn't arrive at Hogwarts to help in the fight, she came specifically to look for Lupin - Lupin is the only person she asked about, and she abandoned Ginny to the DE they were fighting to go scurry off looking for Lupin. Given her very codependent behavior prior to Teddy's birth (utterly miserable when Lupin has rejected her, instantly happy when he does what she wants) I suspect that had his mother lived, Teddy would be as ignored and neglected as if she had died anyway. It is Lupin she loved and wanted - and chose, in the end. It is just incomprehensible to me, as a mother, that any woman would choose her spouse over her child. I love my husband very, very much - but the love I have for my children...that's immeasurable, it dwarfs any other love. I can't understand Tonks' choice and it disgusts me. va32h From aggieraggie at ntlworld.com Thu Jul 26 00:08:02 2007 From: aggieraggie at ntlworld.com (Jo R) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:08:02 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the order assume Snape would side-apparate Death Eaters to Grimmauld Place? In-Reply-To: <01f701c7cf17$dc92e3c0$95b8ab40$@co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172846 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan" wrote: > > Hi All, > > In another list I'm "reading" (well struggling to keep up with like this one > would be a more accurate phrase) Dung posed this question: > >>> If Hermione was able to (effectively) side-along apparate Yaxley to > Grimmauld Place, into the Fidelius Charm, why couldn't Snape side- along with > a gang of DEs? Apparition doesn't require speaking, so the tongue- tying hex > wouldn't have stopped him.<<< > > I'm captivated by this inconsistency. Many of the inconsistencies we fans > have found rely on canon problems between the books, but this doesn't work > even if you've only read Deathly Hallows. Help. > > Cheers, > > Dumbledad. Hi! I understood it to mean that Snape COULD (and DOES) get into Grimmald Place, he just can't tell the DEs about it! He's in there getting the letter form Sirius's room. AggiePaddy From aggieraggie at ntlworld.com Thu Jul 26 00:11:41 2007 From: aggieraggie at ntlworld.com (Jo R) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:11:41 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the order assume Snape would side-apparate Death Eaters to Grimmauld Place? In-Reply-To: <01f701c7cf17$dc92e3c0$95b8ab40$@co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172847 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan" wrote: > > Hi All, > > In another list I'm "reading" (well struggling to keep up with like this one > would be a more accurate phrase) Dung posed this question: > >>> If Hermione was able to (effectively) side-along apparate Yaxley to > Grimmauld Place, into the Fidelius Charm, why couldn't Snape side- along with > a gang of DEs? Apparition doesn't require speaking, so the tongue- tying hex > wouldn't have stopped him.<<< > > I'm captivated by this inconsistency. Many of the inconsistencies we fans > have found rely on canon problems between the books, but this doesn't work > even if you've only read Deathly Hallows. Help. > > Cheers, > > Dumbledad. Doh!! Just re-read this and now understand what you mean!! I assumed that Snape just didn't tell them about the tongue-tie curse and said there was some other curse on it which prohibitted his telling. He wouldn't have been wanting to tell them and they wouldn't know any different! They only knew what Snape wanted them to know! From celizwh at intergate.com Thu Jul 26 00:21:31 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:21:31 -0000 Subject: Hated DH epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172848 Leah: > And then there's the whole Slytherin problem. From > Hagrid in book one onwards, Slytherin has been the > despised, the evil house; it's been reinforced in > every book. Even in DH, DD doesn't say, "You've been > a brave chap,Severus, there must be good in Slytherin", > it's "we sort too soon", ie. you should have been a > Gryffindor, mate houyhnhnm: Although I have said I am satisfied with the ending of the story (mainly because I was dreading any number of worse possibilities) you have put your finger on my biggest dissatisfaction with the HP septology. If the four houses correspond to the four elements as Rowling said in interview, then they must be equal even if different in their natures. There must be a good way to be a Slytherin. A good Slytherin would still be more introverted, more deliberative, less spontaneous, more attached to family and tradition than a Gryffindor but without the malignant prejudice against Muggle-borns. I was waiting for Rowling to develop that idea and she never did. I can only conclude that while the idea of all natures being part of a whole and all types being capable of good or evil in their own way appeals to Rowling on a superficial level, on a deeper level she sees only one way of being a good person, and that is the Gryffindor way. To some extent she treated Ravenclaw house the same way. Most of the Ravenclaws we saw were unattractive in some way, foolish, excentric, or flighty. The good Ravenclaws were those who exhibited the most Gryffindor-like qualities. "It takes all kinds to make a world" is apparently a nice idea that appeals to Rowling on an intellectual level, but deep down she doesn't really believe it. I'm disappointed, but I didn't really expect any more from a woman who despises math and science and doesn't like cats. From mikcers at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 00:19:54 2007 From: mikcers at yahoo.com (Kim) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:19:54 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172849 Ali wrote: > I felt like killing Lupin AND Tonks was unnecessary Mike replied: > Lupin was worried about his son growing up under the shadow of his fathers curse. Instead he grew up the son of heroes who died in the final battle against Voldemort. I think she was trying to make his life easier, and kill off a couple more important people at the same time. Carol responded: >Poor Andromeda loses her husband, her daughter, and her daughter's new husband, but little Teddy, in contrast to Harry, has a loving grandmother and a godfather (and he seems to spend a lot of time at the Potters as he grows older). At the end, we glimpse a seemingly well-adjusted young man (with turquoise hair, IIRC) who seems to have found love with the presumably beautiful Victoire--1/8 Veela. How could she not be?) Kim responds: I found the killing of both of Teddy's parents unnecessary. While I think Carol's response was very well thought out (e.g., Lupin would have suffered without the Wolfsbane potion, Teddy likely grew up happy with wonderful tales of his heroic parents, their deaths were foreshadowed throughout the book), their deaths in an unidentified manner in the thick of battle seemed...well, easy. We know Tonks arrived at Hogwarts and went looking for Lupin right away, so they were likely with each other when they died. But I was invested as a reader, and I felt cheated that I wasn't offered a chance to mourn. I would have, too, because every time I read about either of them, I thought of Teddy. And Teddy's godfather possibly wouldn't survive either. In fact, there was a lot on the line for poor little Teddy since everyone except his widowed grandmother was out of direct danger. Even if Lupin and Tonks knew that their child would have a good life without them because he'd have his grandmother, godfather, and friends, why would they choose to let someone else raise him? This is the opposite of what Harry's parents did. In fact, Harry was specifically protected by the sacrifice that Lily made. It seemed more like Tonks was sacrificing more for "the cause" than for Teddy. She was absent for the better part of the story, and we don't see her until just before she dies. You could argue that she was in agony confined to her home during her pregnancy because she wanted to be out fighting. Speaking as the parent of a 1 year old, I could not imagine leaving with my husband unsure of whether we'd return. It was a choice; she didn't have to go fight. The more I think about it, the more I doubt that Lupin and Tonks were unplanned deaths. Rather, Teddy was an unplanned baby. Lupin was scared at the thought of what his child would be. And Tonks was a fighter until the end. I just wonder if JKR meant to contrast the life of an orphan who grew up in a good environment (friends and family) to his predecessors (i.e., Harry, Neville, Snape, Voldemort) who grew up in pain and isolation, which resulted in so much agony for the world? Was she trying to accomplish more than just killing off a main character? Kim From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 00:33:42 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:33:42 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172850 Hi Carol, I'm glad to see you getting straight into the business end of this one :) before I go any further I must admit defeat, yes I did notice that one of them Sirius, probably, seeing as though he was the mouthy one of the two in the carriage, invented Snivellus out of basically nowhere. I'm satisfied that Snape didn't earn the name owing to snivelling behaviour at school. >From my read of the passage it's pretty clear to me Sirius not a happy kid it's his first year at Hogwarts usually a great occasion for wizardkids, but Sirius shows no joy. The one thing that seems to put a smile on his face is James indirectly insulting his family and the Slytherin house, it's clear that his hatred of the Black family's Dark Arts obsession has already come into play with his ideologies and he likes that James has initially agreed with him. The Hogwarts Express scene seems to set the canvas for James and Sirius's friendship from the off, thanks to Snape mentioning the dreaded Slytherin house in front of them. There is obvious prejudice in James against Slytherin House, but it can't be all bad that his bias leans towards a father who has clearly cared so well for his son. I think it was Sirius who coined the Snivellus insult for a couple of reasons. First out of he and James, it is he who has the quicker tongue, it doesn't look to me like James would be the one to think of something to taunting to say in that instance, and second, Sirius is the one of the two who is angriest at Slytherin House, as we know, it seems more fitting that he be the one who carries the emotion of the discussion beyond Snape and Lily leaving the carriage, I doubt James, who is a generally happier person overall, would have the emotional investment to need too take it any further after they had left. > Carol: > We see that he and Lily are really friends, that he's different from > the boys he runs around with (and blind to their faults). Hmmm. I Don't think he is any more blind than they are, he even argues to Lily that using Dark Magic on other students is fun. He's just like them in that way and a few others that Lily was not averse to mentioning. > Oddly, as > Valky also noticed, the worst memory comes *after* the so-called > Prank, which means that James did not suddenly become noble and > heroic. He's still willing to ambush Severus and publicly humiliate > him. We're given no alternate version, so Severus's idea that James > saved him because he got cold feet must be right, Cold feet? James didn't have anything to do with the Prank as far as we know, it's a wild assumption you're running with there. James rescued Snape from Lupin, he *was* probably protecting his friends as well and why shouldn't he, why should Lupin have suffered the consequence of knowing he had hurt or killed another student and how would James allowing Sirius's stupidity to play out it's awful consequences on both he and Severus be a more noble thing to do? It matters least of all that Sirius was saved the enormity of what he had done, Snape was just clinging to that as an excuse to continue seeing James the way he wanted to see him, it's irrelevant. James couldn't have acted more unselfishly. He risked himself to protect them all from a terrible fate. Moreover it is Snape's canon character that he was prejudiced and silly in his judgements from the off. Petunia, his best friends sister, who she loved very much, *only* a muggle, and he was ready to say that to her face.. making a deal with Voldemort to exchange Lily for Harry? that's just just plain disgusting.. Harry was most pleased with himself to be famous? Could that be any more ridiculous? We SAW how timid and frightened Harry was in his first year and yet, there Snape is telling Dumbledore what an arrogant full of himself kid he sees in Harry. Snape doesn't see past his own nose and thats just all there is to it. There's no way his judgement of James is a reliable one, he was wrong, he was wrong because he was in the habit of being wrong and caring only for what he wanted to believe. Carol: > and the worst memory > has to be, as the LOLLIPOPS people have always argued, because he > slipped and called her a Mudblood and she refused to forgive him even > when he slept outside the Gryffindor common room and abjectly begged > her to do so. That, and not the worst memory, must have been the > turning point. His despair caused him to join his "friends" because he > felt he had not other choice. That's a bit too much credit you're giving him there. He was going with Mulciber and Avery anyway, they *were* his friends. In his argument with Lily in the corridor Snape said he wouldn't "let her..." he wanted her to go with him where he was going, he wasn't interested in the other path, he wasn't taking the DE path because he had no choice, he didn't want in with her friends, he wanted her in with his. I don't see any other fair way to read this passage. > Lily is prejudging him, assuming that > because *they* have become Death Eaters, he has done so, too, but I > think she's mistaken. Well she doesn't think she is mistaken. And seriously, if Snape felt any other way he had the best possible opportunity to say it, not to mention more than enough reason. He was with his Best Friend who had never done him wrong it seems, if he couldn't spill to her that he had doubts about joining LV when she had opened the floor to it unambiguously then he didn't have doubts. He couldn't wait to join. Lily wanted him to deny it and he wanted more than anything in that moment to please Lily, but even under those circumstances, not a peep in his own defense. Lily knew she was right, she knew Snape so well and cared for him so much, would she have turned her back if she wasn't absolutely sure? > Clearly, he's not like > them, nor is there any evidence that he routinely uses the word > "Mudblood" or she would not have been shocked by it. Where is the evidence that Lily lied when she said "You call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?" Clearly she was shocked because she had been a loyal and caring friend to him for so many years, she said herself that she suspected it was only a matter of time, but maybe never really believed their friendship would suffer it, it couldn't be more than that. > That scene is the > turning point in his life, and the next time we see him, he's a > Death Eater begging Dumbledore, again abjectly, to find a way to > save Lily. > Dumbledore, who of course knows him to be the eavesdropper, treats > him and his request with contempt, and Snape accepts the reprimand, Dumbledore's contempt goes further than Snape being the eavesdropper. ".....Could you not ask mercy for the mother in exchange for the son?" "I have- I have asked him -" "You disgust me" said Dumbledore and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. > begging him to keep "her--them--safe" and vowing to do "anything" in > return, a vow he keeps for the rest of his life (678). His "tale of > deepest remorse" is wild grief for Lily which is of course unfeigned. > And he promises to protect Lily's son for Lily's sake, but makes DD > promise never to tell. "Potter's son" must never know that he's being > protected. Dumbledore reluctantly agrees, which explains why he never > told Harry why he trusted Snape. I found this quite saddening, and I thought of the moment in HBP when DD hesitated as if he wanted to tell Harry why he trusted Snape but then didn't. I understood the irony Dumbledore was pointing out here, of all the secrets Snape kept in his life, this was a travesty, that noone should know that he truly cared and loved someone enough to do something for them which gave him no reward and cut him so deeply. > When he learns that Harry has been protected as part of DD's > plan and that he must die setting out to meet his own death, Snape is > horrified. When DD asks how many men and women he has watched die, he > says, "Lately, only those I could not save" (687). This is our glimpse > of the true Snape, the brilliant but reluctant double agent who would > much rather be saving lives. This doesn't ring true to me. If the 'true' Snape would rather be saving lives he would never have tried to bargain with Voldemort for Lily. He needed Dumbledore to point out to him the importance of James and Harry's lives, he didn't place that importance on them himself. The true Snape is both people. One does not negate the other and Snape was never willing to choose the path of being good and self sacrificing of his own accord, it was thrust upon him by fate and he was reluctant to take it even then. There's no doubting, as time went by Snape grew into the brave man he always could have been. And Dumbledore acknowledged this in saying that maybe he was sorted too soon. He needed time to discover his courage, with more time he may have chosen the best of himself earlier and never become a Death Eater at all, but more than time he needed a big push, something hat would force him to come to terms with the feeling person inside him and it's possible that for that purpose nothing could substitute the death of his dearest friend and love of his life, Lily. Valky From gingermc at cox.net Thu Jul 26 00:25:54 2007 From: gingermc at cox.net (Ginger McElwee) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:25:54 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Crow With a Side of Crow (LOOONG) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008701c7cf1b$87de2de0$979a89a0$@net> No: HPFGUIDX 172851 Sydney wrote: > I don't know, maybe she's right, and people's personalities do get > fixed that early and it would be great if there was a magic hat so > we could segregate out the Bad Children. I disagree with most of what you say in your post, but I understand how you arrive at your conclusions. On this point, however, I think you have misunderstood a couple of things. First, personality is, if not fixed, at least largely formed by the time a child is eleven. That does not mean that a child's choices for the rest of his/her life are fixed. It means that a person is basically heroic or ambitious or hard working or fascinated with knowledge. Those are the qualities of the houses. They have nothing to do with being bad or good. They simply describe the basis on which a person is likely to make choices. There is no reason to assume that everyone who is ambitious is evil or that every person who is heroic is good. I don't think Rowling suggests this connection. I think she acknowledges that ambitious people make decisions based on their own interest rather than the interest of others, and this can create a problem; but even within the confines of the Harry novels, there are ample examples of good or neutral Slytherins. Only our main characters are examined in enough detail for the reader to make conclusions about whether the person is good or bad, and the quintessential Slytherin, Malfoy, is presented as weak rather evil. Ginger From fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 00:31:59 2007 From: fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com (fitzchivalryhk) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:31:59 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172852 One of the most unsatisfying point in Deathly Hallows for many HPfGUers is the continual/approval of the Sorting system after the Voldemort war. In DH, by showing that none of the current Slytherin students was good enough to join the other Houses to fight against Voldemort, and discounting other Slytherins as "Griffindor at heart" (i.e. Snape), the book seems to send a message to people that as long as you are categorized as one type of people (namely, Slytherin) at the age of 11, you are a coward or villain for life. I find this type of message disturbing, and am surprised that, even though the Sorting Hat's song in previous years seem to disapprove this type of segregation, the epilogue shows that the system is allowed to remain unchanged at least for the next 19 years. For those who share the point of view that the Sorting and House System of Hogwarts is not beneficial for the wizarding society and its children, what do you think can be done to change it? Abolishing the House system all together? Eliminate the Slytherin House? Abolish Sorting by the Sorting Hat and put the students randomly into each house? Change the ideological implication that permeates the house system? Put a pro-equality teacher as the Head of Slytherin to change the pro-pure-blood atmosphere of the House? Other suggestions? :) fitz From elync at eclectic-egg.com Thu Jul 26 00:33:40 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:33:40 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172853 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwlerch78" wrote: >It's > not that possessing all 3 makes you the master of death; you need to > be the Master of death in order to possess all 3 safely. A great way to look at it, IMO. Being master of death means accepting it as an inevitable part of the cycle of life rather than fearing it, as Voldemort did. Voldemort's possession of the Hallows would be a disaster, his fear of death and obsessive desire for control (which is a hallmark of those who cannot accept the ultimate inevitability of death) would cause him to use them for horrible purposes to try and ensure his own power and immortality. Only one who does not desire those things, who accepts death as "the next great adventure," can be trusted to possess the Hallows without using them to escape it. The master of death has not mastered death, he hasn't avoided it or outrun it or subverted it; he doesn't *need* to, because what he's mastered is his own fear of its inevitability. Lyn From elync at eclectic-egg.com Thu Jul 26 00:38:33 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:38:33 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks *Was: Deathly Hallows: My Review ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172854 > Ulliowl: > Or maybe the opposite ear to George's. If damage to Fred was going to be limited to an ear, it would have to be the *same* ear as George. Thus they could go back to pretending to be each other to keep their mother thoroughly confused over which one she was yelling at, at any given moment. Seems only fitting. :) Lyn From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 00:40:44 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:40:44 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172855 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: Leslie: > No, he doesn't give a damn about Harry as a person. Still, he does the > right thing. That's Snape all over. And he doesn't just do it for > Lily's sake. Because Snape has changed. Fred loses an ear because > Snape saves Lupin, for example, whom he cares less for than Harry. > Snape regrets having to witness the deaths of people (such as Charity) > that he, because of his circumstances as a double agent) cannot save. > > Can you give him credit for something, just one thing, without tearing > him down and impugning his reasons for doing it? > > The man did help to save the world, after all. > Jack-A-Roe Let's review a little bit: - He basically looks down on Petunia because she isn't magical. - His defense that his friends use dark magic is that Potter and his friends play jokes. The problem is that Lilly understands the difference between a practical joke and dark magic. - He tries to find out what the marauders are doing and is saved by James from the werewolf. - He insults Lilly and tries to apologize. She lets him know very directly that there is no difference between her and the others that he and his DE friends insult. She is practically challenging him to admit is loyalties right there. When he doesn't say anything she leaves him. - He provides the information that causes Voldemort to go after her. - He asks Voldemort to spare her but doesn't care about her husband or child. - He agrees to protect Lilly's son. Not Harry the person, just her son. - He tries and threatens to have Harry expelled, which would be the opposite of trying to protect him. - He is verbally and emotionally abusive to Harry throughout the books although he does try to protect him from Quirrel. - He never sees Harry for who he is but thinks of him as if he is James: "mediocre, arrogant as his father, a determined rule breaker" - He agrees not to run away like Karkaroff. - He goes back to Voldemort as DD's spy. - He provides info the Order, although we don't know exactly what. - He extends DD's life. - He basically admits that his soul is not perfect and agrees to be the one to kill DD. - He whinges like a petulant child when DD won't confide in him everything that is going on. "You confide much more in a boy who isn't capable of Occlumancy, whose magic is mediocre" - He is upset that all of his work is for nothing because Lilly's son is supposed to die. He's not upset about Harry, only that Lilly's son is supposed to die. - He attempts to save Lupin but misses and curses off George's ear. - He is upset by the use of mudblood. I think more because it cost him Lilly than because it is an inappropriate term. - He does his best to convince Voldemort to let him get Harry. - He would have failed to give his information to Harry if Voldemort had killed him outright or if Harry hadn't been right there. So we are left with a man who's obsessive love for a women, drove him to try to make up for the fact that he got her killed. Did he ever care about Harry? No, he tells us this by showing his doe patronus when DD asked him. Did he end up helping the light side? Yes. Not because he saw the errors of his ways but because he was trying to make it up to Lilly. And since results do matter, I will say that he redeemed himself somewhat. But he was still a poor human being who only truly cared about himself and Lilly. And no I would not have named my child after him. From va32h at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 00:45:32 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:45:32 -0000 Subject: Draco & Hagrid In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172856 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: > I wanted to comment on two of the series most prominent characters being short shifted in this final volume. First, Draco... I know we learned reasons why Snape AK'd Dumbledore in HBP, but I feel one big reason was so that Draco wouldn't. So that he could remain innocent, at least from murder, so he could turn around and have a chance at a life, and... I just don't think he earned it in book 7. If Draco is going to move on and join society, he should have had some change of heart other than simple defeat and dishonor. va32h here: I do agree with this to an extent. Based on the great emphasis placed on saving Draco in HBP, I thought it would come to fruition too. But perhaps that is the way of life - you can offer a man the chance at redemption, but you cannot force him to take it. Draco *is* different. He does not enjoy the violence he is forced to witness - that alone is a world of difference from the Draco who looked forward to the execution of Buckbeak, and took such pleasure in bullying others. At Malfoy Manor, Draco is very reluctant to identify the trio - he knows exactly who they are. Is it to spare them the torture and violence that is sure to come, or spare himself having to witness it? But there is no "quitting" the Death Eaters, as so many others have learned, and the Malfoys seem to have accepted that they cannot leave, and are just trying to protect each other as best they can. Draco came back to the castle in hopes of catching Harry - but I firmly believe that his desire was not so much to kill Harry but to restore his family into favor with Voldemort and spare them whatever punishment they had been receiving. In the end Narcissa proves to be far braver than her husband or son, baldly lying to Voldemort to save her son. It would be wonderful if any of the Malfoys had a genuine change of heart - but as the Slytherins they are, they put themselves first. In the epilogue, Draco at least acknowledges Harry - I doubt he ever sent Harry a note "Thank you for saving my life - repeatedly!") but there doesn't seem to be the kind of lasting hatred that say...Snape and James had. prep0strous here: > The other character similarly left out to dry is Hagrid. I've been > put out ever since he didn't get a wand after he was exonerated in > book 2 (you don't need to go to/graduate hogwarts to have a wand and > be a wizard. let him buy a new one and be a real wizard!) And he gets treated not too nice pretty often by the trio (like the other sad,slightly annoying, but often loyal background characters - Dobby, Myrtle, Nick). > > But he did have a couple plotlines all his own - Grawp, which... I > mean, it's nice he was at the battle, and on 'Hagger's' side, but was that really the payoff? Of Hagrid's treacherous journey, of being > beaten up taming his brother, of the whole giant...everything? It > feels like something is left out. va32h here: Hagrid's role in this book doesn't bother me - Hagrid's a pretty simple guy when all is said and done. I don't think Hagrid would want a new wand anyway - he seems quite fond of his pink umbrella. Hagrid had the most important symbolic role in the whole book, IMO. Just as he plucked baby Harry from the wreckage of Godric's Hollow, and rescued him from the hut on the rock, when the Dursleys would have denied Harry his birthright, so it is Hagrid who carries Harry's "dead" body out of the forest, and back to the castle, back to life. >From the epilogue, it sounds as if Hagrid is back at Hogwarts, doing what he loves, and is still as beloved by Harry as ever. Yes I would say Grawp's appearance at the battle is Hagrid's payoff. He has "tamed" his brother and earned his love and loyalty - they are as much brothers, in the end, as the Weasleys, fighting for and with each other, rather than Grawp being some wild sort of animal. va32h From texas.midnight at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 00:45:38 2007 From: texas.midnight at yahoo.com (Louis) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:45:38 -0000 Subject: question about house elves Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172857 We know that an elf is bound to their master, unless freed In GOF Winky was bound to Crouches, and she said she, her mom and grandma all work for the same family. In COS Dobby work the Malfoy and Harry cost them their Elf So we know same masters had single elf, so my question is how did the elves meet to have childern? Louis From elync at eclectic-egg.com Thu Jul 26 00:48:00 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:48:00 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" wrote: > After all, your patronus repreents your true inner self. I agree, and I don't remember it being mentioned anywhere that one could consciously control the form of one's patronus. When the spell was performed, if a corporeal patronus resulted from it, the form of the patronus was an expression of something within the person who conjured it and not a form chosen by that person to represent him/herself at that moment (or forever). That's one reason why a person's patronus could change over time, or as the person's inner life evolved and went through various ups and downs or traumatic changes. It's also why I think Snape's doe patronus was the "ironclad" proof for DD that Snape could be trusted to follow through on his original promise to protect Harry. It's not something he could have faked to gain DD's continuing trust. Lyn From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Thu Jul 26 00:56:58 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:56:58 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better Crow /With a Side of Crow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172859 > Alla: > That to me is just **bizarre**. Okay, House is evil, so be done with > it if you do not want to redeem it (and again, I am fine with likes > of Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle not being redeemed, oh and can please > somebody strangle Pansy?), BUT to let new eleven year olds be gone > there as it there is no hope for them? Magpie: Snape, who worked consistently for years against Voldemort, was worse than any of those four Slytherins you mentioned at that age. Which is why I do have a problem with having them there to be evil--I care about the worst ones more than the ones who are even just getting screwed by association, because I think they all are. To me none of those Slytherins are as different from Snape or, more importantly, from anybody on the good side, as the narration treats them, so I was probably bound to ultimately find the story a bit...what's the word? I want to say maturbatory. But I put this post here just to do the biggest me-to ever to Sydney: > Gha! I better jump on this merry-go-round before everything starts > coming up for the third time. If I'm going to write something it's > just going to have to be rambling and not immediately responding to > the board as it is because I don't have two weeks to organize my thoughts. Magpie: Yeah. Double yeah. The weird thing is I remember loving the beginning, feeling that the seams were showing in the middle but still liking it and then...kablam. Total destruction. In surprising ways. And I just wanted to back away in fear--just as I did in Luna's room. (And now I think I'll forever consider it canon that Luna seriously needed rescuing from that father.) Sydney: > -- insufficient Draco, and payoff? what payoff? Magpie turned me > into a Draco fan just in time to be disappointed. Magpie: Sorry! I'm feeling your pain! You know, usually I never have anything really perscriptive to say about the story, but the last time somebody mentioned that "The real master of the Elder Wand is Draco Malfoy!" I remembered that I totally expected, like, the equivalent of a spotlight on petrified Draco, where he wouldn't have to be heroic but might have to like , choose Harry. And that would give Harry a chance to be all cool about having seen him on the Tower and knowing he's afraid but encouraging him to do the right thing. But of course in the very same sentence Harry's all, "But naturally I conveniently pwned him back in Chapter 23 so it all comes down to me." I felt silly for even momentarily thinking it would be anything else. Luckily as a magpie, I'm fond of crows. Ginger: I think she acknowledges that ambitious people make decisions based on their own interest rather than the interest of others, and this can create a problem; but even within the confines of the Harry novels, there are ample examples of good or neutral Slytherins. Only our main characters are examined in enough detail for the reader to make conclusions about whether the person is good or bad, and the quintessential Slytherin, Malfoy, is presented as weak rather evil. Magpie: I don't know whether she actually missed that. I didn't, and I still think it's damning with very faint praise and still doesn't judge those characters the way I would judge them. I don't look back on the thousands of pages I read in this series and ever think, "Gee, what ample examples I was given of good or neutral Slytherins!" If I misunderstood it, I think it was because that bit was more mumbled behind the author's hand while everything else was sung in multiple harmony. -m From seuferer at netins.net Thu Jul 26 00:42:56 2007 From: seuferer at netins.net (Lisa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:42:56 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172860 Well, I normally just lurk like mad here and several other Harry Potter and Snape-centric Yahoo groups, so forgive me if you see this cross-posted to other groups, but I can't keep quiet any longer. Unfortunately, I am the sort who cannot keep quiet over these sorts of things even when I probably ought to. I know we are all hurting and grieving over the end of an era and the ways we would have wanted to see "xyz" done differently. I've posted a lengthy discussion of my over-all likes and dislikes of the book in my livejournal, including my ideas of ways to 'get around' the bits I don't like so I can still play with certain characters in fandom. I won't repost it here, though if you want to read it, it is publicly viewable, here: http://weasleyfan.livejournal.com/23770.html So, I do understand the aching hearts of my fellow-fandom communities. The thing I'm getting frustrated over, at this point, is the savage, almost vicious attacks against JKR. Recently, I've seen fanfic authors berate her epilogue and other portions of the story (like the battle in/around Hogwarts) for being "cliched" and "over-done" because it had been done a bunch in various FANFICTIONS. This is positively infuriating to me. I'm a fanfic writer, too, and a lover of all things fanfic, but I think it behooves us all to remember that these are her books, her characters and her stories to tell how she wants. JKR is amazingly indulgent and even encouraging of fanfiction writing in general, and use of her characters specifically. She has often said in answer to questions at her website, "Well, I'm not going to be covering that aspect in the story, but you should look around at some of the fanfiction out there - it's really creative!" (Particularly in regards to more details about MWPP era events and such.) Now, there are very few popular authors who are this indulgent. JKR more than has enough power, influence and clout, that if she wanted to claim copy-right infringement and start suing people right and left, there would be no public server, anywhere on the internet, that would host any of the wonderful fanfiction out there! Anne Rice, anyone? The travelling aimlessly through the forest was unnecessary? How so? How else was Harry going to get to the desperate point of trusting an unknown Patronus in the middle of nowhere? How else was he going to come to grips with all of the things he needed to find/realise within *himself* before he could move on? Too much bloodshed? This, from a fandom-community who, after the last book, accused Voldemort of being a 'joke' and not being nearly so tough or dangerous if he was so easily thwarted by 'kids' or recruiting 'kids'...? JKR has been telling us from day ONE that the books would get darker, that the final books would not BE "children's books". She has said, again and again, this is war, people will die. She had to SHOW us the savage, ugly, terrifying, heartbreakingly *painful* realities of this. The classic authors' maxim, right? "Show, dont' tell". No one believed Voldemort was 'the most evil Wizard of all time' when she "told" us that through the characters of the books. This was the time, the climax, the place to SHOW us just exactly how horrific Voldemort was, just exactly WHY everyone was so afraid to say his name, even eleven years after he'd last been sighted. Please. I beg you. I *do* feel the pain of loss and my own frustrations of things I wish could have been explained better/presented more clearly, etc. But this was her story to tell, not ours. As I say in the essay in my journal, I personally believe that JKR left some things 'loose' to give us who do play in the fanfic/fandom areas wiggle-room! I think the lack of mention of Severus' body and such after his death was *intentional*, and done *for us*. This was not Severus' story! Yes, he was a crucial, vital, integral part of the story from before Harry's birth, but it was still not 'Severus Snape and the Boy Who Lived...' The stories were "Harry Potter and the______". That means the only things crucial to tie up at the end were the things which directly affected Harry. Do I like it? Not necessarily. I wanted Snape to be given his heroic due as well! But I much prefer having him somewhat ambigiously dead for anyone with a good imagination than to have a glorious funeral and fanfaire and buried six-feet-under. This was her story. To accuse her of being cliched because she has been so wonderfully tolerant of all the fanfiction out there and so much of fanfiction has "already done it", is, frankly, IMO, RUDE. She finished HER story as she has always, from day one, intended to finish the story. SHE did not steal from fanfiction - fanfiction has graciously been allowed to play in HER world. To claim 'cliche' like this comes across as petulant and ungrateful. More importantly, it does not remotely give her the due which she so richly deserves. Regardless of what you feel about the ending or the 'literary quality' of her writing, what she has done with these seven books is nothing short of INCREDIBLE. Is there any other series of books 'out there' which has inspired such a broad variety of fan-groups? Adult groups working through the clues and messages within the stories during enriching, friendship-building discussions. Children's groups where thousands of children discovered the joy of reading and WRITING and exploring a story-in-progress. READING. Fanfiction writers for almost EVERY POSSIBLE pairing and scenario imaginable. Thousands of roleplaying groups of different, unique sorts and all eras. Some of my dearest friends I have met while discussing and exploring the wonderful realm of the Harry Potter universe. None of this would be possible without JKR's foundation. I do not mean to belittle anyone's opinion nor to disregard our sorrow, grief and disappointment that favourite characters did not get the 'screen time' and treatment we wanted to see. I feel those things, too. But those feelings and opinions do not minimise my respect for JKR as an author. It hurts me far more to see the so-called 'fandom' being so vicious in its flaming of the CREATOR of the series. Surely we can discuss our thoughts, theories, wishes and disappointments without deriding JKR in the process? What she has given us, the doorways to imagination and creativity she has opened for THOUSANDS of people, deserves more appreciation than presently being shown by a dissappointingly large cross-section of so-called 'fans'. Thank you, JK Rowling, for sharing your world with us so unselfishly. ~Shanti From prep0strus at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:01:05 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:01:05 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172861 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fitzchivalryhk" wrote: > > One of the most unsatisfying point in Deathly Hallows for many > HPfGUers is the continual/approval of the Sorting system after the > Voldemort war. In DH, by showing that none of the current Slytherin > students was good enough to join the other Houses to fight against > Voldemort, and discounting other Slytherins as "Griffindor at heart" > (i.e. Snape), the book seems to send a message to people that as long > as you are categorized as one type of people (namely, Slytherin) at > the age of 11, you are a coward or villain for life. > For those who share the point of view that the Sorting and House > System of Hogwarts is not beneficial for the wizarding society and its > children, what do you think can be done to change it? > fitz Prep0strus: I think we have to accept that we're working with a flawed, childish system. I think this was something JKR came up with when she was writing a children's book, and as the series became more complicated, more interesting, and more adult, there simply was no good way for this framework to be integrated properly. It's so easy at first: a good house, a bad house, a secondary good house if you're smart but not that awesome, and then a random throwaway house. The problem is when she wants to start having real characters, layered characters. Slytherins are bad people. I know many of us try very hard to force what is there into something else... even JKR. But it can't be done. Virtually all of Voldy's followers. The original house creator... maybe at some point Godric and Salazar really were good friends, but an anti-muggleborn bigot who placed a basilisk in the school for the purposes of killing children... and our examples of 'good' slytherins. Please. Just because they are not evil, doesn't mean they are admirable. Snape is a bitter, nasty man saved from complete evil by his love of Lily. Slughorn is a sycophantic, weak little man who treats children based on what he thinks they can do for him later on. Regalus, like Snape, turns towards evil, and manages to redeem himself only after being pushed too far. And these are the very BEST of the world that JKR shows us. The hat tells us it's about being pureblood or being ambitious. I dunno. Percy is both. Does 'bravery' and 'honor' override those? Or is it simply 'goodness'. Plenty of non-pureblood Slytherins, no matter what Salazar wanted. I guess they're all ambitious... though could Goyle be said to be ambitious? The other houses get to split some good traits. I guess we have to assume Hermione's courage was stronger than her smarts, and Cedric's loyalty stronger than his courage. Of course, we're told Hufflepuff takes 'the rest', which has got to feel really good as a child. Personally, I don't mind if the sorting had would simply choose those who are evil. Cull them from the school and wizarding society right away. Maybe that's a little too 'minority report'. But overall... the houses are a childish delineation, which can only be viewed through a child's eyes of good vs bad. Complexity doesn't play a part. Harry tells little Albus that good people can be Slytherin. But good people don't want to be. I say, eliminate the houses, or have them but have them based on nothing, or heck, keep them how they are. They're fun. But I think we're just going to have to forgive JKR for developing a very flawed system, where some are golden, some are at best unpleasant and at worst evil, and where some are the dregs. And then there's Ravenclaw. :-/ I think we're expecting too much to expect more. ~Adam(prep0strus) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:08:05 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:08:05 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172862 Mindy asked: > > 4) Was the rest of Mad Eye's body actually ever recovered? > Donna responded: > Geez good question, I wondered the same thing myself, while I was wondering how the hell and WHY did Umbridge get it? For me, discovering Alastor's eye in Umbridge's office door was like finding out that Voldemort was using Lily's wedding dress as toilet paper. Carol responds: I'm guessing, but Umbridge said that the "S" on the Slytherin locket stood for Selwyn, and Voldemort talks to a Death Eater named Selwyn when he's attacking Harry, so maybe DE!Selwyn gave it to dear cousin Delores as a present. Maybe, evil as she is, she even requested it when she found out they'd killed Mad Eye. As for what happened to his body, that should have been answered by the fate of poor Charity Burbage ("Dinner, Nagini!"). We had hints as early as GoF that Voldie fed his murder victims to Nagini. He threatened to feed both Wormtail and Harry to her, and since neither Bertha Jorkins's nor Frank Bryce's bodies were ever found, I suspect they met the same fate. As for Mad-Eye, Nagini probably couldn't digest the eyeball or the wooden leg. (I'm just happy that Snape, though he was killed by Nagini, wasn't eaten by her, and that Neville killed her with one deadly stroke soon afterwards. BTW, the Bathilda scene was gruesome, as horrific as anything in the book. Brrr!) Mindy: > > 7) The most infuriating plot development for me personally was Snape jumping out the window, instead of sticking around and giving over Harry his memories BEFORE the Great Battle of Hogwarts. Can you imagine, had Harry NOT been in the Shrieking Shack at just the right moment, he never would have gotten access ot those memories and never would have known he was Horcrux and had to die so that LV could die> too. Where was Snape's sense of responsibility/loyalty to Dumbledore - > > why didn the give over the memories BEFORE he jumped out the window? > > Perhaps he didnt know yet that LV had reached the stage where he wasnt letting go of Nagini? Carol: Considering that McGonagall was literally throwing daggers at him and Flitwick was calling him a murderer, I don't think it was the opportune moment to say, but, wait, guys. I'm on your side. Just let me show Harry some memories. He probably didn't even think of the memories util he was dying. Just before Nagini bites him, we see him white with fear that he's going to fail in his mission. He has to tell Harry about the soul bit (the other memories are his own contribution, not part of the plan. He wants Harry to understand and believe him). He's been inside Hogwarts. He doesn't know until Voldemort sends Lucius to summon him and he sees Nagini floating in her bubble that the time has come to tell Harry about the soul bit. But he can't get away, and even if he had, he wouldn't have found Harry (who in any case would not have listened to him). He had to do what he could to protect Hogwarts, including keeping on staff members who hated him and thought he was a murderer, until he was forced out, and from there he had to stay with Voldemort and wait until he finds out about Nagini before informing Harry. And he can't do that until the battle starts and he can somehow get away from Voldemort and find Harry. Altogether, a mission impossible for Severus, but he completed it in a last brilliant act. Who'd have thought that a wizard could deliberately send out memories to be caught. He must have been very relieved that Harry was there and Hermione could conjure a vial. I don't think his last look into Harry's eyes was only his wanting to see Lily's eyes one last time. I think he wanted Harry finally, all to briefly, to see him--the best part of him that he'd been hiding all those year. Carol, who thinks that Snape must have Transfigured himself into a giant bat but doesn't think that he's an Animagus because the bat would not be human-sized (imagine a human-sized Scabbers!) From xxshoeboxxx at aol.com Thu Jul 26 01:01:07 2007 From: xxshoeboxxx at aol.com (xxshoeboxxx at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:01:07 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Post-HP Depresssion/Indifference Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172863 So shortly after I finished reading the book I broke down into tears knowing I'd never get to visit this wonderful world again. The next few days I was still extremely emotional and excited about how it had ended, especially that Snape was proven to be loyal. I've spent the past two years hoping against hope that Snape would be vindicated and I had finally gotten what I wanted, I was bursting at the seams with happiness. But yesterday while I was reading one of the messages in this group I felt something pop inside me and even since that moment I've felt this strange feeling of indifference wash over me concerning the series and the character of Snape. I feel nothing at the mention of Harry Potter or Snape, at all. I was wondering if anyone else is going through anything like this. Could it be that I had finally got what I wanted all these years and there was no need to wonder anymore about their fates. Nothing more to get excited about concerning these characters. After all those years, was the moment when I felt the pop the moment when I had finally realized that this story is over. I loved the character of Professor Snape, but right now I can't bring up one iota of emotion at the thought of him. Is anyone else going through something similar? snapesdarksoul From maidne at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:12:36 2007 From: maidne at yahoo.com (maidne) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:12:36 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172864 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > I've been waiting for some place to jump into this > discussion. What purpose do The Deathly Hallows serve > in this story? Harry never really uses them in any > significant way. > > I think the Hallows are there because at some point > Harry has to make a choice. He must choose between > Power and Weakness. He must choose whether to make > himself stronger, near undefeatable, or he must > choose to concentrate on making Voldemort weak. > > It is a test of wills and conscience. How many of us > would have chosen Power? We see hints that both Ron > and Hermione covet the Wand; they desire it. Its power > draws them. > > So, at some point, Dumbledore knew Harry would have > to make a choice between Hallow or Horcruxes, and that > choice would determine whether he was more interested > in himself, or whether he was more interested in > Voldemort's defeat. > > This is part of the same choice to go willingly and > comfortably to his own death at Voldemort's hand. If > Harry had chosen the path of Power, he could not have > gone so willingly, he could not have gone without a > fight, and that would have been his defeat. > > This story is about Choices; choosing what is difficult > but necessary over what is easy. Harry made the difficult > choice, a choice that very few people would have had > the courage to make, and ultimately, that choice was his > victory. > > Just passing it along. > > Steve/bboyminn > Interesting -- this is the same test Harry passed with flying colors in book 1. If he had chosen the path of Power then he would never have been able to get the Sorcer's Stone out of the mirror (and we would never have gotten to book 2). Susan From hautbois1 at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 01:17:24 2007 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:17:24 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172865 I agree 100%. I know we're not supposed to post such short responses, but you should know (and others as well) that you're not the only one to think this way. She did a magnificent job...everything wasn't wrapped in a neat little package and that's as it should be. I found it quite true to life (unfortunately so in some places) and that was refreshing. PM --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > Well, I normally just lurk like mad here and several other Harry Potter and Snape-centric Yahoo groups, so forgive me if you see this > cross-posted to other groups, but I can't keep quiet any longer. > Unfortunately, I am the sort who cannot keep quiet over these sorts of things even when I probably ought to. > > I know we are all hurting and grieving over the end of an era and the > ways we would have wanted to see "xyz" done differently. I've posted a lengthy discussion of my over-all likes and dislikes of the book in my livejournal, including my ideas of ways to 'get around' the bits I don't like so I can still play with certain characters in fandom. I won't repost it here, though if you want to read it, it is publicly viewable, here: > > http://weasleyfan.livejournal.com/23770.html > > So, I do understand the aching hearts of my fellow-fandom communities. > > The thing I'm getting frustrated over, at this point, is the savage, > almost vicious attacks against JKR. Recently, I've seen fanfic authors berate her epilogue and other portions of the story (like the battle in/around Hogwarts) for being "cliched" and "over-done" because it had been done a bunch in various FANFICTIONS. > > This is positively infuriating to me. I'm a fanfic writer, too, and a lover of all things fanfic, but I think it behooves us all to remember that these are her books, her characters and her stories to tell how she wants. > > JKR is amazingly indulgent and even encouraging of fanfiction writing in general, and use of her characters specifically. She has often said in answer to questions at her website, "Well, I'm not going to be covering that aspect in the story, but you should look around at some of the fanfiction out there - it's really creative!" (Particularly in regards to more details about MWPP era events and such.) > > Now, there are very few popular authors who are this indulgent. JKR > more than has enough power, influence and clout, that if she wanted to claim copy-right infringement and start suing people right and left, there would be no public server, anywhere on the internet, that would host any of the wonderful fanfiction out there! > > Anne Rice, anyone? > > The travelling aimlessly through the forest was unnecessary? How so? How else was Harry going to get to the desperate point of trusting an unknown Patronus in the middle of nowhere? How else was he going to come to grips with all of the things he needed to find/realise within *himself* before he could move on? > > Too much bloodshed? This, from a fandom-community who, after the last book, accused Voldemort of being a 'joke' and not being nearly so tough or dangerous if he was so easily thwarted by 'kids' or recruiting 'kids'...? > > JKR has been telling us from day ONE that the books would get darker, > that the final books would not BE "children's books". She has said, > again and again, this is war, people will die. She had to SHOW us the savage, ugly, terrifying, heartbreakingly *painful* realities of this. The classic authors' maxim, right? "Show, dont' tell". No one believed Voldemort was 'the most evil Wizard of all time' when she "told" us that through the characters of the books. This was the time, the climax, the place to SHOW us just exactly how horrific Voldemort was, just exactly WHY everyone was so afraid to say his name, even eleven years after he'd last been sighted. > > Please. I beg you. I *do* feel the pain of loss and my own > frustrations of things I wish could have been explained better/presented more clearly, etc. But this was her story to tell, not ours. > > As I say in the essay in my journal, I personally believe that JKR left some things 'loose' to give us who do play in the fanfic/fandom areas wiggle-room! I think the lack of mention of Severus' body and such after his death was *intentional*, and done *for us*. This was not Severus' story! Yes, he was a crucial, vital, integral part of the story from before Harry's birth, but it was still not 'Severus Snape and the Boy Who Lived...' The stories were "Harry Potter and the______". > > That means the only things crucial to tie up at the end were the things which directly affected Harry. Do I like it? Not necessarily. I wanted Snape to be given his heroic due as well! But I much prefer having him somewhat ambigiously dead for anyone with a good imagination than to have a glorious funeral and fanfaire and buried six-feet-under. > > This was her story. To accuse her of being cliched because she has been so wonderfully tolerant of all the fanfiction out there and so much of fanfiction has "already done it", is, frankly, IMO, RUDE. She finished HER story as she has always, from day one, intended to finish the story. SHE did not steal from fanfiction - fanfiction has graciously been allowed to play in HER world. To claim 'cliche' like this comes across as petulant and ungrateful. More importantly, it does not remotely give her the due which she so richly deserves. > > Regardless of what you feel about the ending or the 'literary quality' of her writing, what she has done with these seven books is nothing short of INCREDIBLE. > > Is there any other series of books 'out there' which has inspired such a broad variety of fan-groups? > > Adult groups working through the clues and messages within the stories during enriching, friendship-building discussions. > > Children's groups where thousands of children discovered the joy of > reading and WRITING and exploring a story-in-progress. READING. > > Fanfiction writers for almost EVERY POSSIBLE pairing and scenario > imaginable. > > Thousands of roleplaying groups of different, unique sorts and all eras. > > Some of my dearest friends I have met while discussing and exploring the wonderful realm of the Harry Potter universe. None of this would be possible without JKR's foundation. > > I do not mean to belittle anyone's opinion nor to disregard our sorrow, grief and disappointment that favourite characters did not get the 'screen time' and treatment we wanted to see. I feel those things, too. But those feelings and opinions do not minimise my respect for JKR as an author. It hurts me far more to see the so- called 'fandom' being so vicious in its flaming of the CREATOR of the series. > > Surely we can discuss our thoughts, theories, wishes and disappointments without deriding JKR in the process? What she has given us, the doorways to imagination and creativity she has opened for THOUSANDS of people, deserves more appreciation than presently being shown by a dissappointingly large cross-section of so- called 'fans'. > > Thank you, JK Rowling, for sharing your world with us so unselfishly. > > ~Shanti > From ida3 at planet.nl Thu Jul 26 01:20:25 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:20:25 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172866 Leslie41: > Of course! But some interpretations hold more water than others. Dana: All interpretations hold water in the eye of the beholder as long as they really want to believe what they are seeing is true. Leslie41: > I'm not understanding here if Snape did what he did purely for > Harry, that would be okay but if he does it because of Harry's mom > instead that somehow impugns his manifold acts of bravery? I'm not > following that line of reason. Dana: There is indeed a slight difference in wanting to comfort once own feelings and doing something for someone else. So in other words doing what is right because it is the only right thing to do or doing something because you are so desperately longing for the pain in your heart to be resolved. Snape is doing the later. Helping Harry is not giving him any comfort and he does not get any pleasure out of it and he is constantly looking for excuses to quit and the only thing that keeps him going is the memory of the one he loved and lost. After all these years he still does not give one iota for the kid. What would, to me, have been okay is if he had acknowledged Harry as not being his father and worthy of his help regardless of Lily's sacrifice for the mere fact that it was Snape's action that put this kid in danger his entire life. But Snape doesn't think in these terms he only helps DD because it is the only thing he can do to keep Lily's sacrifice from being in vain. Does that change anything about what he did? No, of course it doesn't but that doesn't mean that Snape as a person really changed into something saint like just because he helped out the light side. Leslie41: > He didn't "try" to save Lupin. He actually *saved* Lupin. > Deflected a curse that would have killed him. I think a clear sign > that he developed "empathy and respect for people's lives" is when > he tells Dumbledore that he has suffered through having to witness > the deaths of people he was not able to save. People that have > nothing to do with Lily Potter, like the Muggle Studies professor. Dana: Yes, and cuts off George's ear in the process, which can't be repaired because the injury was caused by a dark curse. So why did Snape not use a simple stunning spell. It is actually saying something about Snape's way of thinking in how he uses magic. And my actually point was that Snape put Lupin in danger in the first place. Apparently killing DD was not enough to get Snape into LV's good grace and someone else still paid with his life for this move. I understand that people in the light of DH (and JKR's lack of moral values) that it is apperently okay for people on the good side to sacrifice people on their own side in the battle against LV but Snape's willingness to do so in my view does not really differs much from when he was a DE and willingly let people die for LV's cause. He is more reluctantly to go around and kill people randomly but he is still willingly turning a blind eye and he doesn't even question it, he just does. Leslie41: > Actually, that's only partly so. What Harry says to Voldemort is > not that Snape belonged to Harry's mother. He says that "Snape was > Dumbledore's." His loyalty is to Dumbledore. I'm not saying that > this wasn't because of Lily and his love for her (which Harry also > acknowledges), but Rowling clearly marks Snape as Dumbledore's > here, first and foremost. There are so many other ways that she > could have done it to blur that. She makes it pretty clear. Dana: Please read it again because that is not all what Harry said. He said Snape became DD's the moment LV started to hunt down his mother. And he then goes on about Snape's patronus being the same as his mother and that he loved her nearly all his life. He became DD's spy because LV threatened Lily and he has been working against LV ever since because of her. I do not think I will be able to make you see that in essence Snape was not loyal to DD at all. They had an arrangement that pretty much covered the same goal but if DD had changed his mind and had gone on an extended holiday because he no longer saw fit to do anything to keep Lily's memory and sacrifice high, then Snape would have turned on him without blinking twice. Of course this never happened but I think it is stretching things a bit to believe that Snape was loyal to DD because he believed in the man's values. Snape did not trust DD and DD's judgment. I hope I can remind you that DH is not the only book in the series and that not everything Snape stood for was written with a pink pen and rose colored glasses. Leslie41: > It wouldn't surprise me! But as you say, at this point that is not > canon. And in the epilogue we see that she doesn't want to muddy > the waters by making it canon in the book. She wants the testament > of "Albus Severus" to stand alone. And if James turns out to be > James Sirius that certainly wouldn't do anything to change that, > because it will, essentially, have the weight of an afterthought. Dana: Fortunately for me JKR has a high tendency of omitting things in canon and assuming the reader will get it. I hope you haven't missed that Harry says Albus full name quietly so only Ginny can hear it. So apparently it is not something he is so proud of that others should hear it too. And I do not think that the poor kid will go around yelling his full name to anyone that wants to hear it. I have no problem with you believing anything that you want about Severus Snape as you are entitled to do whatever you want with the canon given to you. So if you want to elevate him to sainthood then by all means go ahead. We will then just have to respectfully agree to disagree. Leslie41: > Of course! Because Snape is not his "loved one". And Harry is not > Snape's "loved one." Dana: But you wanted to imply that naming his kid Severus meant that Snape had made a bigger impression on him then either Lupin or Sirius because he doesn't seem to have named a kid after either one of them but when he is marching up to his own death the people that he wants to escort him to his new adventure are the once that are closest to his heart. And as Sirius says we are part of you. Snape is not part of Harry and he did not make a bigger impression on Harry then either Sirius or Lupin. He just paid the man a tribute by giving the man's name as a middle name to his son. And just because we do not get a kid specifically named after either man, does not mean that Harry thinks less about what they have meant and done for him. Teddy Remus Lupin is Harry's godson so he practically already has a son with Remus as a middle name. So now we only have to wait for JKR to confirm that indeed James's middle name is Sirius and the entire marauder era lives fort in Harry's family. (well minus Pettigrew of course but nothing he's ever done will be worth mentioning) Leslie41: > I like Sirius myself! And I am willing to grant that perhaps he > revealed some aspect of remorse about the prank to her. But he > doesn't do it in the books. No remorse at all. We have to infer > that. Dana: I would suggest to read the part of the Prince Tale in which the prank is mentioned again then you see that Sirius in all likelihood had nothing to be sorry for. Snape already knew what he could find. He was just obsessed about wanting to know what James and his friends were up to. Not once in the entire memory does Snape claim to Lily that James and his friends had tried to kill him or that they played a trick on him that could let to his death. Not one inkling attempt to shove the lable of murderer in any of the marauders shoes even when Lily is claiming that his friend's humor is evil. The prank happened before Lily's friendship with Snape ended and before the SWM and Lily would never just say to Snape that James is just an arrogant toerag if he had tried to kill her friend. And I do not believe for one minute that Snape would not have used it against James if it actually had been true because at that time he already knew James had the hots for Lily and he would have done anything to get him as far away from her as possible but I believe Snape would never have had the guts to lie to her and risk losing her if she found out. I already commented on this in a different post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172751 So essentially as canon stands now Sirius did not have to have remorse about anything because he never had the intention to hurt Snape and he is just not sorry to have played a trick on Snape that never materialized into anything hurtful towards Snape. Snape going mad in the Shack was not about his schoolboy grudge. He completely lost it because he was facing the man he held responsible for Lily's death. His comment to DD was a last attempt on Snape's part to win DD over for his cause and just like 20 years before it failed to deliver results. JMHO Dana From mikcers at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:01:15 2007 From: mikcers at yahoo.com (Kim) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:01:15 -0000 Subject: my DH reactions minus Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172867 Sherry Gomes wrote: > I do not get the whole deathly Hallows thing at all. Did Harry end up > Master of death? But he still destroyed the Horcruxes. How did Harry live > in the end? If his mother's blood in Voldemort tethered him to life when > Voldemort killed him in the forest, then how did he live when Voldemort > tried it again in the great Hall? I just don't get it, and I'd be glad for > clarification. M.Clifford wrote: > It seems to me that the second time, in the Great Hall, then, Harry > was the undisputed Master of Death. That was the moment when he took > possession of the last Hallow and mastered it in his magical control, > the only thing he hadn't done yet, and so in that moment, he could not > die. Voldemort's immortality was gone as of Nagini's death so he could > die, and via the shared blood it is possible he could have taken Harry > with him, it was at that moment, I believe, that Harry had achieved > the legendary immortality bestowed by the Hallows and thus couldn't die. Kim: I'm not sure that the possession of the 3 Hallows actually makes the possessor the Master of Death. The following passage leads me to believe that the hallows were three powerful magical items that a tale was built around, but not that they were beyond death. King's Cross, page 714: "So it's true?" asked Harry. "All of it? The Peverell brother --" "--were the three brothers of the tale," said Dumbledore, nodding. "Oh yes, I think so. Whether they met Death on a lonely road...I think it more likely that the Peverell brothers were simply gifted, dangerous wizards who succeeded in creating those powerful objects. The story of them being Death's own Hallows seems to me the sort of legend that might have sprung up around such creations. Dumbledore doesn't make any comments about Harry being invincible, nor does he tell Harry that he is the true owner of the Elder Wand. Harry had to figure that out for himself. Besides, I don't know if the power of the Resurrection Stone was significant. The figures that were resurrected were more like hallucinations. The Forest Again, page 698 "They were neither ghost nor truly flesh, he could see that. They resembled most closely the Riddle that had escaped from the diary so long ago, and he had been memory made nearly solid. Less substantial than living bodies, but much more than ghosts, they moved toward him, and on each face, there was the same loving smile." It seems to me that they could just as well be a figment of his imagination, which leads me to another quote that discounts the difference between real and imagined encounters. King's Cross, page 723 "Tell me one last thing," said Harry. "Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?" Dumbledore beamed at him, and his voice sounded loud and strong in Harry's ears even though the bright mist was descending again, obscuring his figure. "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?" I'm not sure of how the Elder wand was actually Harry's...that whole thing didn't make sense to me. So I couldn't say how he survived. The best I can say is that I think he lived in the end because he was stronger than Voldemort. Unlike Voldy, he wasn't scared of death, the Elder Wand, or of his foe. Maybe he just psyched Voldy out enough to win. Kim From coriandra2002 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:16:30 2007 From: coriandra2002 at yahoo.com (coriandra2002) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:16:30 -0000 Subject: My Thoughts on Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <20070725234723.6CF0AE000410@socom4.uol.com.br> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172868 > James Black Potter: > Scorpius, I believe, is a reference to Crabbe -- both being named > after crustaceans. Lobster, of course, would be of better taste. I believe it's more a reference to the constellation (Scorpio), but I could be wrong. coriandra2002 From coriandra2002 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:22:50 2007 From: coriandra2002 at yahoo.com (coriandra2002) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:22:50 -0000 Subject: Draco & Hagrid In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172869 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: > > > Draco's always been a nasty little pissant, but I thought we were > shown how he could at least partially redeem himself. In 6 he started > down the path, away from being nasty to being evil, and in 7... well, > he comes across more like he's weak-willed than because he has had any > change of heart. I can see how it can be read that he's simply not > evil enough to be a true death eater, but he doesn't do anything > worthwhile either. Actually, that's not entirely true. Remember Crabb setting fire to the Room of Requirement and trapping them all? Malfoy could easily have abandoned his friends and saved himself. In fact, I think that's what most people would have expected, but instead he made a real effort to save Goyle and seemed genuinely shaken by Crab's death. That may not be enough to completely redeem him for all the rotten things he's done, but it is and interesting bit of character development. Coriandra From lexac at mail.com Thu Jul 26 01:29:19 2007 From: lexac at mail.com (Lexa_C) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:29:19 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: <2B6FAB79-35D9-4721-A3D7-28DFF7F7DC2F@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172870 > oliveu2cm: > Perhaps Voldemort went to the white place too and saw what it would > be like if he continued? But he awoke and didn't care, whereas the > experience changed Harry? > > doug: > Interesting. Voldy wouldn't have a mentor to explain what was going > on then either. His experience would likely have been one of extreme > misery and pain, (?) This is a good point. I have to say the entire King's Cross chapter creeped me right out because of the way both Dumbledore and Harry ignored the writhing, whimpering creature right there in the same room with them. It didn't speak well of either of them, in my opinion. Even if it's true, as DD said, that there was nothing you could do to help (which would align with the rather unfortunate predestination bent of the Potterverse), it seems like simple human compassion would drive you to at least attempt something. Your actions, in a case like that, say just as much about *you*, I think, as about who you're trying to help and whether it will do any good. Of course, DD doesn't seem to have been very good at caretaking when it came to his abandoned boys. I'm not sure if I'm supposed to catch the irony or not that Our Heroes can figure out that if you treat a house elf with respect and caring, it makes them better behaved, but they can't seem to apply the same concept of nurture to human beings. - Alexa From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:30:53 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:30:53 -0000 Subject: Snape, mostly (was:Re: My Officially First Deathly Hallow... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172871 spaebrun wrote: > > (the whole Petunia thing has > no purpose in Snapes memories, in my opinion. It should better have > been addressed at the beginning, before the Dursleys leave). > Melissa responded: > Well it did answer the often asked question of what was the identity of the horrible boy whom Petunia overheard talking to Lily about dementors. Carol responds: It also shows that little Severus distinguishes between Muggles like petunia and Muggleborns like Lily, unlike Lucius Malfoy and some of the other pureblood supremacists who don't think that Muggleborns belong at Hogwarts and write people off family trees for marrying a "Muggle" who, in Andromeda'a case, is actually a Muggleborn wizard (Ted Tonks). While Sev dismisses Petunia as just a Muggle (and does some wandless and presumably accidental magic that brings a tree branch down near her head because she's being so nasty to him--shades of harry and Aunt Marge) and he has good cause to hate the one Muggle of his acquaintance his father (I suppose that Eileen can't hex Tobias without getting into some sort of trouble for attacking a Muggle, otherwise it's hard to see how a Muggle could bully a witch and her precocious wizard son), he doesn't have the same prejudice against the Muggle-born Lily. In fact, he's excited about the possibility of informing her that she's a witch (though his revelation doesn't quite go as planned). Later, he doesn't seem to realize that a Muggleborn won't be accepted into Slytherin. He doesn't seem to have been brought up with the Slytherin ethic, though he must have privately developed the idea that wizards are superior to Muggles. The scene also shows that Lily and "Tuney" started out on good terms, but Lily's magic and Petunia's jealousy came between them. From the time she gets her Hogwarts letter and Petunia receives her kindly rejection from Dumbledore, Petunia's sour grapes turn lucky Lily into a "freak." Her parents being proud to have a witch in the family couldn't have helped. I know that Petunia's reaction was spiteful and childish, but I still feel sorry for her. And like so many characters of her generation, she couldn't let go of childhood grudges and jealousies and resentments. At least she knew who Dumbledore was when she found Lily's baby and DD's note on her doorstep. Carol, wondering if JKR will ever reveal what was in that letter From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 01:33:14 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:33:14 EDT Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172872 wolf: It is a fine line between love and obsession. I beleve from reading all the varied opinions out there is that those that find Snape altogther creepy think his feelings for Lily part of a sick obsession. Those that like or feel sorry for Snape seem to find his unrequited love heart-warming. Perhaps when Lily ended their friendship, she saw not only his dark side but his obssesive side. Julie: What obsessive side? The obsessive side where he stalked her around town, where he begged her over and over to take him back, where he left dead bunnies at her doorstep? Seriously though... Obsession is not a four-letter word. It is not within itself necessarily a bad thing. Most of the accomplishments of humankind would not exist without obsession. Scientists, artists (including writers!), politicians, etc, etc--you can't achieve something phenomenal without being obsessed by it, i.e. without putting the whole of your time and attention into it. Further, I think everyone who regularly reads and/or posts here has an obsession--with Harry Potter ;-) We wouldn't devote a certain amount of time in our lives to it if we weren't obsessed in one sense of the word! Which is to say there are different types and levels of obsession, and some types *can* exist hand-in-hand with genuine love. The worst type, that of an obsessed stalker, seems to be what many are accusing Snape of. But where is the evidence? The most repeated piece of evidence is Snape as a TEN YEAR OLD CHILD watching Lily "greedily." Greedy is not a pretty word in general, but it has several meanings, and here it's connotation--"longingly" is innocuous. Snape is watching something that he wants for himself, or wants to be a part of. But which is it, because a "stalker" wants that *person* for himself, almost always for some sort of romantic/sexual gratification. So Snape is a child stalker, a miniature pervert? Ridiculous, IMO. Snape does not want to possess *her*, he wants to possess what she *has*--love, happiness, family, and the joyous aspect of doing magic. Moreover, he wants to *share* it with her, not take it from her. Throughout their entire relationship Snape never once tries to *take* from Lily, never once tries to coerce or force her into anything. So what about a lesser form of obsession? Yes, I do agree that Snape has that, but not because he was initially obsessed with Lily (as in he wanted to possess or own her--there is not one hint of this at all!), but because he caused her death, the death of the woman he loved. His guilt over unknowingly betraying her and then being unable to save her is the root of his obsession. He can never forgive himself for that, and can never regain her love (friendship) or respect, or *her* forgiveness. Because she's gone. Which brings up another factor of Snape's obsession. His obsession only affects himself. It never affected Lily, because it didn't exist then. He loved her but he never intruded on her life once she broke off their friendship. His obsession, once she was gone and the guilt overwhelmed him, did hurt *him.* It kept him from ever living his own life again. From that moment he focused on what he had to do to assauge his guilt, to earn in his mind her respect and forgiveness-- and that was to become Dumbledore's man and devote his life to protecting her son and preparing him to face Voldemort (and survive Voldemort, or so he assumed until Dumbledore informed him otherwise, at which point Snape presumably had internalized some of Dumbledore's values, enough that he remained devoted to freeing the WW of Voldemort even though fully protecting the life of Lily's son had been taken out of the equation). So, love or obsession, you ask. Both, I say. First love, and later, on top of that love, obsession with his chosen path to redemption. Julie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kjones at telus.net Thu Jul 26 01:44:55 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:44:55 -0700 Subject: House Elves Message-ID: <46A7FC97.2030205@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172873 KJ writes: I have a question about house-elves. We are told that their magic is different and that it can be quite powerful as when Dobby blasted Malfoy. Why then would they defend Hogwarts from Deatheaters with frying pans and kitchen implements? KJ From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:46:03 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:46:03 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172874 > > Julie: > What obsessive side? The obsessive side where he stalked her around > town, where he begged her over and over to take him back, where he left > dead bunnies at her doorstep? Seriously though... > >> The most repeated piece of evidence is Snape as a TEN YEAR OLD CHILD > watching Lily "greedily." Greedy is not a pretty word in general, but it has > several meanings, and here it's connotation--"longingly" is innocuous. Snape > is watching something that he wants for himself, or wants to be a part of. > But which is it, because a "stalker" wants that *person* for himself, almost > always for some sort of romantic/sexual gratification. So Snape is a child > stalker, a miniature pervert? Alla: No, I find the word used just the possible sign for future developments, not a pretty one, no, but if used alone of course I won't accuse ten year old of stalking. The strongest evidence to me of obsession is Snape searching Sirius room, taking a **private** letter from one friend to another, tearing apart that letter, taking with him the part where Lily signature was AND in addition to this, doing something so much creepier - tearing apart the photograph that does not belong to him either and **KEEPING** it. I am half expecting as I mentioned before to see the police finding many pictures of Lily in his room Julie: > So, love or obsession, you ask. Both, I say. First love, and later, on top > of that > love, obsession with his chosen path to redemption. Alla: Both, maybe. But I disagree that creepy signs are not there. > Lisa: > But what did he do, when faced presented with the > opportunity to harm someone he found annoying? He attempted murder- > by-Lupin. Alla: Attempted murder is not in canon and judging by Lily's reaction, I would really say it was not that IMO. From va32h at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 01:50:55 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:50:55 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172875 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: This is positively infuriating to me. I'm a fanfic writer, too, and a lover of all things fanfic, but I think it behooves us all to remember that these are her books, her characters and her stories to tell how she wants. va32h here: I have seen this attitude in several forums and quite frankly, it's infuriating to me that we are expected to treat Deathly Hallows with nothing less than reverence, as if JKR had descended from the mount with the text inscribed upon slabs, instead of selling it to us at $35 a pop. These are indeed her characters and stories, but when she CHOSE to share them with us, they became OURS also. If you do not wish your art to be subject to public opinion - keep it away from the public. I remember an English assignment from ages ago - we had to write sonnets and have them analyzed by the other students in class. I was surprised and a little unnerved by the meaning some of my classmates found in my poetry. That's not what I meant, I kept saying. But, my professor explained - if there is textual evidence for an interpretation, then it is valid, even if it is not what the author intended. JKR is a talented writer, but her word is not Gospel, it is not above criticism, and we are not disloyal or ungrateful readers for applying an honest and critical eye to the work. Quite the opposite - I would say that if we did not like the series so much, we would not care so much. As I tell my children when they are complaining about being punished "if I didn't CARE how you turned out, I wouldn't take the time to correct you when you are wrong." No one is disputing Rowlings "right" to tell her story however she wants - but there is no obligation on our part to accept it without question. va32h From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:54:41 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:54:41 -0000 Subject: Snape parallels Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172876 Does anyone else see a similar pattern in Snape and Dumbledore, both obsessed with past guilt (having caused or contributed to the death of someone they loved)? I wonder if the tear in Dumbledore's eye when he sees Snape's Patronus (or recognizes its significance--how can he not have seen it?) is because he sees a similarity between his own loss of Ariana and Snape's of Lily. Neither can get past it. Dumbledore stupidly forgets that the Peverell ring is a Horcrux as well as a Hallow in his eagerness to see her again; he agonizes over her death in the HBP cave scene, which apparently shows Grindelwald torturing Aberforth and Ariana ("them") before Aberforth rebels and starts duelling. (Surely, it was Grindelwald who cast the curse that killed Arizna. Albus would know if he'd cast one and Aberforth simply wouldn't have done it.) The other parallel is a small scen whose relevance at least one poster has questioned, the brief history of the Grey Lady and the Bloody Baron. I actually enjoyed that bit of trivia in the midst of turmoil, but it may have served a thematic purpose as well. the Bloody Baron (another Slytherin) murdered the woman he loved and then killed himself. Severus Snape contributed to the death of the woman he loved and wanted to die when his efforts to save her failed, but after DD asks him what good that would do, he dedicates his life to making sure that she didn't die in vain. Carol, who thinks that all Severus Snape ever wanted was love and acceptance or at least a bit of recognition From lexac at mail.com Thu Jul 26 01:56:58 2007 From: lexac at mail.com (Lexa_C) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:56:58 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172877 > randomfrog26: > > In general, the "good" Slyths were probably motivated by personal > reasons to choose the side of good - Snape by his love for Lily, > Regulus by personal horror at the evil of Voldemort and affection for > Kreacher, (possibly) Andromeda overcoming her family's ingrained pure- > blood prejudice because her love for Ted, Phineas's horror at the > death of Sirius Black, his last living descendant, Slughorn's > affection for Lily persuading him to give Harry the memory. But so > what? They may not be as "noble" as Gryffs in the reasons for their > choices, but their choices to work for good were theirs to make and > should reflect positively on them. I also found these kinds of choices very realistic as a motivation for turning away from evil and prejudice - it can be easy to talk about how horrible and dirty Those Undesirables Over There are, and how what we do to them is justified, when you're surrounded by people who think and talk like that all the time so that it seems normal. But when you know one of Those Undesirables and see them as a person and *care* about them ... that's when you start to see the impact of the words and actions you've been parrotting and mimicking. It's not abstract anymore. And then it becomes a whole different ballgame, one that's a lot less easy to accept. -Alexa From AllieS426 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 01:58:37 2007 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:58:37 -0000 Subject: Importance of Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172878 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "goonie8803" wrote: > > But I also wondered: Why would LV re-open the connection, when he > closed it for so long after the Dept of Mysteries battle? You'd think > he'd want to keep it closed so Harry couldn't know where the Horcruxes > were. We don't know for sure that Voldemort was using Occlumency against Harry, only DD's presumption that he was. HBP 59: "Lord Voldemort has finally realized the dangerous access to his thoughts and feelings you have been enjoying. It appears that he is now employing Occlumency against you." How is it that he "FINALLY" realized, when he used the connection purposely several weeks before to lure Harry somewhere? Does "it appears" mean "Severus Snape has told me"? I suppose that's possible, in which case it would be more than speculation, BUT - I like Harry's logic better. Voldemort could not possess/project to him when he was grieving for Sirius; Harry realizes this when he grieves for Dobby. And Harry has finally learned to CONTROL the connection, which really worked out better for him than the Occlumency ever did. Allie From lkotur at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 01:56:48 2007 From: lkotur at yahoo.com (Damit Lazarus) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:56:48 -0000 Subject: My Review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172879 B O O O O R I N G Just finished, and I am hoping that JKR puts up a big April Fools on her web site and says the real Harry Potter book # 7 is coming out next month. OK really it wasn't that booooring. I think the same story could have been told in 200 pages. The story didn't hold me to the pages as did POA, & HBP. Redeeming points - Snape was a good guy. - the end of term exams were cancelled - Slytherin wins the house cup. I guess I expected better. Damit Lazarus From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:00:19 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:00:19 -0000 Subject: DH rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172880 > Neri: > > And what about an explanation for "in > > > essence divided"? > > > Lisa: > >Dumbledore was working out for himself that Harry was a Horcrux, and > > that, though Voldemort's soul > > resided in Harry, they were "in essence, divided," meaning they could > > be killed separately. Since I stubbornly > > clung to my Harry-is-not-a-Horcrux theory, though, I didn't "get it" > > until the very end. > > > JW: > Around the fourth or fifth time I read the book, I thought I realized > what it meant. However, I interpreted "in essence divided" to mean > that a soul-piece existed in Harry, but that it was NOT a horcrux. I > just assumed that some magical ritual had to take place in order to > properly esconce the soul-piece in the designated container. LV > clearly did not so designate baby Harry, and to me the concept of an > accidental horcrux seems quite contradictory - and it still seems so > (to me). > > After all, with all the soul-pieces flying around during the blood > bath, you might think (or I might think) there would be a virtual game > of musical chairs, errr... soul-pieces. If someone had just said the > magic word, there could have been dozens of accidental horcruxes made > at the Battle of Hogwarts. > Annemehr: I assume that what made the accidental Horcruxing of Harry possible is that LV already had Hxes in existence. If anyone else committed murder and then died, presumably all soul pieces would go "beyond the veil" as a matter of course. LV's soul bits, however, were anchored to earth, so the loose one - the one that wasn't "me" to Voldemort - seems to have sought the nearest warm body instead. That's what I figure Herself meant, anyway. I'm not saying you have to like it. ;) Annemehr From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 26 02:05:20 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:05:20 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Classical & Biblical Quotations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A80160.3040603@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172881 Ken Hutchinson wrote: > The error is one that is critical to me as I try to explain to > conservative Christian friends why I don't think Harry Potter doesn't > violate the Biblical proscription against magic. Magic as used in the > Bible is always an attempt to thwart God's will and so it is rightly > condemned. Bart: There is no Biblical prohibition of magic, per se. There are Biblical prohibitions of certain kinds of magic, almost always mistranslated (due to the fact that scholars would rather be thought to be sloppy translators than to be thought to take magic seriously). While there are a number of ignorant (and yes, I do mean ignorant) fundamentalist Christians who consider Harry Potter evil because of the practice of magic, the more educated fundamentalist and evangelical Christians have a more subtle problem; the idea that one can save one's own soul through simple repentance, rather than through acceptance of Jesus as their personal savior. Bart From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:05:27 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:05:27 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172882 I seem to be in a minority, as I was neither disappointed, nor did I LOVE it. I liked it a great deal, and JKR's storytelling prowess overcomes any issues related to her, um, less than airtight plotting. What I noticed (and noticed in others) is that the nanosecond I put the book down I loved it, it was the best book I had ever read, etc. But the more I pondered and re-read it, the more the gloss wore off. It may seem from the following comments that my views are more negative than they really are. Random thoughts... Unforgivables - If you read back to GOF, you'll notice these curses are not so much unforgivable because they are malum in se but because they have been deemed so by the Ministry. A secondary point is that this is war, and in war good people do things of which they would scarcely consider. Not out of decision, but reflex. You can't go around shooting people, but in combat you can. Not pretty, not nice but there you are. Other than AKing Bellatrix -- keep in mind that Dementors are unavailable for Bellatrix Kissing purposes -- how can you GUARANTEE she'll never come back to visit evil upon your family? Finally, remember that DD explains to Harry that the scar horcrux is parasitic, which explains -- not as tidily as I would have preferred -- why Harry suddenly starts crucio-ing and imperius- ing. Snape/Pensieve - Remember, we are only seeing what Snape wanted Harry to see. This is Snape's edited version of things. Yes, a pensieve shows only true things, but it doesn't show EVERYTHING. It doesn't show what we might call "refuting evidence." In this case Harry saw the memories Snape wished to show him. We don't see Snape discussing Harry with LV, we don't see Snape discussing Occlumency with anyone. In a way we are taking Snape's "word" for it, a dangerous proposition in the Potterverse. Doe Patronus - How can two people have the same Patronus? Gran Longbottom - I LOVED her. Loved that she expressed her love for Neville, albeit in a stiff-uppah-lip way. I loved it that she got in the fight. I think of her in resembling the late Queen Mother. Neville - I had wished it had been Neville who got to Bellatrix first. I found it a small letdown that it was Molly. He wouldn't have had to AK her, mabe squirt bubotuber pus on the black mark which proves poisonous...OK, I'll quit that. The Secretive DD - Like in may spy novels, DD provides characters with information on a need-to-know basis. Invariably he is proven right in the end. Snape's Death - I never had an issue with Snape *becoming* good, even heroic. (In fact, I called it.) But I have trouble believing that Snape was ALWAYS true-blue once he decided to turn. I firmly believe he deliberately sabotaged the Occlumency lessons, for example. It was my thinking that Snape would have a more, um, clear and unambiguous -- self-serving, selected pensieve memories do not count -- moment of redemption. At best his redemption seems to have been manifested gradually and too subtly to ring true. The death-by- Nagini struck me as clunky and contrived and constructed thus for the express purpose of having the pensieve moment. Occlumency - Harry figure that out rather easily. Imagine if some teacher had, y'know, guided him. Ron the Parselmouth - Clunky and clumsy device. Parseltongue is not something learnable. IIRC, DD calls it a gift in COS. (Although, it's funny that he faked it.) The SCAR as Horcrux - I guessed this one too, not because it makes such eminent sense, but because this'd be one way for Harry to "die" without dying. "King's Cross" - I fully expected that scene, only I thought it'd be achieved through the veil. I liked that the ugly baby was the fragment of LV's soul. While this bit can be intepreted through a Christian lens very neatly, it's also part of the whole Classical Epic genre (think Odysseus and Hercules going down into the underworld). Depending on your view of things you could take it one way, or another or both. (I, being broadminded, choose "both.") Tom Riddle - I LOVED it that Harry kept calling him that. Like DD did in OOP. It unhinged him. Good. Elder Wand mastery - I "got" it, but it seemed needlessly convoluted. Could have been cleaner. Peter P.'s Life Debt - Somewhat weakly dealt with. Like how he dies, though, as the end result of his own treachery. Lily & Snape - While it's patently obvious Snape loved Lily, his understanding of love seems to be a VERY stunted, one-dimensional and selfish one. That's not to say that his pain wasn't real or that he was the product of a sad childhood...but those are all contributing factors and don't change the character of Snape's feelings. Regardless what Snape felt about it, his feelings for Lily very poor stand-in for true love. I defy anyone to tell me they'd want someone loving them the way Snape loved Lily. Bravery - Snape, in his own way, exhibited great bravery. The ultimate reason why he did so is open to debate. But doing the right thing for the wrong reason still counts for something. What I see being debated is: "Was Snape the enemy of my enemy or was Snape my friend?" I've tended to dislike Snape a bit, but I can give the devil his due. A lot of people have engaged in exegetical yoga to reconcile their views to the storyline. Yes, he was a complete bastard but he was also heroic. Being brave for completely stupid reasons is still brave. To not see the nuances, subtleties and -- yes!-- paradoxes inherent in him is to slight him as a character. He is Harry's anatagonist, not his enemy. Lastly, remember that Harry's feelings for Snape are borne of how Snape treats Harry. Snape & Lupin - Going back to POA, I never saw Lupin being particularly hostile to Snape, beyond being a Marauder. Yet Snape was always unpleasant to Lupin, but he finally saved Lupin from being AKed. The fact he had been awful to Lupin until recently bolsters my thinking that Snape's conversion was not complete by PS/SS, indeed, it wouldn't be until sometime between HBP & DH. Senseless Deaths - This is war, alas, and people (owls & elves included) die. They die for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. They die regardless of who loved them, or what they stood for. Now, the death of the Muggle Studies teacher struck me as WILDLY inelegant. It reminded me of those Star Trek episodes when a character you'd never seen before schleps down to Planet Zork with Kirk, Bones and Spock...you just KNOW that guy's dead before the third commercial break. Hedwig's death (St. Hedwig is the patron saint of orphans) underscored the fact Harry had passed to manhood. Dobby's death gave Harry an opportunity to grieve *maturely.* The Epilogue - It was a bit thin, and a bit pat, but I didn't mind it too damned much. I was sort of "meh" on it. Slytherin - That Slughorn came back, presumably with a few Slytherins in tow, is a hardly a ringing endorsement for the notion that we mustn't prejudge people. At VERY BEST, it's a hint, an indication that there is some good in Slytherin House. Shipping - Never been one to care one way or the other, I found the pairings to be not unacceptable. Ravenclaw - LOVED the Ravenclaw password system. Malfoys - I loved that, evil though they may have been, they still loved Draco, and that Narcissa's love for Draco overcame whatever fear she may have had for LV's wrath...and she seems to be a damned accomplished Occlumens! Ron - The fact that Ron wasn't sobbing hysterically at the body of his slain brother and, instead, was available for conversation with Harry realllllllllllllllly struck me wrong. DD & Snape - I liked how they were both trying to come to grips with their respective "skeletons" in the closet and doing so in a flawed (i.e. human) way. They are both fully-fleshed, complex characters. (Incidentally, "Severus" was an early Christian leader who may or may not have been a heretic, whose exact allegiances are the subject of speculation, conjecture and debate...) Camping - That got old, FAST. Questions which still linger... What did Dudley see when he was Demented? What happened to the Dementors? What happened in the "missing" 24 hours? Why does Neville have such a bad memory? How does the (by my scoring anyway) third best wizard in the world, Snape, "accidentally" curse off George's ear? What's the Ministry like now? "Remember my last?" Whatever happend to a clarification of THAT? Where's Snape's portrait? What did *Lupin* ever do to earn Snape's wrath? (Being friends with James & Sirius doesn't count for much here.) Why did Lupin go from being one of the most self-posessed and serene adults to near-unhinged in DH? Why didn't Neville get burned by the flaming hat? (I'm guessing it was because Neville was a "true Gryffindor" and the hat was Godric's) If Grindelwald wasn't the true master of the Elder Wand -- as he swiped it from Gregorovitch -- how is it that DD became the true master? This assumes that at some point DD found the true master of the Elder Wand and disarmed him, allowing him to win the duel. OK, enough from me now... -Joe From casmir2012 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:13:25 2007 From: casmir2012 at yahoo.com (casmir2012) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:13:25 -0000 Subject: Stan Shunpike Imperiused or DE? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172883 When Harry was flying on the Motorbike and turned to see Stan Shunpike with the DE's, it was never fully explained whether he was a DE or just under some spell. What do you think? From fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:17:17 2007 From: fitzchivalryhk at yahoo.com (fitzchivalryhk) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:17:17 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172884 prep0strus: > But overall... the houses are a childish delineation, which can only > be viewed through a child's eyes of good vs bad. Complexity doesn't > play a part. Harry tells little Albus that good people can be > Slytherin. But good people don't want to be. I say, eliminate the > houses, or have them but have them based on nothing, or heck, keep > them how they are. They're fun. But I think we're just going to have > to forgive JKR for developing a very flawed system, where some are > golden, some are at best unpleasant and at worst evil, and where some > are the dregs. And then there's Ravenclaw. :-/ I think we're > expecting too much to expect more. I agree that the house system is a childish delineation, which is more suitable for the earlier books than the later. I was hoping as the series progresses from children-oriented literature to a more adult oriented one, some of the concepts employed in the series would be progressing as well. For example, JK Rowling has done a wonderful job on Dumbledore's characterization, from the god-like grandfather he was in Book 1, he progresses to become a manipulative general fighting for the good side he was in Book 7. As for the mechanics of sorting, I don't think it's really based on conscious choice either. How many of the children in Slytherins know that they are being sorted to "the evil house" when they are being sorted to Slytherin? For the muggleborns, the students hardly know what they are getting into by the whole sorting process. For the purebloods, they probably only know that they are getting into a house their parents and grandparents were in. And for someone like Snape, who was clearly told (by his relatives?) that Slytherin = brainy and Griffindor = brawny, his choice is hardly a well-informed one. I can't help but feel that in the process of the 7 books, although JK Rowling has touched on the problem of the Sorting and House system, especially in the Sorting Hat song, she has employed a rather hasty solution - let's sweep all the Slytherins into evil category, instead of a well-thought-out response to this social probelm in the wizarding world. fitzchivalryhk From seuferer at netins.net Thu Jul 26 02:07:13 2007 From: seuferer at netins.net (Lisa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:07:13 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172885 > va32h here: > > I have seen this attitude in several forums and quite frankly, it's > infuriating to me that we are expected to treat Deathly Hallows with > nothing less than reverence, as if JKR had descended from the mount > with the text inscribed upon slabs, instead of selling it to us at > $35 a pop. This is not at all what I said. I agree that we have every right to criticise and explore the holes in the story and the missing information that we'd wished she'd put in/explained/etc. There is a difference between critiquing the WRITING and flaming the WRITER. To say - as I have seen mulitple times in the various fandom communities now - that JKR should not have done a 'battle at Hogwarts' or an 'Epilogue at the train station with sappy children-named-after-the-dead' because it was sappy and overdone, already in FANFICTION is to rob JKR of the right and ownership of her characters and her story. My frustration and concern is the people who want to flame the whole series, in general and the author specifically, rather than rationally discuss and explore the text of the story and the characters involved. No one made anyone pay any money for these books. If we didn't like them, we didn't have to buy them, read them, absorb them. Critique is good and constructive. Personal attack of the author is unnecessary. Lisa From casmir2012 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:29:59 2007 From: casmir2012 at yahoo.com (casmir2012) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:29:59 -0000 Subject: Wands that do their own spells Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172886 Was it ever explained how Harry's wand started sending off spells on it's own during his encounter with Voldemort at the beginning of the book...as he was leaving the Dursleys? From denisewcr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:22:54 2007 From: denisewcr at yahoo.com (Denise Leblanc) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:22:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Importance of Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <107661.63389.qm@web54110.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172887 allies426 wrote: I like Harry's logic better. Voldemort could not possess/project to him when he was grieving for Sirius; Harry realizes this when he grieves for Dobby. And Harry has finally learned to CONTROL the connection, which really worked out better for him than the Occlumency ever did. Denise: Wouldn't he have opened it to see if Harry was trying to find the Horcruxes? this way he could try to figure out if he was and where he was to try and capture Harry? It seems Harry learn to use it to his advantage and find out what was going on instead of Voldy. She doesn't say if voldemort could feel him in his mind that I could remember. Any ideas? Denise From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 02:39:43 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:39:43 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172888 > > > > Julie: > > What obsessive side? The obsessive side where he stalked her around > > town, where he begged her over and over to take him back, where > he left > > Alla: > > No, I find the word used just the possible sign for future > developments, not a pretty one, no, but if used alone of course I > won't accuse ten year old of stalking. > > The strongest evidence to me of obsession is Snape searching Sirius > room, taking a **private** letter from one friend to another, > tearing apart that letter, taking with him the part where Lily > signature was AND in addition to this, doing something so much > creepier - tearing apart the photograph that does not belong to him > either and **KEEPING** it. > > I am half expecting as I mentioned before to see the police finding > many pictures of Lily in his room Julie: That is one interpretation, and I doubt I'll change your mind. But it is the only time we see him even in possession of a picture of Lily, so it's just as likely that he's never had a picture of her and he reacts emotionally to this picture because of that fact. Additionally, why wouldn't he just take the part of the picture that means something to him? He hated James--and the feeling was completely mutual. Why would Snape want a picture of him, or of baby Harry, who he really didn't know? Also, while the picture isn't Snape's, the person it belonged to is dead. You can say it is Harry's picture since Harry inherited the house, but no doubt Harry has been given many pictures of his mother, so it's not as if Snape is taking something that he knows is incredibly valuable or irreplaceable. So if it's a crime it's a very minor one, certainly not worthy of your horror that he was **KEEPING** the photo, IMO ;-) And as we don't know if Snape has any other photos of Lily or how many (never did see him with a camera either), keeping the photo also doesn't indicate in any concrete way whether Snape *loved* Lily or was merely *obsessed* by her. Though I think the bulk of his actions point to the former (to me). > Julie: > > > So, love or obsession, you ask. Both, I say. First love, and > later, on top > > of that > > love, obsession with his chosen path to redemption. > > > Alla: > > Both, maybe. But I disagree that creepy signs are not there. > Julie: Fair enough. Creepy to me would be actual canon that Snape stalked her movements, actual canon that he hoarded numerous pictures of her, or similar sort of things that would strongly indicate creepiness, rather than a couple of canon points that can easily fit with either love or obsession. > > Lisa: > > > But what did he do, when faced presented with the > > opportunity to harm someone he found annoying? He attempted > murder- > > by-Lupin. > > > > Alla: > > Attempted murder is not in canon and judging by Lily's reaction, I > would really say it was not that IMO. > Julie: Attempted murder is not in canon, but real danger to Snape's life is in canon, evidenced by the life debt to James. No need for that if James hadn't actually saved him from possible death. I personally don't think Sirius intended Snape to die, but I don't really blame Snape for believing that, given the mutual hatred they all had for each other. I feel certain if the shoe was on the other foot, Sirius would fully believe Snape had been trying to murder him. I was truly surprised BTW that the Prank came *before* the Worst Memory. I know a lot of readers assumed the Prank is what turned James around and made him attractive to Lily (me included). Lily really did dislike James, at least through fifth year. I wish we had been told *what* exactly motivated James to change from being such an arrogant toerag who hexed students in the hallways just for fun (even though without dark spells) to a boy Lily could like and eventually love. Perhaps his motivation was Lily herself. (Yep, this would mean James was willing to change for Lily, while Snape didn't have enough desire or courage to do so. But we already know that, as this is part of the whole Snape package. Snape blew it big time, and he knows it. He's been paying for it one way or another ever since.) Julie From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:43:42 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:43:42 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172889 Lisa: > This is not at all what I said. I agree that we have every right to > criticise and explore the holes in the story and the missing > information that we'd wished she'd put in/explained/etc. > > There is a difference between critiquing the WRITING and flaming the > WRITER. > > To say - as I have seen mulitple times in the various fandom > communities now - that JKR should not have done a 'battle at Hogwarts' > or an 'Epilogue at the train station with sappy > children-named-after-the-dead' because it was sappy and overdone, > already in FANFICTION is to rob JKR of the right and ownership of her > characters and her story. > > My frustration and concern is the people who want to flame the whole > series, in general and the author specifically, rather than rationally > discuss and explore the text of the story and the characters involved. > > No one made anyone pay any money for these books. If we didn't like > them, we didn't have to buy them, read them, absorb them. > > Critique is good and constructive. > > Personal attack of the author is unnecessary. Alla: So, how do you draw the line between personally flaming the author and critiquing her books? Because frankly your example of JKR should or should not do Battle of Hogwarts or epilogue sounds to me as very very legitimate critique of her writing by the fans. It is her story, I wholeheartedly agree with you, but if people think that epilogue was unnecessary and book would flow easier without it, or they think characters future should be left to imagination, they are going to say it. I do not share this view, I **loved** the epilogue AND Battle of Hogwarts ( Minerva hitting Snape before especially - YUM) but it is IMO perfectly legitimate one. Among other things that's what we always had been doing on this group - picking apart every smallest detail and YES ranting and venting if we think that scene is unnecessary or badly written. For the record, since in so many posts mine drawn as many others, I **loved** the book, I have some minor grapes with it, but I loved it overall, but I will defend very vigorously the right of everybody to say that any scene was sloppily written or unnecessary. That is my right as a fan to say so about any work of any writer I read, and mostly loved or not. And yes, I consider myself to be a real fan of JKR. If you do not count OOP, every other book of the series I reread multiple times, bought papercover and hard cover version and some foreign language versions. I **am** a real fan, just as multitude of other fans here. And while I am a real fan, I for example consider the last speech of DD in OOP as many know to be the most disgusting scene ever. In light of new canon, I will withdraw my earlier opinion that the scene was OOC for DD. Seems very IC to me now. Oh, and I am not a fanfic writer, never had been, so whether JKR allowed fanfic writers to write or not, makes no difference to me. I consider personal flaming of the author to be unnecessary, yes. But by personal flaming I mean calling author names, I mean to draw conclusions of her views in RL, etc. But having said that, I think fans are entitled to draw the conclusions of JKR RL views as well based on her books, although I myself do not do that. Alla From prep0strus at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:49:35 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:49:35 -0000 Subject: The Body Count Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172890 I'm wondering if anyone can shed some light on the body count at the end of the big Hogwarts battle. Before round 2, Voldy states that the defenders have lost half their number, and that they're outnumbered by death eaters. After round two, I didn't have the impression that much time had passed or many more had died. And we learn that around 50 defenders had died at the end. First of all, I had no idea there were that many death eaters... I guess we have to assume that there were death-eaters-in-training as well as some imperiused non evil folks. But more confusing is the number of defenders. Before the waves of reinforcements, it should just be order members, teachers, and of-age students (and a couple more who snuck out). We don't know precisely who died - it's possible that among the ones who weren't Fred, Lupin, Tonks, and Colin there may be a teacher (Prof. Vector, anyone?) or a named student or other non-red shirt. Mostly, though, it has to be of age students who fought the good fight. the problem is... of age students would be 7th years, and maybe 1/2 the 6th years. Seeing as how the largest group we've seen would be male griffindors (5), most overage students there could possibly be (and shouldn't even be that many) would be 60. That includes Slytherins, and others who wouldn't return out of fear. How did the body count get so high? And I don't recall anyone mentioning many death eaters. I know good guys don't go for death blows as often, but it seems that team evil did REALLY well. In previous battles, there were a lot of spells thrown, and they were going for death, but there wasn't much. I know this is the Final Battle, but... 50 casualties? In the Encyclopedia I'm going to need an 'In Memoriam' page listing the fallen heroes, cause I just don't see where the cannon fodder came from. I'd love to hear any ideas and explanations I've overlooked. ~Adam (Prep0strus) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:52:51 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:52:51 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172891 > Julie: > That is one interpretation, and I doubt I'll change your > mind. But it is the only time we see him even in possession > of a picture of Lily, so it's just as likely that he's never > had a picture of her and he reacts emotionally to this picture > because of that fact. Additionally, why wouldn't he just take > the part of the picture that means something to him? He hated > James--and the feeling was completely mutual. Why would Snape > want a picture of him, or of baby Harry, who he really didn't > know? > > Also, while the picture isn't Snape's, the person it belonged to > is dead. You can say it is Harry's picture since Harry inherited > the house, but no doubt Harry has been given many pictures of > his mother, so it's not as if Snape is taking something that > he knows is incredibly valuable or irreplaceable. > > So if it's a crime it's a very minor one, certainly not worthy > of your horror that he was **KEEPING** the photo, IMO ;-) And > as we don't know if Snape has any other photos of Lily or how > many (never did see him with a camera either), keeping the > photo also doesn't indicate in any concrete way whether Snape > *loved* Lily or was merely *obsessed* by her. Though I think > the bulk of his actions point to the former (to me). Alla: Spending my fifth post already, but oh well. You think it is **Okay** that he took a picture? I should have clarified - it is not the part that he tear it apart that horrifies me the most. Although it does too. It is the part that he **took** it in the first place. Yeah, something that does not belong to him and Yes, belongs to Harry now and letter, oh my goodness - scary to me. I do not care that he never had pictures of Lily. It was not **his** to take IMO. Oh, and not that it is very relevant, but Harry was given lots of pictures of his mom? I remember one album. And Harry crying over ther letter? His mom's handwriting that he never saw. Yeah, I think the rightful owner of that letter should have had it complete, NOT Snape. But just as Snape helped to rob Harry of something huge - his parents, he robs him of the whole letter here IMO. Symbolic IMO. I know by the way that it serves the plot as well - Harry is not supposed to discover too early that DD was friends with Grindelwald, I am still disgusted by it, even if it is a plot device too. JMO. From va32h at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 02:54:41 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:54:41 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172892 I think this is number 5 for me today, so I chose the longest possible post to reply to, with the most available topics to discuss! Joe wrote: Doe Patronus - How can two people have the same Patronus? va32h replies: I don't see any reason why two people *can't* have the same patronus. How would you know that the animal you desired for your patronus is "taken"? All the characters in the HP series have different Patronuses, which is I'm sure a literary convenience. Joe wrote: > Neville - I had wished it had been Neville who got to Bellatrix > first. I found it a small letdown that it was Molly. He wouldn't > have had to AK her, mabe squirt bubotuber pus on the black mark > which proves poisonous...OK, I'll quit that. va32h replies: Neville's destruction of the snake is symbolically perfect. He is, essentially, the heir of Harry, taking up the mantle of resistance, finishing the job of destroying horcruxes that Harry set out to do, and proving worthy (as Harry was) of taking the Gryffindor sword. He is the other boy to whom the prophecy might have applied - and his actions in DH show that he would have been just as formidable an opponent as Harry. Molly killing Bellatrix is another kind of symbolism - Mother Molly destroying Barren Bella - the woman who claimed she would be proud to deliver up her sons to Voldemort (the very statement showing how truly ignorant she is of mother-love). Joe wrote: > Snape's Death - I never had an issue with Snape *becoming* good, > even heroic. (In fact, I called it.) But I have trouble believing > that Snape was ALWAYS true-blue once he decided to turn. I firmly > believe he deliberately sabotaged the Occlumency lessons, for > example. It was my thinking that Snape would have a more, um, clear > and unambiguous -- self-serving, selected pensieve memories do not > count -- moment of redemption. At best his redemption seems to have > been manifested gradually and too subtly to ring true. The death-by- > Nagini struck me as clunky and contrived and constructed thus for > the express purpose of having the pensieve moment. va32h replies: Yes, I struggle with Snape's redemption too. But I do find his death- by-snake very symbolic. Yes, it convenietly allows for a slow death, which gives Snape time to give Harry the memories, but it is also ironic (Potion master dies of poison!). But Snape being killed by a snake is, IMO, a metaphor for Snape's Slytherin side winning out over his loyalty to Lily. His life was effectively ended 18 years ago, when he chose Slytherin over Lily, Nagini is just finishing the job. Joe wrote: > Ron the Parselmouth - Clunky and clumsy device. Parseltongue is not > something learnable. IIRC, DD calls it a gift in COS. (Although, > it's funny that he faked it.) va32h here: Ugh! I agree, I hate this part! So silly and contrived. And, like all the plot holes in the book, so easily fixed! Why not just have Ron and Hermione tell Harry "we are going to nip down to the Chamber and see if that basilisk still has any venom. Wait five minutes, then send your Patronus down to the Chamber to say "open" in Parseltongue." Instead of worrying where Ron & Hermione are, Harry can worry about whether they are getting safely through the Chamber. Joe wrote: > Peter P.'s Life Debt - Somewhat weakly dealt with. Like how he dies, though, as the end result of his own treachery. va32h here: Yeah, that was confusing. As best as I can figure, Voldemort cursed the hand so it would strangle Wormtail, if Wormtail ever showed disloyalty to LV. That moment's hesitation on Wormtail's part was enough to activate the curse. That does sound like the sort of thing LV would do, after all. Joe wrote: > > Snape & Lupin - Going back to POA, I never saw Lupin being > particularly hostile to Snape, beyond being a Marauder. Yet Snape > was always unpleasant to Lupin, but he finally saved Lupin from > being AKed. The fact he had been awful to Lupin until recently > bolsters my thinking that Snape's conversion was not complete by > PS/SS, indeed, it wouldn't be until sometime between HBP & DH. va32h here: My interpretation of Snape's hostility toward Lupin is that while James and Sirius were really a couple of arrogant, bullying, prats, Lupin was fundamentally a nice person, who knows what it's like to be rejected and different and undesirable. This ought to make Lupin more sympathetic to the victims of James & Sirius' bullying, but instead Lupin is just so grateful to be inside the Marauder circle that he sits quietly by at lets James and Sirius continue on their spiteful, bullying way. I had actually not noticed that Snape saved Lupin's life (the memories were starting to get a little draggy for me at that point) but yes, I would agree, that's some growth on Snape's part. Joe wrote: > Senseless Deaths - This is war, alas, and people (owls & elves > included) die. They die for being in the wrong place at the wrong > time. They die regardless of who loved them, or what they stood for. > Now, the death of the Muggle Studies teacher struck me as WILDLY > inelegant. It reminded me of those Star Trek episodes when a > character you'd never seen before schleps down to Planet Zork with > Kirk, Bones and Spock...you just KNOW that guy's dead before the > third commercial break. Hedwig's death (St. Hedwig is the patron > saint of orphans) underscored the fact Harry had passed to manhood. > Dobby's death gave Harry an opportunity to grieve *maturely.* va32h here: Charity "Red Shirt" Burbage, eh? Yes, I agree - to have the last book open with the death of a character we've never actually heard of before...that's pretty weak. And again - so very easily fixable, as Hermione took Muggle Studies and the teacher's name could have been inserted any time from PoA on. And if Charity's death was a new idea that hadn't been in the Big Outline, well then JKR should have chosen another teacher, whose name we did know. Professor Vector, the Arithmancy witch or Professor Sinestra, the Astronomy teacher. Seeing as Voldemort spent all of OoTP obsessing over the prophecy, I would think Sybill Trelawney would be the Hogwarts teacher he would most want to capture and interrogate. But I guess Voldy just stopped caring about the prophecy, like he stopped caring about blocking Harry from his mind. IN FACT - now it occurs to me that IF Voldemort had kidnapped Trelawney, and tortured the full prophecy out of her memory, he would have heard the part about "Power the Dark Lord knows not", which Voldemort would have naturally assumed was some sort of magical power, like say...the Elder Wand, and that could have sparked the whole Voldy-hunting-for-the-Elder-Wand plotline, much more efficiently. Joe: > Ron - The fact that Ron wasn't sobbing hysterically at the body of > his slain brother and, instead, was available for conversation with > Harry realllllllllllllllly struck me wrong. va32h: When? When Fred first falls, Ron and Percy both are unwilling to leave the body. It isn't until they realize they must keep moving or be killed themselves that they move the body - and they move it to keep it from being defiled by DE. If you are referring to after the entire battle - remember several hours pass. Harry and Voldemort dueled as the sun rose, and after Voldy dies, they stay in the great hall for hours "reports came in all morning long" from various parts of the country, DEs running away or being captured, Shacklebolt being named interim Minister, and so on. Molly and Ginny were sitting side by side, they weren't wailing over Fred's body at that point either. Joe wrote: > Questions which still linger... va32h answers: Well they will probably stay lingering. Personally, I think fandom read far too much into what JKR "promised" to answer in book 7. She always answers questions vaguely anyway, and something she planned on including 2 or 5 years ago may have simply been cut. va32h From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:55:48 2007 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:55:48 -0000 Subject: Post-HP Depresssion/Indifference In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172893 snapesdarksoul: > So shortly after I finished reading the book I broke down into tears > knowing I'd never get to visit this wonderful world again... >...Is anyone else going through something similar? Amiable Dorsai: Post Potter Depression. Take two fanfics and call me in the morning. Amiable Dorsai M.D. From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Thu Jul 26 03:00:35 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:00:35 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172894 "Lisa" wrote: > > > va32h here: > > > > I have seen this attitude in several forums and quite frankly, it's > > infuriating to me that we are expected to treat Deathly Hallows with > > nothing less than reverence, as if JKR had descended from the mount > > with the text inscribed upon slabs, instead of selling it to us at > > $35 a pop. > > This is not at all what I said. I agree that we have every right to > criticise and explore the holes in the story and the missing > information that we'd wished she'd put in/explained/etc. > > There is a difference between critiquing the WRITING and flaming the > WRITER. > > To say - as I have seen mulitple times in the various fandom > communities now - that JKR should not have done a 'battle at Hogwarts' > or an 'Epilogue at the train station with sappy > children-named-after-the-dead' because it was sappy and overdone, > already in FANFICTION is to rob JKR of the right and ownership of her > characters and her story. > > My frustration and concern is the people who want to flame the whole > series, in general and the author specifically, rather than rationally > discuss and explore the text of the story and the characters involved. > > No one made anyone pay any money for these books. If we didn't like > them, we didn't have to buy them, read them, absorb them. > > Critique is good and constructive. > > Personal attack of the author is unnecessary. > > Lisa > Anne Squires: I agree with every single word that Lisa wrote. I remember after HBP that people had similar reactions. It shocked me because I had only been in the fandom since 2004. I think a couple of things are gong on. Excuse the following rant please. Some (not all) readers of fanfic are very immersed in the fanfic portion of the fandom and have read literally hundreds and hundreds, maybe even thousands of stories. (I know I have.) They don't seem to realize that it would be impossible for JKR not to repeat some scenes that appear in fanfic. They also don't seem to acknowledge that many (no, make that all) writers of fanfic are picking up on themes that JKR laid out herself. It's true that in many instances JKR many have hidden her themes and eventual story lines; but she has been telegraphing certain messages in her books from the very beginning. Fanfic writers simply picked up the threads that JKR had laid down and ran with them. What I find laughably inconsistent is that some people complain that what they were expecting and/or hoping didn't occur and in practically the next breath they complain that what did happen had already been done. Read enough fanfic and everything had been done. Why can't people realize that the stories and the series follow clear archetypal patterns. Of course the ideas have been done before. It's the unique universe and the spectacular ways in which JKR has woven this very archetypal tale that makes it so fantastic. Bottom line many people in the fanfic section of the fandom need to get over themselves. It's an archetypal epic story which follows prescribed patterns. JKR was copying fanfics. That's ludicrous in the extreme. She was copying the collective unconscious in a very unique, and I find surprising way. I also think that some writers/readers of fanfic are just plain jealous of JKR's success. I believe that many are immature teens/early twenties. I remember after HBP that many fans said they would boycott future films and books because they didn't get the ships they wanted. Well, right after that the GOF DVD broke all records and sold more DVDs quicker than any other DVD or video in history. I also just read that GH sold 8.3 million in the first day in the US. HBP sold 6.9 million on it's first day in the US. So, obviously the boycott of the H/H shippers really impacted sales negatively. I think I also see an attitude of "I wrote that; she stole my idea." LMAOL Sour grapes much. Some folks in the fanfic fandom just need to Grawp. Anne Squires From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 26 03:00:08 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:00:08 -0000 Subject: My Thoughts on Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "coriandra2002" wrote: > > > James Black Potter: > > > Scorpius, I believe, is a reference to Crabbe -- both being named > > after crustaceans. Lobster, of course, would be of better taste. > > > I believe it's more a reference to the constellation (Scorpio), but I > could be wrong. > Very close but it is actually Scorpius that is the official astronomical name of the constellation. I think Scorpio is the name that astrologers use. For most of us in the northern hemisphere Scorpius is low on the southern horizon at this time of year. It is a lovely constellation with the red giant star, Antares, blazing like a red beacon in its heart. I wonder how well it can be seen from England since it is quite low here in northern Illinois which is about as far south as Rome. In any event Draco is following the Black family tradition of naming children after constellations and stars. Perhaps he will have a grandchild named Zubenelgenubi! Ken From redninja at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 02:55:36 2007 From: redninja at gmail.com (Keith) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:55:36 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172896 > Alla: > > So, how do you draw the line between personally flaming the > author and critiquing her books? > > I consider personal flaming of the author to be unnecessary, yes. > But by personal flaming I mean calling author names, I mean to draw > conclusions of her views in RL, etc. > > But having said that, I think fans are entitled to draw the > conclusions of JKR RL views as well based on her books, although I > myself do not do that. > > I think the only thing I've really been seeing that attacks JKR's self is regarding the love stories. "JKR doesn't understand true love" type of talk. That would really hurt my feelings if I read that somewhere about me. Keith. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 02:58:12 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:58:12 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172897 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > Lisa: > > > But what did he do, when faced presented with the > > opportunity to harm someone he found annoying? He attempted > murder- > > by-Lupin. > > > > Alla: > > Attempted murder is not in canon and judging by Lily's reaction, I > would really say it was not that IMO. > Lisa: The attempted murder most certainly is in canon: Sirius knowingly and purposely lured Snape to a spot where he would certainly be killed (or at the very least, maimed and turned into a werewolf) by a werewolf. James obviously saw the extreme danger in it as well, and saved Snape from such a fate, and saved Sirius from ... what? Expulsion, if not actual prosecution, depending upon wizarding laws regarding attempted murder. And I hardly think any court, wizarding or otherwise, would say it wasn't attempted murder simply because a 16 year old girl didn't seem to think it was anything but a prank. From va32h at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 03:08:20 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:08:20 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172898 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "anne_t_squires" wrote: > I also think that some writers/readers of fanfic are just plain > jealous of JKR's success. I believe that many are immature > teens/early twenties. I remember after HBP that many fans said they > would boycott future films and books because they didn't get the ships > they wanted. Well, right after that the GOF DVD broke all records and > sold more DVDs quicker than any other DVD or video in history. I also > just read that GH sold 8.3 million in the first day in the US. HBP > sold 6.9 million on it's first day in the US. So, obviously the > boycott of the H/H shippers really impacted sales negatively. I think > I also see an attitude of "I wrote that; she stole my idea." LMAOL > Sour grapes much. Some folks in the fanfic fandom just need to Grawp. va32h here: Since you felt the need to quote me - let me inform you that I am 36 years old, and have never read, much less written, a fanfiction. And I could care less about "ships". I think it is extremely presumptous to conclude that anyone with a criticism of the book has "sour grapes". va32h From muellem at bc.edu Thu Jul 26 03:11:36 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:11:36 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172899 >Lisa wrote: > My frustration and concern is the people who want to flame the whole > series, in general and the author specifically, rather than rationally > discuss and explore the text of the story and the characters involved. > > No one made anyone pay any money for these books. If we didn't like > them, we didn't have to buy them, read them, absorb them. > > Critique is good and constructive. > > Personal attack of the author is unnecessary. colebiancardi: at this point, with the book out less than a week and from the looks of it, many on this board are disappointed in the way certain things were handled, I think that some slack should be given to us listies as well. "Real" literary analysis of this particular book probably won't happen until a month or so from now; right now, I know I am still struggling with why certain things played out the way they did. JKR gave us hints and clues, from the previous books and her interviews, on where this series was going. I don't think by expressing personal disappointment and the lack of growth & maturity of characters is a *personal attack*. JKR is a wonderful writer, giving us a WW with complex characters. However, she hit the wall with this book, IMHO. She couldn't, in my eyes, seem to reconcile the shades of grey with the "bad" house of Slytherin. Nor did she deal with the questionable actions of the *good* house using *unforgivables*, which I thought was a huge no-no. At the end of HBP, when Snape tells Harry "No Unforgivable Curses for you" - I thought that was the direction JKR was heading - that the *goodies* would not sink to the level of the *evil-doers*. And those biases *do* affect people adversely and how to overcome those biases - to look at people as individuals, not separating people into "You are either with us or against us" groups. If you tell someone from day one they are bad to the bone, the question of "why should I change?" comes up. If the past is something I cannot redeem or make atones for, why bother? If you have already pigeon-holed me into a stereotype, and you won't change your mind about me, again, why bother with it? How can one can break free from those preconceptions and ideas about people on *both* sides? Those types of questions, which are good questions for people of all ages, not just adults. Children are quite asute with character development and judgement. In OotP, Sirius's statement of "..the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters" was going to be prophetic in some way with the final outcome in book 7. Alas, it seems it has not. My disappointment came in book 7. JKR books 1 through 6 showed a world of complex and compelling characters, some good, some bad, some morally questionable, some grey - and it was wonderful. A *nice* person could be *evil* and a *mean* person could be *good*. IMO, Book 7 showed me a writer who had written herself into a corner and had no way to get out of it except splitting the world into good people and Death Eaters. Snape, a character who has fascinated this board since they were started due to his ambiguity and whom JKR stated was a gift of a character, was reduced to the emotional level of a hormonally challenged teenager. Snape, in books 1 through 6, was a wonderful anti-hero to Harry's hero. And it was shattered. Dumbledore, a wizard who was supposed to be above the biases of the WW, slapped down Snape with his one liner of "we Sort too soon". Why couldn't he have just stopped at the "You are a braver man by far than Igor Karkaroff" and left the complement stand alone, instead of hitting Snape with the old bias of the House system as a throw-away? How else am I supposed to react this soon after the book? The books are part of the author's being - she is responsible for the way these characters turned out; it is part and parcle of who JKR is. Her creations, her vision, her world. Not fanfiction's - but hers. And if some members feels that JKR's world is twisted, so be it. It is their opinion and those members have made a valid point. Deathly Hallows - again, not my favorite book in the series. Yesterday, I posted it wasn't in my top 4 - I think now I have put it dead last in 7th. I am not enamored by the world we ended up with in the Harry Potter series. I was not enchanted by it, unlike books 1 through 6, which is a world that has hope and possiblities to break the glass ceilings of hatred and biases. As JKR is a published author who is celebrated - yes, I expected more than fan-fic. She is published and I do pay good money to read her works. Fan-fic is fine, but when it comes down to it, I want to read something different from her. That is why she is famous. Perhaps JKR will revisit this world in 10 years. I hope so. I also hope her stance on some of these topics will revert back to the original promise that 1-6 gave me. Perhaps she was feeling fatigued by book 7 and had to wrap it up in a nice neat package. Because that is how it felt to me colebiancardi From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Thu Jul 26 03:18:47 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:18:47 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172900 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "anne_t_squires" > wrote: > > I also think that some writers/readers of fanfic are just plain > > jealous of JKR's success. I believe that many are immature > > teens/early twenties. I remember after HBP that many fans said they > > would boycott future films and books because they didn't get the ships > > they wanted. Well, right after that the GOF DVD broke all records and > > sold more DVDs quicker than any other DVD or video in history. I also > > just read that GH sold 8.3 million in the first day in the US. HBP > > sold 6.9 million on it's first day in the US. So, obviously the > > boycott of the H/H shippers really impacted sales negatively. I think > > I also see an attitude of "I wrote that; she stole my idea." LMAOL > > Sour grapes much. Some folks in the fanfic fandom just need to Grawp. > > va32h here: > > Since you felt the need to quote me - let me inform you that I am 36 > years old, and have never read, much less written, a fanfiction. And I > could care less about "ships". > > I think it is extremely presumptous to conclude that anyone with a > criticism of the book has "sour grapes". > > va32h > Anne Squires: I am sorry I didn't snip correctly. I truly didn't not mean to insult you. I actually agree with every thing you wrote as well. I strongly agree that people discuss the series in an adult fashion. Tear it apart even. I find it enjoyable to find new meaning and interpretation. I was responding to Lisa's comments which I think (I don't want to put words in her mouth) were mainly about what is going on in the fanfic portion of the fandom where people are flaming JKR and claiming that her work is a poorly done fanfic. Sorry, Anne From redninja at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 02:42:57 2007 From: redninja at gmail.com (Keith) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:42:57 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172901 > > alison: > > the relationship between Ron and Hermione was established > > early on, it was about the only 'given' in the whole series. > > Harry and Ginny where also a given from the start. > > > sandra: > You're right, they were all "a given" right at the start > or at least very early on ... but my point is that there's no > tenderness shown between any of them. I can't think of any > warm moments between R and H, no stumbled honest > expressions of their feelings, no first time they held hands (or > were seen to hold hands) and generally it's just one bickering > session agter another through all seven books. > ... I felt nothing even though the characters were > individually likeable. > I would have thought that Ron, who was never the most poetic or > literate of characters, to have confided with Harry or at least > sought his opinion as a friend regarding Hermione and how he > was feeling, wouldn't you? ... > I wouldn't expect the same of Hermione which is why I only > mention Ron, because we never actually hear about her friends > beyond Ron and Harry. ... I feel unmoved and genuinely let down > That's why I feel JKR isn't a romantic writer at all. Lurker here. I can give two good reasons you didn't see the relationship develop anything like you wished: #1: People are different. Some couples have a lot in common, some are an "opposites attract" type. R and H are both very closed-book, and VERY stubborn. I had a pair of friends that went through a 2 year phase when I was in high school. (Unmarked and unwarranted jealousy when one had dates, etc) it finally took a damn near intervention from our circle of friends to get them to realize they were supposed to be together. (btw they stayed together for at least 5 years, I fell out of contact after that) #2: JK Rowling is trying to get you (the reader) to be frustrated by R and H's lack of action. It is a ham-fisted audience manipulator, as much as the cliff hanger in the last 2 minutes of every episode of 24. The locket scene laid bare Ron's insecurity. Remember his perspective: he is an emotionionally immature teenage boy, who is paranoid that H might just fancy Harry more: he's smarter, rich, famous beyond belief. Like most insecure boys, Ron probably thinks Harry is more attractive as well. H's constantly being smarter than him would also be an intimidator. -Keith From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 03:43:13 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:43:13 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172902 Joe: > Unforgivables - If you read back to GOF, you'll notice these curses > are not so much unforgivable because they are malum in se but > because they have been deemed so by the Ministry. zgirnius: Oooh, lots of interesting comments! Yes, I think that is what we were supposed to get from the book. *Not* intrinsically utterly evil, it matters why you are doing them. The definiteive statement of which position seems to be Dumbledore's words to Snape when they are discussing the idea that Snape should kill Dumbeldore instead of Draco: "You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation." No mention of the significance of the mechanics Snape chooses for the purpose. I liked this, as I always had a problem with the idea that a killing with a wand was somehow more evil than a killing with a gun, intrinsically. > Joe: > Snape/Pensieve - Remember, we are only seeing what Snape wanted > Harry to see. This is Snape's edited version of things. Yes, a > pensieve shows only true things, but it doesn't show EVERYTHING. It > doesn't show what we might call "refuting evidence." zgirnius: This occured to me, and is in my opinion an important point. It is one reason I believe that Snape came to care for Harry, and why I think his "Look at me" meant not only that he wanted to see Lily's eyes one last time before he died, but also that he realized, in his final moments, that he wanted Harry to understand him, not to win him to yet another false view of himself. And to achieve that, he needed to give an honest account of himself, at least as far as he could manage in the final seconds of his life, lying in a pool of his own blood. Because the memories we saw were not particularly sanitized at all. Why show himself dropping the branch on Petunia? Why show enough memories that Harry could understand his mother's decision to cut off ties? Why, most damningly, show that first meeting with Dumbledore in its full glory, from start to finish, including the admission that disgusted Dumbledore so deeply? > Joe: > In a way we are taking Snape's "word" for it, a > dangerous proposition in the Potterverse. zgirnius: It is a deal less dangerous now that the series is complete. That "Albus Severus" bit in the much-loathed Epilogue is more or less the last word. Joe: > Doe Patronus - How can two people have the same Patronus? zgirnius: I think the emotional trauma of Lily's death caused a change to Snape's Patronus (we know from HBP this can happen). Since she was dead, they did not have the same Patronus, as she no longer had one at all. That's probably the 'ironclad reason'. > Joe: > Neville - I had wished it had been Neville who got to Bellatrix > first. I found it a small letdown that it was Molly. He wouldn't > have had to AK her, mabe squirt bubotuber pus on the black mark > which proves poisonous...OK, I'll quit that. zgirnius: Oh, but the Sword of Gryffindor! And killing Nagini!! (How cool is it that Neville avenged Snape's death, though of course he did not know it at the time?) I thought that was an amazing moment for him, and was happy to see Molly have hers too. > Joe: > Ron the Parselmouth - Clunky and clumsy device. Parseltongue is not > something learnable. IIRC, DD calls it a gift in COS. (Although, > it's funny that he faked it.) zgirnius: I think the gift part is when you are born speaking it, like Tom was. That does not rule out the possibility of learning it like a language. > Joe: > I defy anyone to tell me they'd > want someone loving them the way Snape loved Lily. zgirnius: Yes, being loved by the person Snape was as a young Death Eater would not be near the top of my list. But he was not the same person when he died. > Joe: > Snape & Lupin - Going back to POA, I never saw Lupin being > particularly hostile to Snape, beyond being a Marauder. Yet Snape > was always unpleasant to Lupin, but he finally saved Lupin from > being AKed. The fact he had been awful to Lupin until recently > bolsters my thinking that Snape's conversion was not complete by > PS/SS, indeed, it wouldn't be until sometime between HBP & DH. zgirnius: I would say the conversion (as in, choosing a new side and sticking with it) occured in the scene after the Potters died. What was an ongoing process, even to the moment of Snape's death, was a gradual process of becoming a better person, which I would not term complete except in the sense that it ended with his dath. > Joe: > Ravenclaw - LOVED the Ravenclaw password system. zgirnius: That is SOOOO the House for me. > Joe: > How does the (by my scoring anyway) third best wizard in the world, > Snape, "accidentally" curse off George's ear? zgirnius: I presume because everyone involved (Snape, Lupin/George, the otehr Death Eater) were all flying at high speeds when it happened. > Joe: > What did *Lupin* ever do to earn Snape's wrath? (Being friends with > James & Sirius doesn't count for much here.) zgirnius: Snape claims to believe that Lupin was in on Sirius's little joke. The only tangible act one can point to is that it must have been he that told Sirius how to get into the tunnel. Snape had no way to know this was so his Animagus friends would be able to free him for jolly romps through the countryside - I presume he therefore decided Lupin told Sirius for the purpose of the prank. From breakfree at xtra.co.nz Thu Jul 26 03:48:21 2007 From: breakfree at xtra.co.nz (daimauwr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:48:21 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172903 Joe: Doe Patronus - How can two people have the same Patronus? Well actually only one has the Patronus - Lily has been dead for 16 years. One could presume that ownership of a particular Patronus dies when they die. As we are not told if Severus had a previous Patronus and that Lily was a gifted witch, she may well have developed that ability before Snape. He may have adopted the doe in her remembrance. Daimauwr From colwilrin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 03:51:46 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:51:46 -0000 Subject: The unforgivable curse argument Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172904 I admittedly have not read the new 700+ postings to the list, but picked up this point in the many that I did read. Many are upset that Harry used the Crucio curse. I am not, for one specific reason. In the US (where I am from...and have spent the last 48 hours taking the lawyer's bar admittance examination), the use of deadly force is allowed, and justified when one is in a position of fear of imminent death to oneself or another. When Harry used the Crucio curse, he was in a battle situation. Voldemort and the DE's were intent on killing both Harry and those who supported Harry. In any US court, Harry's actions would be justified under Self-Defense. I am not sure of how other countries view self defense, but I presume that most would have some sort of self-defense provisions. I was actually a bit happy when Harry finally got serious and fought fire with fire. I never wanted him to AK anyone...but he used the force necessary to protect himself...and I was thrilled by it. Just as I was thrilled when Molly asserted herself enough to dispatch Bellatrix. Way to go girl! Colwilrin From kkersey at swbell.net Thu Jul 26 03:56:36 2007 From: kkersey at swbell.net (kkersey_austin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:56:36 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172905 > Libby: > > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to > > fake Parseltongue well enough to access the Chamber of Secrets Maybe it's a Weasley thing - Ginny could do it too, albeit while being possessed by Riddle's Diary Horcrux. You know, it just occurred to me that maybe Ron's being able to fake Parseltongue is part of a larger pattern - Voldemort liked to think of himself as being uniquely gifted with certain powers and knowledge, but it keeps turning out that he's not as special as he thought. E.g. his delusion that he was the only one to have discovered the Room of Requirement (in spite of much evidence to the contrary in the room itself!). Also, near the beginning of the book other wizards seem horrified that he can fly without a broomstick, but then we see Snape do that too. Ron is about as far as you can get from being the Heir of Slytherine but he was able to get into the Chamber of Secrets anyway. Voldemort is the only one we hear about who is able to possess other living beings, though, right? Elisabet From lexac at mail.com Thu Jul 26 04:00:58 2007 From: lexac at mail.com (Lexa_C) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:00:58 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172906 Sandra: > I would have thought that Ron, who was never the most poetic or > literate of characters, to have confided with Harry or at least > sought his opinion as a friend regarding Hermione and how he > was feeling, wouldn't you? Not in a million years. Not when he had insecurities that led him to worry that Harry was his romantic rival. And then piled on top of that, the fact that Harry was his best friend. The last person I'd want to discuss the whole issue with would be the person I had such conflicting feelings about, particularly at the age of 17. -Alexa From caleksandrova at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 04:08:44 2007 From: caleksandrova at gmail.com (Karina Aleksandrova) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:08:44 -0000 Subject: Wands that do their own spells In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172907 casmir2012 wrote: > > Was it ever explained how Harry's wand started sending off spells on > it's own during his encounter with Voldemort at the beginning of the > book...as he was leaving the Dursleys? > Yes. The wands sort of "learn" magic with time, so that Voldemort's wand knew some hardcore stuff ;) due to all the magic he experimented with in his life. In the battle between Voldemort and Harry in book 4, when the two wands connected with the Priori Incantatum effect, Harry's wand sort of "imbibed" some of the power of Voldemort's wand. At the start of Deathly Hallows Voldemort was not using his own wand (rather he "borrowed" from Lucius), so his wand didn't have all the experience of Voldemort's original wand. Harry's wand on the other hand recognized Voldemort (even if he was using a different wand), and did something unexpected. I think it's explained in the King's Cross chapter by Dumbledore. From colwilrin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 04:10:57 2007 From: colwilrin at yahoo.com (colwilrin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:10:57 -0000 Subject: Snape parallels In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172908 Carol: Severus Snape contributed to the death of the woman he loved > and wanted to die when his efforts to save her failed, but after DD > asks him what good that would do, he dedicates his life to making sure > that she didn't die in vain. > > Carol, who thinks that all Severus Snape ever wanted was love and > acceptance or at least a bit of recognition > Colwilrin: Snape is the one character that I think JKR developed the most. He is the most complex of all, and I can say is almost the central character of the series. He has intrigued and held the allegiance of fans throughout the series. He has been the one character that created polar, zealous arguments from fans supporting both sides of his possible allegiance. He is probably my favorite character...if I really think about it. Snape loved Lily from childhood. She accepted him, and was his connection with "normalcy". Think of any awkward, unpopular teenager...then think about that same teenager having the most popular girl as his "secret best friend". Lily meant the world to him. It is very sad that he could not get past that love and find a relationship where the girl would return his affections. Having Lily die because of something that Snape did...no matter how far or unforseen from his original intention...was a severe blow to Snape. It forever precluded him from moving beyond his love for Lily. His personal growth was frozen in that moment in time...never to find resolution. JKR understands this psychology, and illustrates its natural progression with the precise understanding of a mental health expert. From the first sighting of the "shining doe", I teared up. I knew that it was Snape's patronus. I knew that the patronus would be whatever Lily's was...but couldn't figure out her patronus until that doe walked in. I smacked myself in the head "DUH"...a doe. From that moment, I knew it was Snape...and he was helping...not that I ever doubted him. My only complaint regarding Snape is that he did not die fighting. My impression by book 6 was that Snape was as powerful...if not moreso than DD or Voldy. I surely thought that he would go down in a bitter fight. However, that would not have leant to preserving his memories for Harry to find. Still do wish it would have been a blaze of glory...or (my ulimate wish)...that he survived and THEN became Hogwart's Headmaster...the second best they ever had! From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 04:13:06 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:13:06 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172909 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kkersey_austin" wrote: > Voldemort is the only one we hear about who is able to possess other > living beings, though, right? > > Elisabet > True, but Harry can do it too, 'cause of the soul-bit he got. Yeah, really. He can. I swear. ;) Annemehr From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 04:23:19 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:23:19 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why I liked the Epilogue In-Reply-To: <00ad01c7ce36$178ab2b0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> References: <00ad01c7ce36$178ab2b0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: <2795713f0707252123u146cc42fn66ce83c098f955d3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172910 Kimberley: With all the talk about hating the epilogue, I just wanted to chime in as liking it. For me, it ended what was an extremely dark, emotional book, on a lighter note. Lynda: I liked the epilogue, too. I hink it gave a nice sense of closure to the series overall. I would have liked to learn about characters who were not mentioned, but it really was not a necessity. Lynda -- 2 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherriola at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 04:33:47 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:33:47 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The unforgivable curse argument In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46a8242e.05358c0a.3c5e.38c1@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172911 Colwilrin Many are upset that Harry used the Crucio curse. I am not, for one specific reason. In the US (where I am from...and have spent the last 48 hours taking the lawyer's bar admittance examination), the use of deadly force is allowed, and justified when one is in a position of fear of imminent death to oneself or another. When Harry used the Crucio curse, he was in a battle situation. Voldemort and the DE's were intent on killing both Harry and those who supported Harry. In any US court, Harry's actions would be justified under Self-Defense. I was actually a bit happy when Harry finally got serious and fought fire with fire. I never wanted him to AK anyone...but he used the force necessary to protect himself...and I was thrilled by it. Just as I was thrilled when Molly asserted herself enough to dispatch Bellatrix. Way to go girl! Sherry: As it was war, I could have accepted even Harry using the killing curse. It's the Imperius and Cruciatus that bothered me. Cruciatus is a torture curse, inflicting terrible agony in every fiber of someone's body. That isn't self defense or fighting fire with fire. We have soldiers facing court martials for torturing prisoners. Torture is wrong, in my opinion, and I hated seeing the hero, the good guy using it. I didn't mind molly offing Bella, because it was war, and soldiers do kill in war. That's their job. I didn't want Harry to have to kill, but that would have been far easier to accept than cruciatus for me. Sherry From tracygee at mac.com Thu Jul 26 04:25:38 2007 From: tracygee at mac.com (Tracy Garrett) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:25:38 -0400 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession Message-ID: <00d701c7cf3d$0558aa40$210110ac@TracysNotebook> No: HPFGUIDX 172912 Wolf wrote: It is a fine line between love and obsession. I believe from reading all the varied opinions out there is that those that find Snape altogether creepy think his feelings for Lily part of a sick obsession. Those that like or feel sorry for Snape seem to find his unrequited love heart-warming. Perhaps when Lily ended their friendship, she saw not only his dark side but his obsessive side. tracygee: As others have commented, Snape certainly showed a lot of obsessive qualities in his "love" for Lily. I think the important part, though, is that he did "love" her as best he could. Rowling several times points out in the books that what makes Voldermort truly evil is his inability to love. He can't possess Harry because he can't stand the feeling of love. Snape--for all his faults, and there are plenty of them--is at least able to feel some type of love for Lily. His family background was not full of loving parents, a stable home life, lots of friends and positive role models. He's an outcast--unloved by his parents or any friends. Lily, from what we see, is the only female who gives him any type of positive attention. He grew up with her and grew to care for her, even though he had no idea how to express these feelings. I believe his ability to love Lily is what changes him completely. Were it not for her, he certainly would have been a Death Eater 100% behind Voldermort until the end. With her death, and the guilt this brought to Snape, he is saved. Dumbledore gives Snape a way to make Lily's death mean something. Help us defeat Voldermort; help us keep Harry safe. His love was not the stuff Harlequin romances are made of. Snape's love is not romantic, brave or normal in a lot of ways. It was--yes--obsessive, unrequited and jealous at times. Unrequited love is not fun. It soured him in a lot of ways. In the end, though, it was faithful and strong enough to help him turn from his evil ways. Back to lurkdom. From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 04:33:44 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:33:44 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Parseltongue and Ron WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707252133i6cba46c9w3a4e9d21a679180c@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172913 Karina: I've been suspecting that Parseltongue is learnable since Dumbledore didn't ask Harry for translation of the Morfin's memory wherein he and Voldemort spoke exclusively in Parseltongue. Lynda: It didn't bother me either, because any language is learnable, really, if someone has enough initiative. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From k12listmomma at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 04:40:51 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:40:51 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH Thoughts References: <436897.11603.qm@web36607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <018a01c7cf3f$2518a590$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172914 > The fact remains that anyone who believes in Harry can take as FINAL CANON > Harry's last words on Severus(and by extension JKR's) "you are named for > two Hogwarts Headmasters, one of them a Slytherin and probably one of the > bravest men I know' .....not Dumbledore, not Sirius, nor Lupin, not even > his own father, but Severus Snape.......may he rest in peace. "always" > > barb Ah, but then do you not even acknowledge the lesson Dumbledore tried to teach Harry- that even he with his great intellect, could STILL MAKE MISTAKES? That's canon too, and I think it would be a pity to write that part off, thinking yet that we know the full story. Yes, I believe in Harry, and I believe in Dumbledore. And one thing JKR makes painfully clear in this series is that no man in perfect. I have this theory, roaming around in my head, that unlike Slughorn who tampered with his memories and it was terribly evident that it had been meddled with, Snape is a much more skilled wizard and could modify them so that it would be undetected. Shelley > > > > 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 breakfree at xtra.co.nz Thu Jul 26 04:23:35 2007 From: breakfree at xtra.co.nz (daimauwr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:23:35 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: <89d7a880707242207m1ba9f95dw492d6de1345818a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172915 > Debbie Grosskopf > Isn't the Patronus supposed to be a unique creation for > everyone? How can Snape and Lily have had the same Patronus? > Isn't is supposed to be so unique that it is a secure form of > messenger? If the Patronus is unique then the WW would soon run out of objects to imitate - considering the number of wizards and witches that have died since Hogwarts was established. Harry has the same as his father - the Stag, therefore one must presume that genetically this form can be passed down through generations. As there is no daughter in the Potter family then Lily's patronus must be up for grabs. In OOP film we see some interesting forms - Hermione's otter, a hare, a dog (Ron's?) and we know that DD's was a phoenix. Due to his unrequited love for Lily his appropriation of her Patronus makes sense. Daimauwr From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 04:54:35 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:54:35 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172916 > > Alla: > > > > No, I find the word used just the possible sign for future > > developments, not a pretty one, no, but if used alone of course I > > won't accuse ten year old of stalking. > > > > The strongest evidence to me of obsession is Snape searching Sirius > > room, taking a **private** letter from one friend to another, > > tearing apart that letter, taking with him the part where Lily > > signature was AND in addition to this, doing something so much > > creepier - tearing apart the photograph that does not belong to him > > either and **KEEPING** it. > > > > I am half expecting as I mentioned before to see the police > finding > > many pictures of Lily in his room > > Julie: > That is one interpretation, and I doubt I'll change your > mind. But it is the only time we see him even in possession > of a picture of Lily, so it's just as likely that he's never > had a picture of her and he reacts emotionally to this picture > because of that fact. Additionally, why wouldn't he just take > the part of the picture that means something to him? He hated > James--and the feeling was completely mutual. Why would Snape > want a picture of him, or of baby Harry, who he really didn't > know? Valky now: I'm wondering, now, in aside to this, how did the image of Lily react to being torn away from the rest of the happy scene with her beloved family, if at all. It would be sad for Snape if it took the smile from her face, but maybe in the same if it did, a lesson for him as well... I mean, when he tore the picture I honestly thought to him 'get a clue Severus' he never seemed to understand her bond with her family at all, he didn't seem to notice what a large part of her that was, I think he got himself a picture of only half of Lily, in any case, and I noted it down as another tragic flaw. > > > Lisa: > > > > > But what did he do, when faced presented with the > > > opportunity to harm someone he found annoying? He attempted > > murder- > > > by-Lupin. > > > > > > > > Alla: > > > > Attempted murder is not in canon and judging by Lily's reaction, I > > would really say it was not that IMO. Lisa: The attempted murder most certainly is in canon: Sirius knowingly and purposely lured Snape to a spot where he would certainly be killed (or at the very least, maimed and turned into a werewolf) by a werewolf. James obviously saw the extreme danger in it as well, and saved Snape from such a fate, and saved Sirius from ... what? Expulsion, if not actual prosecution, depending upon wizarding laws regarding attempted murder. And I hardly think any court, wizarding or otherwise, would say it wasn't attempted murder simply because a 16 year old girl didn't seem to think it was anything but a prank. Valky: There'll be no swaying you from this opinion, will there Lisa? FWIW, Snape knew what he was getting himself in to, and in all likelihood Sirius knew that he knew. But moreover I wonder just how anyone could cling to the notion that Sirius, the boy who looked forward every day to a romp in the field with the clawed cursed creature would ever have thought Lupin dangerous at all, let alone a opportunity to murder someone. It just doesn't fit, Sirius was just never cognisant of the danger, he was ten times the reckless fool James was and that has got to be saying something considering what we know of James and Harry who were alike in that regard, and to him, Lupin was little more than an animated Teddy bear, Lupin never went easy on his friends when he was in werewolf form, Sirius spent his time with the werewolf in constant mortal peril and clearly as of the pensieve scene, he didn't have a high regard of that fact at all. So I ask, if Sirius wanted someone dead, don't you think he would have used something he actually believed was deadly? Valky From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 04:58:20 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:58:20 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH: Epilogue, Unforgivables and Other Quick Thoughts. In-Reply-To: <381159.74161.qm@web30209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <381159.74161.qm@web30209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707252158v340573a4xa178a990773a0ff8@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172917 elfundeb wrote: > Too many Unforgivables were cast by Harry and co. Lynda: Oh, I don't think so. I've always considered that it all has to do with intention. So expelliarmus can be dark magic as easily as crucio. I depends on the situation. And war changes the situation. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 05:15:15 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:15:15 -0700 Subject: My take on the Deathly Hallows----Spoilers!!!! Message-ID: <2795713f0707252215t477afafasc0aeb36bf0901988@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172918 Love it. That doesn't mean that I don;t recognize that there are unanswered questions,etc, but overall, I love this book! Okay specifics. Hedwig's death upset me. I understand that she would have been hard to have along for the journey, but she could have been left with Pig and Crookshanks! Madeye's death was sad, but he died as a warrior would want to. Same with Dobby. Yes I cried, but at least Dobby died helping his idol and friend Harry Potter. The deaths that were hardest for me were Lupin and Tonks. I'm glad she killed both of them, though, rather than only one. Either of the twins will regroup and continue to live a healthy productive life, but either Tonks or Lupin might have reverted into despondency, even with Teddy to raise, so its better that both die than only one. Even though I never liked Percy I'm glad he finally got some good sense! It was good to have his character involved in the HP camp during the last battle. I was glad to see the Snape/Lily story finally and learn a little bit about Petunia's knowledge of the WW. It would have been nice to find out if they went back to normalcy after Voldemort was defeated, but its not really all that important. Hopefully Dudley's change of Heart was permanent, though. The characters we know nothing about 19 years later aren't really essential to the story. Yeah, it would be nice to know about some of them, but its not essential. I guess I'll just let my imagination go into overdrive. Its good at that. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lynx412 at verizon.net Thu Jul 26 05:17:31 2007 From: lynx412 at verizon.net (Cheryl Huttner) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:17:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Epilogue: What about FRED??? In-Reply-To: <239252.78334.qm@web30004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <528475.97280.qm@web84313.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172919 Sorry to do it this way, I'm having problems cut/pasting with yahoomort: Melanie: Whould Harry have named a son after a man he could not stand? Me: I'm just suprised there wasn't a Tom. Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 05:18:12 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:18:12 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Favorite Moment In-Reply-To: <875393.54351.qm@web31511.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <875393.54351.qm@web31511.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707252218l4c227870ga4b6ac9a5595d774@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172920 Clarvoyent: My favorite moment in the book - Molly dueling Bellatrix and becoming Molly Triumphant. So we know where Ginny inherited her ability. Lynda: Oh! I've known that for several books now! I had no foubt about that! Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From simtimmy at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 05:00:16 2007 From: simtimmy at yahoo.com (Tim) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:00:16 -0000 Subject: Post-HP Depresssion/Indifference In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172921 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, xxshoeboxxx at ... wrote: > > So shortly after I finished reading the book I broke down into tears > knowing I'd never get to visit this wonderful world again. You are not alone. I have not been so excited to have read a book/saga/piece of art since Return of the Jedi as a 12 year old. This universe and story and characters have brought out such an emotional response of the last 4 books that I dare say I won't be this excited again. Maybe that is the key to it. Is it the end of childhood responses that the Harry Potter story has brought out in adult/child-like readers like myself. I finished the book in a 6 hour session from midnight to 6am, leaving me excited/drained/content. Once I woke up I was happy but also empty and almost upset by the feelings of ending a saga. Be interesting to see when I throw on a HP movie again, especially knowing what I now know. Tim From kimberlyjohnson at mailhaven.com Thu Jul 26 05:03:23 2007 From: kimberlyjohnson at mailhaven.com (Kimberly Johnson) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:03:23 -0600 Subject: Too predictable? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1185426203.3195.1202105837@webmail.messagingengine.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172922 Coming out of my years of lurking.... While it was an enjoyable book overall, did you HP experts think that some of the main plotlines were too predictable, based on the last two years of conversations on this board? RAB, Snape DDM and in love with Lily, and Harry as Horcrux, final battle at Hogwarts, House elves fighting? By the time I got to Harry as the final Horcrux, I pratically shouted out, "Oh good grief!" I think I would have enjoyed the book more if I wasn't so into the world of Harry Potter. But oh well. Even I (a newspaper reporter) wrote a feature story a few weeks ago telling readers they should remember the character of Krum, as he attended Durmstrang and could fill HRH in on some Dark Arts info. (Granted, I left out the cup as Horcrux in my story and got a few angry e-mails.) Either you guys are excellent, or JKR is reading this board. Personally, I think the main posters to this board are great, and perhaps JKR is a bigger lurker than I am. My wizard hat goes off to you guys here. You should definitely congratulate yourselves for your deep, introspective views over the years. I thought there was very little in the book that hadn't been discussed here. Still have to re-read that whole wand and horcrux thing... for the fourth time. Although it will probably be cleared up somewhere on this board. Kim J. (who was waiting for Ron to yell "my precious!" before destroying the locket. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 05:27:35 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:27:35 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172923 Alexa: > I have to say the entire King's Cross chapter creeped me right out > because of the way both Dumbledore and Harry ignored the writhing, whimpering creature > right there in the same room with them. It didn't speak well of either of them, in my > opinion. Harry didn't ignore the creature, he did try to help. The whimpering thing was Voldemort's soul in all the agony that he had brought on himself through destroying it. While Harry was in that white room what could he have done to repair the damage Voldemort had done to himself? There was nothing. Tom Riddle's only chance, like an iceberg in hell, was to find in him some remorse, like Grindlewald at his death, something to repair his tattered soul before it was too late and he had done his dying deed and chose it to be evil. In the final battle Harry warns Riddle of what he faces, a battle he can never win, that will probably kill him, and a soul that has no joy in the afterlife; the only chance Tom has is a moment of remorse, to choose not to end his life as evil as he had lived it. Voldemort shot an AK at Harry, but we'll never really know what his last thoughts were. Maybe Riddle knew he was defeated and cast it knowing that it was the end of him but Harry never saw the look on his face when he cast that last spell, we don't know how Voldemort faced his death. Afterward, to Harry, his face looked vacant and unknowing, so there's nothing there telling us which way Voldemort went down. In the end he knew how to save himself and that was all Harry could ever have done. Me, I'd like to think Tom Riddle did find that grain of remorse at death, and that the rising sun hid his changing expression as he chose to let it end in Harry's hands and go on to death, with a little hope that he might get a second chance. Valky From bearhug at tpg.com.au Thu Jul 26 05:17:23 2007 From: bearhug at tpg.com.au (The Cuthills) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:17:23 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Parseltongue and Ron WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) References: Message-ID: <007201c7cf44$401b1170$0301a8c0@userb26c5552b3> No: HPFGUIDX 172924 Phyllis wrote: > I didn't think it worked to have Ron open the Chamber of Secrets > to get out the basilisk fangs - either you know Parseltongue or > you don't - how could he fake it? Karina: I loved that bit, actually. I've been suspecting that Parseltongue is learnable since Dumbledore didn't ask Harry for translation of the Morfin's memory wherein he and Voldemort spoke exclusively in Parseltongue. Anne: I wondered if Ron's speaking Parseltongue might have been the "magic" that was performed late in life??? It's very rare magic - only LV and Harry are known speakers, it *was* a moment of desperation in the Battle of Hogwarts...from a certain point of view it could been seen as someone doing hitherto impossible magic? It's a long shot, I know, but just maybe... From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 05:35:49 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:35:49 -0000 Subject: Was Snape Evil? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172925 Suppose there were no Voldemort and no Dumbledore and no wizard war, there was just a teacher who treated a very nice boy (and all his friends) like shit for 6 years because he didn't like the boy's father. Is that man evil? I tend to think he is, not Hitler level evil of course, but evil nevertheless. But now suppose that very same man had protected the life of that boy and put his life on the line and did everything possible to oppose someone who WAS Hitler level evil, and suppose he did it for 16 years. Now things become more complicated, a lot more complicated. I don't believe there is a simple yes or no answer to the question is Snape evil. If there was such a simple answer he wouldn't be such a fascinating literary creation. Eggplant From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 05:16:56 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:16:56 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A82E48.2090509@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172926 Lisa blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 08:42: > > I can't keep quiet any longer. Thanks, Lisa, for your views. Unfortunately, I think you've weakened your argument by concatinating together all the various opinions as if they were held by a single person. For example, I am one who DID feel HP's wanderings in the woods were overlong and dragged down the story. I have criticized JKR's writing (note: NOT JKR, just her writing) at several points; however, I wouldn't style my comments as "savaging", merely the legitimate opinions of one reader. I have also never read any of the fanfic (well, I did read most of one book a couple of years ago, that's all), nor am I a huge HP fan (just a casual reader). As a result, though I do hold several of the opinions you've challenged, I don't hold them for the reasons you've mentioned, and therefore I feel a bit abusd by finding myself lumped together with the alleged abusers of JKR, or lashers-out expressing their grief. > Lisa: > Recently, I've seen fanfic authors > berate her epilogue and other portions of the story (like the > battle in/around Hogwarts) for being "cliched" and "over-done" > because it had been done a bunch in various FANFICTIONS. CJE: I didn't specifically feel, on a first reading, that the epilogue was weak, though I understand the arguments of those who do, and feel they may have a point. I don't know if "cliched" is how I felt about the climactic battle, but I did find JKR's rather weak prose distracting as I read it, and NOT because I was grieving over the end of an era. I personally have found myself increasingly distracted by JKR's over-wordiness and clumsy style since at least Book 3. In the end, I found the Hogwart's battle satisfying on some levels, unsatisfying on others. > Lisa: > This is positively infuriating to me. I'm a fanfic writer, too, and > a lover of all things fanfic, but I think it behooves us all to > remember that these are her books, her characters and her stories > to tell how she wants. CJE: Agreed. I also agree that it's unfair to criticize HP7 on the basis that fanfic sometimes got there first. But as those are hardly MY reasons for my criticisms, I'm unable to find your counter-arguments compelling. > Lisa: > The travelling aimlessly through the forest was unnecessary? How > so? CJE: It may or may not have been "unnecessary". It WAS over-long and seriously dragged down the pacing of the story. If the point of the wanderings WAS, as you argue, to prepare Harry to some point emotionally or intellectually, then I'm afraid the problem is simply that that point could certainly have been made more clearly than it was. If, as some have argued, the point was to force Harry to choose between Horcrux and Hallow, I think that could easily have been clarified with, say, a one-paragraph flashback of Harry recalling Dumbledore's words about our choices defining us. If we're being asked to bear with many chapters of seemingly pointless wandering, it behooves the author to make sure we understand why, in the end. I saw no clear point to it. > Lisa: > As I say in the essay in my journal, I personally believe that JKR > left some things 'loose' to give us who do play in the > fanfic/fandom areas wiggle-room! CJE: Hmm, coming from a fanfic author, this argument strikes me as a bit self-serving. How many of JKR's hundreds of millions if readers worldwide are even aware of fanfic, let alone have ever read any of it. It doesn't seem plausible that JKR would leave her worldwide readership hanging on so many points just so the the tiny-by-comparison fanfic community has something to play with. > Lisa: > I think the lack of mention of Severus' body and such after > his death was *intentional* , and done *for us*. CJE: "Us" being the fanfic community. But what of us readers who are NOT part of your community? Are we to be left unsatisfied just for your sakes? > Lisa: > This was her story. To accuse her of being cliched because she has > been so wonderfully tolerant of all the fanfiction out there ... CJE: Well, from my point of view, I would say she was cliched simply because, at times, she was cliched. That's not necessarily a criticisms. Most authors are guilty of employing cliches; what's probably more important is whether they're employed WELL. > Lisa: > Is there any other series of books 'out there' which has inspired > such a broad variety of fan-groups? In short, yes. CJE Culver, Taiwan From xxshoeboxxx at aol.com Thu Jul 26 05:37:13 2007 From: xxshoeboxxx at aol.com (xxshoeboxxx at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:37:13 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Post-HP Depresssion/Indifference Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172927 Have you felt a feeling of indifference towards the story since you've finished? A second ago my friend just realized the significance of Snape asking to look into Harry's eyes before he died. Two days ago I would've been bursting at the seams with excitement but now I barely care. Is that weird? xxshoeboxxx From jmoshier at prodigy.net Thu Jul 26 05:40:53 2007 From: jmoshier at prodigy.net (Juanita Moshier) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:40:53 -0000 Subject: Why I liked the Epilogue - Return to Lighter Tone of First Book In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707252123u146cc42fn66ce83c098f955d3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172928 > Lynda: > > ...I think it gave a nice sense of closure to the series overall. I > would have liked to learn about characters who were not mentioned, > but it really was not a necessity. jmoshier: The Epilogue reminded me of the light-hearted tone of the first book, specifically, "The Journey from Platform Nine-and-Three Quarters" (Ch. 6). Both that chapter from the Philosopher's Stone/Sorcerer's Stone and the Epilogue from the Deathly Hallows are about children who are going to Hogwarts for the first time. In the first book, it was Harry. In the Epilogue, it was Albus, Harry's son. There are passages in the two chapters that echo each other. For example, a red-headed girl asked if she can go to Hogwarts. She was told by a parent that she is not yet old enough. (p. 92, Philospher's Stone, U.S. edition and p. 753, Deathly Hallows, U.S. edition) From ttyler9 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 05:57:10 2007 From: ttyler9 at yahoo.com (Theriot Tyler) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:57:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who came to magic late in life? Message-ID: <480840.25999.qm@web63714.mail.re1.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172929 > JW: > An interesting idea! Granny Longbottom is "late in life." > Julie: > SS p 125 US version: > "Well, my gran brought me up and she's a witch," said Neville" Also, remember McGonagall telling Neville that she'd mail Augusta, telling her that the fact that he failed her Charms OWL does not mean the subject is worthless. Only wizards and witches go to Hogwarts. Just ask little Petunia Evans... - Terry From lexac at mail.com Thu Jul 26 06:09:15 2007 From: lexac at mail.com (Lexa_C) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 06:09:15 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172930 > Alexa: > > I have to say the entire King's Cross chapter creeped me right out > > because of the way both Dumbledore and Harry ignored the writhing, > whimpering creature > > right there in the same room with them. It didn't speak well of > either of them, in my > > opinion. Valky: > Harry didn't ignore the creature, he did try to help. > The whimpering thing was Voldemort's soul in all the agony that he had > brought on himself through destroying it. While Harry was in that > white room what could he have done to repair the damage Voldemort had > done to himself? He could have given Tom Riddle's soul some idea of what it was like to be touched, even for a moment, by comforting, caring hands. Who knows the difference that could have made in the ultimate outcome of Voldemort's life? Probably none at that point, which is why I said it says more about Harry that he doesn't make the effort. Of course, if Tom Riddle had been touched by comforting, caring hands at any point in his life when he needed it, maybe more things would have turned out differently. -Alexa From k12listmomma at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 03:48:34 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:48:34 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Rose and Hugo was Re: The return to normalcy (Was: The (Hated) Epilogue) References: Message-ID: <004601c7cf37$d7e21f60$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 172931 > "justcarol67" > We >> see Harry and Ginny and Ron and Hermione as proud parents (the names >> Hugo and Rose seems to come out of nowhere, but the boy's name starts >> with his mother's first initial and the girl's with her father's). >> > > Potioncat: > It went something like this: > Ron named the daughter. He "said" he was naming her for his Aunty Rose, > but really it was for Rosmerta. > > Hermione named the son. She "said" it was for her favorite Muggle > author. She just didn't mention to Ron what Mr. Hugo's first name was. > ;-) And that is why I think it is possible that Victoire could be Ron and Hermione's- Ron would be able to tease Hermione that she got her "Vicky" after all. (Since it was Ron who called Victor Krum "Vicky") I could equally see her being French, a spitting image of her mom Fleur. I hope that is one of the questions that JKR answers Monday in her chat- who's child is Victoire anyway? Shelley From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 06:40:51 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 06:40:51 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunk_of_the_Marauders_-_Murder_by_Wolf?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172932 --- "Lisa" wrote: > > Lisa: > > I've never understood anyone's sentimentality toward > Sirius. If anyone deserved Snape's (and anyone else's) > contempt, it was Sirius. ... But what did he do, > when faced presented with the opportunity to harm > someone he found annoying? He attempted murder- > by-Lupin. .... bboyminn: Sorry, but I have never been able to understand this point of view. Though I do not wish to offend, I have always found this a somewhat hysterical reaction by over-enthusiastic fans. First, werewolves don't usually kill. They bite but they don't kill. Though I will admit that the 'trapped animal' aspect of Snape cornering Lupin in the Shrieking Shack come pretty close to the 'kill' scenario. Second, Snape is not some poor defenseless waif. He is armed-and-dangerous. Snape has his wand and he knows how to use it. He is a talented wizard well versed in the Dark Arts. If I'm afraid for anyone, it's Lupin. I think he was in far more danger than Snape, and I think Lupin has far more reason to be angry than Snape does. Once again, I point out that Snape went into the tunnel, and by extension, into the Shack of his own volition. He chose to go there against school rules and against the implied wishes of the Headmaster, and had to overcome clear and obvious safeguards in the process. Into a situation he couldn't possibly think was not dangerous. Next, we don't know what Sirius told Snape. While I have absolutely no way of knowing what Sirius said, I do know the nature of kids. It is possible that Sirius told Snape NOT to go to the tree and NOT to prod the knot, and to NOT enter the tunnel, because if he did, he would meet his death. Of course, he would say it this way because he would know it would goad Snape even more. In a sense, telling him not to go while telling him how to go, is like issuing a challenge. I dare you to go. If Snape was the innocent victim that people would like to paint him as, he would have been snug in his bed, not wandering around in a clearly forbidden area after hours. I mean, if you intentionally put your foot in a bear trap, you can hardly complain when it snaps shut. I'm sure Sirius intended to scare the pants off Snape, and make a fool of him. But I don't think he intended to kill him. However, Sirius was shortsighted enough that he never thought how this would affect Lupin in the worst case scenario. If Lupin wasn't kiled or injured, there was a high degree of probability that he would have had to injure someone (Snape) in order to protect himself. I don't think James rushed in to protect Snape, I think he stopped Snape in order to protect Lupin. Any protection Snape received was secondary to James' intent. I do agree that Sirius is very deserving of Snape's contempt. But I refuse to see Snape as an innocent victim. He is a very very guilty victim. If he was innocent, like I said, he would have spend that night snug in his bed minding his own business. I think Sirius was impulsive and short-sighted as many many 15 year olds are, and yes, very arrogant too. I think James was acting more to protect Lupin than Snape. The Life Debt from Snape was just an added bonus. I'm not absolving Sirius of his actions. He did a stupid and dangerous thing. But I am not absolving Snape either. He carries a huge portion of the blame for this incident, and I refuse to see him as an innocent victim of anything. Snape made a choice, and nearly paid dearly for that choice. Just my very strong opinion, which I posted many times before. Steve/bboyminn From dwalker696 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 06:12:52 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 06:12:52 -0000 Subject: Post-HP Depresssion/Indifference In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172933 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, xxshoeboxxx at ... wrote: > > Have you felt a feeling of indifference towards the story since > you've finished? > Donna answers: Hello, yes, I understand a great deal of what you are describing. For the last few months I have joked with friends and family, after Book 7 comes out I will have nothing left to live for, there will nothing left for me to read, etc. All completely said as a joke, mind you. But then when the Borders clerk handed me my book at 12:12, I actually burst into tears, quite unexpectedly. I was so embarrassed, I started laughing and babbling excuses, but this sensation of being very sad and nervous but elated all at once really took me surprise. When I got down to about 100 pages to go, the same feeling came over me, the ohmygosh the end is nearly here. When I finished the book Saturday evening, I was desperate to talk about it with someone, anyone. I couldn't wait to start re-reading it again. Then Tuesday came, and the HPFGU posts started, and I was devouring them, I thin in part to keep my DH "buzz" going. Then all of a sudden, this morning, I got online, opened the first HPFGU digest in my email box, read the post titles, and thought: good heavens, who cares? Why does this matter? Then, after feeling that emotional flatness in response to something that has always charged me up, I felt terribly guilty about feeling so apathetic about Harry et al. Be it a testament to JKR that I am having post-book LET DOWN. Just like Christmas let down! Or vacation let down! I have never had let down after a book before. But, I do not think this let down will last. And when I say let down, I do not mean I am left disappointed by the book by any means! I am talking about the emotional void that is left after something big and wonderful has been occupying our hours and days. But, already I can feel that apathy starting to slip away a wee bit...calling a relative of mine, a librarian and bibliophile who also loves Harry, and discussing the book, that helped - having a personal conversation with someone vs. reading stranger's posts on HPFGU, it got me a bit charged up again. Knowing JKR will be on the Today Show tomorrow (even if it is with Meredith Viera who I can't stand) has my interest peaked. I think, clearly Harry has a new place in my heart - instead of like a dark, mysterious man of intrigue, now that I know all the secrets he has a place in my heart more like a comfortable, familiar friend. I told my husband, it's not unlike our relationship - went from an exciting roller coaster ride with adventure around every turn, into a secure and familiar place to cozy up, and explore further depths of the relationship. I know I will reread Harry again, and find more things to think about and wonder about. Don't be so certain you will feel this way forever. It really almost is like grieving, a loss. I know for me, it was such an emotionally intense experience, ran the gamut of everything from shock to joy to horror to painful sadness to beauty- it's like I used all my emotions up, and I need to recharge them. Plenty of people get depressed after Christmas, but that doesn't mean they don't get excited and happy for Christmas the next time it turns up, and I suspect the next time I go in to my daughter's room to listen to her still plugging away at DH I will regain my zest for it again. The fact that you do feel so down about it being over is proof of, conversely, how much positive emotion you felt about it before. And, I too, have always convinced of Snape's true convictions. My children's friends are always asking me who my favorite characters are, and when I tell them Hermione and Snape, they are horrified. Snape isn't always nice, I tell them, but he is a GREAT CHARACTER. Nice doesn't always necessarily mean right, and mean doesn't always mean wrong. I had suspected since Book 1 that Sev would die for Harry's cause, but I still "miss him". Sincerely hoping you feel more cheerful soon- Donna From doliesl at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 06:42:42 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 23:42:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Snape/Lily love or obsession Message-ID: <901152.5490.qm@web82205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172934 >Wolf wrote: It is a fine line between love and obsession. tracygee: As others have commented, Snape certainly showed a lot of obsessive qualities in his "love" for Lily. I think the important part, though, is that he did "love" her as best he could. Rowling several times points out in the books that what makes Voldermort truly evil is his inability to love. He can't possess Harry because he can't stand the feeling of love. Snape--for all his faults, and there are plenty of them--is at least able to feel some type of love for Lily. His family background was not full of loving parents, a stable home life, lots of friends and positive role models. He's an outcast--unloved by his parents or any friends. Lily, from what we see, is the only female who gives him any type of positive attention. He grew up with her and grew to care for her, even though he had no idea how to express these feelings. I believe his ability to love Lily is what changes him completely. Were it not for her, he certainly would have been a Death Eater 100% behind Voldermort until the end. With her death, and the guilt this brought to Snape, he is saved. Dumbledore gives Snape a way to make Lily's death mean something. Help us defeat Voldermort; help us keep Harry safe. His love was not the stuff Harlequin romances are made of. Snape's love is not romantic, brave or normal in a lot of ways. It was--yes--obsessive, unrequited and jealous at times. Unrequited love is not fun. It soured him in a lot of ways. In the end, though, it was faithful and strong enough to help him turn from his evil ways. Back to lurkdom. D: I agree. I don't understand why some people must insist it being either obsession or love, as if there cannot be anty obsessiveness in love, nor any love in obsession, as if power of love can only have one ' why can't it be an obsessive love? Isn't there a quote from HBP by Slughorn (no book with me, so can't look up page no. nor exact quote) about the how immensely powerful obsessive love can be. When I read that back then I was aware that as a possible clue to Lollipop. No one is really delusion in comparing Snape's love as some ideal perfect fluffy love. I think some people mention the allusion to literary archetype like Heathcliff, instead it's a redemptive force for Snape, not destructive one like Heathcliff. D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From janetberres at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 26 06:37:31 2007 From: janetberres at sbcglobal.net (Janet Berres) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 06:37:31 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172935 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo R" wrote: > > Someone posted that JKR was having a live web chat on 30th July. What > would you want to ask her, given the opportunity? > I would want to know about Dumbledore's scar on his knee that was supposed to look like a map of the London Underground. JK in an early interview said she would tell more about it (or that it would be important later in the series). Or does it have to do with the last scene at King's Crossing? Inquiring minds want to know... Janet P.S. This is my first post :-) From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 07:56:21 2007 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:56:21 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Epilogue Bashing Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172936 There is so much bashing of the epilogue going on that I am posting this excerpt from Cheryl Klein's (editor at Scholastic) blog about Deathly Hallows. And this leads me to the epilogue. It is not receiving much love, I see?some people hate it because it doesn?t answer all their questions, some people hate it because it gives answers they don?t want, and some people just find it cheesy. I think it paid off five essential themes of the series (not just the book): 1. Family. At the beginning of this series, who was Harry? A boy without a family, orphaned, friendless, belonging to no community, unhappy in the family he did live with, who gave him no love. At the end, he not only has a wife and children who love him (and whom he loves), he has a godson, many brothers-in-brothers-in-law, all their wives and children, and the accept wizarding community. 2. Maturity. Harry?s son?s name signifies that Harry has come to recognize Snape?s sacrifice and supreme courage (?Sometimes I think we sort too soon?), and to value those virtues over the pettiness with which Snape treated him at Hogwarts. Such a judgment is the mark of a intelligent, thoughtful, and empathetic adult, so it shows us that Harry has grown up and become wise. 3. Fame. We see that Harry is happy being simply a father like the other fathers, and when all the kids on the train are gawking at him, he (and Ron) accept it matter-of-factly, rather than displaying the awkwardness that? s stalked him since his first visit to the Hogwarts Express in Book 1. 4. Choice. He tells Albus essentially what Dumbledore told him in Book 2 -- ?It is our choices, far more than our abilities, that show who we truly are? -- carrying that wisdom into the next generation. 5. Power, or Where Real Happiness Comes From. Repeating a bit things I? ve said above . . . The epilogue is resolutely domestic, with kids squabbling and dads talking about parking?it?s a scene straight out of typical middle-class family life, plus wands. As far as we know from it, Harry is not powerful, he is not super-important, he does not wield any significant power. He is just a dad who loves his family. This, I think, may be part of the reason why people dislike the epilogue so much?the Chosen, special one, the Boy Who Lived, the one we?ve identified with all this time, has become just a regular guy, which means (by fictional standards especially) that frankly his life is a little boring. But J. K. Rowling is showing us clearly that he?s finding his happiness in everyday love and domestic life rather than big fantasy heroism ?he is a Jane Austen and not a World of Warcraft hero in the end. And that is a kind of happy ending we can all aspire to: ?All was well.? Sandy ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From anujaasathe at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 07:56:09 2007 From: anujaasathe at gmail.com (Anuja Sathe) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:26:09 +0530 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? Message-ID: <56fd16320707260056m41118ebcn527cb5a69ca0656b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172937 I dont get why Dumbledore wanted Harry to find the hallows.Was it so that Harry would be the master of death which would give him a chance to survive despite being a horcrux?? or was it just to tell him that Voldemort would be looking for the Elder wand and to try to stop him? Anuja From pamela at wayswriter.com Thu Jul 26 07:58:46 2007 From: pamela at wayswriter.com (Pamela Kock) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:58:46 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: House Elves In-Reply-To: <46A7FC97.2030205@telus.net> References: <46A7FC97.2030205@telus.net> Message-ID: <46A85436.1050406@wayswriter.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172938 Kathryn Jones wrote: > KJ writes: > > I have a question about house-elves. We are told that their magic is > different and that it can be quite powerful > as when Dobby blasted Malfoy. Why then would they defend Hogwarts from > Deatheaters with frying pans and kitchen > implements? > > KJ > > > My take on the house elves is that the elves are very powerful with their magic, but also extremely naive. They clearly have enough power, if they'd direct it properly, to kick the witches & wizards' butts instead of allowing themselves to be enslaved! But for some reason, their psyches haven't matured along with those powers so they can put two and two together and realize how to use them for their own benefit. Whenever one of them does a big magical job, his attitude is "Of course I can do this," even though he'd never thought to do it before! So I suppose the elves wouldn't think to use their magic, they'd use implements that were familiar to them. Pam From bamf505 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 08:18:06 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: About Potterwatch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <992032.50955.qm@web31507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172939 --- Meliss9900 at aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 7/24/2007 7:42:18 P.M. Central > Daylight Time, > Aisbelmon at hotmail.com writes: > > Metylda wrote: > > > > So, my curiosity is to why all the members of the > > radio show Potterwatch had 'R' code names? River, > > Royal, Romulus, and Rapier/Rodent. > > > > I think it was more like those pseudonyms fit their > real names > > River : Lee Jordan . .the River Jordan > Royal: KINGsley > Romulus: Remus (the twins raised by wolves) > Rodent: Weasel. > > Melissa > bamf: That would work, save for one thing. Weasels are not rodents. They are mustelids. (Sorry, ferret owner for a number of years. Musetlids include weasels, skunks, ferrets, polecats, badgers and wolverines and tend to eat rodents. Rodents include rats and mice.) And it also does not answer why Ron was exclaiming over who they were (other than for reader benefit). I think Valky's on to something... bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Jul 26 08:23:20 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:23:20 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172940 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, OctobersChild48 at ... wrote: > There is so much bashing of the epilogue going on that I am posting this > excerpt from Cheryl Klein's (editor at Scholastic) blog about Deathly Hallows. > > And this leads me to the epilogue. It is not receiving much love, I see some > people hate it because it doesn't answer all their questions, some people > hate it because it gives answers they don't want, and some people just find > it cheesy. I think it paid off five essential themes of the series (not just > the > book): Geoff: I see the arguments behind this reply but what really annoys me about the epilogue is that it is skimpy. I made reference to Tolkien's ROTK recently. In Appendix B "The Tale of Years" , he spends some time at the end detaling what happened in the years following the fall of Sauron by mainly outlining briefly what the main characters did. It is not long or over-detailed but tells us whether so-and-so got married, how many children they had, maybe a brief comment on what they did as one example Sam became the Mayor of the Shire for several terms) and when they died. It amounts to no more than a couple of pages but ties up a whole heap of loose ends. This doesn't happen in DH. What has happened to the Hogwarts staff? Has George married? What about Dean or Seamus or Hagrid? And who did Draco marry - what has he been doing over this time? And all the rest.... We have invested huge amounts of time in following the adventures of our friends through seven years and are left scratching our heads - except for one family. Was it worth having an epilogue or should it have been left to us to speculate? I suppose fanfic will have a go at filling the gaps but the epilogue currently leaves me feeling as if I had been invited out to lunch and only given a ham sandwich. :-) From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 08:23:58 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:23:58 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Rose and Hugo was Re: The return to normalcy (Was: The (H... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172941 In a message dated 7/26/2007 1:26:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time, k12listmomma at comcast.net writes: And that is why I think it is possible that Victoire could be Ron and Hermione's- Ron would be able to tease Hermione that she got her "Vicky" after all. (Since it was Ron who called Victor Krum "Vicky") I really think that Victoire is Bill and Fleur's. The French spelling is one reason and I think that Hermione would have had to have stunned Ron to keep him from breaking up that snogging session. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leahstill at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 08:40:54 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:40:54 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172943 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, OctobersChild48 at ... wrote: > > There is so much bashing of the epilogue going on that I am posting this > excerpt from Cheryl Klein's (editor at Scholastic) blog about Deathly Hallows. > > > And this leads me to the epilogue. It is not receiving much love, I see??"some > people hate it because it doesn???t answer all their questions, Leah: Yes, this was one of the reasons I disliked it. Apparently there may be an encylopedia so perhaps information was deliberately concentrated. But I felt short-changed. If the book had ended with no epilogue, I wouldn't have minded so much, but if there's going ot be one, let it be more of an overview. As Geoff points out, Tolkien did it in a very few pages. Eliot did it brilliantly in 'Middlemarch' in only a few pages.. In the end, I got the impression that there were only a few people who really mattered in the Potterverse. (snip) I think it paid off five essential themes of the series (not just > the > book): Leah: I have no problems with what is said about Family, Maturity, Fame and Power. I have no problem with Harry not being a huge hero figure. Choice is where I get really hung up on the epilogue. I don't want to repeat what I've posted a few times but we just do not deal with the House problem, with the Slytherin problem; you still don't choose to go into Slytherin, so why is it still there? Then there is social justice, which is raised throughout the series, but is not dealt with adequately. And finally. The epilogue is in my opinion, one of the most badly written parts of the entire seven books. JKR can do famuly scenes brilliantly, this one (apart from the Severus moment) was just banal. Leah From bamf505 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 08:44:56 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <288386.36745.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172944 --- OctobersChild48 at aol.com wrote: > There is so much bashing of the epilogue going on > that I am posting this > excerpt from Cheryl Klein's (editor at Scholastic) > blog about Deathly Hallows. > > bamf, answering a lot of posts bout the epilogue: I don't care what an editor says we should take from the epilogue. I've had teachers try to tell me that Eve was subservient to Adam before the fall in Paradise Lost. I disagree. What I took from the Epilogue was nothing other than something so divorced from what we had just read it killed the book for me. It wasn't serving coconut pie at the end of a fabulous feast. It was serving fillet mignon in a delicate wild mushroom reserve with asparagus tips on the side and them for dessert, it was having a bag of candy corn thrown at you from across the room. The two things just don't go together. I am not a shipper. I have never cared who Harry ended up with and would have been more pleased if he had ended up alone, raising Teddy himself. (Why does he need a job? He inherited two substantial fortunes!) We learn nothing in the epilogue that we didn't learn in the book, with the exception of the names of their brats. I would rather have read about the few weeks following the events. I wanted to know how George coped with the loss of his brother - his twin - the person that's always been there for him his whole life. I wanted to know if Lavender survived. I want to know how things changed at the ministry and if Umbridge ever got her comeuppance. To me, the epilogue paints a false picture. Sure, eventually you get to a place where you can move on and be happy, but the epilogue misses out on the fact that it isn't easy. It won't be easy to mourn those who have fallen, no matter how valiant their deaths. I would rather have ended with a dedication at Hogwarts to those that fought, with the scene ending as Fleur states she's pregnant. To me, that shows that life continues, even amid the tragedy. That after the dust settles, the next generation will be born. I'm allowed to complain about feeling let down. As a fan, it's my job. *putting several knuts down, as I spoke more than to coppers...* bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________ Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz From maccanena at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 09:00:06 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:00:06 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1f40e2480707260200x653be8cfh49ee20818d957ddd@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172945 On 7/26/07, Kim wrote: > > Even if Lupin and Tonks knew that their child would have a good life > without them because he'd have his grandmother, godfather, and friends, why > would they choose to let someone else raise him? This is the opposite of > what Harry's parents did. In fact, Harry was > specifically protected by the sacrifice that Lily made. It seemed more like > Tonks was sacrificing more for "the cause" than for Teddy. I am sorry, but I have to say I don't like this comparison between Lupin and Tonks and James and Lily regarding what they give priority to, the cause or their child. James and Lily stayed home protecting their child because it was the child of the prophecy and Voldemort was looking for him to kill him specifically. By doing that, by protecting Harry, they were fighting for the cause. If Harry had been a normal baby and James and Lily had been simply members of the Order fighting Voldemort, they would have probably done the same as Lupin and Tonks, that is, leave their son with a grandparent or some other custodian while they go fight to provide a better world for their son. Maria From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 09:36:42 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:36:42 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172946 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Keith" wrote: > > > alison: > > > the relationship between Ron and Hermione was established early on, it was about the only 'given' in the whole series. Harry and Ginny where also a given from the start. > > > > > > sandra: > > You're right, they were all "a given" right at the start or at least very early on ... but my point is that there's no tenderness shown between any of them. I can't think of any warm moments between R and H, no stumbled honest expressions of their feelings, no first time they held hands (or were seen to hold hands) and generally it's just one bickering session agter another through all seven books. ... I felt nothing even though the characters were individually likeable That's why I feel JKR isn't a romantic writer at all. > > Lurker here. > > I can give two good reasons you didn't see the relationship develop anything like you wished: > #1: People are different. Some couples have a lot in common, some are an "opposites attract" type. R and H are both very closed-book, and VERY stubborn. > > #2: JK Rowling is trying to get you (the reader) to be frustrated by R and H's lack of action. It is a ham-fisted audience manipulator, as much as the cliff hanger in the last 2 minutes of every episode of 24. > > -Keith > Hello lurking Keith! I see your point about JKR holding it all back, but of all the friends I've ever known, there is a noticeably different way in which two people look at each other when the heart strings start playing, and the way they speak about (and to) each other as well. If Ron was insecure, which I've seen in those I care about, and I might have been like it myself, but there comes a point where nature takes over - what better way to let the world know there's a degree of attraction by holding hands? Or how about conversations between Ron and Harry where Ron would unintentionally mention her name too often, or say that the two of them had been to places without Harry? None of that happened, so even though I see your point, I put it down to the fact that JKR would run a thousand miles away from wtiting anything romantic or subtle, but is more than happy to hand out vile torture scenes, deaths, fights and arguments. I read far too many shouting matches, too much bickering, too much impatience, and no normal, pleasant, heartfelt stages of a relationship. I think that's probably down to JKR's understanding of such things, maybe? But whether it is or it isn't, the whole R&H, H&G dynamics left me colder than my fridge (which needs fixing and defrosting). Sandra. From maccanena at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 09:59:57 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:59:57 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: References: <32768569.1185372773201.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1f40e2480707260259w13c70473kf854775b32e8e90c@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172947 Kit wrote: > > > > > Bart: > > 1) Where was it ever established that James' Patronus was a stag? > > I wondered why this point wasn't being raised! I don't believe it ever > has been explicitly established. We know James's animagus was a stag, > obviously, and we know McGonagall has a patronus which matches her > animagus form, so there's some support for the idea. But if one's > patronus changes, does the animagus form change? And then if James's > was a stag, that would mean Harry simply inherited James's > patronus...yet every one is supposed to be unique.... > > > 2) I suspect that Lily's patronus WAS a doe, in that she was in love > with an animagus stag. > > But what was Lily's patronus before she fell in love? Of, if Lily > always had a doe patronus -- did James then change his own to become a > stag? (Or did each just happen to have a patronus of "matching" > species -- who knows, maybe that hints at why they were so > compatible.) If all these patronuses are changing left and right > (Tonks, Snape, possibly Lily or James), it does seem as though > reliable confidential communication could be impaired. > Now Maria: I find this whole patronus business very interesting, and this is what I think about them: To start, we are told by Lupin that the Patronus charm is incredibly difficult and way beyond Harry's age when he learns it, and even some of the older DA members do not know it, so we can safely assume that it is some magic one learns either for NEWT DADA level or even afterwards. So by the time Lily learned how to produce a patronus, probably in her seventh year, she was already close to James. Therefore, her patronus didn't have to change at all. It probably was a doe from the start. We are also told that the witch or wizzard does not choose the form the patronus takes, but it does take the shape of a favorite or significant animal in the person's life. So it makes sense that Harry's patronus is his father's animagus (even though at the time he didn't know it), that Lily's is the partner of the stag as well, and that Snape's was Lily's. We can't extract that James's was a stag just because his animagus was, but it could be. I am trying to remember how much choice one had in the animal one tranform into when becoming an animagus. There is some degree of choice, I am quite sure, as I recall Sirius or Lupin saying that Sirius and James transformed into big animals and could keep Lupin under control. Maybe someone can remind us about this detail. But independently of whether James choose to be a stag animagus or he simply became one, we can't assume the shape of his patronus. But it is a good starting guess. It would be interesting to find out whether he became an animagus before he learned how to produce a patronus charm (as they became animagus in their fifth year, and based on what I said earlier about the age at which usually the patronus charm is learnt), or the other way around (we hear that James and Sirius were brilliant students, so they might have learned the patronus ahead of everyone else, the same way they became animagi independently). And the patronus can be unique even though it is not the only one from its species. I have had several dogs of the same breed and each was distinct and recognizable, unique. Mmmm, there was more about patronuses inside me that I expected! Maria, who should be working on her CV rather than writing these posts, but couldn't resist From dougsamu at golden.net Thu Jul 26 10:15:24 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 06:15:24 -0400 Subject: Wands that do their own spells Message-ID: <9F80B81C-7BD0-493A-ABD5-440C3F319AB2@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 172948 casmir2012: Was it ever explained how Harry's wand started sending off spells on it's own during his encounter with Voldemort doug: I chalked it up to the VoldySoul acting in self-defense. ___ __ From dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 10:35:00 2007 From: dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk (Tim Regan) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:35:00 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why didn't the order assume Snape would side-apparate Death Eaters to Grimmauld Place? Message-ID: <003501c7cf70$aea45300$0becf900$@co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 172949 Hi All, I quoted Dung: >>> If Hermione was able to (effectively) side-along apparate Yaxley to Grimmauld Place, into the Fidelius Charm, why couldn't Snape side-along with a gang of DEs? Apparition doesn't require speaking, so the tongue-tying hex wouldn't have stopped him <<< AggiePaddy replied: >>> I understood it to mean that Snape COULD (and DOES) get into Grimmauld Place, he just can't tell the DEs about it! He's in there getting the letter from Sirius's room. <<< And AggiePaddy replied again: >>> Just re-read this and now understand what you mean!! I assumed that Snape just didn't tell them about the tongue-tie curse and said there was some other curse on it which prohibited his telling. He wouldn't have been wanting to tell them and they wouldn't know any different! They only knew what Snape wanted them to know! <<< I think the problem with analysing this inconsistency is that people tend to do it from Snape's perspective, but from there it is not inconsistent. Snape is good. He does not want to take Death Eaters to Grimmauld Place. If they ask him to take them there Snape can invent a reason why he cannot, the tongue-tying curse may help him in that invention but he is a clever man, good at Occlumency, and Voldemort's right-hand-man (literally) so I doubt Snape would have much trouble putting the other Death Eaters, or even Voldemort himself, off. No, the trouble comes if you look at it from the perspective of an Order member. Let's imagine you are Arthur Weasley. Once you have finished celebrating your reprieve from death I want you to cast your mind back to the time just after Dumbledore died. I know it is painful but bear with me. One problem you face is that Snape has shown his colours. He has killed Dumbledore and escaped with the other Death Eaters. How are you going to secure Grimmauld Place? Are you going to secure Grimmauld Place? Hermione believes you decided to secure it, she says "Ron's dad said they've put up jinxes against him" (DH chapter 9). But how do you imagine that the jinxes you used, the tongue-tying curse and the others, prevent Snape from side-apparating a host of Death Eaters to Grimmauld Place? There seem to be two choices you have here. On the one hand, you may have thought that the curses were enough to keep Snape away from even the front step and thus to prevent him side-apparating there with other Death Eaters. Well you were wrong there - Snape did get in. On the other hand, you may have known that Snape would be able to enter, and thus that he could bring the Death Eaters to the doorstep with him. But at least you would know he suffered inconvenience and ignominy in the attempt because of your jinxes. But in this latter option how would you react if you found that the trio were using Grimmauld Place as a hideout? You would have to send them a warning that they were in no sense safe. You would have to warn them that Voldemort and an army of Death Eaters may side-apparate to the front doorstep at any moment. But you don't have much time. You are under threat too. All you can manage is a fourteen syllable Patronus message to the trio. That is enough though, you could say "House insecure, get out, family safe, do not reply". But instead you send a Patronus message saying "Family safe, do not reply, we are being watched". Why? Cheers, Dumbledad. ___________________________________________________________ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From maccanena at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 10:44:18 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:44:18 +0100 Subject: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo, and the connection with Voldemort's mind Message-ID: <1f40e2480707260344y1446ceb5w1b4b1894e1ea7d09@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172950 I am enjoying immensely reading all the messages in this list, seeing things I had missed, understanding questions that had puzzled me, and reading the general analysis. There are a few points that I haven't seen discussed yet and that I have been thinking about: - The letter from Lily to Sirius: it was incredibly moving, I knew Harry was crying and he had to re-read it a million times, each one with a different bit of info extracted from it. However, one that is not mentioned and got to my heart at the first reading is the comment Lily makes about James growing restless trapped inside the house. I could feel so much for Sirius, trapped in Grimmauld place during Order of the Phoenix, and how often he would lock himself in his room, now I imagine him reading this letter, looking at his photo of the Marauders on the wall, and getting some comfort that his best friend, even though dead, understands his feelings. - A lot of people have complained about the book dragging a bit during the camping months. And honestly, I don't disagree. But I see a purpose in making those chapters drag as they did. If we are frustrated and feel bored reading a few pages... how must have our trio felt during those months! I think it has the right pace to make us understand a little bit what the main characters are feeling. And even then, we will never get close to fully grasping how long, frustrating, desperate, those months were for Harry, Ron and Hermione. Put the locket on top of that, and the hunger... just imagine that. - Rose and Hugo: these normal names really caught my attention too. But then it made me think about the Grangers. We know they are renamed Wendell and Monica, but we have never heard their real first names, right? Hermione may have wanted to name their kids after them, as a tribute for all their suffering as a consequence of their daughter being a witch. But most specially she may have done so if she hadn't been able to find them again in Australia, which I hope was not the case, but it is a possibility. - One last thought, perhaps more complicated than the ones above. Regarding the connection between Harry and Voldemort, by which Harry could see into Voldemort's mind, I am starting to think that this was a one way connection only. Let me explain myself: Harry sees the stuff that Voldemort is doing, thinking, feeling, etc, and the point of his learning Occlumency is that he will stop seeing it, so that Voldemort cannot pretend he is doing something different and thus lure Harry into a trap. However, we have no indication that Voldemort can see/feel/know what Harry is doing, regardless of him being such a good Legilimens. I am talking at a distance, not in person. I am talking of the long-distance connection between them. I don't know if this has been discussed before, I haven't been around the list in a while. But going back to the main point and what I think is an addition from the latest book canon. If Occlumency is supposed to protect from Legilimency, then there was no point in Harry using it, because Voldemort was not reading Harry, it was the other way around. And now we learn (officially, I know many suspected this) that Harry is a Horcrux and therefore has a bit of Voldemort in him. So, the connection between them is not a two way connection, but only one way (Harry reading Voldemort) because Harry has a bit of Voldemort soul, but Voldemort does not have any of Harry's soul (I don't think the blood counts, blood is physical and therefore I can understand that it would keep Harry physically alive when he sacrifices himself, but its not soul). Does this make sense? Anyway, this post is getting long and there is much to discuss. I still have some of my email allowance, so if i think of somehing else I will post again later. Maria From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Jul 26 10:53:29 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:53:29 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172951 > Joe wrote: > > > Senseless Deaths - This is war, alas, and people (owls & elves > > included) die. They die for being in the wrong place at the wrong > > time. They die regardless of who loved them, or what they stood > for. > > Now, the death of the Muggle Studies teacher struck me as WILDLY > > inelegant. It reminded me of those Star Trek episodes when a > > character you'd never seen before schleps down to Planet Zork with > > Kirk, Bones and Spock...you just KNOW that guy's dead before the > > third commercial break. > > va32h here: > Charity "Red Shirt" Burbage, eh? Yes, I agree - to have the last book > open with the death of a character we've never actually heard of > before...that's pretty weak. And again - so very easily fixable, as > Hermione took Muggle Studies and the teacher's name could have been > inserted any time from PoA on. And if Charity's death was a new idea > that hadn't been in the Big Outline, well then JKR should have chosen > another teacher, whose name we did know. Professor Vector, the > Arithmancy witch or Professor Sinestra, the Astronomy teacher. Seeing > as Voldemort spent all of OoTP obsessing over the prophecy, I would > think Sybill Trelawney would be the Hogwarts teacher he would most > want to capture and interrogate. Hickengruendler: No, it had to be the Muggle studies teacher. Maybe JKR could have mentioned the name earlier, but it still had to be her, and not Trelawney or Sinistra. Because there's a dark irony, that the two Death Eaters in Deathly Hallows were teaching Muggle studies and DADA, the two subjects who are directly related to fighting Voldemort/ tolerating and accepting other cultures. If they were teaching Divination and Astronomy, it would have been much less significant. From CariadMel at aol.com Thu Jul 26 11:03:54 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (CariadMel at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 07:03:54 EDT Subject: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172952 Maria wrote : ... Snip... Rose and Hugo: these normal names really caught my attention too. But then it made me think about the Grangers. We know they are renamed Wendell and Monica, but we have never heard their real first names, right? Hermione may have wanted to name their kids after them, as a tribute for all their suffering as a consequence of their daughter being a witch. But most specially she may have done so if she hadn't been able to find them again in Australia, which I hope was not the case, but it is a possibility.... snip Cariad now: Can't remember who suggested it but it was a super idea, Hugo was named for Hermione's fav Muggle writer, Victor Hugo. Except she omitted his first name as Ron would not have appreciated it! Not canon but a great theory! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From CariadMel at aol.com Thu Jul 26 11:12:06 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:12:06 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172953 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, OctobersChild48@ wrote: > > > There is so much bashing of the epilogue going on that I am posting this > > excerpt from Cheryl Klein's (editor at Scholastic) blog about Deathly Hallows. > > > > And this leads me to the epilogue. It is not receiving much love, I see some > > people hate it because it doesn't answer all their questions, some people > > hate it because it gives answers they don't want, and some people just find > > it cheesy. I think it paid off five essential themes of the series (not just > > the > > book): > > > > Geoff: > I see the arguments behind this reply but what really annoys me about > the epilogue is that it is skimpy. > > I made reference to Tolkien's ROTK recently. In Appendix B "The Tale of > Years" , he spends some time at the end detaling what happened in the > years following the fall of Sauron by mainly outlining briefly what the > main characters did. It is not long or over-detailed but tells us whether > so-and-so got married, how many children they had, maybe a brief > comment on what they did as one example Sam became the Mayor of > the Shire for several terms) and when they died. It amounts to no more > than a couple of pages but ties up a whole heap of loose ends. > > This doesn't happen in DH. What has happened to the Hogwarts staff? > Has George married? What about Dean or Seamus or Hagrid? And who > did Draco marry - what has he been doing over this time? And all the > rest.... > > We have invested huge amounts of time in following the adventures of > our friends through seven years and are left scratching our heads - > except for one family. Was it worth having an epilogue or should it > have been left to us to speculate? > > I suppose fanfic will have a go at filling the gaps but the epilogue > currently leaves me feeling as if I had been invited out to lunch and > only given a ham sandwich. > :-) > ************** with you here Geoff. should have been another chapter set in Hogwarts putting things straight. This glimpse into the future is pure fan fic which is great if thats your bag but not as a way to end the series. I think JKR was influenced too heavily by 'shippers'who wanted proof positive that the schoolday romances would go all the way. Cariad, impatiently awaiting the encyclopaedia. From darksworld at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 11:11:57 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:11:57 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172954 I have read multiple posts with people upset that the good guys were casting unforgivables. Well, let us analyze this just a little bit. Who named the unforgivables? The ministry. These are the folks who have committed the vast majority of the wrongs in the wizarding world for many years. Are they nice spells? No. Should there be a mandatory life sentence for their use? Probably not. I think that anyone who thinks that Harry and the folks on his side should stick to ministry regulations better take a look at what that ministry made possible. Anyone complaining about the use of "unforgivables" by the good side needs to think about the other laws of the wizarding world that the good side broke. Hmmm....Hermione existed. Ted Tonks existed. Remus Lupin existed. Harry Potter stayed free. My point is that legality and morality are two different things. The unforgivables are called that because of legality, not morality. I think JKR must just have been too damn subtle on that point. I got it clear back in GOF. Hidden in the subtext of GOF is the fact that legality and morality are often at odds with each other, and that it is often difficult to discern which one is which. OOTP showed clearly that legality must sometimes be tossed completely out the window for morality's sake. (Hence my refusal to ever forgive Hermione for her use of the term "Ministry approved" in HBP.)By the time Harry casts the first UC in DH we know that laws are pointless at this point. The situation is not one where laws and niceties can be observed, it is one of survival. Harry doesn't sit and torture people with the cruciatus curse, he uses it, rather effectively, to neutralize an attacker. Overkill, maybe, but not unforgivable by a longshot. His uses of the imperius curse in Gringott's are not for personal gain or nefarious purposes. Hell, he doesn't want a damn thing but to get the horcrux so that he can defeat the guy causing so much death and destruction in the world. And people are going to attack over a goblin and a death eater being forced to comply for a few minutes? I'm sorry, but it seems that those people are the type that believe Rita Skeeter's stuff over everything else in the books. Charles, who hates the Ministry and their sodding laws. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Jul 26 11:16:33 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:16:33 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172955 > zgirnius: > Dark, but I offer: > > "Would you like me to do it now? Or would you like a few moments to > compose an epitaph?" Potioncat: Me too. I actually had a "He didn't just say that!?" moment and had to re-read it. But the first funny line that had me setting the book down to laugh was, "Fred and George turned to each other and said together, 'Wow---we're identical!'" It got funnier when my youngest, a fellow fan eagerly asked what was so funny and I said, "George and Fred just noticed they were identical." He looked at me with a doubting look and asked, "You mean, after all this time, they didn't know?" From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Jul 26 11:37:33 2007 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (vivamus42) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:37:33 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: <32768569.1185372773201.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172956 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > From: Debbie Grosskopf > >Isn't the Patronus supposed to be a unique creation for > >everyone? How can Snape and Lily have had the same Patronus? > >Isn't is supposed to be so unique that it is a secure form of > >messenger? > > Bart: > I've been trying to keep my posts to a minimum (and I'm waiting until after the flood to start looking at series-long discussions, such as Unforgivable Curses, Snape's personality, and Harry as a Horcrux) but here are a few things: > > 1) Where was it ever established that James' Patronus was a stag? > 2) I suspect that Lily's patronus WAS a doe, in that she was in love with an animagus stag. > 3) As I've stated before, the moment that I saw the doe Patronus, the very first thing I thought of was "Snape!" I was dead certain that was Snape's Patronus, yet as near as I can tell, there was nothing in the canon to explain this. Can anybody here think of where I might have gotten the idea? > 4) Be that as it may, it is clear that Snape associated the doe with Lily. > > Bart Vivamus: I don't think James' Patronus ever was described. I would agree with others that the doe is JKR's way of showing that James & Lily were a natural match. The doe also is one of the most graceful, beautiful, and inoffensive creatures in the forest (unless they come out of the forest to eat your flowers!) and so I think it also is meant to reflect Lily's character. Patronuses seem to be reflections of the person's character, but I don't think they have to be unique. You cannot choose your patronus, and your patronus does not change, unless your heart and nature undergoes a change (such as with Snape and Tonks, both of which happened because of love motivated grief.) For that reason, one person could not imitate another's patronus, but there might well be two persons with the same kind of patronus. A doe and a stag are, after all, just different genders of the same animal. Vivamus From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 12:00:28 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:00:28 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172957 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo R" wrote: > > > > Someone posted that JKR was having a live web chat on 30th July. What would you want to ask her, given the opportunity? > > Dungrollin: Argh... where to start? 1. Why did you tell Emerson and Melissa that Grindelwald was dead? 2. Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters? 3. What was Wormtail doing at Snape's house at the beginning of Half- Blood Prince? 4. Did Hermione ever lift the sneak hex from Marietta? 5. Which teacher was married and why did you claim it was plot- sensitive? 6. Why did you write in Quidditch Through the Ages that no wizards can fly without brooms unless their animagus form can fly? 7. How did McGonagall, Ron, Hermione, Hagrid and the Order react to the news that Snape wasn't a traitor after all? 8. Was it Harry's sacrifice (willingness to die) which made him able to block Voldemort's AK with an Expelliarmus, or was it the fact that he was the master of the Elder Wand? 9. What happened to Lucius and Narcissa and Umbridge? 10. At what stage in the series did you come up with the idea of the Deathly Hallows and the master of the Elder wand? 11. Harry can't be an auror, because he can't risk anybody else becoming the master of the Elder wand, so what was his job after Hogwarts? 12. What happened to the Defence Against the Dark Arts curse? 13. Why didn't it occur to Tom Riddle that other students must have found the Room of Requirement if it was full of their hidden possessions? 14. If DD planned to be the last master of the Elder Wand, why did he leave clues for Harry to unite the Deathly Hallows? 15. In the Hospital Wing at the end of Half-Blood Prince, why didn't it occur to Lupin or McGonagall that Snape might have repented over the death of Lily? Surely they were aware, like Lily's friends, that they'd been friends at Hogwarts? I'll think of more, I'm sure. Dungrollin From jenlundq at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 11:55:01 2007 From: jenlundq at hotmail.com (pwrmom2) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:55:01 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172958 Charlie: > I'm sorry, > but it seems that those people are the type that believe Rita > Skeeter's stuff over everything else in the books. > > Charles, who hates the Ministry and their sodding laws. > Pwrmom2: I agree with Charles, there is a difference between using the unforgivables for good and evil. Sadly this was a state of war for them. there have been so many posts I haven't been able to read them all so forgive me if I'm repeating something already said. Think of murder. Against the law in most if not all countries, yet all of these countries have exceptions when it comes to war. It comes to a point where it is kill or be killed, use an UC or have one done to you. When in a high stress situation having AV thrown at you, I think it would be hard to sit and think or what other curse to use instead and hope no one undoes the curse or they come out of it and AV you. It's kill or be killed, Use the imperius curse to help you get at the horocrux that will help rid the world of evil and in this way still be not harming the DE who would as soon kill you as look at you...etc. War is ugly and I think that is part of what JKR was showing. In a war state people are doing things they would never have imagined doing prior to this state, but they have family members and friends being killed, and other innocents (ie the Muggles who were being killed without even knowing the WW exists). From Rahel.Lilleleht at mail.ee Thu Jul 26 11:24:46 2007 From: Rahel.Lilleleht at mail.ee (Rahel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:24:46 +0300 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? Message-ID: <005a01c7cf77$9237b250$4101a8c0@Altair> No: HPFGUIDX 172959 Kim said: "Even if Lupin and Tonks knew that their child would have a good life without them because he'd have his grandmother, godfather, and friends, why would they choose to let someone else raise him? This is the opposite of what Harry's parents did. In fact, Harry was specifically protected by the sacrifice that Lily made. It seemed more like Tonks was sacrificing more for "the cause" than for Teddy. She was absent for the better part of the story, and we don't see her until just before she dies. You could argue that she was in agony confined to her home during her pregnancy because she wanted to be out fighting. Speaking as the parent of a 1 year old, I could not imagine leaving with my husband unsure of whether we'd return. It was a choice; she didn't have to go fight." Well, dear, people are different. Take it from another parent of a 1 year old (and of a 3 years old). Under the conditions life presented to the Lupins, I would have not hesitated but acted just like Tonks did. I would have left my child under the best care I know it would get, and went off to protect the loved one who was in imminent danger - my husband. You can't compare Tonks' and Lily's actions as they were based on two totally opposite situations. In Lily's case, the Dark Lord was after the child. Of course Lily and James did their best to protect him, including going in hiding! But in Tonks' case, Teddy was not the one in imminent danger. And when Remus went off to fight for a better world for his son to grow up to, I can understand all too well, why Tonks would join. She might have thought, she could make sure her husband gets out of the battle alive, for instance. Sometimes, the love for the child does not displace the love for the husband, you see. Rahel From lkotur at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 11:21:34 2007 From: lkotur at yahoo.com (Damit Lazarus) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:21:34 -0000 Subject: Item from Gringotts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172960 Can anyone tell me when the Horcrux from the wizard bank was destroyed? Thanks Damit Lazarus From editorkel at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 11:05:43 2007 From: editorkel at yahoo.com (editorkel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:05:43 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172961 > Alexa wrote: > Of course, if Tom Riddle had been touched by comforting, caring hands at any point in his >life when he needed it, maybe more things would have turned out differently. But neither had Harry, until he arrived at Hogwarts. And once there, Tom, like Harry, had a caring and watchful headmaster and loads of friends. The lure of power and immortality was simply too strong. editorkel From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 10:40:47 2007 From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:40:47 -0000 Subject: Hedwig Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172962 Although i loved the book i was really upset that Hedwig was killed off. I regret to say that i cried my eyes out. The deaths of Fred, Mad- eye and the others wasn't nice but it was accepted that some people would die- i just cant think why Hedwig had to as Harry could have released her before the journey. It was especially sad because she was angry with Harry before they left, she should have come back at the end when Harry saw his parents and the others. Lesley From mac_tire at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 09:57:03 2007 From: mac_tire at hotmail.com (pattiemgsybb) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:57:03 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks characterization in HD --- Was: Initial critique of DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172963 persimmon76 wrote: > Did Lupin's behavior in DH strike anyone else as odd? A Lupin > "deranged" is such > a hard image to shake. Yes, yes, yes. And that really bugged me because I think Lupin is one of her best creations -- the gentle werewolf trying to make his way through a world that, by and large, doesn't want him. I adored him in PoA; he was surely the best teacher we've seen (McGonagall was probably good too, if stricter). He was patient, funny, caring -- and that continued throughout the series until DH. I don't think DH Lupin makes any sense, and I don't think this Tonks makes much sense either. guzuguzu: > YES-- I was extremely disappointed by the way Lupin (and Tonks) were> written in DH. First we had "deranged," irrational Lupin (would he > actually think that ditching his kid would make the kid *less* ashamed > of him?). He wants to leave Tonks because she's become an outcast?-- > she seemed quite happy from the tiny glimpses we saw of her. Lupin > freaking out about a new wife and kid (who he is positive will be a > werewolf-- but more on that later*) could have been a realistic minor > subplot, but apparently it wasn't too much for him to overcome, since > all he needed to get over it was to have his friend's 17-year-old > > son call him a coward. That was the end of that. Lupin's face looks grayer, more lined at Privet Drive; his face falls into lines of misery at the wedding, he's quite willing to leave a pregnant Tonks with her folks ? all because he's bitter at himself for making her an outcast. Meanwhile she's glowing and grinning and full of life because she has her man. Clearly Tonks couldn't care less about being an outcast, but it seems all Lupin does is agonize about what a horrible mistake his marriage was, and his only happy, playful moments revolve around his son (once the kid's born, anyway). WIFEY!Tonks is so squeeingly oblivious to Remus's misery that I can't believe she's for real. And then there's the afterlife business -- I understand why Tonks wasn't present, she's not one of Harry's "family" at the time of her death -- but as you guys have said, what, no mention of the woman at all? Even though Harry directly addresses Lupin, and discusses Lupin's son? Weird. And of course Lupin looks happier than Harry's ever seen him. The moral is: if you have to marry Tonks, pray for an early death and then run away to find your mates. Poor Tonks! Thank heavens she has her Daddy for company, at least. Oh, and that nasty verbal tongue-lashing from Harry, at Grimmauld Place? Ick. Too too harsh; I could almost picture Snape saying some of that stuff. But then what the heck was up with Lupin going for his wand (not so different from going for a gun, in their world) and hexing Harry, blasting him up against the wall? That shocked me as much as anything in the book and I can't see how we could accept that as being in character. (For a while I wondered: was it a red herring to make people think Remus had "gone over"? I saw some possible hints of that, which worried me greatly ? I kept saying, "if she turns Remus into a bad guy, I'll burn this book.") > Tonks: This actually got me angry. Glad to know that the newly qualified > Auror who trained to be part of an elite force to take down dark wizards > and who is also a member of the ever-shrinking Order of the Phoenix > decided to sit the war out to have a baby. What a noble thing to do. > Especially with a husband who, until Harry gives him a tongue-lashing, > is not particularly keen on reproducing. Thank you. Who is this madly fertile woman, and what did you do with OotP Tonks? Oh, and can someone tell me why a man who so desperately wanted to avoid having children, and who is very intelligent, couldn't figure out how to get hold of some birth control! It's hard to imagine these two flying into bed overwhelmed by passion and making wild, thoughtless love (I could see Tonks being up for it, but not miserably depressed Lupin...), so I do think they'd have had enough time to attend to that little matter. I really liked the book, overall, but I'm absolutely bewildered by the Lupin we meet there. pattiemgsybb From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 12:29:51 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:29:51 -0000 Subject: Item from Gringotts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172964 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Damit Lazarus" wrote: > > Can anyone tell me when the Horcrux from the wizard bank was destroyed? > > Thanks > > Damit Lazarus > Hermione used the Basilisk tooth in he Chamber of Secrets, it was done while Harry was talking to Nick and the Grey Lady and trying to identify the Ravenclaw Horcrux. Valky From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Jul 26 12:35:32 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:35:32 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172965 > Dana: > Fortunately for me JKR has a high tendency of omitting things in > canon and assuming the reader will get it. I hope you haven't missed > that Harry says Albus full name quietly so only Ginny can hear it. > So apparently it is not something he is so proud of that others > should hear it too. And I do not think that the poor kid will go > around yelling his full name to anyone that wants to hear it. Hickengruendler: And yet he did decide to name his son "Albus Severus". It's not that anybody forced him to choose this name. So I don't understand whyt you are saying here. He choose to name his son after Snape, and yet is so ashamed of his choice, that he doesn't want anybody to know about it? Than why name him Severus in the first place? From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com Thu Jul 26 12:38:53 2007 From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (wickywackywoo2001) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:38:53 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks characterization in HD --- Was: Initial critique of DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172966 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pattiemgsybb" wrote: > > Yes, yes, yes. And that really bugged me because I think Lupin is one > of her best creations -- the gentle werewolf trying to make his way > through a world that, by and large, doesn't want him. The whole Lupin/Tonks romance left me cold, and neither of them was a favourite character of mine. But I didn't like the way JKR treated them in this book. It seemed to me that she'd gone to some trouble to create this "daring" couple, breaking all sorts of taboos to be together. As you say, Lupin wasn't wanted by the wizarding world, and Tonks volunteered for the same trouble. They were a living, breathing problem to the society around them. And then...she kills them. BOTH. It seemed a peculiarly antiseptic way of dealing with the conundrum she'd set up. Wanda From homeboys at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 12:42:34 2007 From: homeboys at comcast.net (Adesa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:42:34 -0000 Subject: Too predictable? In-Reply-To: <1185426203.3195.1202105837@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172967 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly Johnson" wrote: > While it was an enjoyable book overall, did you HP experts think > that some of the main plotlines were too predictable, based on > the last two years of conversations on this board? > > RAB, Snape DDM and in love with Lily, and Harry as Horcrux, final > battle at Hogwarts, House elves fighting? By the time I got to > Harry as the final Horcrux, I pratically shouted out, "Oh good > grief!" Adesa: Really? I found it to be surprising most of the way through. Yes, RAB was obvious...but Umbridge having the locket was a shock. And yes, Harry being a horcrux has been discussed ad nauseum, but I never really bought it, and Harry's handling of it made up for its lack of originality. Of *course* there's going to be a big battle at Hogwarts in the end, but I didn't expect all the smaller scuffles right from the very beginning. The house elves fighting wasn't a real shocker, either, but Kreacher's turnaround and Dobby's death were both unexpected. And Snape...JKR really had me starting to doubt his DDM status. I kept waiting for the Big Reveal that didn't come until his deathbed. I was left unsurprised but relieved and feeling quite sorry for Snape's lot in life. > (who was waiting for Ron to yell "my precious!" before destroying > the locket. Adesa: I have to say, the wearing-the-locket-makes-you-grumpy thing was *too* LotR for me. I get that there was supposed to be an emtional connection so of course it would start to affect them, but still...JKR usually lifts from obscure stories and myths, not such obvious sources. All in all, though, I found DH to be anything *but* predictable. There were many ways this story could have gone, and though parts of it went the way many expected, in the whole it was surprising. Where the plot itself was predictable, it was handled well or had a twist added. Loved it. (OK, except the epilogue...) Adesa in Virginia From kennclark at btinternet.com Thu Jul 26 12:40:25 2007 From: kennclark at btinternet.com (Kenneth Clark) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:40:25 -0000 Subject: Fudge anyone? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172968 What happened to Fudge? Or Rosmerta? Ken Clark From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 13:00:19 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:00:19 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172969 I was extremely happy with the epilogue. It told me what I wanted to know. Harry and Ginny, Ron and Hermione are married and have children. Hogwarts was restored and the world is at peace. Normality is probably what these characters most desired and it was given to them. To tell us everything that happened to the other characters would require another book. Bookworm857158367 From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 13:07:12 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:07:12 -0000 Subject: Rose and Hugo was Re: The return to normalcy (Was: The (H... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172970 Victoire is clearly intended to be Bill and Fleur's. Aside from the fact that she has a French name, which Fleur would give her daughter, she's too old to belong to Ron and Hermione. She's kissing 19-year-old Teddy Lupin in the epilogue but is young enough to be going to Hogwarts. That would put her age at about 17, about to turn 18. I don't think the name is after Victor Krum at all. Victoire means "victory" and she was probably named in honor of the victory over Voldemort. I wouldn't be surprised if she was conceived the night that they won -- Bill and Fleur making love and conceiving their child as a way to assert the power of life over death. Bookworm From jenlundq at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 12:21:29 2007 From: jenlundq at hotmail.com (pwrmom2) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:21:29 -0000 Subject: Post-HP Depresssion/Indifference In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172971 As a lot of you have mentioned, I was feeling a little blue when I finished HP7, not because of all the emotions I had gone through during the book. Ok I had a lot of that as JKR intended, but as you menitoned, knowing I woulnd't have that excitement again. Harry Potter is the first book series I have EVER been that excited about. Yes, I have series I love and do look forward to each new installment, but none have ever lived up to how I feel about HP. I didn't let it get me donw though. I've actually gone the other way. Yesterday I rewatched Prizoner of Azkaban with my sons and actually noticed I was watching it a little differently now that I know how everything ends. I know JKR mentioned that she had told some of the actors small snipets of the characters future just enough to help them know where the characters were coming from and I had flashes of that, I think now watching the movie with my new perspective. My poor husband hasn't seen Order of Phoenix yet (we have a young child too young to see it, so I got to see it with my sons). We are going to see it tomorrow night and I look forward to my fresh perspective as well. I figure I will be in a Harry Potter mania for another week or so then slowly get back to kmy normal life. I'm going to enjoy this ride while it lasts, however. Thanks to JKR for creating such a wonderful series. pwrmom2 From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Jul 26 13:14:02 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:14:02 -0400 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. Message-ID: <008001c7cf86$d75a86f0$a4c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 172972 va32h said: "as Hermione took Muggle Studies and the teacher's name could have been inserted any time from PoA on. " Hermione only took Muggle Studies in third year. She dropped it at the end so she could have a normal timetable. However, if JKR was going to kill her off in the first chapter of DH, we could have at least been given a name in PoA. Certainly, some of us would have had to have done some serious remembering as to where the name fit, but when I first read "Charity Burbage who, until recently, taught at Hogwarts..." I though, No she didn't!! DuffyPoo CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 26 13:14:08 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:14:08 -0000 Subject: Classical & Biblical Quotations In-Reply-To: <46A80160.3040603@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172973 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Ken Hutchinson wrote: > > The error is one that is critical to me as I try to explain to > > conservative Christian friends why I don't think Harry Potter doesn't > > violate the Biblical proscription against magic. Magic as used in the > > Bible is always an attempt to thwart God's will and so it is rightly > > condemned. > > Bart: > There is no Biblical prohibition of magic, per se. There are Biblical > prohibitions of certain kinds of magic, almost always mistranslated (due > to the fact that scholars would rather be thought to be sloppy > translators than to be thought to take magic seriously). > > While there are a number of ignorant (and yes, I do mean ignorant) > fundamentalist Christians who consider Harry Potter evil because of the > practice of magic, the more educated fundamentalist and evangelical > Christians have a more subtle problem; the idea that one can save one's > own soul through simple repentance, rather than through acceptance of > Jesus as their personal savior. > > Bart > In the ASV, the version I have on my Palm, Exodus 22:18 says "thou shalt not suffer a sorceress to live". Ok, not a prohibition on magic per se, but if those who practice magic are to be executed is that not the same thing? It is passages like this one that are the source of of the common conservative Christian objections to the Harry Potter series. At least that is what I hear in the media, I don't know of a single one of my peers who does object to Harry Potter. The more subtle problem you mention is so common in secular literature and media that I doubt many would take Harry Potter to task over this. In fact Narnia, which is much beloved among conservative Christians, has a scene in which Aslan accepts as his own a young man who worshipped another god. I have never thought that Rowling was hiding a Christian message in the Harry Potter series. Perhaps those two quotations in the graveyard argue otherwise, but I'm not sure if that is the message she meant to send or simply something that some readers will see in the scene. Ken From homeboys at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 13:14:30 2007 From: homeboys at comcast.net (Adesa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:14:30 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: <46A82E48.2090509@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172974 > CJE: >I personally have found myself increasingly distracted by JKR's over- wordiness and clumsy style since at least Book 3. Adesa: Really? I've always enjoyed her style. Her verbosity has always seemed, to me, to be vindicated by the sheer volume of information she conveys. I always thought that she crammed a lot of good information into each sentence. Perhaps she has occasionally overused adverbs (OotP, anyone?) but otherwise makes excellent word choices. I frequently find myself in the last few chapters of a HP adventure wondering how on earth JKR can squeeze in everything she needs to, only to have her wrap it up very nicely indeed. Yes, she uses a lot of words. But then, she's got a big story to tell. When it starts to *feel* wordy, I think, is a problem. But feeling that an author is rambling is very different from part of the story having slower pacing. Each episode of our hero's years at Hogwarts had times when the weeks slipped by without much happening. JKR would slip in bits here and there of action that furthered the plot, usually following the same pattern as DH (though not as exciting or with as many brushes with DE's). What's different about DH is that the reader *feels* the dragging weeks. So, if JKR knows how to successfully write time passing without boring her readers, perhaps the tedium of weeks in the woods is intentional. It had me feeling restless, and I believe JKR meant for me to feel that way. That being said, I think she dropped the ball in her Epilogue. Either she'd had it done for so long that she didn't want to change it to show her improved skills over the years (and the improved interest of her audience), or she was simply trying to finish it all off in too much of a rush. It felt like the latter. I don't mind that we are left wondering a lot about what happens to many characters. I *do* mind that the style with which she wrote the Epilogue was so very different from the rest of the series. Adesa in Virginia From squeaker19450 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 12:02:13 2007 From: squeaker19450 at yahoo.com (barb burke) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DH Thoughts Message-ID: <281988.92083.qm@web36604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 172975 I'm sorry, but evidently some folks still don't GET IT. This is the author speaking through Harry. It is the FINAL canon. Snape was good for whatever reason and nineteen years later is still good and true and brave. So spake JKR .Greater love hath no man that he lay down his life...... squeaker19450 From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 13:23:41 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:23:41 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172976 It's not the sort of thing that a tradition-bound society would do away with. For one thing, it may be so magically engrained that it would not even be possible to do away with the four houses. The Four Founders set it up in a certain way and it is a system that has existed for a thousand years. Bookworm857158367 From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 13:15:25 2007 From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:15:25 -0000 Subject: Rowlings Debunking of the Marauders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172977 Dana: > > Fortunately for me JKR has a high tendency of omitting things in > > canon and assuming the reader will get it. I hope you haven't > > missed that Harry says Albus full name quietly so only Ginny can > > hear it. > > So apparently it is not something he is so proud of that others > > should hear it too. And I do not think that the poor kid will go > > around yelling his full name to anyone that wants to hear it. Hickengruendler: > And yet he did decide to name his son "Albus Severus". It's not > that anybody forced him to choose this name. So I don't understand > why you are saying here. He choose to name his son after Snape, and > yet is so ashamed of his choice, that he doesn't want anybody to know > about it? > Than why name him Severus in the first place? Lesley: I was under the impression that Harry was just having a father and son moment with Albus and that the only information that Harry was keeping quiet about was the fact that Harry chose to be in Gryffindor over slytherin because if everyone knew they could do this then the sorting hat would be without a job. I think Albus's middle name was Severus becaus he was the only child that had Lily's eye's. From greendayisawesome at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 13:19:04 2007 From: greendayisawesome at yahoo.com (greendayisawesome) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:19:04 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172978 bookworm857158367 wrote: > > I was extremely happy with the epilogue. It told me what I wanted > to know. > To tell us everything that happened to the other characters would > require another book. I also liked the epilogue. . . The one thing I was hoping all along with the 7th book is that Harry would have joy and happiness in his life. I think JKR was very wise not to go into great detail because it left the reader to come up with their own version of what happened. Besides, maybe by leaving the door a smidgen open, it could lead to another Harry Potter series. . . One can hope, can't they? :o) greendayisawesome From csh at stanfordalumni.org Thu Jul 26 13:14:03 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:14:03 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: <46A7B8F3.70004@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172979 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lee Kaiwen wrote: > > Steve blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 02:57: > > > I think the Hallows are there because at some point > > Harry has to make a choice. He must choose between > > Power and Weakness. > > Perhaps. Unfortunately, the Deathly Hallows storyline is weakly > written and weakly integrated, to the point where their purposes in > advancing the story is murky at best. What purpose is served to send > Harry on a Horcrux quest, only to suddenly distract him with the > Deathly Hallows? > Seems unnecessarily cruel of Dumbledore. > > In any case, Harry didn't really choose between Horcrux and Hallow > until after it became clear Voldemort would beat him to the wand. So > ultimately, Harry didn't volitionally choose weakness over power; > the choice was thrust upon him, diluting the moral victory of the > choice. As the originator of this thread, I'm actually coming around to thinking that the Deathly Hallows is the central theme BECAUSE it is a potential distraction to Harry. The distraction, as people have written, give Harry a choice. He must choose correctly (and, Steve, I don't think it is actually a choice between Power and Weakness), and he ultimately does. I don't agree with Mr. Lee that Harry didn't really choose between Horcrux and Hallow. The "Wandmaker" chapter makes it clear that he chooses to talk to Griphook BEFORE Ollivander thus choosing Horcrux over Hallow WHILE he still had a choice--remote as his chances of succeeding were, he could tried to beat Voldemort to Dumbledore's tomb (uggh!), but he didn't, and NOT because the chances were remote (his chances are dismally remote for everything in the whole book): "Harry hesitated. He knew what hung on his decision. There was hardly any time left; now was the moment to decide: Horcruxes or Hallows?" He agonizes over this choice with doubt creeping into his mind over the subsequent pages: "The enormity of his decision not to race Voldemort to the wand still scared Harry...He was full of doubts, doubts that Ron could not help voicing...The odd thing was that Hermione's support made him feel just as confused as Ron's doubts." As for "Seeming unnecessarily cruel of Dumbledore," again, I have to disagree with Mr. Lee--ultimately, it is Harry's choices that enable him to defeat Voldemort, and Dumbledore lays out the choices for Harry however cruel that may seem to be, but it is, IMHO, not unnecessary. Chuck Han From rondynella at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 13:20:35 2007 From: rondynella at yahoo.com (Rondee) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:20:35 -0000 Subject: Rose and Hugo was Re: The return to normalcy (Was: The (H... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172980 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bookworm857158367" wrote: > > Victoire is clearly intended to be Bill and Fleur's. Aside from the > fact that she has a French name, which Fleur would give her > daughter, she's too old to belong to Ron and Hermione. She's kissing > 19-year-old Teddy Lupin in the epilogue but is young enough to be > going to Hogwarts. That would put her age at about 17, about to turn > 18. >From the Today Show, Jo saids, "Victoire, who was snogging Teddy ? Lupin and Tonks' son ? is Bill and Fleur's eldest." Rondee From csh at stanfordalumni.org Thu Jul 26 13:27:08 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:27:08 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: >... > I think the Hallows are there because at some point > Harry has to make a choice. He must choose between > Power and Weakness. He must choose whether to make > himself stronger, near undefeatable, or he must > choose to concentrate on making Voldemort weak. >... In an earlier response, I noted in passing that I didn't agree with Steve that it was a choice between Power and Weakness. I wanted to expand on my disagreement because I think the rest of Steve's assessment and analysis is super spot on (thanks Steve!): Maybe I'm being nitpicky--I agree that the choice Harry makes is to weaken Voldemort, but, IMHO, that's not a choice between Power and Weakness. Harry chooses the path counter to obvious might (as Steve point out), but is that Weakness? I think it is Harry's Ultimate Strength... Chuck Han From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 13:44:19 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:44:19 -0000 Subject: The Bloody Baron and Severus Snape: flaws and strengths of the Slytherin House. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172982 The Bloody Baron and Snape both displayed classic Slytherin characteristics in this book. The Bloody Baron was passionately in love with a woman he couldn't have, so he killed her in a fit of rage and then killed himself in remorse. "All these centuries later, he wears his chains as an act of penitence -- as he should," says the Gray Lady. Hot-tempered, passionate, brooding, dangerous, self- centered, punishing himself as well as others. Compare the Bloody Baron with Severus Snape, the Death Eater. He was sensitive and naturally intuitive, but used his intuition to hit his victims in the most sensitive spots. He called the object of his affection a Mudblood and was willing to let her husband and son die, but continued to have an obsessive love for her even after her death, begrudgingly protected her son and begged to look into Harry's eyes as he was dying because they were just like Lily's. Slytherin represents the Element of Water. The three water signs in astrology are Cancer, Pisces, and, appropriately enough for Scorpius Malfoy, Scorpio. A Scorpio in particular is a dangerous sign when it twists inward. Snape and the Bloody Baron are both great representatives of twisted Scorpios, but they could easily have been something else. It would have been interesting to see an example of a good Slytherin in this series -- a person who used his sensitivity and intuitiveness to heal rather than to destroy his enemies. I would bet that some of the greatest healers at St. Mungo's and the greatest mystics and religious leaders of the age are also Slytherins. JK Rowling simply avoided telling us about them. Bookworm857158367 From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Thu Jul 26 13:46:56 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:46:56 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172983 Charles: > I have read multiple posts with people upset that the good guys were > casting unforgivables. Well, let us analyze this just a little bit. > Who named the unforgivables? The ministry. These are the folks who > have committed the vast majority of the wrongs in the wizarding world > for many years. Are they nice spells? No. Should there be a mandatory > life sentence for their use? Probably not. I think that anyone who > thinks that Harry and the folks on his side should stick to ministry > regulations better take a look at what that ministry made possible. > > Anyone complaining about the use of "unforgivables" by the good side > needs to think about the other laws of the wizarding world that the > good side broke. Hmmm....Hermione existed. Ted Tonks existed. Remus > Lupin existed. Harry Potter stayed free. > > My point is that legality and morality are two different things. The > unforgivables are called that because of legality, not morality. I > think JKR must just have been too damn subtle on that point. I got it > clear back in GOF. Hidden in the subtext of GOF is the fact that > legality and morality are often at odds with each other, and that it > is often difficult to discern which one is which. OOTP showed clearly > that legality must sometimes be tossed completely out the window for > morality's sake. (Hence my refusal to ever forgive Hermione for her > use of the term "Ministry approved" in HBP.)By the time Harry casts > the first UC in DH we know that laws are pointless at this point. The > situation is not one where laws and niceties can be observed, it is > one of survival. Harry doesn't sit and torture people with the > cruciatus curse, he uses it, rather effectively, to neutralize an > attacker. Overkill, maybe, but not unforgivable by a longshot. His > uses of the imperius curse in Gringott's are not for personal gain or > nefarious purposes. Hell, he doesn't want a damn thing but to get the > horcrux so that he can defeat the guy causing so much death and > destruction in the world. And people are going to attack over a goblin > and a death eater being forced to comply for a few minutes? I'm sorry, > but it seems that those people are the type that believe Rita > Skeeter's stuff over everything else in the books. Magpie: Yeah, people are really silly for thinking that there could be a moral implication to Unforgivable spells--especially one that's a torture spell--when it's really just illegal. That must be the problem people have with the spells--that they're illegal by Ministry standards--since torture has no moral implications in itself and is very effective for neturalizing enemies in fiction. It's like those people who keep complaining about the use of torture in real life--as Judge Scalia says, "Are you going to convict Jack Bauer?" Besides, in GoF we were being told about the Ministry approving of Unforgivables in the past. Now the Ministry doesn't approve--so obviously if you're going to break the laws by keeping Muggle-borns out of jail you have to also break the laws against using Unforgivables. -m From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Thu Jul 26 13:53:30 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:53:30 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo R" wrote: > > Someone posted that JKR was having a live web chat on 30th July. What > would you want to ask her, given the opportunity? Spinners End was Snape's childhood home. Why did he still live there at the age of 37? Hardly because he loved the place itself. You'd rather think that he would have preferred to live somewhere else. Did he torture himself with sentimental memories from the time he spent with Lily, or was it just for convenience (parents moved - couldn't sell the house, or maybe they died and left him the house)? Marika From mindycl at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 13:49:22 2007 From: mindycl at gmail.com (Mindy) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:49:22 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > Allie now: > > But how did Portrait Dumbledore even **KNOW** the escape date? He was > dead months before Harry's 17th birthday, and I doubt the Order had > planned which particular Saturday they were going to take Harry so far > in advance. > Mindy says: I have another puzzling question.... Snape only became Hogwarts headmaster in September. How the heck did he get into Dumbledore's office in July???? From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 13:54:38 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:54:38 -0000 Subject: Dudley Dursley at Platform 9 and 3/4 and etc... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172986 So, my mom and I were discussing DH last night, both of us agreeing that we generally adored the book and had both already begun reading it for the third time since last week...but, that darned epilogue. I just can't get over it. I don't hate it, but I wish there had been more. And my mom and I were discussing ways the epilogue could have been basically the same, but conveyed a bit more information about the world's changes since the end of DH. One of the things we came up with, which I really liked, was the idea that Harry and DUDLEY, yes, Dudley, had reconciled after Dudley discovered that his own child was a witch/wizard. I thought it would have been a beautiful and succinct comment on how people can change, and how the WW could change, if out of the steam from the train emerged Dudley, his wife, and son. A firm handshake and a "Where were you, you were almost late for the train?" from Harry, would have shown us that even the most vile of people can be changed. Also, that would totally have made me weep, seeing Harry reunited with an actual blood relative. It would have been great if Scorpius and Dudley's on had been friends, or something to show that the whole "pureblood" bull was at an end. Plus, really, wouldn't Draco and Dudley have been pals? ; ) I would just have LOVED that, and it would have been basically the same epilogue, but conveying a slightly different message. It would also have tied up the loose Dursley end...because, what in Merlin's beard happened to those people? I know we hate them, but I did want to know what happened to them. Anyway, aside from my complaints about the epilogue, I will reiterate that I thought DH was perfect. Not because it doesn't have some plot holes, because it definitely does, but because it is the way it had to end. I say again, the whole series had the momentum of something inevitable, of history, something that already happened. When we look back on WWII, or the coming of William to England, we know it had to happen that way, because it already did. That's how I feel about Harry. This is just the way it was, and I LOVE the way it was. Writing 4200 pages of the same story is downright impossible to do without a few mistakes. But in those 4200 pages, she has remained true to the characters, she has allowed them to grow and change, she has told an incredibly complex story and made (I think) darn few mistakes, and hey, we're all here talking about it, so she must have done something right. Someone else posted that they are frustrated with the fandom at the moment. 'Ear, 'ear! I think we all might know more about these books than anyone else on the planet. We have dissected them until they're shredded...of course we've found contradictions and loose ends, and things that don't really fit. Few authors in contemporary lit have been as torn apart as JKR. We forget that a lot of the stuff we discuss isn't stuff that she would discuss, or stuff that she wrote. We have a lot of our own ideas, and I think people need to remember that she isn't writing to fulfill all of our questions, but writing to finish Harry's story as SHE saw it. Just my 2 knuts. I just have to go on record saying that I think she's a remarkable writer, to have created these books and these characters that are so real to all of us, and Harry has been, and will continue to be, a real gift in my life. Cheese, but true. Peace, Katie From lexac at mail.com Thu Jul 26 14:03:24 2007 From: lexac at mail.com (Lexa_C) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:03:24 -0000 Subject: Babbling on on Avada Kadavra mechanics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172987 > > Alexa: > > Of course, if Tom Riddle had been touched by comforting, caring hands at any point in his > >life when he needed it, maybe more things would have turned out differently. > > > editorkel: > But neither had Harry, until he arrived at Hogwarts. He had a foundational year of being doted on by Lily and James, as well as the literal, magical shield of Lily's love that saved his life. And once at Hogwarts, I suspect the experience of being in Slytherin is significantly different than being in Gryffindor - something I'm sure Snape also could tell us about. Of course, now we're getting into issues with the Sorting Hat and the housing system, which appears to be a significant problem for more people than me - if there's any concrete support for abolishing that destructive institution, it's the "abandoned boys." Even in the Calvinist Potterverse, Riddle may have been born the Bad Seed, and Harry may have been born one of the elect Good, but I think it begs the question of how nurture and environment - *at Hogwarts* - was a key issue in the shaping of Snape. I can't approve of DD's decision to allow a kid like Riddle, with clear sociopathic tendencies, to be placed in Slytherin, where those tendencies are likely to be nurtured, particularly while not even saying anything to any of the staff about the boy's psychological and emotional problems, any more than I can approve of his decision to basically dump Harry at the Dursleys and leave him without any useful contact or support for 10 years. - Alexa From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Jul 26 14:07:18 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:07:18 -0400 Subject: Fudge anyone? Message-ID: <001801c7cf8e$474d1c50$4490d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 172988 Ken Clark aske: "What happened to Fudge? Or Rosmerta?" Or Rita Skeeter who my dear husband wants really to get her comuppance. (He hasn't finished the book yet so I can't tell him nothing happens.) Or Mundungus. DuffyPoo CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From unicornspride at centurytel.net Thu Jul 26 15:07:30 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:07:30 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The unforgivable curse argument References: <46a8242e.05358c0a.3c5e.38c1@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <004d01c7cf96$b139d5b0$0202a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 172989 > Colwilrin > Many are upset that Harry used the Crucio curse. I am not, for one > specific > reason. In the US (where I am from...and have spent the last 48 hours > taking the lawyer's bar admittance examination), the use of deadly force > is > allowed, and justified when one is in a position of fear of imminent death > to oneself or another. > > When Harry used the Crucio curse, he was in a battle situation. > Voldemort and the DE's were intent on killing both Harry and those who > supported Harry. In any US court, Harry's actions would be justified > under > Self-Defense. > > I was actually a bit happy when Harry finally got serious and fought fire > with fire. I never wanted him to AK anyone...but he used the force > necessary to protect himself...and I was thrilled by it. Just as I was > thrilled when Molly asserted herself enough to dispatch Bellatrix. Way to > go girl! ------------------------ > Sherry: > > As it was war, I could have accepted even Harry using the killing curse. > It's the Imperius and Cruciatus that bothered me. Cruciatus is a torture > curse, inflicting terrible agony in every fiber of someone's body. That > isn't self defense or fighting fire with fire. We have soldiers facing > court martials for torturing prisoners. Torture is wrong, in my opinion, > and I hated seeing the hero, the good guy using it. I didn't mind molly > offing Bella, because it was war, and soldiers do kill in war. That's > their > job. I didn't want Harry to have to kill, but that would have been far > easier to accept than cruciatus for me. Lana: I was thrilled that Harry used the curse. Not because he tortured someone, but because of everything he went thru, he chose not to kill. I do not think that you can really compare troops to this. Not even remotely the same thing. These people have been chasing him and trying to kill him since before he was even a year old. I think a little torture is justified. Lana From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 14:08:35 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:08:35 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172990 Wow. Haven't been around here in a while. Too busy to keep up with things, but I had to throw this one out there, as it was a personal victory for what seemed a massively improbable prediction. Way back when, given some interview quotes that had to lead somewhere, I came up with a new fondness for a very old (and hilarious) theory, as noted here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/132993 This was an attempt to deal with the events of HBP, as well as some classically tantalizing interview quotes, especially the classic: JKR: (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That's a very horrible idea. Well, even I never expected to get, in canon (sorry, page numbers are out of my hands at the moment): "If she means so much to you," said Dumbledore, "surely Lord Voldemort will spare her? Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?" "I have-I have asked him-" "You disgust me," said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little. "You do not care, then, about the deaths of her husband and child? They can die, as long as you have what you want?" ----------------- Well, it's not entirely accurate, as Snape seems to have shown more remorse than the scenario postulated, and was DDM rather than the OFH which I favored--although TEWWW EWWW itself is more about the initial conditions than any subsequent actions. But it did nail the idea that he had a direct hand in Voldemort's actions towards Lily, and that he was motivated out of an explicitly personal concern. This has also just been echoed by the JKR commentary on the Today Show: "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." -------------- Putting it all together: childhood love but still willing to join the Death Eaters, begging your evil boss for her life (but forget the husband and child), protecting only out of a personal love for a long-dead woman who you probably didn't have any contact with after school and thus wouldn't *know* anymore in many ways. In the end, it was about personal issues, not moral standards. George and Diana are both dead theories now. Unquestionably brave, but....EWWWW! -Nora gets back to her high-voiced heroes, and is a little sad to see Faith have to wave goodbye to the siblings From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 26 14:30:26 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:30:26 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172991 Nora, quoting from The Today Show today: > "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see > Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected > Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." > > -------------- > > Putting it all together: childhood love but still willing to join > the Death Eaters, begging your evil boss for her life (but forget > the husband and child), protecting only out of a personal love for a > long-dead woman who you probably didn't have any contact with after > school and thus wouldn't *know* anymore in many ways. In the end, > it was about personal issues, not moral standards. George and > Diana are both dead theories now. > > Unquestionably brave, but....EWWWW! SSSusan: Count me as one who was quite thrilled to hear about JKR responding to these questions in this way. As much as I believed in DDM!Snape, as much as I had been convinced that events on the tower had played out as they did and was happy to see that confirmed, as fascinated as I was by discovering that the long-bantered about Lily theories LOLLIPOPS and TEWWW EWWW were in varying degrees accurate, I have been just a tad bit honked off by characterizations of Snape that I've seen which went a little too far (imho) in classifying him as The Good One or a hero. I call it TooGood!Snape. Yes, he was proven out as Good!Snape -- or at least DDM!Snape and protector of Harry -- but I also did not find him a hero. I loved that Harry came to grips with him, I loved that Harry so quickly recognized how he, Voldemort *and* Snape were Hogwarts' 'abandoned boys,' how he openly acknowledged Snape's bravery to all around. But Snape didn't immediately turn into a full- fledged hero or the *true* 'epitome of goodness' in my mind. Having JKR reply as she did to these questions makes me feel better about my reaction that some folks were going a little too far towards TooGood!Snape. His wasn't a conversion based upon a total reordering of moral principles; his wasn't a conversion towards wanting to protect all on the right side. He was still a deeply flawed man who, wonderfully, bravely, managed to make, for years, the 'right' choices of going along with DD's plans and protecting Harry Potter. But he wasn't a full-fledged hero, and he wasn't the epitome of goodness. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who as one can tell by her name, *is* a Snape fan... just one who wants to retain a realistic picture of what the man was all about From mercia at ireland.com Thu Jul 26 14:41:30 2007 From: mercia at ireland.com (meglet2) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:41:30 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172992 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mindy" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > > > > Allie now: > > > > But how did Portrait Dumbledore even **KNOW** the escape date? He > was > > dead months before Harry's 17th birthday, and I doubt the Order had > > planned which particular Saturday they were going to take Harry so > far > > in advance. > > > > Mindy says: > > I have another puzzling question.... Snape only became Hogwarts > headmaster in September. How the heck did he get into Dumbledore's > office in July???? I asked that one on Tuesday night and if it was a mistake. One friend had read that whole bit with the portrait as having taken place months before and that the Order had indeed planned Harry's escape long in advance including the change of date. But that doesn't really work for me. That chat with the portrait definitely suggests Snape is HM and DD is dead and therefore couldn't be happening in July. I still think it is a mistake and part of the careless writing of the book. But I would love to be proved wrong with a better theory. Mercia > From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 14:26:35 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:26:35 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172993 Deepthi: Hi all, I am responding to multiple posts here.. --------- LKH said: JKR sucks at romance. For one... I do not get all the Hermione/Ron shippers. It is not normal in my opinion to constantly bicker with your crush... Usually people put on their BEST behavior when trying to win the one they love. Deepthi: Ron is a teenager, and teenagers are very awkward with the opposite sex, more so when they feel an attraction. I thought JKR's portrayal here was dead on. There are all kinds of possible starts to a relationship, and something where you get all the bickering out right at the beginning may actually have a better chance in the long run, than one where everything has been sugar-coated to start with, and it is only later that you see the person's true colors. Ron and Hermione do care for each other - that is why Ron gets jealous when Hermione goes to the Yule ball with Krum in GoF, Hermione is furious when Fleur kisses Ron after the second task in GoF, and Hermione hurtles to the hospital wing when Ron almost dies in HBP (in Slughorn's office) LKH said: the infatuation with his mother (he wanted to FEAST upon her image) made the ship entirely creepy. There wasnt enough true buildup.... No connection of souls so to speak. Deepthi: The actual quote is "His /eyes/ feasted on her" Harry is a teenager who has no real memories of his mother. The only memory he has is of Voldemort killing his mum. With this background, it is not surprising that he couldn't take his eyes off her, he knew that he would have to face Voldemort very soon, and by necessity take his attention off her. As for a connection, everyone feels a connection to their mother, even if they have no memories of her alive. We seem to be living in an age where all innocence has been lost, and even your relationship with your mother is suspect. LKH: JKR's blatant lack of understanding human Sexuality killed the whole story for me. I was sorely dissapointed that she could delve into the aspects of Torture and other deeply disturbing human emotions.. yet she couldnt touch sexuality with a ten foot pole. Deepthi: You are within your rights to say that she didn't portray sexuality the way you wanted it, but please don't turn it into a personal attack on her. We have to remember that JKR is writing for a audience that varies in age from seven to ninety (or more). She had to be very subtle with any portrayals of sexuality. It is there in the canon, if you read carefully.. GoF: At the Yule Ball, Snape is blasting rosebushes apart, and couples emerge from them. Obviously, teenagers in Harry's world are like teenagers in the real world, they have physical relationships, they wouldn't need to hide if they are simply holding hands, or looking at each other. OoTP: It takes Harry half an hour to return to the common room after he kisses Cho. HBP: Ron pulls Lavendar into an empty classroom, if they just wanted to kiss, they have no problems doing that in front of everyone. DH: Ron shoots a guilty look at Lupin when he has to hold on to Tonks (chapter 4). Obviously, he is very aware of her as a woman. There are plenty of such scenes, not even counting Harry's obvious reactions to Cho and Ginny. I felt that it was very true to life without getting too much into the details. -------- Sandra said: Hello Alison! You're right, they were all "a given" right at the start or at least very early on (I always wanted Hermione to be with Harry, and still did right till the end!) but my point is that there's no tenderness shown between any of them. I remember when I was at school and how I felt every time certain friends began sharing looks, or when their friendships became 'touchy' as well as 'talky' , or being together when they needn't, and all the other hundreds of ways which don't need listing, but all that was missing from TDH just like it was from all the other books. Deepthi: How about Ron holding Hermione at Dumbledore's funeral? Ron was too immature for a serious relationship until the end of HBP. But in DH, there are plenty of scenes where Ron is holding Hermione, or they are holding hands. See Page 76, 94, 97 and so on.. Obviously, this being an action story, and not a romance, JKR couldn't couldn't spend too much time dwelling on the relationships. ----- Sandra again: > > I think that's probably down to JKR's understanding of such things, > maybe? Deepthi: Writers draw from their own experience, but their books don't have to encompass the whole of their experience. Let us appreciate JKR for the great books she has shared with us, and keep personal comments on her out of these discussions. From muellem at bc.edu Thu Jul 26 14:56:34 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:56:34 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172994 > Lesley: > I was under the impression that Harry was just having a father and > son moment with Albus and that the only information that Harry was > keeping quiet about was the fact that Harry chose to be in Gryffindor > over slytherin because if everyone knew they could do this then the > sorting hat would be without a job. I think Albus's middle name was > Severus becaus he was the only child that had Lily's eye's. > colebiancardi: Where I agree with Lesley on the father/son time, I have to disagree on the last sentence. When a child is born, their eyes are blue and the shape of a child's eyes aren't the same as they were when they were just a newborn. I think it was just a *happy* coincidence that the child named Albus Severus has Lily's eyes. jmo From pjarrett at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 15:03:18 2007 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (patrick.jarrett) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:03:18 -0000 Subject: Fudge anyone? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172996 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kenneth Clark" wrote: > > What happened to Fudge? Or Rosmerta? > > Ken Clark > Patrick: I can't say I'm sorry he didn't make an appearance in DH. I think it was clearly JKR saying that Fudge didn't matter once he was out of office (from HBP.) He had been terrified by LV's return. As for Rosmerta, I haven't anything to guess at. -- Patrick From muellem at bc.edu Thu Jul 26 15:16:17 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:16:17 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172997 > Nora wrote: > This has also > just been echoed by the JKR commentary on the Today Show: > > "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see > Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected > Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." > > -------------- > > Putting it all together: childhood love but still willing to join the > Death Eaters, begging your evil boss for her life (but forget the > husband and child), protecting only out of a personal love for a > long-dead woman who you probably didn't have any contact with after > school and thus wouldn't *know* anymore in many ways. In the end, it > was about personal issues, not moral standards. George and Diana are > both dead theories now. > > Unquestionably brave, but....EWWWW! > colebiancardi: yep, I saw that interview and thought, wow oh wow. So, what is the definition of a hero, I wonder? I was expecting, at the very least, that Snape is an Anti-Hero, which plays off well with Harry's Hero. And basically, is JKR stating that placing Snape in Slytherin doomed and sealed his fate as a bad person with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, if he didn't *love* Lily? So, the House System, which is still in play 19 years later, helped formed and cement any biases and *badness* that those unfortunate enough to get placed in Slytherin. No redemption. You cannot atone. What type of message is that? I guess JKR is cementing the idea that Snape did not mature in the last 16 years since Lily's death. That there is nothing but Lily. That was my rant earlier about the lack of personal growth & maturity and making atones and moving on. She doesn't give certain characters that possibility, based on that interview this morning. not pleased at all. Their was ONLY one person that started out nasty with horrible biases, which he picked up from his parents, whom we see change & mature. And he didn't even DIE at the end. And that person was a Muggle - Dudley. I guess Muggles have a leg-up on atonement and rejecting biases that they were taught. They get a second chance and they get to live. From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 15:17:14 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:17:14 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172998 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meglet2" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mindy" wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" > wrote: > > > > > > > Allie now: I doubt the Order > had > > > planned which particular Saturday they were going to take Harry > so > > far > > > in advance. > > > > > > > Mindy says: > > > > I have another puzzling question.... Snape only became Hogwarts > > headmaster in September. How the heck did he get into Dumbledore's > > office in July???? > >That chat with the portrait definitely suggests Snape is > HM and DD is dead and therefore couldn't be happening in July. I > still think it is a mistake and part of the careless writing of the > book. But I would love to be proved wrong with a better theory. > > Mercia > > > I don't know about a "mistake," necessarily. It seems that DD's office is not that hard to get into. All you have to do is see Harry being able to go there right after Snape's death simply by knowning the password. It doesn't seem a far stretch that Snape would know the password to get into the office after DD's death and before he became Headmaster. So I don't see that Snape being in DD's office after DD's death but before becoming Headmaster as a big problem, timeline-wise. Adam From lazuli_tps at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 15:08:36 2007 From: lazuli_tps at yahoo.co.uk (lazuli_tps) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:08:36 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 172999 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Nora, quoting from The Today Show today: > > > "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see > > Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected > > Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." > > Hi all. Though as of yet I have no idea what TEW etc and LOLLI etc is all about (being exceptionally late to this board) I sort of agree with the previous poster, and JKR. However I do see him as a hero. I have always loved Snape, and the books are (were?) as much about Snape's past as they are about Harry's future, but to call Snape a hero without clarification is... problematic. Yeah he was a hero in that, despite the risks and his fear, he constantly put himself in danger for 'The Greater Good'; but whose good? The world, or his own personal revenge? His changing sides and spying was not altruistic at the start. But over time..? It's not clear how much he had come to see that his work was for everyone by the end. Even after everything he had been through, if Harry didn't have Lily's eyes to constantly remind him of both his love and guilt, who's to say he would have had the strength to carry out the plans? We'll never know, because carry on he did. And this is why he is a hero of sorts: a flawed, bitter, complicated hero. And story wise that's the best sort there is. Lazuli ^_^ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 15:22:03 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:22:03 -0000 Subject: The link between love and courage (and HRH's occupations) (Was: Harry lives...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173000 Kit wrote: > I didn't mean to suggest otherwise -- I only meant that, in my view, Dobby has an innocence that the adult witches and wizards don't share. Dobby's death *was* heroic -- he was "a warrior by choice," as you say. But it's my belief that his motivation was his love for Harry, first and foremost, and love for the cause only insofar as that is Harry's cause -- and in his eyes Harry's cause must be the right cause. (Remember that when Dobby first appears he is trying to keep Harry safe by preventing Harry from going to, or remaining at, school -- even though this is not what Harry himself wants. His priority is Harry's safety.) Dobby and his fellow elves, whether some be free or not, have no guarantee that they will benefit if Voldemort is defeated -- and they have every reason to believe that the average witch or wizard isn't overly concerned with their welfare. I felt that Dobby's decision to risk his life for Harry's was both a very brave and a very altruistic one for that reason; he put his life on the line for the person he loved, time and time again. Carol responds: Your post just turned on a lightbulb for me. Courage and love, personal love, not Agape, are linked. Even Narcissa has the courage to lie to the Dark Lord at the last. Snape, whom JKR still considers spiteful, according to this morning's today interview, was nevertheless "immensely, immensely brave" because of his love for Lily. Kreacher may reform because Harry is kind to him and treats him as he thinks a house-elf should be treated, but it's "Master Regulus, champion of house-elves," the master who died for him (another act of immense courage based on love of a house-elf!), not principle. Harry himself would surely never have had the courage to walk to what he thought would be his death without the love of his friends (and, I suppose, the hallowed dead who walked beside him). So Dumbledore was right. The most powerful weapon is the world is Love, not principle or belief in a cause (though love gets tied in with the defeat of Voldemort, the antithesis of Love, for all these people and creatures. Oh, and Molly killing Bellatrix to protect her daughter from dying like Fred. BTW, for all the people complaining that Rowling didn't give enough information in the epilogue, Harry and Ron become Aurors (or course) and Hermione is high up in some MoM department (I didn't catch it, but it's probably related to magical creatures). Didn't we all know that's what they would do? She didn't mention poor George, though, or any characters except HRH. I assume that a video of the interview will be up on Leaky soon. (The links posted there now reveal how she felt about the characters' deaths but not their occupations; there's no transcript yet. Part 2 of the interview airs tomorrow.) Carol, wondering how JKR could fail to realize that Snape is her greatest creation From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 15:23:44 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:23:44 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173001 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "colebiancardi" wrote: > colebiancardi: > yep, I saw that interview and thought, wow oh wow. So, what is the > definition of a hero, I wonder? I would suspect that it has something to do with doing the right thing for the right reason. I've always thought that intention plays a major role in JKR's worldview, as magic seems to respond to it, among other things. Take Neville standing up to his friends and showing courage for the right reason. The way that Snape's love for Lily is presented, it's on an uncomfortable line. It motivates him to a lot of risks, but it doesn't make him a better person in areas such as treating students well, etc. It's more along the lines of obsession than love. True love reminds me of the Marschallin's lines at the opening of the Rosenkavalier Trio, near the end of the opera: "I swore to love him in the right way, so that I could even love his love for another..." (This is a woman giving up her young lover, who has fallen in love and risked a lot to save a young woman from an unwanted marriage.) > And basically, is JKR stating that placing Snape in Slytherin doomed > and sealed his fate as a bad person with no redeeming qualities > whatsoever, if he didn't *love* Lily? I didn't get the feeling that it was specifically his placement in Slytherin House that did it. > I guess JKR is cementing the idea that Snape did not mature in the > last 16 years since Lily's death. That there is nothing but Lily. > That was my rant earlier about the lack of personal growth & > maturity and making atones and moving on. She doesn't give certain > characters that possibility, based on that interview this morning. What confuses me a bit about this line of argument, seen here and elsewhere, is the assumption that every character *has* to have the option to grow and mature and move on, or it's the author being cosmically unfair and mean. Well, we knew as far back as book four that we were not operating with a strict calculus of punishment and reward, and that was cemented in book five. (The first few books operate more along those lines, but the system breaks down as the world gets more confusing and darker.) My objection here is much like PACMAN (Perfectly Angelic Characters Make Awful Novels): novels in which everyone makes the hard climb to profound self-betterment are not usually the most interesting things in the world. I think a good portion of Snape's story IS that he was stunted and unable to let go, and he was kept running by his own personal interests and motivations. Being as the series is not "Severus Snape and the...", we don't get the internal view into what's going on in his head throughout, but his end story is rather tragic, although he is a profound force for the victory over Voldemort. -Nora says: you want to see unfair, look at the amount of death in opera... From chaomath at hitthenail.com Thu Jul 26 15:20:44 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:20:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173002 On Jul 25, 2007, at 7:42 PM, Lisa wrote: > The thing I'm getting frustrated over, at this point, is the savage, > almost vicious attacks against JKR. Recently, I've seen fanfic > authors berate her epilogue and other portions of the story (like > the battle in/around Hogwarts) for being "cliched" and "over-done" > because it had been done a bunch in various FANFICTIONS. I haven't seen any of that here on HPforGrownups; please pay more attention to where you post your rants. Cross-posting is usually a very bad idea. My negative comments about DH have nothing to do with fanfiction and the fan community. I've read very little HP fanfic (mostly because there's too much of it to easily find the good stories) and written none. > Please. I beg you. I *do* feel the pain of loss and my own > frustrations of things I wish could have been explained better/ > presented more clearly, etc. But this was her story to tell, not > ours. But once she released it to the public, it's ours to comment on, praise, and criticize. (Any professional author knows that, so I'm not worried about JKR.) If you, as a fan, don't know that, then you haven't been paying attention. What else is fanfic if not commentary in narrative, fictional form? Some fanfic is even negative criticism, in a way. > Is there any other series of books 'out there' which has inspired > such a broad variety of fan-groups? There are many, long-standing fandoms out there that rival HP. I suspect that much of HP is a passing fad. Oh, yes, some will undoubtedly continue, and time will tell if the Potterverse has enough staying power to rival LoTR, Star Trek, etc. (I doubt it; LoTR was much richer and has a literary background that JKR can't touch, and sci-fi fans are WAY more obsessive than fantasy fans (I say this gently, of course; I'm more of a sci-fi fan than a fantasy fan, myself.) For me, my regard for JKR's work has been slipping steadily through the series, and I really read DH to "find out what happens" not because I was desperate for another book. But then, maybe I'm an odd fan who doesn't have to revere an author (or actor) in order to have fun in the fandom. As to HP bringing kids to reading, well, unfortunately the studies don't confirm this. Yes, there was a mania each time the book was released. But in the US, there has not been an increase in the reading rates among children. (I leave it as an excercise to the reader to find the news coverage of this study; I believe it came out in the last month and was in the NYT.) > There is a difference between critiquing the WRITING and flaming the > WRITER. Yes, and as far as I have read, there has been nothing on this list that remotely resembles a flame. Maybe I've missed it; I can't keep up with the volume of posts. But I doubt it. All of the criticism here has been focused on the actual book. So I reiterate, pay more attention to where you post. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 15:26:19 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:26:19 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173003 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Nora, quoting from The Today Show today: > > > "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see > > Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected > > Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." > > <>> > Unquestionably brave, but....EWWWW! > > > SSSusan: > Count me as one who was quite thrilled to hear about JKR responding > to these questions in this way. > > As much as I believed in DDM!Snape, <>, I have been just a tad bit honked off by > characterizations of Snape that I've seen which went a little too far > (imho) in classifying him as The Good One or a hero. > <>But Snape didn't immediately turn into a full- > fledged hero or the *true* 'epitome of goodness' in my mind. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, > who as one can tell by her name, *is* a Snape fan... just one who > wants to retain a realistic picture of what the man was all about > I agree 100% and am glad someone else shares this view. I have always been a Snape-defender (not ALWAYS a fan) and always trusted he was on the good side...although characterizing him as a "hero" is a bit much. He was good, but flawed, as are most of us...which is why I think I related to Snape all these years much more than Harry. Adam, for whom the stories evolved into Snape's story as much as Harry's. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Jul 26 15:21:54 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:21:54 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Rowling=92s_Debunking_of_the_Marauders?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173004 Leslie: > Through Harry, Rowling vindicates Snape, and by the end of DH, we see > as well that Harry's grown up enough to understand what sort of > behavior should be truly valued: that which selflessly provides the > most good for all. There is no "Sirius Remus Potter." In one way or > another, all of the Marauders turn out to be grave disappointments. > Say what you like about the idea that Snape only does what he does > for Lily?goodness, he might say that himself! However, unlike Remus > Lupin (who much of the time utters words that belie his actions), > Snape's actions belie his words, and the most arresting of those > actions is that (at great risk) he chooses to save not only Lupin, > but spends much of DH (and also HBP) attempting to keep people that > have never even met Lily away from harm. Jen: None of the Maruaders or Snape came out on top of any goodness race by the end of DH for me (nor did Dumbledore for that matter). I read all these characters as both brave and flawed, good and bad; all struggled with personal weaknesses and made positive and negative choices along the way that affected Harry's life greatly. In a way that trip through the forest with his mother, father, Sirius and Remus was Harry saying a final goodbye to childhood and as such, putting away childish notions like the idea that those we worship as children will remain god-like as we grow up. Yet Harry loved them *anyway*; they were the ones he must have had on his mind when the resurrection stone appeared. He'd made peace with them despite their flaws. And nineteen years later Harry's accepted all the information revealed to him about two more important men in his life, Dumbledore and Snape. His ability to do so already existed because he'd made such a leap with his father and friends. I don't think he named his child Albus Severus because he believed those men to be better than the Marauders but because he came to view both as incredibly brave, the quality he himself seems to value the most. Jen From jnferr at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 15:33:08 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:33:08 -0500 Subject: over analysing? Message-ID: <8ee758b40707260833k7362dff6n91a55b246b81ce69@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173005 montims: I know that we all need to discuss the book(s), and I am very grateful that there is this great group, with such excellent ideas, but while we are teasing out every last strand, I really feel that we should appreciate that in JKR's eyes: DD is the epitome of goodness Snape is brave and noble the Marauders were lovable pranksters (though not as lovable as Lily...) Harry and Ginny love each other with a deep and abiding love, as do Ron and Hermione everything turns out for the best etc etc etc We, who analyse every detail, can and will reach other conclusions, and conclude that something is creepy, someone is sinister or a childabuser or whatever, but I really feel that that is due to JKR not having written more specifics, or hammered home her beliefs. I think she thinks that having a character say "everybody loved her", for example, is enough for us to believe it. I'm just saying that even though she doesn't prove them consistently, the basic facts of the stories can be pretty straightforward, and the majority of readers will take them that way. We have invested a lot more into them and it seems we all read them differently. I was left with Neville's rallying cry against injustice, and I am happy to take that as the theme. Your mileage may vary... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rkdas at charter.net Thu Jul 26 15:33:29 2007 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:33:29 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173006 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: >> Carol, wondering how JKR could fail to realize that Snape is her > greatest creation Ah you sparked me, Carol. I was totally taken aback by JKR's less- glowing assessment of Snape whom so many idolize and love. And from your post, you too seemed to have gathered that she is much more situationally positioned in her ethics than previously realized. Snape was only a hero because of his great love of Lily. Had Harry been the son of another witch, he wouldn't have protected him. Ah. I feel somewhat disoriented now. Love as a bond is so subjective. It's almost as if she feels that the subjective quality of love can be the antidote for things such as "the greater good." Jen D. hoping at some point that Book 7 clears up more than it obscures... > From kkersey at swbell.net Thu Jul 26 15:33:24 2007 From: kkersey at swbell.net (kkersey_austin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:33:24 -0000 Subject: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle In-Reply-To: <2155A7BA65BC4A9183B07839DC5D32A1@ShimonMoshesPC> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173007 Mindy asked: > > 1) We never find out the theory or background behind the veil that Sirius falls through, and his body is never recovered. was JK ever planning to address that? I doubt it. This Veil was in, after all, the Department of *Mysteries*. Personally I really like how she portrayed the whole DoM thing - the idea that the Ministry has created a bureacracy to address the "big questions" about death, mind, etc. is kind of funny. What we see in each room is a physical manifestation of something that symbolizes each Mystery - the vat of brains (and it was so perfect for Ron, who is so often the victim of his own negative thinking, to be attacked by the brains!), the timepieces, and of course veil for death ("beyond the veil"). But in spite of all these tools and laboratories, I get the impression that not a lot of progress has been made by the researchers. These areas are, after all, Mysteries - not just to the wizarding world, but to us as well, and presumably to author herself. The door to the Love room she wisely kept locked - I think that as an author she may have believed that any attempt to portray its contents would trivialize the mystery. A big pink valentine card? I don't think so! Each reader can imagine for his or herself what might lie beyond that door. The locked door itself echos the idea of keeping one's true feelings locked in one's heart; Love is a mystery too personal and individual to be studied in a bureaucratic lab. I doubt that the Unspeakables even have a key to that room anyway. So while JKR has shown us the Veil, she has kept a lot of options open about what exactly happens after death - I think that the stories can accomodate a wide spectrum of religious views regarding the afterlife. I got a little nervous during the Kings Cross chapter, but she does a couple of things there. First, makes it clear that Harry is not actually dead there, but at the threshhold between life and death. I love that she chose a train station, a place of transition, and specifically King's Cross, which has served from the beginning as a transition between worlds (muggle/WW; home/school). Second, she ends the chapter with Dumbledore telling Harry that it is "all in his head", but no less real for being so. Indeed, while Dumbledore does a lot of talking, his speech is littered with phrases like "...as you already know", and he never gives Harry any truly new information. Harry already has most of the facts of the stories Dumbledore tells, what is new is that he is hearing them from Dumbledore's point of view. I'll need to reread the chapter to make sure, but my initial impression is that it works just as well whether the reader sees Dumbledore's presence as his soul literally coming back to interact with Harry, or as a projection of Harry's subconscious and imagination putting together the facts he already knows (along with some reasonable speculation about motivations) with a new understanding. Hmm. Kind of like what we like to do here. ;-) On the other hand, a hallmark of JKR's writing,or at least her depiction of the Wizarding World, is to take the symbolic and make it literal. As a prime example, and bringing this back around to topic, taking the phrase "beyond the veil" and creating the Veil in the DoM. So I can see it being intended to really be Dumbledore's soul. But I think that she is trying to have it both ways here, so it works regardless of the reader's specific beliefs about an afterlife. Well, long answer to a short question! Elisabet From lazuli_tps at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 15:19:41 2007 From: lazuli_tps at yahoo.co.uk (lazuli_tps) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:19:41 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173008 Yeah, I loved the Snape and Shampoo comment. I also loved 'Nutty as squirrel poo!' I don't know if JKR made that one up, but I've never heard it before. Lazuli ^_^ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 15:42:28 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:42:28 -0000 Subject: Rowling tells all Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173009 If you want to know more about the fate of the characters than you learned in the epilog see an interview Rowling just gave that goes into a lot more detail: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/ Eggplant From kkersey at swbell.net Thu Jul 26 15:45:43 2007 From: kkersey at swbell.net (kkersey_austin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:45:43 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173010 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kkersey_austin" > wrote: > > > Voldemort is the only one we hear about who is able to possess other > > living beings, though, right? > > > > Elisabet > > > > True, but Harry can do it too, 'cause of the soul-bit he got. > > Yeah, really. He can. > > I swear. > > ;) > Yeah, he can, and millions of us at a time. And here we thought JKR's characters and plot twists were the secrets of her success... Elisabet From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com Thu Jul 26 16:04:20 2007 From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (wickywackywoo2001) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:04:20 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173011 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: I > don't want to repeat what I've posted a few times but we just do not > deal with the House problem, with the Slytherin problem; you still > don't choose to go into Slytherin, so why is it still there? Then > there is social justice, which is raised throughout the series, but > is not dealt with adequately. > It seemed to me to give a false impression of what is possible after a seriously damaging war. Things do not just "go back to normal", even after some years. I expected to see a changed world. Rowling made great use of Nazi Germany parallels; this was as if WWII ended, and the Germans went right back to admiring militarism and marching and uniforms and excessive adulation of strong leaders. You can't go through a war and not come out questioning what led to it. Tolkien grasped that - even though the Shire is repaired at the end of LOTR, it's never quite the same, and people just have to accept that some things have been lost for good. In fact, I thought that one of the permanent results of Voldemort's reign of terror would be that the Sorting Hat was destroyed - I thought that was half the point of it bursting into flames on Neville's head. Not just to punish him, but to destroy the link to the past. After all, Voldemort had just announced that he was abolishing all the other houses, so nobody would be sorted ever again. Instead, we're right back to the same old stupid sorting into classes that was part of the problem from the beginning. > And finally. The epilogue is in my opinion, one of the most badly > written parts of the entire seven books. JKR can do famuly scenes > brilliantly, this one (apart from the Severus moment) was just banal. > I've read books and interviews by successful writers, and one thing many of them said which always struck me as silly was "If you've written a phrase or a paragraph that you think is especially brilliant and indispensible, RIP IT OUT." It turns out they were right. This epilogue was apparently written long ago, and carefully cherished; Rowling was bound and determined to have it in, no matter what, and we see the results. It stinks, and I think if she hadn't been so emotionally attached to it, she would have realized how inferior it is. Wanda From aida_costa at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 15:33:52 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:33:52 -0000 Subject: The Bloody Baron and Severus Snape: flaws and strengths of the Slytherin Hou In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173012 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bookworm857158367" wrote: >Snape and the Bloody Baron are both great representatives of twisted Scorpios, Snape is actually a Capricorn, as evidence by JKR's Wizard of Month info. His birthday is January 9th. Aida From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 26 16:26:24 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:26:24 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173013 colebiancardi: > > yep, I saw that interview and thought, wow oh wow. So, what is > > the definition of a hero, I wonder? Nora: > I would suspect that it has something to do with doing the right > thing for the right reason. I've always thought that intention > plays a major role in JKR's worldview, as magic seems to respond to > it, among other things. Take Neville standing up to his friends > and showing courage for the right reason. > > The way that Snape's love for Lily is presented, it's on an > uncomfortable line. It motivates him to a lot of risks, but it > doesn't make him a better person in areas such as treating students > well, etc. It's more along the lines of obsession than love. SSSusan: That reference to Neville reminds me of another reason that I feel it was 'appropriate' [ha! how dare I say what's 'appropriate' for Herself to bring up? hee!] to bring up that Snape was not a hero even while he was very brave. Let me explain what I mean. We all remember the famous moment of Neville standing up to his friends, which got him praise & reward from DD. It was a very brave thing to do, to stand up to his friends. And Neville, I think, developed along those lines even more. What about Snape? What about what we saw in his pensieve memories, when Lily confronted him about him joining in with his 'little Death Eater friends'? He had once told her that her Muggleborn status did not matter, he obviously craved her affections & cherished their relationship, but in the end, he lacked the bravery to stand up to his friends and tell them that they were wrong. He *turned* brave later, making the choice of honoring Lily's memory by playing the dangerous role of double-agent, by protecting a boy he couldn't love or even like, and by *showing* all of this to Harry. THAT was brave, and I think that's what Harry recognized and what JKR acknowledged today. But he wasn't able to do it back when his earlier decision faced him (nor was Dumbledore in his earlier life!), so I do give him credit for his later bravery. But the fact that he changed sides only for Lily's sake, not for ideological reasons, not for James' or Harry's sake... only for Lily's... I guess that's what prevents me from thinking of him as a hero. Colebiancardi? > > And basically, is JKR stating that placing Snape in Slytherin > > doomed and sealed his fate as a bad person with no redeeming > > qualities whatsoever, if he didn't *love* Lily? Nora: > I didn't get the feeling that it was specifically his placement in > Slytherin House that did it. SSSusan: Me, either. Again, I refer back to Neville. He was placed in Gryffindor but he didn't *automatically* go along with his Gryffindor friends. He evidenced the Gryffindor trait of bravery in standing up to his friends and *not* going along with him. Snape could have done the same thing and not gone along with his Slytherin friends when faced with the choice of losing Lily's respect & friendship forever. He did not. I see that as a personal choice, not as some kind of 'automatic' coming from his placement in Slytherin. I guess I see it that his love for Lily wasn't *enough.* Back when he was a student at Hogwarts AND later after he'd come back to DD. His love for Lily got him to the point of taking many right actions, but it didn't take him to a lot of true growth & change internally, which is what Nora was saying as well, I believe. And (I could be missing something here -- feel free to point that out!) I'm not seeing that as connected to his being placed in Slytherin, to his having been doomed by that placement. Nora: > I think a good portion of Snape's story IS that he was stunted and > unable to let go, and he was kept running by his own personal > interests and motivations. Being as the series is not "Severus > Snape and the...", we don't get the internal view into what's going > on in his head throughout, but his end story is rather tragic, > although he is a profound force for the victory over Voldemort. SSSusan: Absolutely! As I was talking things over with my 11-year-old daughter, I told her that Snape's story is a profoundly sad one in my view. He was socially & emotionally stunted. As I told her, many people in life suffer heartbreak in love, but most of them find a way to move on. Snape was pathetically damaged socially (and I'm not BLAMING him for that, I'm just saying). He could not move on. Siriusly Snapey Susan From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 16:27:08 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:27:08 -0000 Subject: Responding to the responses to a LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173014 Responding to some responses and then, as a bonus, to other semi- related posts I managed to run across between here and there. > > Joe: > > Snape/Pensieve - Remember, we are only seeing what Snape wanted > > Harry to see. This is Snape's edited version of things. Yes, a > > pensieve shows only true things, but it doesn't show EVERYTHING. It > > doesn't show what we might call "refuting evidence." > > zgirnius: > This occured to me, and is in my opinion an important point. It is > one reason I believe that Snape came to care for Harry, and why I > think his "Look at me" meant not only that he wanted to see Lily's > eyes one last time before he died, but also that he realized, in his > final moments, that he wanted Harry to understand him, not to win him > to yet another false view of himself. And to achieve that, he needed > to give an honest account of himself, at least as far as he could > manage in the final seconds of his life, lying in a pool of his own > blood. > > Because the memories we saw were not particularly sanitized at all. > Why show himself dropping the branch on Petunia? Why show enough > memories that Harry could understand his mother's decision to cut off > ties? Why, most damningly, show that first meeting with Dumbledore in > its full glory, from start to finish, including the admission that > disgusted Dumbledore so deeply? Me again: My point was not that the memories themselves had been sanitized or edited, but that they had been chosen *selectively* for these memories to convey to Harry precisely what Snape wanted. I meant to underscore a difference between "the truth" and "the whole truth." > > Joe: > > In a way we are taking Snape's "word" for it, a > > dangerous proposition in the Potterverse. > > zgirnius: > It is a deal less dangerous now that the series is complete. > That "Albus Severus" bit in the much-loathed Epilogue is more or less > the last word. Me yet again: What we see in the Epilogue (which was "okay, fine" for me) is based on what Harry believes. I agree with Harry in that Snape was EXTREMELY brave. Since life is a results-driven affair, I have no major problem with why Snape behaved bravely. If he did so for noble reasons or dysfunctional reasons is irrelevant to me. > Joe: > > Doe Patronus - How can two people have the same Patronus? > > zgirnius: > I think the emotional trauma of Lily's death caused a change to > Snape's Patronus (we know from HBP this can happen). Since she was > dead, they did not have the same Patronus, as she no longer had one > at all. That's probably the 'ironclad reason'. I know a person's Patronus can change by a deep change of heart, but can you "will it" to change into something specific? (I guess the answer must now be "yes" although the mechanics seem to be a bit nebulous.) > zgirnius: > Oh, but the Sword of Gryffindor! And killing Nagini!! (How cool is it > that Neville avenged Snape's death, though of course he did not know > it at the time?) I thought that was an amazing moment for him, and > was happy to see Molly have hers too. Me, still: Undoubtedly cool for Neville, but, for me, somewhat -- not hugely -- less satisfying than offing Bellatrix. > > Joe: > > Ron the Parselmouth - Clunky and clumsy device. Parseltongue is not > > something learnable. IIRC, DD calls it a gift in COS. (Although, > > it's funny that he faked it.) > > zgirnius: > I think the gift part is when you are born speaking it, like Tom was. > That does not rule out the possibility of learning it like a language. Me once more: They say "the actual proves the possible" and therefore it must be true, but I still found it clunky (but funny). It'd've been tidier if the Chamber had simply not been sealed up, or if R&H went in the way they had exited (which was different from the entry) in COS. It strikes me as weird that for eleventy zillion years, the most learned magical folk couldn't figure it out but a dropout with a gift for mimickry does it? > > Joe: > > I defy anyone to tell me they'd > > want someone loving them the way Snape loved Lily. > > zgirnius: > Yes, being loved by the person Snape was as a young Death Eater would > not be near the top of my list. But he was not the same person when > he died. Me: The Snape at the end still had a very stilted, distorted view of love. If I had such a character (i.e., Snape at the end) in love with me, I'd get the aurors to issue a restraining order. > > Joe: > > How does the (by my scoring anyway) third best wizard in the world, > > Snape, "accidentally" curse off George's ear? > > zgirnius: > I presume because everyone involved (Snape, Lupin/George, the otehr > Death Eater) were all flying at high speeds when it happened. Me, still at it: Snape always struck me as being too good a wizard for this sort of thing to be an accident, so that raised an eyebrow. > > Joe: > > What did *Lupin* ever do to earn Snape's wrath? (Being friends with > > James & Sirius doesn't count for much here.) > > zgirnius: > Snape claims to believe that Lupin was in on Sirius's little joke. > The only tangible act one can point to is that it must have been he > that told Sirius how to get into the tunnel. Snape had no way to know > this was so his Animagus friends would be able to free him for jolly > romps through the countryside - I presume he therefore decided Lupin > told Sirius for the purpose of the prank. Me some more: The fact Snape was hostile to Lupin as far as POA doesn't speak well for Snape. Snape had plenty of time to get it through his hygienically challenged scalp that Lupin was not in on that joke. But in this, Snape came across as petty and vindictive. Which is good. A Snape who is pure and noble and mature and oozing tortured longanimity is unidimensional at best...I've stepped in deeper puddles than such a character. > Ken > In the ASV, the version I have on my Palm, Exodus 22:18 says "thou > shalt not suffer a sorceress to live". Ok, not a prohibition on > magic per se, but if those who practice magic are to be executed > is that not the same thing? It is passages like this one that are > the source of of > the common conservative Christian objections to the Harry Potter > series. At least that is what I hear in the media, I don't know of > a single one of my peers who does object to Harry Potter. Me, piping up: I'm using the Douay-Rheims version (one which came out WAAAAAY before HP) and the translation is pretty similar: "Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live." But! It has an explanatory footnote to the effect that a wizard (or sorceress, etc.) is someone engaged in *invocational* magic, i.e., summoning up spirits via occult practices. I grant that not a majority of Bibles will have this or similar footnotes, and I further grant that most anti-HP Evangelical Christians are unlikely to find all that much much comfort in a Catholic edition of Scripture, but there ya go. > squeaker19450 > I'm sorry, but evidently some folks still don't GET IT. This is > the author speaking through Harry. Me: I'm not sure that Harry is meant to be an omniscient spokeswizard. I'd be grateful if you could walk me through it, because I don't see it. (Not to say that Harry is necessarily wrong, just that I don't think he necessarily speaks for JKR.) Oh, and Harry said Snape was the bravest (not greatest, noblest, etc.). (I rather enjoyed Bookworm857158367's take on the Bloody Baron & Snape, incidentally. As well as SSSusan's "His wasn't a conversion based upon a total reordering of moral principles.") On the Good Guys and the Unforgivables. In Harry's case, the parasitic nature of the Bit O' Voldemort gaining strength accounts for the Crucio bit. The AK is understandable, given the war scenario, as is the Imperius curse. But Harry had tried this curse in OOP and it didn't work so well, and I don't recall *much* wailing and gnashing of teeth over it. Still, while he may have meant that at the time (so that the curse actually "registered" with its target) and while he may have been gradually degenerating morally due to the parasitic Horcrux (exacerbated by the locket wearing?), it shows that in trying circumstances, even the "best" of us can and do have sharp moral lapses. I'm also trying to make a distinction between acceptable and understandable, that is, in Harry's case there were mitigating circumstances. The important bit is to realize that Harry did not stay in that state which permitted him to go a- Crucio-ing. From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 15:50:01 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:50:01 -0000 Subject: Hedwig In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173015 > Lesley wrote: > Although i loved the book i was really upset that Hedwig was killed > off. I regret to say that i cried my eyes out. The deaths of Fred, Mad- > eye and the others wasn't nice but it was accepted that some people > would die- i just cant think why Hedwig had to as Harry could have > released her before the journey. It was especially sad because she was > angry with Harry before they left, she should have come back at the end > when Harry saw his parents and the others. Oh you are right there Lesley. Hedwig's death was such a shock to me too. Teared up so bad I couldn't continue to read for a while. Then Dobby gets whacked, that was a shock, teared up on that one too. Since Rowlings killed off animals and house elves, I had steeled myself when she started whacking the people but just cried when she killed Fred. Man I was just emotionally drained when I finished the book. I am still effected by the book's story line as I tear up again. Yes I know this book is fictional and it shouldn't matter but it does matter. I understand now why Rowlings cried for so long after finishing the book. Please pass the kleenex................. Lady Potions From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 16:42:04 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:42:04 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered (wrong!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173016 Neri wrote: > > > As much as I can make sense of Dumbledore's original plan, Snape was to be killed by Voldemort and the Elder Wand end with no master. > Rowena(?) replied: > I don't think that's quite right. DD himself says he intended Snape to have the Elder Wand, and is disapointed it didn't work out that way, (Kings Cross Station chatper). Personally I find this rather touching evidence both of DD's trust in Snape, leaving him something so powerful and perilous, and his concern for him. Maybe he hoped with the Elder wand Snape might manage to survive the War. (Unsigned post so I hope I got the atribution correct.) > Carol responds: I've been thinking about this (so disturbed by the horrible pig-to-the-slaughter idea that I could barely stand to see the books on the store shelves for millions of children to read). Not only did the idea fill me with revulsion, it was inconsistent with the Christian themes of the book and with the Dumbledore we see at King's Cross, who, unlike Voldie (condemned to spend eternity as a rejected and horrible fetus) is restored to wholeness, and with DD's and Harry's moment of silence for Snape. Clearly, DD intended Snape to be the master of the wand and keep it safe (one part of the plan was to make sure that neither Draco or a true Death Eater got it), but that can't be the whole plan. Clearly, he didn't expect Snape to die. The moment of regret for his fate in King's Cross would have been the most horrible hypocrisy if that were the case. What, then, did Dumbledore want Snape to do? I think he wanted Snape to disarm him before killing him so he would be not only the master but the possessor of the wand (which LV at that point would not have known). He also intended for Snape to be headmaster of Hogwarts to protect the students as best he could from the Carrows and prevent them from taking complete control by retaining McGonagall and others as staff members. (We don't see much of Snape as headmaster, but he clearly encouraged the re-formation of the DA by reinstituting Umbridge's decrees, knowing full well what would happen.) Portrait!DD, who had Snape send a fake Sword of Gryffindor to Gringotts and arrange for Harry (or, as it happens, Ron) to retrieve it, and Snape does so with his own brilliant plan. Dumbledore also needs him to tell Harry about the soul bit, which can only be done when Voldemort is keeping Nagini close to him. I think, had Snape been master of the wand, DD would have told him to let Harry disarm him before he told him about the soul bit. (Just how he would have persuaded Harry that he was DDM and that Harry must listen to him, I don't know.) But Dumbledore needed Snape alive to protect Hogwarts as far as he could without giving himself away (did anyone notice that Slughorn still trusted him? I guess he didn't believe that Snape had killed DD) and to tell Harry about the soul bit at the end so he could sacrifice himself, as Snape thought, for the greater good. So "poor Severus" was intended to survive," but "that bit didn't work out," to Dumbledore's regret. Dumbledore may be flawed, but he's clearly depicted as good in "King's Cross" and JKR is sending a Christian message, trumpeted by the implications of that chapter title. It would be both malicious and hypocritical if that benevolent Dumbledore (incontrast to the flawed and manipulative living DD who nevertheless did all he could to insure Harry's resurrection) were a ruthless murderer by proxy who set up his most loyal lieutenant as a pig to the slaughter. What a horrible message that would send to millions of children, and how disgusting it would have been for Christ figure!Harry to name his son after such a cold-hearted manipulator. (Better to name his son Severus Dobby!). Carol, noting that the whole point of the Hallows is to provide additional protection for Harry beyond the shared drop of blood so that the soul bit can be destroyed without killing Harry and Voldemort can truly die through Harry's sacrificial act of love once the last Horcrux has been destroyed Carol, From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 15:48:54 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:48:54 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A8C266.9030407@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173017 OctobersChild48 at aol.com blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 15:56: > excerpt from Cheryl Klein's (editor at Scholastic) blog about > Deathly Hallows. > > And this leads me to the epilogue. It is not receiving much love, > I seesome people hate it because it doesnt answer all their > questions, some people hate it because it gives answers they > dont want, and some people just find it cheesy. I think it paid > off five essential themes of the series (not just the book): CJ writes: Hmm... But it could easily have done all that and STILL covered many of the other bases. Simply replace the whole cute-but-pointless driver's test with something like: ---------------- "Harry!" "Hey, Ron." "So how's Auguring these days?" "Well, pretty slow, you know, since we managed to track Shunpike to Albania last year. That Muggle-baiting up on the coast last spring was the most fun I've had all year. Speaking of which, rumour has it the Department of Mysteries is working on an improved Obliviate charm." "Beats me. You think the head of the Ministry tells ME anything?" "You mean just 'cause you're married to her, right? Hi, Harry." "Great to see you again, Hermione." "Now, really, Ronald dearest. What kind of example would that set? Be kinda hard to call it the Department of *Mysteries* if we went around talking about work to every Tom, Dick and Harry -- um, no offense, big H! -- who asked. "Besides, husband of mine, when's the last time YOU'VE talked shopped to ME?" "Hmm, lessee -- what was it you said last time the folks came over? 'Why is it every time you and your dad talk shop, *I* get grilled about all things Muggle?'" Hermione's retort was interrupted by Lily and Hugo, Rose's younger brother, who were having an animated discussion about which House they would be sorted into.... ---------------- CJ Taiwan From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 16:00:19 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:00:19 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173018 Libby wrote: > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to > fake Parseltongue well enough to access the Chamber of Secrets > Admittedly, he did earlier show skill impersonating Wormtail's voice > well enough to fool the Death Eaters at Malfoy Manor, but Parseltongue > has been billed as such a rare talent that it rang false for me. > > Seems to me a well-placed Reductor Curse would have accomplished much > the same thing without fudging. Here's my take on this. Ron was around when Harry was using Parseltongue. He was standing there in the girl's bathroom when Harry spoke in parseltongue to the sink. When I was a kid I watched a lot of western movies and kids I hung around with would repeat sounds that sounded like the Spanish words the Mexicans in the movies used. Moochachos - not spelled right but is the Spanish word for Friends. So when Hermione and Ron went to the Chamber Of Secrets I think all Ron did was imitate the sounds he heard Harry make and he was very lucky that he produced the correct sounds. But that sometimes happens don't it ? Plus these kids are magical and when they really need or want something, they can do some extraoridinary things. Lady Potions From tifflblack at earthlink.net Thu Jul 26 16:46:44 2007 From: tifflblack at earthlink.net (tiffany black) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:46:44 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Funny lines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001901c7cfa4$8d73ef40$6401a8c0@TIFFANY> No: HPFGUIDX 173019 > zgirnius: > Dark, but I offer: > > "Would you like me to do it now? Or would you like a few moments to > compose an epitaph?" Potioncat: Me too. I actually had a "He didn't just say that!?" moment and had to re-read it. But the first funny line that had me setting the book down to laugh was, "Fred and George turned to each other and said together, 'Wow---we're identical!'" It got funnier when my youngest, a fellow fan eagerly asked what was so funny and I said, "George and Fred just noticed they were identical." He looked at me with a doubting look and asked, "You mean, after all this time, they didn't know?" Tiffany: How about "I'd do up my fly by hand though if I were you." 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 __________ NOD32 2374 (20070703) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com From homeboys at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 16:42:57 2007 From: homeboys at comcast.net (Adesa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:42:57 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173020 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adamjmarcantel" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meglet2" wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mindy" wrote: > > > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Allie now: > I doubt the Order > > had > > > > planned which particular Saturday they were going to take Harry > > so > > > far > > > > in advance. > > > > > > > > > > Mindy says: > > > > > > I have another puzzling question.... Snape only became Hogwarts > > > headmaster in September. How the heck did he get into > Dumbledore's > > > office in July???? > > > >That chat with the portrait definitely suggests Snape is > > HM and DD is dead and therefore couldn't be happening in July. I > > still think it is a mistake and part of the careless writing of the > > book. But I would love to be proved wrong with a better theory. > > > > Mercia > > > > > > > I don't know about a "mistake," necessarily. It seems that DD's > office is not that hard to get into. All you have to do is see Harry > being able to go there right after Snape's death simply by knowning > the password. It doesn't seem a far stretch that Snape would know > the password to get into the office after DD's death and before he > became Headmaster. So I don't see that Snape being in DD's office > after DD's death but before becoming Headmaster as a big problem, > timeline-wise. > > Adam > Adesa: And remember, right after DD's death, McGonogall was able to go right in. True, she *was* the Deputy Headmistress. But it shows us that the only person *not* able to get in (even with a password) was Umbridge. And methinks that was a special spell with much love ;O) from Dumbledore to Umbridge. From tenne at redshift.bc.ca Thu Jul 26 16:16:30 2007 From: tenne at redshift.bc.ca (Tenne) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:16:30 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Epilogue Bashing References: Message-ID: <00ae01c7cfa0$53dc9330$797ba8c0@terrilaptop> No: HPFGUIDX 173021 littleleahstill wrote: > I > don't want to repeat what I've posted a few times but we just do not > deal with the House problem, with the Slytherin problem; you still > don't choose to go into Slytherin, so why is it still there? Then > there is social justice, which is raised throughout the series, but > is not dealt with adequately. But you do choose to go into Slytherin. If you don't want to be placed there, the sorting hat will place you in another house. It happened to Harry and Harry tells his son that he can make the choice. Draco wanted to go to Slytherin and I imagine, so did most of the other kids that ended up there. Whether we like it or not, there will always be bullies and people who are attracted to power and evil. These people are a fact of life and at least in the WW we know who they are, they are in Slytherin. I know myself from going through the school system, bullies are bullies well before age 11. I personally would have rathered they be put into a seperate house when I was in school and I could have had Ravenclaws mainly around me. Tenne From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 16:48:45 2007 From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:48:45 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173022 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meglet2" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mindy" wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" > wrote: > > > > > > > Allie now: > > > > > > But how did Portrait Dumbledore even **KNOW** the escape date? > He > > was > > > dead months before Harry's 17th birthday, and I doubt the Order > had > > > planned which particular Saturday they were going to take Harry > so > > far > > > in advance. > > > > > > > Mindy says: > > > > I have another puzzling question.... Snape only became Hogwarts > > headmaster in September. How the heck did he get into Dumbledore's > > office in July???? > I took the timing to be after Snape became HeadMaster. I thought the scene took place with DD's portrait. As for how the portrait knew- easy. The people in portraits are able to move between their portraits, so someone had a portrait of DD when the move was being discussed. Also- might still have something to do with Chocolate Frog cards- they seemed very important to DD. From seusilva at uol.com.br Thu Jul 26 16:51:05 2007 From: seusilva at uol.com.br (james black potter) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:51:05 -0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070726165109.32234E0007C5@socom4.uol.com.br> No: HPFGUIDX 173023 Eggplant: If you want to know more about the fate of the characters than you learned in the epilog see an interview Rowling just gave that goes into a lot more detail: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/ james black potter: Ugh. Now I'm extremelly glad about the short epilogue. Rowling has not really thought about post-Hogwarts... Auror!Harry makes no sense, these ideas are dated. Thanks God she let this stuff out of the canon. "... the ministry evolves into a 'really good place to be". Yeah, sure. From verosomm at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 16:55:50 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:55:50 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173024 > > colebiancardi: SNIP > > Their was ONLY one person that started out nasty with horrible biases, > which he picked up from his parents, whom we see change & mature. And > he didn't even DIE at the end. And that person was a Muggle - Dudley. > > I guess Muggles have a leg-up on atonement and rejecting biases that > they were taught. They get a second chance and they get to live. > Actually (and I'm willing to eat crow tomorrow, Sunday, or on Tuesday, when we hear from JKR again), after rereading the book, I think Dudley DOES die, as do Vernon and Petunia. I don't have my book here, but about 1/3 of the way in, there is something about Dedalus's house being blown up... isn't that where the Dursleys are? So I think it's possible that they, Diggle, and Jones have now all perished for the cause. I HOPE I'm wrong, but that's how I understood it (but only when I read it the second time)... none of the five are mentioned again. Veronica From muellem at bc.edu Thu Jul 26 17:02:13 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:02:13 -0000 Subject: Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: <00ae01c7cfa0$53dc9330$797ba8c0@terrilaptop> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173025 > littleleahstill wrote: > > I > > don't want to repeat what I've posted a few times but we just do not > > deal with the House problem, with the Slytherin problem; you still > > don't choose to go into Slytherin, so why is it still there? Then > > there is social justice, which is raised throughout the series, but > > is not dealt with adequately. > > Tenne wrote: > > But you do choose to go into Slytherin. If you don't want to be placed there, the sorting hat will place you in another house. It happened to Harry and Harry tells his son that he can make the choice. > Draco wanted to go to Slytherin and I imagine, so did most of the other kids that ended up there. Whether we like it or not, there will always be bullies and people who are attracted to power and evil. These people are a fact of life and at least in the WW we know who they are, they are in Slytherin. > colebiancardi: but, Snape's reasons for wanting to be in Slytherin was not because he was evil or wanted power - remember he stated that he would rather be brainy than brawny to James & Sirius on the train. So, to Slytherin's, it seems, that they view their House quite differently from others. James & Sirius were *bullies* when they were at Hogwarts - Lupin states they would hex people in the hallways and such and all those detentions!! So, I don't think it is fair to dump on the Slytherins here as bullies. Just because people are ambitious, doesn't mean they are evil & will step over everyone to get to the top. Slytherins are also described by the Sorting Hat as clever and will help you achieve your goals. Bullies are in all houses. It isn't as simple as how JKR portrays it in DH. From psych12 at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 16:42:08 2007 From: psych12 at gmail.com (leggrachel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:42:08 -0000 Subject: The unforgivable curse argument In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173026 "colwilrin" wrote: > When Harry used the Crucio curse, he was in a battle situation. > Voldemort and the DE's were intent on killing both Harry and those > who supported Harry. In any US court, Harry's actions would be > justified under Self-Defense. > I was actually a bit happy when Harry finally got serious and > fought fire with fire. I never wanted him to AK anyone...but > he used the force necessary to protect himself...and I was > thrilled by it. "leggrachel" writes: One theme of JKR is that there aren't those simple lines between good and bad, like we all wish there were. Snape, for example, is quite a dynamic character, and for all that he remained loyal, she stated that Snape would not have been interested in saving Harry at all had it not been for his love of Lily. I think it's the same thing here with unforgivables curses. When it's no holds barred battle, I think the time for subtlety was passed. Interestingly, earlier in the book, Lupin mentions that the Death Eaters seemed to think that disarming was Harry's signature move. And in the end, that's what actually gets rid of Voldie - his killing cruse rebounding from Harry's own disarming spell. From desafio6 at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 16:30:19 2007 From: desafio6 at gmail.com (Leticia Chen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:30:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4641ef6a0707260930u6909d63do83516e126b5c2b85@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173027 > Adam: > ... So I don't see that Snape being in DD's office > after DD's death but before becoming Headmaster as a big problem, > timeline-wise. I don't see this as a problem either, since Hermonie summons the books through the window and we know Snape is a bat. So he could have enter the grounds and the office after the funeral. -- Letty From homeboys at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 17:04:34 2007 From: homeboys at comcast.net (Adesa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:04:34 -0000 Subject: The unforgivable curse argument In-Reply-To: <004d01c7cf96$b139d5b0$0202a8c0@Lana> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173028 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lana" wrote: > > > > > > Colwilrin > > Many are upset that Harry used the Crucio curse. I am not, for one > > specific > > reason. In the US (where I am from...and have spent the last 48 hours > > taking the lawyer's bar admittance examination), the use of deadly force > > is > > allowed, and justified when one is in a position of fear of imminent death > > to oneself or another. > > > > When Harry used the Crucio curse, he was in a battle situation. > > Voldemort and the DE's were intent on killing both Harry and those who > > supported Harry. In any US court, Harry's actions would be justified > > under > > Self-Defense. > > > > I was actually a bit happy when Harry finally got serious and fought fire > > with fire. I never wanted him to AK anyone...but he used the force > > necessary to protect himself...and I was thrilled by it. Just as I was > > thrilled when Molly asserted herself enough to dispatch Bellatrix. Way to > > go girl! > ------------------------ > > Sherry: > > > > As it was war, I could have accepted even Harry using the killing curse. > > It's the Imperius and Cruciatus that bothered me. Cruciatus is a torture > > curse, inflicting terrible agony in every fiber of someone's body. That > > isn't self defense or fighting fire with fire. We have soldiers facing > > court martials for torturing prisoners. Torture is wrong, in my opinion, > > and I hated seeing the hero, the good guy using it. I didn't mind molly > > offing Bella, because it was war, and soldiers do kill in war. That's > > their > > job. I didn't want Harry to have to kill, but that would have been far > > easier to accept than cruciatus for me. > > Lana: > > I was thrilled that Harry used the curse. Not because he tortured > someone, but because of everything he went thru, he chose not to kill. I do > not think that you can really compare troops to this. Not even remotely the > same thing. These people have been chasing him and trying to kill him since > before he was even a year old. I think a little torture is justified. > > Lana > Adesa: I, too, was happy Harry used the Cruciatus curse. Not because his tormentors deserved torture, but because I got the feeling he was looking to do only enough damage to defend himself; nothing long- lasting. His ability to give others second chances, I think, rival Dumbledore's by the end of our story. I also think that JKR's point that people are not *all good* or *all evil*, that we each have shades of grey in us, was part of Harry's actions. And what's wrong with that? Above all else, IMO, is JKR's ability to capture human behavior in all its imperfection. That's why I loved OotP so much and why I've *cared* about fictional characters for a decade. From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Thu Jul 26 17:10:07 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:10:07 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173029 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fitzchivalryhk" wrote: > > One of the most unsatisfying point in Deathly Hallows for many > HPfGUers is the continual/approval of the Sorting system after the > Voldemort war. In DH, by showing that none of the current Slytherin > students was good enough to join the other Houses to fight against > Voldemort, and discounting other Slytherins as "Griffindor at heart" > (i.e. Snape), the book seems to send a message to people that as long > as you are categorized as one type of people (namely, Slytherin) at > the age of 11, you are a coward or villain for life. > > I find this type of message disturbing, and am surprised that, even > though the Sorting Hat's song in previous years seem to disapprove > this type of segregation, the epilogue shows that the system is > allowed to remain unchanged at least for the next 19 years. > > For those who share the point of view that the Sorting and House > System of Hogwarts is not beneficial for the wizarding society and its > children, what do you think can be done to change it? > Abolishing the House system all together? > Eliminate the Slytherin House? > Abolish Sorting by the Sorting Hat and put the students randomly into > each house? > Change the ideological implication that permeates the house system? > Put a pro-equality teacher as the Head of Slytherin to change the > pro-pure-blood atmosphere of the House? > Other suggestions? :) > > fitz > I just have to say that waaaay back on message # 63263, I posted the first thread on this Group about the discriminatory practices of the "Segregation Hat" and got flamed. So, it's good to see that there are others who think the Sorting Hat does more harm to the wizarding world than good. I was surprized that the Sorting system still existed at Hogswarts "19 years later". I think Dumbledore's lament about sorting too early is spot on because people can change as they grow (physically and mentally). Milz From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 17:17:23 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:17:23 -0000 Subject: Who came to magic late in life? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173030 Annemehr wrote: > Nuts. The first bit of magic we see her do is shooting a cooking pot > across the room with her wand. And being embarrased by her father in > front of Bob Ogden hardly counts as "desperate circumstances." Carol responds: I agree with Annemehr. Merope was never a Squib. She knew how to brew a powerful love potion without ever having attended Hogwarts. (How that's possible, I don't know.) And she had a wand, which means that she was magical enough for a wand to choose her. As for eighteen being "very late in life," not even a ten-year-old would think that. Maybe JKR originally planned a different escape for Harry, one involving a battle of Privet Drive (George's ear and all), with Mrs. Figg doing magic "under desperate circumstances." And then she realized that with DD dead and the Floo network watched, Mrs. Figg (despite her half-Kneazle cats) would have had no way to summon the Order. That being the case, JKR had to invent a different escape plan that didn't involve Mrs. Figg. (If she had intended the person to be Filch, she still had the opportunity to do so.) I missed Figgy, by the way, and I hope we do find out what happened to her. I half-expected her to be DD's sister until I found out that the sister died.) At any rate, until JKR says differently (probably on Monday's chat), I'll hold to my current opinion. And if the person turns out to be Merope, I'll just wonder about the way JKR's mind works. Carol, who thinks that the book got out of JKR's control in some respects and she couldn't fit in all aspects of the original plan From homeboys at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 17:20:49 2007 From: homeboys at comcast.net (Adesa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:20:49 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173031 > colebiancardi: >>SNIP<< > What type of message is that? I guess JKR is cementing the idea that > Snape did not mature in the last 16 years since Lily's death. That > there is nothing but Lily. That was my rant earlier about the lack of > personal growth & maturity and making atones and moving on. She > doesn't give certain characters that possibility, based on that > interview this morning. > > not pleased at all. Adesa: But do people really experience personal growth and atonement throughout their adult lives? Sure, many do. But there *are* people who get stuck in adolescence, people whose obsessions never go away, people who neither forgive nor seek forgiveness, people who never get their act together. There really are people like that in the world, to varying degrees. That you and I and most people we know have grown emotionally since our young adulthood doesn't mean *everyone* has. And those who haven't have my sympathy -- but I wouldn't want to spend time with them. I find Snape to be very believable, though thoroughly unlikable. From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Thu Jul 26 17:24:01 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:24:01 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173032 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: This has also just been echoed by the JKR commentary on the Today Show: "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." Marika: Wow! I'm a bit surprised - and curious. It seems that Rowling and I have a different take on what a hero is. Helping save Harry's life, helping Harry to defeat Voldemort, trying to keep the kids at Hogwarts safe, trying to stop Voldemort from catching people he wanted killed.... That's a hero to me. His reason for doing all this might not have been altruistic, but they were not the opposite either. He did good to honor the woman he loved, and I find that heroic. If Snape on the other hand hadn't loved Lily, he probably hadn't become a hero. A person can be a hero (the way I see it) on many different levels. Snape is not one on a personal level, because he's not a good role model, but to me he is one on a national level. (I hope my choices of words made sense here - since English is not my first language.) Marika From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 17:26:57 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:26:57 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173033 "Mindy" wrote: > > 4) Was the rest of Mad Eye's body actually ever recovered? Sneeboy2 replies: Good questions all; I'm only going to comment where I have something different to say than the others. On this one I assumed the MoM recovered the body and that's how Umbridge got the eye, which must have seemed too useful to dispose of along with the rest of him. Mindy writes: > 5) Harry used so much relatively simply magic throughout the book to > slip from the Death Eaters such as Accio, Expelliarmus, Stupefy, > Imperio... I'm surprised none of the Death Eaters ever did that... a > simple "accio harry" or disarming him would've helped their cause a > lot, I'm surprised they never thought of it - they weren't dumb > wizards! Sneeboy2 replies: I think we're supposed to see them not so much as stupid but cruel and power mad. Rather than using the most expedient or clever strategies, they automatically resort to deadly force or torture. Mindy writes: > 6) I am so confused by Dumbledore's speech during Harry's near-death > experience. The entire premise of the prophecy has completely > crumbled. If indeed, Harry couldn't die as long as LV was alive > because of his blood being in LV, and LV being unable to die as long > as Harry was alive because he was a Horcrux, how does that > explain "Neither can survive while the other lives" prophecy? Sneeboy2 replies: I agree that this doesn't fit the prophecy; the fact of the matter was that neither could DIE while the other lived. I can only surmise that, as DD explained to Harry in OotP, most prophecies go unfulfilled due to the free will of the people involved. The prophecy seems to have played the role of setting the ball rolling, and motivating the players' actions, but it didn't predict the outcome. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 17:55:56 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:55:56 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173034 > >>Prep0strus: > > Slytherins are bad people. I know many of us try very hard to force > what is there into something else... even JKR. But it can't be > done. Virtually all of Voldy's followers. The original house > creator... maybe at some point Godric and Salazar really were good > friends, but an anti-muggleborn bigot who placed a basilisk in the > school for the purposes of killing children... and our examples > of 'good' slytherins. Please. Just because they are not evil, > doesn't mean they are admirable. Snape is a bitter, nasty man > saved from complete evil by his love of Lily. Slughorn is a > sycophantic, weak little man who treats children based on what he > thinks they can do for him later on. Regalus, like Snape, turns > towards evil, and manages to redeem himself only after being pushed > too far. And these are the very BEST of the world that JKR shows > us. > Betsy Hp: Exactly. Slytherin's are bad. Trying to read anything else into the text is an exercise in futility. I agree that it's probably because they're the spiritual descendents of Salazar. So yes, no Slytherin will ever love purely, strive nobly, or sacrifice themselves selflessly. The best a Slytherin can hope for is to please a Gryffindor. But only in the most basest of ways. Snape, I think, came the closest to approaching Gryffindor blessedness (he at least recognized that Gryffindor's are there to be worshipped though of course he was unable to do so properly), but he was still a Slytherin, so it was morally impossible for him to achieve that goal. It's like the story of Noah in the Bible. He had one bad son, Ham (IIRC), whose decendents were (are?) doomed to serve their cousins for eternity. (IOWs, The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the sons teeth are set on edge.) [An aside: You got the moral ladder a bit wrong (in the part I snipped). The Houses in moral order are, Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, Slytherin. The Hufflepuffs are better than the Ravenclaws.] > >>Prep0strus: > Personally, I don't mind if the sorting had would simply choose > those who are evil. Cull them from the school and wizarding > society right away. Maybe that's a little too 'minority report'. > Betsy Hp: It's a good question, frankly. Why not kill, sterilize, or merely send directly to Azkaban, any child who gets the Hat to yell "Slytherin" during the Sorting Feast? I presume it's because it's hard to be morally righteous if you don't have someone to be morally righteous towards. The Gryffindor sun would not gleam half as bright if not contrasted against the Slytherin darkness. > >>Prep0strus: > > But I think we're just going to have to forgive JKR for developing > a very flawed system, where some are golden, some are at best > unpleasant and at worst evil, and where some are the dregs. > Betsy Hp: Or (and this is my planned course of action) we can call JKR a psycho- bitch and not invite her over for tea. Betsy Hp From sdeepthi at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 17:45:02 2007 From: sdeepthi at yahoo.com (sdeepthi) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:45:02 -0000 Subject: A bit frustrated with fandom at the moment - DH spoilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173035 Maeg: > > Yes, and as far as I have read, there has been nothing on this list > that remotely resembles a flame. Maybe I've missed it; I can't keep > up with the volume of posts. But I doubt it. All of the criticism > here has been focused on the actual book. So I reiterate, pay more > attention to where you post. > Deepthi: I haven't kept up with all the posts either, but I have come across some that are in this vein. look at the Ron and Hermione thread, for instance. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172463 People have said that JKR doesn't understand human sexuality, that there is something hard in her that makes her shy away from writing romance, and so on. I have also seen a post on a different topic where the poster casually mentions JKR's lack of moral values!! Such comments do cross the line. And even though there hasn't been anything like "JKR stole my idea", there have been posts where people complain that everything had been guessed before the book came out. IMO, that is to be expected, you can't be completely in the dark if you read the guesses made by the 30,000+ people on this list. Here's one of those posts.. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172690 I think Lisa/Shanti was justified in starting this thread. For one thing, I haven't seen any objectionable personal criticism of JKR after her post. From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:00:05 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:00:05 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A8E125.5030902@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173036 chuck.han blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 21:14: > > As for "Seeming unnecessarily cruel of Dumbledore," again, I have to > disagree with Mr. Lee--ultimately, it is Harry's choices that enable > him to defeat Voldemort, and Dumbledore lays out the choices for Harry > however cruel that may seem to be, but it is, IMHO, not unnecessary. Thanks for the comments, Chuck. First, I may have a few of the particulars of timing wrong on the race to the wand; I haven't given the book a second read; but my impression was definitely that the race was all but over BEFORE Harry made his final decision. As for the above, I'm not arguing that it was cruel to lay out Harry's choices; I'm saying it was the WAY it was done that strikes me as unnecessarily cruel. Given all the one-on-one time Dumbledore spent with Harry in book six bringing him up to speed on the Horcruxes and handing Harry his mission, it's inconceivable that Dumbledore simply forgot to mention the Hallows to Harry. One is forced to conclude that, viz a viz the Hallows, Dumbledore was deliberately keeping Harry in the dark. THAT's what strikes me as unnecessarily cruel. CJ, Taiwan From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 18:03:36 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:03:36 -0400 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: <1185469745.14784.5161.m57@yahoogroups.com> References: <1185469745.14784.5161.m57@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C99DC66C51689B-A48-1E3C@webmail-de10.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173037 "justcarol67" wrote: >> Carol, wondering how JKR could fail to realize that Snape is her > greatest creation Jen wrote: Ah you sparked me, Carol. I was totally taken aback by JKR's less- glowing assessment of Snape whom so many idolize and love. And from your post, you too seemed to have gathered that she is much more situationally positioned in her ethics than previously realized. Snape was only a hero because of his great love of Lily. Had Harry been the son of another witch, he wouldn't have protected him. Ah. I feel somewhat disoriented now. Love as a bond is so subjective. It's almost as if she feels that the subjective quality of love can be the antidote for things such as "the greater good." Jen D. hoping at some point that Book 7 clears up more than it obscures... > Julie: Is anyone really surprised that Snape wouldn't have protected Harry if he hadn't been Lily's son, given that Snape initially agreed to help Dumbledore protect Harry *only* because he loved Lily and was eaten away with guilt at her death??JKR's answer is?pertinent to that time period, IMO, and not to who Snape eventually became. Eventually he protected *all* the students at Hogwarts, to the best of his ability anyway. But I totally see that he never would have come to Dumbledore?initially?for the sake of protecting some?random child from Voldemort. I also agree that Snape isn't a hero in general sense of the word, though he was very courageous. I loved Jen's idea that Harry is acknowledging that courage. But I also believe if Harry hadn't also seen that Snape *did* evolve from that 21 year old young man who had NO concern for anything outside his own needs to a man who while not truly heroic did incorporate some of Dumbledore's values (evident in his agreeing to "kill" Dumbledore to save Draco's soul, in his saving of Lupin-a man he hated, in his horror at Harry being raised as a sacrificial pig--even if he didn't personally care much about Harry as a person, among other things), then Harry would never have honored Snape merely for being "brave." Harry instead recognized that Snape started out like Harry and Tom,?all "orphans"?in unhappy circumstances, and while Snape?initially followed?Tom's path, he turned away from it because of his love for Lily--Harry's mother, and devoted his life to the side of Good, even if he only became a marginally better man along the way. Snape is no hero, maybe he's an antihero at best. He's damaged goods, stuck in the past and unable to move beyond it, but he?is a?different person, if not a "good" person, still clearly more principled than he was when he first came to Dumbledore. Julie ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kmrhapsody at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 17:38:04 2007 From: kmrhapsody at gmail.com (kmrhapsody) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:38:04 -0000 Subject: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173038 > eggplant wrote: > > If you want to know more about the fate of the characters than you > learned in the epilog see an interview Rowling just gave that goes > into a lot more detail: > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/ Well until it is in the encyclopedia, it's still fluffy speculation to me. Definitely fits with the feel of the epilogue itself, full of hot air and nothingness. Kiah From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 17:49:45 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:49:45 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173039 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fitzchivalryhk" wrote: > For those who share the point of view that the Sorting and House > System of Hogwarts is not beneficial for the wizarding society and its > children, what do you think can be done to change it? > Abolishing the House system all together? > Eliminate the Slytherin House? > Abolish Sorting by the Sorting Hat and put the students randomly into > each house? > Change the ideological implication that permeates the house system? > Put a pro-equality teacher as the Head of Slytherin to change the > pro-pure-blood atmosphere of the House? > Other suggestions? :) Sneeboy2 replies: I couldn't agree more. One of my predictions for DH was that the Sorting Hat would be destroyed, thus eliminating the basis for house-based stereotypes. (Though, as someone pointed out, there would still be separate residence halls and sports teams, the rivalries they engendered could be friendlier.) I was disappointed that JKR offered instead the mild "exception to the rule" of Snape and -- even more mildly -- Draco. There was the "sort too soon" comment, and others books hinted that there was some choice or family tradition involved in the sorting. But the stereotypes held true in the end. Having the Syltherins, as a group, live up to their reputations seemed to confirm that you can safely judge people by what group they belong to. Snape's backstory shows that the sorting system played a key role in ending his friendship with Lily, and thus his becoming a DE; if this is JKR's subtle condemnation of the system, I think it's too subtle for most readers, especially the younger ones. From jnferr at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 18:04:04 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:04:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Pig to be Slaughtered (wrong!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40707261104g18aa0674x9a14a64c918f70f4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173040 > > Carol: > Dumbledore may be flawed, but he's > clearly depicted as good in "King's Cross" and JKR is sending a > Christian message, trumpeted by the implications of that chapter > title. montims: I'm sorry, but I don't understand the implications of the station in the chapter title - could you please expand on this theory? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ida3 at planet.nl Thu Jul 26 18:05:01 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:05:01 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered (wrong!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173041 Carol responds: > What, then, did Dumbledore want Snape to do? I think he wanted Snape > to disarm him before killing him so he would be not only the master > but the possessor of the wand. Dana: Although I think the entire wand thingy is totally confusing as Harry did not magically disarm Draco but just grabbed the wands Draco was holding out of his hand, I think I understand what DD plan was about which unfortunately would have been not fail safe for Snape entirely. DD asked Snape to kill him and because this death was pre-arranged the wand would have been left without a rightful owner with no possibility to ever be claimed by anyone else because Snape would not have technically defeated DD. I do not know if DD took in consideration that Snape might get killed for it but essentially my 2cent is that DD wanted Snape to end up with the wand not being its true owner and thus the wand being just like a any other wand. I think DD was counting on LV not killing Snape because he was supposed to be a loyal servant. LV did not kill Lucius when he took his wand. If LV already had taken the wand from Snape but it was not enough to perform the promised amount of magic then killing Snape for it would essentially not have mattered, the wand would never again reveal its secrets. Unfortunately the entire ordeal gives me the vibe of major lack in logical reasoning on part of the author because if the wand would not perform while taken from Snape, wouldn't that have aroused LV's suspicion that something was up with how Snape came in possession of the wand? Anyway I think DD meant LV to lose interest in the fable surrounding the wand because after he would have taken it from Snape he would discover it was nothing more then an ordinary wand. JMHO Dana From bartl at sprynet.com Thu Jul 26 18:09:03 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:09:03 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions for JKR Message-ID: <24889568.1185473343270.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173042 Dungrollin: >2. Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to side-along apparate to >Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters? Bart: I'm sure the spell would account for that; that's kind of an obvious workaround the secret keeper. Dungrollin: >3. What was Wormtail doing at Snape's house at the beginning of Half- >Blood Prince? Bart: I thought that was obvious: Spying on Snape. Morty STILL didn't quite trust Snape. Dungrollin: >6. Why did you write in Quidditch Through the Ages that no wizards >can fly without brooms unless their animagus form can fly? Bart: Quidditch Through the Ages is a metabook (a real world copy of a fictional book), and, within its continuity, it was written at a time when this was believed to be correct. Dungrollin: >8. Was it Harry's sacrifice (willingness to die) which made him able >to block Voldemort's AK with an Expelliarmus, or was it the fact that >he was the master of the Elder Wand? Bart: Well, DD made it KIND of clear (and I'm going to have to reread the section to be absolutely sure). Here's the way I read it, at least. Just like not all containers for water are bottles, not all containers for souls are horcruxes. While Harry is containing a piece of Voldemort's soul, and acting in a way similar to a horcrux, he is not one. Essentially, Morty's soul had been split so badly that when his AK backfired, triggering off a series of events which included the explosion and Harry's scar, yet another piece of his soul broke free, and just entered the nearest living being, Harry. Therefore, Harry did not need to be destroyed to free the soul piece, as would a horcrux. Also, Morty's soul piece did not blend with Harry's; it stayed separate, albeit accessible by Harry (AND Morty). Now, when Morty recreated his body using Harry's blood, it created an additional link, and a new level of protection for Harry. Here's where it goes to guesswork on my part. It is not uncommon in drunk driving accidents that the drunk has the fewest injuries. That is because the drunk is relaxed; the muscles don't work against the bones, and much of the shock is allowed to pass through the body instead of being absorbed by it. In giving himself up for sacrifice, Harry, plus the extra protection, ensured that only the Morty piece was exposed to the AK spell. This was WHY DD couldn't let Harry (or even Snape) know that it would work; if Harry knew he wasn't going to die, then, paradoxcially, he would have. This was also the reason for DD's momentary look of triumph when he found out HOW Morty got resurrected; he saw how to keep Harry from dying (and, once again, Morty's own actions ensuring the prophecy). Could DD have found another way of keeping Harry alive? Possibly. In any case, Harry wasn't expected to gain mastery of the wand, only the knowledge (and ability to use the stone). Dungrollin: >9. What happened to Lucius and Narcissa and Umbridge? Bart: I expect the courts treated Cissy well, seeing that she ended up helping Harry at great risk to herself. Dungrollin: >11. Harry can't be an auror, because he can't risk anybody else >becoming the master of the Elder wand, so what was his job after >Hogwarts? Bart: In case you hadn't noticed, Harry had a small fortune from his parents, a large fortune from Sirius, not to mention his interest in George's successful business. So, he probably lives off investments; JKR has also stated that he give occasional lectures at Hogwarts, and it's not impossible that he does so elsewhere, as well. Dungrollin: >12. What happened to the Defence Against the Dark Arts curse? Bart: JKR has stated that it's gone. Dungrollin: >13. Why didn't it occur to Tom Riddle that other students must have >found the Room of Requirement if it was full of their hidden >possessions? Bart: Look up "psychopath". I'm being serious. I did, and even just the info readily available on the web (Wikipedia makes a good starting point, with a lot of references to primary source material) gives a LOT of insight into Morty. I dare say that JKR did her research, as well. Dungrollin: >14. If DD planned to be the last master of the Elder Wand, why did he >leave clues for Harry to unite the Deathly Hallows? Bart: I don't think he did; I think he left clues for Harry to know about them, but to NOT try to unite them. Dungrollin: >15. In the Hospital Wing at the end of Half-Blood Prince, why didn't >it occur to Lupin or McGonagall that Snape might have repented over >the death of Lily? Surely they were aware, like Lily's friends, that >they'd been friends at Hogwarts? Bart: Ah, this gives me a chance to go on a bit more about my impressions of Snape and Lily. First of all, I do not believe that there was anything sexual between them. From what we have been shown, the love Snape had for Lily was closer to the love Harry has for Hermione. Well, MAYBE "friends with benefits". Maybe even married. But, to my mind, it was a deep friendship, not a romantic relationship; this was the flaw in most LOLLIPOPS theories. But, when the events of "Snape's Worst Memory" took place, Lily saw that his love for her was IN SPITE of the fact that she was Muggle-born. I have read that, in American African-Caucasian marriages, sooner or later, the Caucasian partner is very likely to use the so-called "n" word (actually, I read that it's a certainty, but I also know that there are Americans who were never exposed to the term until it was too late for it to go into their subconscious, so they wouldn't use it any more than a RW person would use "mudblood" as an insult). The point is that Lily realizes that thinking that, because he loves her, Snape is without the bigotry that his friends show, is an empty hope. She let Snape know, it was the Death Eaters or her, and Snape made his choice. But it is also clear from the events in SWM that the Marauders were not aware of HOW good friends he was with Lily; she was probably a little embarrassed to admit being that good a friend of a member of the Death Eaters crowd, especially on seeing that, at that age, she didn't particularly like the Marauders, either. By the time she fell in love with James, Snape was a (painful?) memory. She might have told James about her past friendship, but there was no need for Lupin or Sirius to find out. From their point of view, any affection Lily had for Snape was her general kindness to inferior beings. Bart From marshsundeen at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 17:19:48 2007 From: marshsundeen at hotmail.com (marshallsundeen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:19:48 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173043 colebiancardi: > yep, I saw that interview and thought, wow oh wow. So, what is the > definition of a hero, I wonder? I was expecting, at the very least, > that Snape is an Anti-Hero, which plays off well with Harry's Hero. > And basically, is JKR stating that placing Snape in Slytherin doomed > and sealed his fate as a bad person with no redeeming qualities > whatsoever, if he didn't *love* Lily? So, the House System, which is > still in play 19 years later, helped formed and cement any biases and > *badness* that those unfortunate enough to get placed in Slytherin. > No redemption. You cannot atone. marshallsundeen writes: As JKR has made clear in the book, your choices are what matter. Snape chose to be a death eater. He chose to despise Sirius and James. He chose to despise Harry. He also chose to protect Harry and work for Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix. I think the many that loved Snape as a character loved the complexity. As we find out about Dumbledore in Deathly Hallows, people are not all good or all bad. Snape could have made different choices in his life and may have had a very different life. JKR did not doom Snape, he doomed himself. From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:10:51 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: <20070726165109.32234E0007C5@socom4.uol.com.br> Message-ID: <593482.92855.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173044 Eggplant: If you want to know more about the fate of the characters than you learned in the epilog see an interview Rowling just gave that goes into a lot more detail: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/ james black potter: Ugh. Now I'm extremelly glad about the short epilogue. Rowling has not really thought about post-Hogwarts... Auror!Harry makes no sense, these ideas are dated. Thanks God she let this stuff out of the canon. "... the ministry evolves into a 'really good place to be". Yeah, sure. ***Katie replies:*** I completely (but respectfully) disagree. I totally wish she had put that stuff in there! Harry as an Auror makes total sense. As JKR was anxious to point out through the entire series (EXCEPT the epilogue), the world isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters. After Voldemort's death, there are still going to be nasty, bad wizards out there that need to be caught. Aurors will still be needed, and that is what Harry always wanted to do, once fake Moody had put the idea in his head. Also, Harry, I think, would be unable to settle down into a banal family life. Yes, he would relish his time with Ginny and his kids, but he would need more. I think an Auror is exactly right for him, and I have no idea why she did not put that in there. I also liked hearing that Hermione was involved in an overhaul at the MoM. Seeing her simply as Ron's wife was sort of sickening to me. "The most brilliant witch of her age" becomes just Mrs. Ronald Weasley?? Yuck. Hermione would have needed to exercise her brain and her social justice bent. She could never have been uninvolved from the world of magical politics. I am very sorry JKR did not put these things in the epilogue. It would have been much more fulfilling. Katie . --------------------------------- Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 17:46:45 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:46:45 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A8DE05.2080308@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173045 Charles Walker Jr blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 19:11: > My point is that legality and morality are two different things. The > unforgivables are called that because of legality, not morality. CJ: I, for one, couldn't disagree more. We're talking about the KILLING CURSE here, not jaywalking, as if murder were being outlawed just for convenience. > Charles Walker Jr: >legality and morality are often at odds with each other, and that it > is often difficult to discern which one is which. CJ: Don't obfuscate, please. "Often" is a long way from "always". The UCs are unforgivable precisely BECAUSE on these there IS absolute moral clarity. Put another way, the absolute legal finality (the "un" in "unforgivable") of the UCs can only be a reflection of their absolute moral finality. >Charles Walker Jr: > By the time Harry casts the first UC in DH we know that laws > are pointless at this point. CJ: More obfuscation. "Laws are pointless" is a statement of absolute anarchy. What we know is, at most, that SOME laws may have become pointless. >Charles Walker Jr: > Harry doesn't sit and torture people with the cruciatus curse, > he uses it, rather effectively, to neutralize an attacker. CJ: An attacker!? Amycus Carrow was Crucio'd by Harry for the offense of spitting on McGonagall. Unless you're assuming "Amycus spun around" is to be interpreted as threatening (a debatable point). But even that hardly explains why a simple Expelliarmus wouldn't have sufficed. And since you've referred to GoF, I think we ought to take a look at the passage that describes the alleged lifting of the ban on the UCs. On pages 526-7 of the paperback, Sirius describes the situation to Harry: "Well, times like that bring out the best in some people and the worst in others. [Barty] Crouch's principles might've been good in the beginning --- I wouldn't know. He rose quickly through the Ministry, and he started ordering very harsh measures against Voldemort's supporters. The Aurors were given new powers - powers to kill rather than capture, for instance. And I wasn't the only one who was handed straight to the dementors without trial. Crouch fought violence with violence, and authorized the use of the Unforgivable Curses against suspects. I would say he became as ruthless and cruel as many on the Dark Side." Not even a cursory reading of the above could fail to note two salient points: first, authorization to use the UCs during the first Voldemort war was limited to Aurors, to be used against suspects only. There was no blanket lifting of the ban even then. Secondly, the authorization to use the UCs is quite clearly NOT spoken of approvingly. It was part and parcel with an excessive ruthlessness that left the "good" guys hardly distinguishable from the enemy. CJ, Taiwan From tmarends at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:19:04 2007 From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:19:04 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173046 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sneeboy2" wrote: > > "Mindy" wrote: > > > > 6) I am so confused by Dumbledore's speech during Harry's near- death > > experience. The entire premise of the prophecy has completely > > crumbled. If indeed, Harry couldn't die as long as LV was alive > > because of his blood being in LV, and LV being unable to die as long > > as Harry was alive because he was a Horcrux, how does that > > explain "Neither can survive while the other lives" prophecy? > > Sneeboy2 replies: > > I agree that this doesn't fit the prophecy; the fact of the matter was > that neither could DIE while the other lived. I can only surmise that, > as DD explained to Harry in OotP, most prophecies go unfulfilled due > to the free will of the people involved. The prophecy seems to have > played the role of setting the ball rolling, and motivating the > players' actions, but it didn't predict the outcome. > Tim replies: Actually, thinking about it a few days later, it does make sense. Harry did die in that chapter. Because V was still alive, and had Harry's blood, Harry could hold onto life, like V did when Harry was a baby (he had most of the Horocuxes already made, so he could hang onto life). The difference is Harry's body was not destroyed in the process, so he could come back to it, not as some half-spirit thing that V was for so long. Dumbledore clearly stated that Harry had the choice of coming back. He could have stayed dead and let V take over. I know she didn't write it, but that curled up childlike thing that Harry saw, IMHO, was the part of V that was in Harry. Since Harry had died, his blood would no longer protect V. Once Nagini the snake was destroyed (way to go Neville!) V only had the little bit of his soul in his ressurected body left to keep him alive. By killing Harry, V made himself vulnerable to death. Of course, even if he had heard the full prophecy I doubt he would have understood that, or he would have completely avoided Harry at all cost. Tim From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:22:25 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:22:25 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The unforgivable curse argument In-Reply-To: <004d01c7cf96$b139d5b0$0202a8c0@Lana> References: <46a8242e.05358c0a.3c5e.38c1@mx.google.com> <004d01c7cf96$b139d5b0$0202a8c0@Lana> Message-ID: <46A8E661.7080301@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173047 Colwilrin blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 23:07: > When Harry used the Crucio curse, he was in a battle situation. CJ: Sorry, but no. Harry Crucio'd Amycus Carrow for the sin of spitting on McGonagall. Colwilrin: > In any US court, Harry's actions would be justified under Self-Defense. CJ: Decidedly not. Harry was hidden beneath his Invisibility Cloak at the time, and thus was not threatened by Carrow, nor is spitting life-threatening in any case. This was no act of self-defense; it was pure, cold, naked revenge for defiling McGonagall. Sherry blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 23:07: > Cruciatus is a torture curse CJ: An excellent point. Cruciatus is NOT a self-defense spell; it is torture. Anyone who tries to defend Harry's use of it on the grounds of self-defense has to explain why none of the literally dozens of other defensive spells Harry knows -- from Expelliarmus to Binding to Confundus to the Shield spells he was throwing around in the final battle -- wouldn't have done just as nicely. CJ, Taiwan From melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:20:37 2007 From: melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com (melrosedarjeeling) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:20:37 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks characterization in HD --- Was: Initial critique of DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173048 >"pattiemgsybb" wrote: > > > > Yes, yes, yes. And that really bugged me because I think Lupin is > one > > of her best creations -- the gentle werewolf trying to make his way > > through a world that, by and large, doesn't want him. > Yes, I too thought Lupin, especially, deserved better. The initial, out-of-character, "demented" Lupin bugged me; the holier-than-thou Harry slapping him down for it bugged me; and it TOTALLY bugged me that after all that blathering about how important it is to be there for your child, both Lupin and Tonks arrive to fight at the final battle leaving the kid with her mother. And now it's portrayed as heroic. So somehow it was wrong for Lupin to risk his life before the kid is born, but it's ok afterward? Unless JKR has a previously hidden pro-fetus agenda, this is an inconsistency that shows the whole subplot up as a weak device to cast suspicion on Lupin as the betrayer. melrosedarjelling From dossett at lds.net Thu Jul 26 18:26:18 2007 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:26:18 -0000 Subject: Albus Severus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173049 Carol - just wanted to tell you that I always enjoy your posts, and have to agree 100% with your feelings about Albus Severus. I'm still tearing up over it too! I also appreciate that several times you have emailed with encouragement - you're a genuinely nice person and I'm glad to "know" you through the list! Before DH came out, you posted that you were looking forward to further analysis of the books - I hope you do that; I find that very enjoyable, even though I mostly lurk. It's great to keep on learning, and I feel that I am learning from you! Well, it's over, and I'm glad to know how it all ends - but still looking forward to further discussion - Pat From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 18:33:59 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:33:59 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173050 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Alice Franceschini" wrote: > > Libby wrote: > > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to fake Parseltongue . > > > Here's my take on this. Ron was around when Harry was using Parseltongue. He was standing there in the girl's bathroom when Harry spoke in parseltongue to the sink. > So when Hermione and Ron went to the Chamber Of Secrets I think all Ron did was imitate the sounds he heard Harry make and he was very lucky that he produced the correct sounds. But that sometimes happens don't it ? Plus these kids are magical and when they really need or want something, they can do some extraoridinary things. > > Lady Potions > Hello Lady P! That's an interesting point, but you have to bear in mind how long ago Ron and Harry were in the girls bathroom. I think about 5 years earlier, because it was back in book two. So Ron would need qquite a memory to recall a totally bizarre language like that, wouldn't he? And even if he had heard Harry since then, like with the snitch in TDH, and somehow immediately committed the strange sounds to memory, Parseltongue is not portrayed as alnguage which can be learned. Remember how scared everyone was when in book 2 (I think) during the dueling classes when Harry talks to Draco's snake? It wasn't just the fact that Harry apparently set it on someone, it was the fact that he COULD speak to it at all. I got the impression you were born with the ability, rather like being born with the ability to be a wizard or witch. So for a language which could easily and effectively be imitated, Harry certainly got a big reaction out of everyone in book two. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought he was believed to be "The Heir Of Slytherin" when he demonstrated this talent? So I stand by my first point, that JKR was either losing interest or was under pressure to get the book finished for a deadline and decided to let a couple of pages slip by, by using a lame couple of sentences instead. I wasn't too happy when I read that R and H had suddenly gone into the Chamber Of Secrets and .found a pile of basilisk fangs. It was far too convenient and too simple, and was one of many plot-points which upset the balance of the book for me. I couldn't believe it when I read it, I had to go over it twice to be sure that such a weak plot escape hatch had been used. I know people like to see the best in JKR's work (that's why we come here) and there's always lots to enjoy, but every now and then some absolute howlers get through the net, and in my view that was a prime example. Sandra (still reeling!) From kmrhapsody at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 18:20:42 2007 From: kmrhapsody at gmail.com (kmrhapsody) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:20:42 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: <143063.73922.qm@web60912.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173051 > percchick: > > OKAY...I agree that Ron and Hermione are believable. I definitely can feel a certain....destiny that they might have. > I think, in the long run, Hermione and Ron are justly matched. Well most folks know I just couldn't buy the Hermione Ron thing for almost the entire series. I always felt that Ron needed to do a bit of growing/changing before he would be on par with Hermione. I could almost buy the nasty treatment and bickering as childhood kind of stuff, but by the time you're in your teens...you really should know better how to treat another human being. That said, the Ron we were given in this book was just fine for me. I had no problem with them hooking up in the end. In fact, the book made it seem like he was actually trying to earn her affection rather than assuming that it -should be there- naturally. Still, I still wasn't sold on the idea that Hermione had reciprocal feelings for him. The crying and the yelling at the mid book split were totally in character for her regardless of whom it was. The whole glance during the wedding was a definite red herring for me. Kmrhapsody From aida_costa at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 18:15:46 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:15:46 -0000 Subject: JKR's comments about Snape - is there a transcript of this? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173052 I can't find a transcript anywhere where she talks about Snape (as some of you here have been quoting). I found the one where she discusses the epilogue and which deaths were planned and which ones were not, but no Snape. Can anyone point me in the right direction, please? Thank you. Aida ----------- NOTE from your friendly neighborhood list elf: 'Ear 'ear! Citing sources would be greatly appreciated by all here, readers and posters alike. Best practice is to grab the URL of your source and include it with your commentary, to provide context. Just a reminder about citations: do *not* infringe on copyrights by copying the whole thing and posting it here, *do* provide "point me's" to where your readers can get on the same page as you. Thanks! From tenne at redshift.bc.ca Thu Jul 26 18:12:32 2007 From: tenne at redshift.bc.ca (tenne at redshift.bc.ca) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:12:32 -0700 Subject: Choices was Epilogue Bashing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1185473552.46a8e410214f1@members.uniserve.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173053 > colebiancardi: > > but, Snape's reasons for wanting to be in Slytherin was not because he > was evil or wanted power - remember he stated that he would rather be > brainy than brawny to James & Sirius on the train. My point was simply that it is a choice to go to Slytherin or not. That house attracts a certain type of person. If Snape wanted to be known as brainy, why did he not choose Ravenclaw? There has been no indication that brains are a part of Slytherin, if they are, why are Crabb and Goyle in that house? I think Slytherin represents a desire for power and a personality that will allow you to do anything to achieve your end. And there will always be people who are attracted to that. Although the 4 houses are a simplistic view of human nature, they are a very realistic view of it. Snape was a Slytherin through and through. Perhaps he did some good things because of his love for Lily but that doesn't change his personality. He was attracted to the dark arts and he did believe the propaganda of his house. If he didn't, there was no way the term mudblood would have slipped so easily off his tongue. He never really changed, IMO, he was still mean, sarcastic and convinced Slytherins were the best of the best. He just did one good thing. Good people can do bad things and bad people can do good things, doesn't change what the majority of their life was like. Tenne From deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:35:51 2007 From: deborah_s_krupp at yahoo.com (Deborah Krupp) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Body Count In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <87273.92121.qm@web35005.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173054 prep0strus wrote: I'm wondering if anyone can shed some light on the body count at the end of the big Hogwarts battle. I know this is the Final Battle, but... 50 casualties? In the Encyclopedia I'm going to need an 'In Memoriam' page listing the fallen heroes, cause I just don't see where the cannon fodder came from. I'd love to hear any ideas and explanations I've overlooked. ~Adam (Prep0strus) Deborah: I think we are led to believe that parents of students, as well as homeowners in Hogsmeade have come to assist in the final battle. We have to believe they could have been alerted quickly and were able to get into the castle. Perhaps as these people are not as well-trained as the Order members or Dumbledore's Army members, that would help explain why so many died? --------------------------------- Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Thu Jul 26 18:41:43 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:41:43 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: <01e701c7ce6e$0f0bbb60$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173055 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly" wrote: > > Maybe it's too early for a "funny lines" thread but I just wanted to say that I loved Ron in this book. He said two things that just had me in tears laughing. > > Just before the wedding when Mrs. Weasley is making him clean his room... > He says something to the affect, "And are they getting married in my bedroom ? No !"..... "Why in the name of Merlin's saggy left-" I don't know why but I just thought that was the funniest thing...! > > Then again when they are discussing packing for their journey.... Hermione can't think what books to bring and Ron says... pg. 95 Amer. ed. "Oh, of course, .....I forgot we'll be hunting down Voldemort in a mobile library". > > I loved these lines and just how funny and frank Ron was, especially to Hermione. > > Kimberly > (whose daughter talked her into eating Bertie's Beans... ewwwww !) > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > McGonagall's line "Professor Snape has--to use a common term--done a bunk." Also the DD line about the Chudley Cannons... Milz From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:45:23 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:45:23 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173056 --- "chuck.han" wrote: > > --- "Steve" wrote: > >... > > I think the Hallows are there because at some point > > Harry has to make a choice. He must choose between > > Power and Weakness. He must choose whether to make > > himself stronger, near undefeatable, or he must > > choose to concentrate on making Voldemort weak. > >... > > In an earlier response, I noted in passing that I > didn't agree with Steve that it was a choice between > Power and Weakness. I wanted to expand on my > disagreement because I think the rest of Steve's > assessment and analysis is super spot on (thanks > Steve!): > > Maybe I'm being nitpicky--I agree that the choice > Harry makes is to weaken Voldemort, but, IMHO, that's > not a choice between Power and Weakness. Harry > chooses the path counter to obvious might (as Steve > point out), but is that Weakness? I think it is > Harry's Ultimate Strength... > > Chuck Han > bboyminn: Actually, you are right. Notice I never said WHOSE Power and whose Weakness. Harry can choose to strengthen himself in hopes of overpowering Voldemort, or he can concentrate on weakening Voldemort. Eschewing the desire and ability to give himself immense power and strength would be a hard choice for anyone. And, Harry thinks long and hard on it. Think about when they are at Shell Cottage, and Harry has to decide whether to question Ragnok or Ollivander. That is the moment Harry decides. He knows via the connection to Voldemort that Voldemort is heading to Hogwarts to steal Dumbledore's wand. There was still time to get their first, there was still time to try and stop Voldemort. Ron is furious, that Harry hasn't tried to do exactly that. But Harry has made his choice. Dumbledore wanted them to know about the Hallows, but his stated goal was always for Harry to attack the Horcruxes, and that is what Harry decides to do. But from Dumbledore's perspective, it must be Harry's choice. This whole thing simply would not have worked if Harry had simply been 'following orders'. Harry had to know the possibilities, and he had to, of his own volition, make the noble choice. I've always said, and said so in this group many times, that Revelation is alway preferable to Explanation. The revelations that come from with in us, are always more powerful, more true, and more full known than anything that is explained to us. The power doesn't come from information, it comes from a true and clear understanding of that information. By making his own choice, and a choice between what would strongly draw anyone and what would repel virtually anyone, Harry made the hard choice. He chose the noble path rather than the path of Power. So says I. Steve/bboyminn From verosomm at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:40:31 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:40:31 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173057 > fitz wrote: > For those who share the point of view that the Sorting and House > System of Hogwarts is not beneficial for the wizarding society and its > children, what do you think can be done to change it? > Abolishing the House system all together? > Eliminate the Slytherin House? > Abolish Sorting by the Sorting Hat and put the students randomly into > each house? > Change the ideological implication that permeates the house system? > Put a pro-equality teacher as the Head of Slytherin to change the > pro-pure-blood atmosphere of the House? > Other suggestions? :) Here are mine... keep the four houses... as part of the History of Magic curriculum (and please, get someone INTERESTING to teach it!). The four houses should be used to teach the kids that hard work and loyalty (Hufflepuff), intelligence (Ravenclaw), bravery and chivalry (Gryffindor), and ambition (Slytherin) are all qualities that can hold positive and negative tendencies in their possessors, which is why uniting these elements, which every human has to some extent, ends up with the possessor being a well-rounded, well-adjusted individual (because please let's not make it a goal for Hogwarts to turn out another Voldy). Divide the kids *randomly* for Quidditch and housing purposes, but let the dorm houses be more unified... randomly mix the kids up for their classes, instead of having "these two houses in DADA, these two in Herbology," etc. for mealtimes, use the hundreds of small tables (used at the Yule Ball) in the Great Hall and during the entire first year (and maybe even a few subsequent years) have assigned seats at all three meals, that change consistently, so all the first-years have time to meet each other and make friends regardless of who their dormmates are. That said, I think JKR's point (but I am an eternal optimist) in still having the sorting system 19 years later is that VOLDEMORT didn't want it and only valued Slytherin traits, where all four should really be valued. Not to mention I think that 12-year-old James was a stuck-up, berk-like, toe-rag like his grandfather, Snape, and Draco, at the age of 11, all of whom seemed to think there was only one good house. I'm guessing (like I said, eternal optimist) that it just happened that in the previous year Gryffindor took first place either in Quidditch or the House cup, or both, and Slytherin last, so James is more teasing him that he's going to be on the losing team (because let's assume these kids, as well as their sister, inherited some of their parents' skills?) Veronica From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 26 18:48:50 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:48:50 -0000 Subject: Concerning a 'saccharine' epilogue Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173058 Whether we LIKED it or not [and while I liked the outcomes, the presentation was a little oversweet, and the child names were over the top for me], weren't there lots of us who weren't at all surprised at the saccharine in the epilogue? I mean, JKR said this: "The Little White Horse was my favourite childhood book. I absolutely adored it. It had a cracking plot. It was scary and romantic in parts and had a feisty heroine." Anyone who's read Elizabeth Goudge's TLWH knows that it has about as saccharine and cheesy and totally implausible an ending as ever there was, where EVERYthing that could possibly happen to bring about EVERY single character's happiness does happen. While I had my doubts/concerns about whether JKR would kill Harry, whenever I recalled that that was her favorite childhood book, I suspected again that Harry would definitely live... and we might just get OBHWF. Siriusly Snapey Susan, with kudos to Katherine for having suggested this very thing onlist in '06: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159614 From graynavarre at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:36:25 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <429107.95680.qm@web30102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173059 --- doddiemoemoe wrote: > > > I'm sorry but Snape's last request kinda seals it for me...as the most > creepiest part in Dh(look at me)was Snape's last request..and given > both of their patronuses it just sent me into realms neither I nor JKR > (I don't think/believe) wanted me to be in... I took it to mean two things. First, he wanted to see Lily's eyes. But also, he wanted Harry to look at his memories "Look at me" so that Harry would know the final secrets that he had to know to fight LV. Barbara From bgrugin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:43:34 2007 From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:43:34 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173060 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" wrote: > > After all, your patronus repreents your true inner self. > I agree, and I don't remember it being mentioned anywhere that one > could consciously control the form of one's patronus. When the spell > was performed, if a corporeal patronus resulted from it, the form of > the patronus was an expression of something within the person who > conjured it and not a form chosen by that person to represent > him/herself at that moment (or forever). That's one reason why a > person's patronus could change over time, or as the person's inner > life evolved and went through various ups and downs or traumatic > changes. It's also why I think Snape's doe patronus was the "ironclad" > proof for DD that Snape could be trusted to follow through on his > original promise to protect Harry. It's not something he could have > faked to gain DD's continuing trust. > > Lyn > MusicalBetsy here: Here's what I don't understand - DD seemed surprised that Snape's patronus was STILL a doe. Am I understanding this correctly? But isn't the patronus how the Order communicated? So shouldn't everyone know each other's patronuses? After all, Kingsley Shacklebolt's and Arthur Weasley's speak in their voices, so why doesn't DD know that Snape's patronus has always been the same - I don't think it's ever changed, because Snape says "Always" when DD asks, "After all this time?" MusicalBetsy, who really enjoyed the book and keeps trying to steal the book from her daughter when she's put it down so I can reread certain sections (but I always give it back like a good mom) From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Thu Jul 26 18:54:10 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:54:10 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173061 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sneeboy2" wrote: > > > Sneeboy2 replies: > > Snape's backstory shows that the sorting system played a key role in > ending his friendship with Lily, and thus his becoming a DE; if this > is JKR's subtle condemnation of the system, I think it's too subtle > for most readers, especially the younger ones. > I think Snape and Neville are examples of "living up to expectations" (or stereotypes). If you tell a child he is worthless, stupid, etc. that child might "live up" to those expectations in life. Likewise, if you tell a child he is smart, good, etc., that child might "live up" to those expectations. In the case of Snape, he lived up to the expectation of being "bad"--- becoming a DE, rejecting his Muggle-born friend, etc. It was only when Snape realized that being "bad" wasn't all it was cracked up to be did he turn his life around. He was fortunate, because in real-life, some people don't manage to "break the cycle"...ever. As for Neville, being sorted to Gryffindor boosted his self-confidence. So the Sorting System would be beneficial---IF (and this is a big IF), the qualities/characteristics of the House are positive. From what the epilogue states, I fear Slytherin's reputation has remained unchanged "19 years later". :-( Milz From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:56:09 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:56:09 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173062 Carol earlier: > > We see that he and Lily are really friends, that he's different from the boys he runs around with (and blind to their faults). Oddly, as Valky also noticed, the worst memory comes *after* the so-called Prank, which means that James did not suddenly become noble and heroic. He's still willing to ambush Severus and publicly humiliate him. We're given no alternate version, so Severus's idea that James saved him because he got cold feet must be right. > > Dana responded: > I think you should read it again. (Sorry to lazy to quote) > > Snape tries to excuse Mulciber using Dark Magic on a girl and when he fails, he pulls in James Potter and his nightly activities. Snape already knew what Lupin was and not just from glimpsing him just that night. Lily specifically states that she knows his theories about Lupin, while she clearly had not talked to Snape after the ordeal happened. She goes on about Snape sneaking into the tunnel behind the Willow and that James saved him. Snape tries to make her see that James did not do it to be heroic but that he only wanted to safe his friends but never accuses him of trying to kill him. He just says that he doesn't want Lily to be fooled by him. Carol: And where did I argue against any of this? All I said was that the so-called Prank came before the worst memory (canon) and that we get no alternative version of what happened to contradict Snape's view that James got cold feet. Note that Lily doesn't know exactly what happened, only that James saved Severus, but she doesn't view James as a hero. She calls him "an arrogant toerag" (DH Am. ed. 674). And she's right. James certainly has not become noble as a result of rescuing Severus (which was what I assumed had prompted him to start on the path toward maturity and heroism). The scene where he bullies and humiliates him occurs *after* he rescues Severus (unfortunately, we still don't know how). Where is the canon that he didn't rescue Severus because he got cold feet? It certainly was no noble heroic impulse to save an enemy. Dana: > Snape lied to DD about why he was in the tunnel and tried to use it to get the Marauders expelled but his plan failed. And DD, 20 years after the fact, is still not buying. Carol responds: Huh? Where are you getting all this stuff about Snape lying to Dumbledore? I didn't mention DD in relation to "The Prince's Tale," so you're arguing against some imaginary straw man. Even if you can find canon to support your point, the relevance to my post escapes me. My point, since you seem to have missed it completely, was that the so-called Prank came before the worst memory and was therefore not the turning point for Snape, who had apparently *not* made up his mind to be a DE as Lily supposes after the worst memory scene, and that we have no alternative to Snape's version of the rescue by James, which Lily didn't witness (she doesn't know what's "down there" in the Shrieking Shack and Severus doesn't tell her that his theory about the werewolf is right). Lily still thinks that James is a "toerag," and Severus is happy to find that she doesn't think he's as wonderful as the rest of the school seems to. There's no indication whatever that he's going down the same road as Avery and Mulciber, only that he, like Lupin and Black later in life, can't see the flaws in his friends or the difference between their cruelty and James Potter's hexing people in the hallways. (Makes me wonder what would have happened if he'd been sorted into Gryffindor and become friends with James and Sirius instead of having them judge him from day one based on his wish to be in a house he thinks represents brains not brawn (672). If only he'd wanted to be sorted into Ravenclaw!) Dana: > The scene actually says several things. Snape was not continuously bullied by the Marauders and the attack on Snape in SWM did not come totally out of the blue. Snape was as Sirius stated always sneaking around them, trying to find out what they where up to, trying to get them expelled. Carol: I have never believed nor have I ever stated that Severus was continually bullied (though I know that others have expressed that view). We agree there. Given his arsenal of hexes, many of them his own inventions, I'm pretty sure that in a fair fight (not a sneak two-on-one attack that cannot be justified by Severus's peek into the Shrieking Shack, which could have killed him), he could have held his own. (We see later just how brilliant the adult Snape is at duelling. The teenage snape was probably no slouch at it, either.) But that's beside the point. James is at this point, in the words of his own friend, "an arrogant berk," and in the words of the woman who ultimately married him, "a bullying toerag" who hexes people in the corridors if they annoy him. His countless detentions show that he was a troublemaker. So whatever turned James into the man who died tried trying to fight Voldemort, it wasn't his unwilling rescue of Severus Snape from the Shrieking Shack. And what turned Severus Snape to the Dark side wasn't the so-called Prank. It was Lily's rejction, her refusal to forgive him, that left him, in his own view, with nowhere to turn but to his "friends," Mulciber and Avery and any others who had not yet left school. Dana: > Only JKR can resolve the issue of how Sirius played the trick on Snape but Snape did not go in unknowing. He took the bait in an attempt to get rid of the Marauders and in particularly James. He tried to play it for all it was worth with DD and later Harry but did not dare to do that with Lily. Carol: I agree that he expected to see a werewolf, but his going into the Shrieking Shack willingly does not justify Sirius's showing him how to go in. Have you forgotten that the Marauders, being Animagi, could do so safely but Severus couldn't? As for playing it for all it was worth, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but it has nothing to do with the points I was making. Please do me the courtesy of responding to what I actually said rather than making assumptions about what I meant. And it might be a good idea to actually consult the canon you confess to being too lazy to quote before you advise me to reread it. Carol, still interested in the implications of having the so-called Prank come before the worst memory From graynavarre at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 18:58:43 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:58:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape parallels In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <634538.63220.qm@web30106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173063 --- colwilrin wrote: > My only complaint regarding Snape is that he did not > die fighting. My > impression by book 6 was that Snape was as > powerful...if not moreso > than DD or Voldy. I surely thought that he would go > down in a bitter > fight. However, that would not have leant to > preserving his memories > for Harry to find. Still do wish it would have been > a blaze of > glory...or (my ulimate wish)...that he survived and > THEN became > Hogwart's Headmaster...the second best they ever > had! > I also wanted him to fight back but that would have negated of his work as an double agent against LV. If he had fought back (while none of the others that LV killed had), then LV might have realized that Snape was not what he had portrayed himself to be. One of his last actions against LV was to take no action to protect himself. Barbara From chaomath at hitthenail.com Thu Jul 26 19:12:20 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:12:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Another inconsistency? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FBA3FCC-D0B0-405F-9D03-CE979B1D6024@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173064 Toner wrote: > I thought Fenrir had a dark mark? > > During the tower scene at the end of HBP, a group of DEs join DD, > Harry and Draco up on the top of the tower, and the rest of the OotP > can't get up the stairs due to some magical wall except for Snape. At > the time, the reasoning for this was that only people with Dark Marks > could go through the invisible wall. > > However, in DH, Fenrir cannot enter the Malfoy Manor, even though it > appeared you needed a Dark Mark to go through the gate (like Snape and > Amycus in the first chapter). Also, he couldn't summon LV because he > didn't have a Dark Mark and was relying on one of the Malfoys or > Bellatrix to call him. From the situation and Fenrir's attitude, he > certainly would've called LV if he could. I'm not sure about the Dark Mark, but I thought Fenrir Greyback's inability to enter Malfoy Manor was due to his low status because he's a werewolf. My impression was that there were several times it was emphasized that Fenrir wasn't a "true" Death Eater, or maybe I should say he wasn't a member of the "inner circle." He is tolerated because he's useful, but he is looked down upon by the purebloods. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From graynavarre at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 19:02:13 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <308094.4230.qm@web30112.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173065 > fitz wrote: > For those who share the point of view that the > Sorting and House System of Hogwarts is not beneficial for the > wizarding society and its children, what do you think can be done > to change it? This my second post, so it might make it in. Slytherins have their own type of courage. Phineas Black says in OotP, "Slytherins have courage, they just know when to run." I look at Slytherins as looking out for their interests, cleverly and with brains working to get their own way. That could be for good or evil. Slytherins don't believe in "last stands." There would be no Slytherins at the Alamo or in the Charge of the Light Brigade. Griffindors would be at both. If they were in a conflict for a good cause in which they had to fight, I would see them as the Minute Men in the Revolutionary War - they would hit the enemy, fade away, hit the enemy, run away. If they were captured by the enemy, they would deny all involvement. Then, if released, would hit the enemy again. On the other hand, there were Slytherin children in Hogwarts when it was attacked, so I would imagine that their parents would not have been happy with any Death Eaters that harmed their children. I also agree with whoever said that the first year students shouldn't sorted into houses. It divides them immediately and doesn't help them get to know or respect the others. Barbara From juli17 at aol.com Thu Jul 26 19:15:28 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:15:28 -0400 Subject: Responding to the responses to a LONG collection of DH related thoug In-Reply-To: <1185469745.14784.5161.m57@yahoogroups.com> References: <1185469745.14784.5161.m57@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C99DD07680EB4F-A48-2375@webmail-de10.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173066 > zgirnius: > This occured to me, and is in my opinion an important point. It is > one reason I believe that Snape came to care for Harry, and why I > think his "Look at me" meant not only that he wanted to see Lily's > eyes one last time before he died, but also that he realized, in his > final moments, that he wanted Harry to understand him, not to win him > to yet another false view of himself. And to achieve that, he needed > to give an honest account of himself, at least as far as he could > manage in the final seconds of his life, lying in a pool of his own > blood. > > Because the memories we saw were not particularly sanitized at all. > Why show himself dropping the branch on Petunia? Why show enough > memories that Harry could understand his mother's decision to cut off > ties? Why, most damningly, show that first meeting with Dumbledore in > its full glory, from start to finish, including the admission that > disgusted Dumbledore so deeply? Joe: My point was not that the memories themselves had been sanitized or edited, but that they had been chosen *selectively* for these memories to convey to Harry precisely what Snape wanted. I meant to underscore a difference between "the truth" and "the whole truth." Julie: That is one interpretation, though I really think they were chosen selectively by the AUTHOR to convey the real Snape to Harry and to the readers. Snape has been perhaps the central ambiguity of the series and would be the point of any more misdirection when this is the final book, the end of the series? (Not that it will or should stop anyone from molding Snape into a worse-or better-person than he was of course!) > > Joe: > > In a way we are taking Snape's "word" for it, a > > dangerous proposition in the Potterverse. > > zgirnius: > It is a deal less dangerous now that the series is complete. > That "Albus Severus" bit in the much-loathed Epilogue is more or less > the last word. Joe: What we see in the Epilogue (which was "okay, fine" for me) is based on what Harry believes. I agree with Harry in that Snape was EXTREMELY brave. Since life is a results-driven affair, I have no major problem with why Snape behaved bravely. If he did so for noble reasons or dysfunctional reasons is irrelevant to me. Julie: I intepret the epilogue the same way as I do the Pensieve scene. This is the final book, and I think it is not only Harry's but the author's last word. We do not have to accept her interpretation or intent, but there it is in any case. > > Joe: > > I defy anyone to tell me they'd > > want someone loving them the way Snape loved Lily. > > zgirnius: > Yes, being loved by the person Snape was as a young Death Eater would > not be near the top of my list. But he was not the same person when > he died. Joe: The Snape at the end still had a very stilted, distorted view of love. If I had such a character (i.e., Snape at the end) in love with me, I'd get the aurors to issue a restraining order. Julie: I'm a bit conflicted here. I don't think I'd want someone to love me the way Snape loved living!Lily, because he is too damaged to express it or act on it. Though if I died and he loved me enough to protect my child, I'd be okay with that ;-) And I have to ask, what's the point of a restraining order? Snape *never* goes near Lily once she breaks it off with him. This whole dangerous stalker image if Snape is NOT supported by canon, or by Snape's own personality (he hides his love of Lily from her, he doesn't pursue her relentlessly with it). > > Joe: > > How does the (by my scoring anyway) third best wizard in the world, > > Snape, "accidentally" curse off George's ear? > > zgirnius: > I presume because everyone involved (Snape, Lupin/George, the otehr > Death Eater) were all flying at high speeds when it happened. Joe: Snape always struck me as being too good a wizard for this sort of thing to be an accident, so that raised an eyebrow. Julie: I'm okay with it now that it's canon, as it is proof that Snape can do something good that has *nothing* to do with Lily. But I confess when Molly said "It could have been worse" I was CONVINCED Snape took the ear off on purpose to avoid something worse--Snape, you clever spy, you avoid killing George and only take off his ear instead, so you can keep your all-important cover with the DEs intact! This especially would fit with portrait!Dumbledore's advice to Snape that he must keep his cover during that attack at all costs. But, alas, I must accept the nobler version ;-) > > Joe: > > What did *Lupin* ever do to earn Snape's wrath? (Being friends with > > James & Sirius doesn't count for much here.) > > zgirnius: > Snape claims to believe that Lupin was in on Sirius's little joke. > The only tangible act one can point to is that it must have been he > that told Sirius how to get into the tunnel. Snape had no way to know > this was so his Animagus friends would be able to free him for jolly > romps through the countryside - I presume he therefore decided Lupin > told Sirius for the purpose of the prank. Joe: The fact Snape was hostile to Lupin as far as POA doesn't speak well for Snape. Snape had plenty of time to get it through his hygienically challenged scalp that Lupin was not in on that joke. But in this, Snape came across as petty and vindictive. Which is good. A Snape who is pure and noble and mature and oozing tortured longanimity is unidimensional at best...I've stepped in deeper puddles than such a character. Julie: I agree it is good. But I also think it probably was enough that Lupin was part of the group that taunted him, even if Lupin perhaps never took part in the actual taunting. He tacitly accepted it, thus tacitly agreed that Snape deserved seven years of harassment (Snape's view). > squeaker19450 > I'm sorry, but evidently some folks still don't GET IT. This is > the author speaking through Harry. Joe: I'm not sure that Harry is meant to be an omniscient spokeswizard. I'd be grateful if you could walk me through it, because I don't see it. (Not to say that Harry is necessarily wrong, just that I don't think he necessarily speaks for JKR.) Oh, and Harry said Snape was the bravest (not greatest, noblest, etc.). (I rather enjoyed Bookworm857158367's take on the Bloody Baron & Snape, incidentally. As well as SSSusan's "His wasn't a conversion based upon a total reordering of moral principles.") Julie: Much as I said above, I don't see any reason JKR would neglect to speak through the *hero*. He's the central person in the book, so why wouldn't we take his last word as her last word? And I too agree with Sssusan's assessment that Snape's was not a conversion based upon a total reordering of moral principles. But it was based on a reordering of *some* of his moral principles, IMO, thanks to his long association with Dumbledore, and yes, his ability to love, even if that love extended only to one other person (because the latter gave him the ability to feel remorse and guilt and act from it). Joe: On the Good Guys and the Unforgivables. In Harry's case, the parasitic nature of the Bit O' Voldemort gaining strength accounts for the Crucio bit. The AK is understandable, given the war scenario, as is the Imperius curse. But Harry had tried this curse in OOP and it didn't work so well, and I don't recall *much* wailing and gnashing of teeth over it. Still, while he may have meant that at the time (so that the curse actually "registered" with its target) and while he may have been gradually degenerating morally due to the parasitic Horcrux (exacerbated by the locket wearing?), it shows that in trying circumstances, even the "best" of us can and do have sharp moral lapses. I'm also trying to make a distinction between acceptable and understandable, that is, in Harry's case there were mitigating circumstances. The important bit is to realize that Harry did not stay in that state which permitted him to go a- Crucio-ing. Julie: I do think it's a bit convenient to blame Harry's new ability to crucio on Voldemort's soul piece (and the locket was long destoyed by that time wasn't it?). I found that scene uncomfortable myself, because I don't really see any good explanation for Harry being willing to use a torture curse. There are other magical ways to subdue people. And I'd really prefer my good guys to abstain from enjoying torturing even their worst enemies, though I do understand that in trying circumstances even the best of us do want to inflict pain on others. Doesn't mean one has to give into that impulse though. Julie ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From verosomm at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 19:00:21 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:00:21 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173067 Elisabet wrote: > > Maybe it's a Weasley thing - Ginny could do it too, albeit > while being possessed by Riddle's Diary Horcrux. Veronica: There was a thread on here a few weeks before the book came out, that the basilisk, in mythlore, can be defeated by a "weasel" if the weasel eats rue, which makes the weasel immune to the basilisk's stare, or something to that effect. Ron was given essence of rue in Book 6 after he drank the poisoned mead. I'm guessing, since the basilisk was already dead, but the chamber mouth, on the faucet in Myrtle's bathroom, was like an enchanted basilisk, Ron using the Parseltongue worked since he's a "weasel" "weasley"? Sorry I don't know what the # for the thread is and the server keeps telling me it's busy when I do a search! But it's here, I swear, and I don't want to take credit for it, since it's not my original idea. Also, someone on THIS thread was saying they thought Parseltongue couldn't be learned... I'm guessing it could, but nobody "good" wanted to learn it since it's got such a bad stigma attached to it, so after all these years, no one knows it can be learned. Veronica From rkdas at charter.net Thu Jul 26 19:21:15 2007 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:21:15 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: <8C99DC66C51689B-A48-1E3C@webmail-de10.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173068 Julie wrote: SNIPPED> > Snape is no hero, maybe he's an antihero at best. He's damaged goods, stuck > in the past and unable to move beyond it, but he?is a?different person, if not > a "good" person, still clearly more principled than he was when he first came > to Dumbledore. > > Julie > Intrigued as I was by Snape, I have to admit I was mightily let down that he and Harry had no face-to-face. Deep inside me, I wanted his sacrifices to be acknowledged but then reality came into play and I had to realize that indeed, he gave the Dark Lord the prophecy. He was damaged goods, as you so aptly put it before and after, almost beyond redemption. That JKR made it possible for him to serve so noble a role, even if it didn't include my desire to see him redeemed in Harry's eyes (whilst alive, I had hoped) is a testament, must be so, to her belief that some level of redemption is possible for almost everyone. The dark lord was given a final opportunity to find a speck of humanity in himself (Harry entreated him to try to feel some remorse) and it wasn't possible for him. He indeed, had no humanity left. I was left wishing for more for poor, tortured Snape but I am thinking what he got was realistic, a grown-up ending. Jen D. (still in shock from having read the last words of the last words of any Harry Potter story...) > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ __ > AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > From chaomath at hitthenail.com Thu Jul 26 19:46:08 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:46:08 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4F9FAF84-3D68-447D-9B4E-4DC50730F58F@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173069 On Jul 26, 2007, at 9:26 AM, sdeepthi wrote: > Deepthi: > Hi all, I am responding to multiple posts here.. > > --------- > LKH said: > > JKR sucks at romance. For one... I do not get all the Hermione/Ron > shippers. It is not normal in my opinion to constantly bicker with > your crush... Usually people put on their BEST behavior when trying > to win the one they love. > > Deepthi: > Ron is a teenager, and teenagers are very awkward with the opposite > sex, more so when they feel an attraction. I thought JKR's > portrayal here was dead on. There are all kinds of possible starts > to a relationship, and something where you get all the bickering > out right at the beginning may actually have a better chance in the > long run, than one where everything has been sugar-coated to start > with, and it is only later that you see the person's true colors. > Ron and Hermione do care for each other - that is why Ron gets > jealous when Hermione goes to the Yule ball with Krum in GoF, > Hermione is furious when Fleur kisses Ron after the second task in > GoF, and Hermione hurtles to the hospital wing when Ron almost dies > in HBP (in Slughorn's office) > > LKH said: > > the infatuation with his mother (he wanted to FEAST upon her image) > made the ship entirely creepy. There wasnt enough true buildup.... > No connection of souls so to speak. > > Deepthi: > The actual quote is "His /eyes/ feasted on her" Harry is a teenager > who has no real memories of his mother. The only memory he has is > of Voldemort killing his mum. With this background, it is not > surprising that he couldn't take his eyes off her, he knew that he > would have to face Voldemort very soon, and by necessity take his > attention off her. As for a connection, everyone feels a > connection to their mother, even if they have no memories of her > alive. We seem to be living in an age where all innocence has been > lost, and even your relationship with your mother is suspect. > > LKH: > JKR's blatant lack of understanding human Sexuality killed the > whole story for me. I was sorely dissapointed that she could > delve into the aspects of Torture and other deeply disturbing > human emotions.. yet she couldnt touch sexuality with a ten foot > pole. > > Deepthi: > > You are within your rights to say that she didn't portray sexuality > the way you wanted it, but please don't turn it into a personal > attack on her. It's not a matter of "how I wanted it" -- that makes it sound like I'm at fault (even though I didn't write that comment; I just agree with it). JKR's portrayal of romantic (note, not sexual) love largely fell flat for me. I didn't *feel* any of it. Harry's initial feelings for Cho were probably the ones that worked best for me; all of the others were cold and flat. > We have to remember that JKR is writing for a audience that varies > in age from seven to ninety (or more). She had to be very subtle > with any portrayals of sexuality. It is there in the canon, if you > read carefully.. Er, no. I think kids understand that their parents love each other differently than they love their children. It's related, but different, and the difference is important. You don't need to have explicit sex scenes or elaborate descriptions -- you just need good ones, and I don't think JKR did that. continues: > GoF: At the Yule Ball, Snape is blasting rosebushes apart, and > couples emerge from them. Obviously, teenagers in Harry's world > are like teenagers in the real world, they have physical > relationships, they wouldn't need to hide if they are simply > holding hands, or looking at each other. > > OoTP: It takes Harry half an hour to return to the common room > after he kisses Cho. > > HBP: Ron pulls Lavendar into an empty classroom, if they just > wanted to kiss, they have no problems doing that in front of everyone. > > DH: Ron shoots a guilty look at Lupin when he has to hold on to > Tonks (chapter 4). Obviously, he is very aware of her as a woman. These are mostly about physical actions, not the emotion of romantic love. > There are plenty of such scenes, not even counting Harry's obvious > reactions to Cho and Ginny. I felt that it was very true to life > without getting too much into the details. As I said, I'll give you Cho, but I never bought Harry's feelings for Ginny. I found the concept of Harry protecting Ginny by not displaying his affection very sad and moving, but it was only the *concept*. I never really felt that JKR convinced me that Harry truly valued her as a person and as a romantic entanglement. I was just told that, and it seemed somewhat trite. Bah. I don't give a fig about JKR's ability or inabilty to understand romantic love, but I do care about her inability to write convincingly about it. For a series that hounds on the idea that "love is the savior" and whose narrative arc is about growing up, this seems to be a large flaw. I'm reminded of Lloyd Alexander's Chronicles of Prydain. Taran and Eilonwy's arc is similar to Ron and Hermoine's, but it seems like that was handled much more convincingly. Maybe I'm misremembering (it has been a decade since I've read them). But Alexander managed to give us romantic love in a real children's book (that is, juvenile fiction, not young adult fiction). I suppose you could argue that Taran and Eilonwy's arc was more central to the story, but still, JKR had lots more pages to handle this if she'd been able to. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From heiloo at aol.com Thu Jul 26 19:47:55 2007 From: heiloo at aol.com (susan4508) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:47:55 -0000 Subject: The Body Count In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173070 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: >> How did the body count get so high? And I don't recall anyone > mentioning many death eaters. I know good guys don't go for death > blows as often, but it seems that team evil did REALLY well. In > previous battles, there were a lot of spells thrown, and they were > going for death, but there wasn't much. I know this is the Final > Battle, but... 50 casualties? In the Encyclopedia I'm going to need > an 'In Memoriam' page listing the fallen heroes, cause I just don't > see where the cannon fodder came from. > > I'd love to hear any ideas and explanations I've overlooked. > I can't remember who says this to Harry--Neville, maybe--that they contacted Dumbledore's Army and the Order and "it just snowballed from there." That's how people like Oliver Wood ended up fighting the first big battle of Hogwarts. It's reasonable to assume 100 or even more people were defending Hogwarts in the first battle. And I'm sure Ginny and Colin Creevey weren't the only underage students to sneak into the fight. The families of students and residents of Hogsmeade and other reinforcements came in the second battle. Susan From ida3 at planet.nl Thu Jul 26 19:58:18 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:58:18 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173071 Carol: > I agree that he expected to see a werewolf, but his going into the > Shrieking Shack willingly does not justify Sirius's showing him how > to go in. Have you forgotten that the Marauders, being Animagi, > could do so safely but Severus couldn't? As for playing it for all > it was worth, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but it > has nothing to do with the points I was making. Dana: I red what you wrote and you wrote that what Snape said about James getting cold feet was actually true. And I replied that you should read it again because if Snape was truly of the opinion, like he expressed in PoA, that the Marauders were out there to kill him then he would have said something about it to Lily but he didn't. Also Magpie once told me that in order to be tricked, it needs the element of not knowing what you are walking into otherwise it is no trick but as you yourself are agreeing to here, Snape wasn't tricked, he already knew. Snape knew and went anyway and Snape wanted to turn the trick around on the marauders but it backfired. The moment Snape made the decision to go to the tunnel while knowing what he could find made him solely responsible for the entire event from unfolding like it did. Snape knew the Marauders where out at night and he sneaked into the tunnel to find out what they were up to and not because Sirius tricked him into doing anything. What Sirius thought or what his initial reasons were for the entire thing doesn't really matter anymore as the moment Snape chose to put himself in harms way, all knowing what he could find, it became his own responsibility and his alone. I have forgotten nothing but you seem to think that Snape would not know that wrestling with a werewolf would not be good for your health. If someone would forget that a werewolf is actually dangerous and not just a furry little problem then it was Sirius. Would you play with a gun that you know is loaded if someone tells you that it is safe to do so? Would you jump out of an airplane without a parachute if someone, who does wear one, next to you says it's okay? In both cases you wouldn't because you know there is a possibility that it will not work out that well for you. The trick was no longer a trick the moment Snape made his own choice knowing full well what he could find. Snape not claiming that the marauders tried to kill him is proof to me that he knew full well that his presence in the tunnel had nothing to do with anything Sirius said to him and therefore Snape asking DD if he had forgotten that Sirius tried to kill him at age 16, was a lie. Of course if you for a second would take off your Snape orientated glasses, you would actually be able to read the text without the need for me to type out the entire thing out the same book you hold in front of you. Snape's omission to confront Lily about any type of murder attempt on either James or Sirius part means that it never was. Snape wasn't tricked. JMHO Dana, who doesn't need a warning from the Elves as I have just obliterated my memory Carol who? From heiloo at aol.com Thu Jul 26 19:43:20 2007 From: heiloo at aol.com (susan4508) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:43:20 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: <46A6B84E.80308@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173072 > > Bart: > He wasn't speaking Parseltongue; he was repeating a single word he > heard. What Bart said. Just because you can parrot back one word of a foreign language doesn't mean you speak it. Susan From kathy.m.mandrell at pfizer.com Thu Jul 26 20:00:44 2007 From: kathy.m.mandrell at pfizer.com (kmmand2000) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:00:44 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173073 > Diana wrote: > After all, your patronus repreents your true inner self. > Lyn wrote: > It's also why I think Snape's doe patronus was the "ironclad" > proof for DD that Snape could be trusted to follow through on his > original promise to protect Harry. It's not something he could > have faked to gain DD's continuing trust. > MusicalBetsy here: > Here's what I don't understand - DD seemed surprised that Snape's > patronus was STILL a doe. Am I understanding this correctly? But > isn't the patronus how the Order communicated? So shouldn't > everyone know each other's patronuses? After all, Kingsley > Shacklebolt's and Arthur Weasley's speak in their voices, so why > doesn't DD know that Snape's patronus has always been the same - I > don't think it's ever changed, because Snape says "Always" when DD > asks, "After all this time?" > Kathy: just throwing thoughts around... there was some discussion about the essay and Snape and Harry disagreeing on how to take on a Dementor. Perhaps Snape did not want his Patronus known (so obvious, how embarrassing), perhaps pretended he couldn't make one and so chose a different way to fight Dementors and a different way to communicate with the Order. Altho' it seems like it would be embarrassing for him to say, "I can't do it!" From carylcb at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 19:51:21 2007 From: carylcb at hotmail.com (Caryl Brown) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:51:21 -0400 Subject: Definition of abbreviations Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173074 Can someone please define LOLLIPOPS and TEWWW EWWW for me? They don't appear in the Snape Abbreviations file and I haven't found them anywhere else. Thanks, clcb Elfy note: Acronyms can be found at Innish Alley in the Database: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database?method=reportRows&tbl=28 From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:16:11 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:16:11 -0000 Subject: Definition of abbreviations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173075 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Caryl Brown" wrote: > > Can someone please define LOLLIPOPS and TEWWW EWWW for me? They don't > appear in the Snape Abbreviations file and I haven't found them > anywhere else. > > > Elfy note: Acronyms can be found at Innish Alley in the Database: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database?method=reportRows&tbl=28 To add on: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#snapetheories contains explanations of and links to many older posts dealing with Snapetheories. This may be useful as some of us cranky old types make reference to the theories of our youth as we watch them be loaded onto the GARBAGE SCOW. -Nora remembers her considerable fondness for George and Diana, but sees JKR's interview response "He wouldn't have been remotely interested in what happened to this boy." really putting the nail in both of them From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu Jul 26 20:17:36 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:17:36 -0000 Subject: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173076 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > If you want to know more about the fate of the characters than you > learned in the epilog see an interview Rowling just gave that goes > into a lot more detail: > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/ > > Eggplant Geoff: I agree with Kathryn; the stuff should have been in the book. I just printed it off so I shall have to put up with silly bits of loose paper floating around inside my DH copy until the encyclopaedia surfaces. At least it dispels my fears that Harry has dropped his interests just to concentrate on family and that he has followed some of his dreams. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 20:16:25 2007 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (strange_familiarities) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:16:25 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: <593482.92855.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173077 > ***Katie replies:*** > Harry as an Auror makes total sense. As JKR was anxious to point out through the entire series (EXCEPT the epilogue), the world isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters. After Voldemort's death, there are still going to be nasty, bad wizards out there that need to be caught. Aurors will still be needed, and that is what Harry always wanted to do, once fake Moody had put the idea in his head. Also, Harry, I think, would be unable to settle down into a banal family life. Yes, he would relish his time with Ginny and his kids, but he would need more. Najwa now: I agree with Katie. Law enforcement is always necessary, and Harry definitely would do nicely as an auror. Katie again: > I also liked hearing that Hermione was involved in an overhaul at the MoM. Seeing her simply as Ron's wife was sort of sickening to me. "The most brilliant witch of her age" becomes just Mrs. Ronald Weasley?? Yuck. Najwa: I agree with this too, Katie. To have Hermione , of all people, not use that brilliant brain of hers for the betterment of human and magic kind would definitely be a waste. The issues I had with the epilogue was the confusion of everything. For one, why wasn't Teddy Lupin living with the Potters? Isn't he Harry's godson and an orphan? Also, why was Teddy at the platform? If math serves me correctly, Teddy had to at least be 7 years older than Harry's children, and considering James is at least a second year, Teddy should have graduated by then. I wasn't really pleased with the epilogue, but I did like that she actually told us about the trio's employment status. I thought this book would tell everyone about what James Potter did for a living, but I guess that will remain a mystery, unless we could count the Order of the Phoenix" as a job. From sarah_kendrick2004 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:20:22 2007 From: sarah_kendrick2004 at yahoo.com (sarah_kendrick2004) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:20:22 -0000 Subject: Accchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173078 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sandra Collins" wrote: > Hello Lady P! That's an interesting point, but you have to bear in > mind how long ago Ron and Harry were in the girls bathroom. I > think about 5 years earlier, because it was back in book two. So > Ron would need qquite a memory to recall a totally bizarre > language like that, wouldn't he? And even if he had heard Harry > since then, like with the snitch in TDH, and somehow > immediately committed the strange sounds to memory, > Parseltongue is not portrayed as alnguage which can be > learned. Felinegroovy: Yes, I am another newbie.... In response to Sandra and Libby, Ron did not hear Harry in the bathroom five years before and remember it for this time, he heard Harry say "Open" in parseltongue when he opened the locket in DH. He just tried imitating the sounds. It is not unlike imitating the words of a foreign language. IMHO, I think that the amazing part of Harry knowing Parseltongue is that he just KNOWS its. No one taught him, he didn't even know he was speaking it. I would imagine that Parseltongue could be taught.learned if there was someone who could teach it. That would likely require a phenom, like Harry, who is born with the ability, as I don't know of any other way a snake could teach it. Even if it is not teachable, the imitation of the sounds to get the right "word" to open the COS is not a far fetched idea. From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Thu Jul 26 20:32:38 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:32:38 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adamjmarcantel" wrote: > > I agree 100% and am glad someone else shares this view. I have > always been a Snape-defender (not ALWAYS a fan) and always trusted he > was on the good side...although characterizing him as a "hero" is a > bit much. He was good, but flawed, as are most of us... A hero can't be flawed? Contrarywise a flawed persona can't be heroic? I don't think I agree. But then I think it's pretty obvious that by the battle of Hogwarts - if not long before - it's no longer about Lily or protecting her son but about defeating Voldemort forever. If it wasn't, if he was still obsessed solely with Lily, then why did Snape tell Harry he must die? rowena_grunnionffitch From aslitumerkan at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 20:23:27 2007 From: aslitumerkan at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-9?Q?Asl=FD_T=FCmerkan?=) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:23:27 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Responding to the responses to a LONG collection of DH related thoug In-Reply-To: <8C99DD07680EB4F-A48-2375@webmail-de10.sysops.aol.com> References: <1185469745.14784.5161.m57@yahoogroups.com> <8C99DD07680EB4F-A48-2375@webmail-de10.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <6467e1f0707261323i3d37d054xf82d733a8c90fe6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173080 Asli: Carrows spat on McGonagall. This was very upsetting for Harry, as it would be for any of us. I don't think it had anything to do with Voldemort's soul in him, even the good guys can be bad, there is no such thing as a perfect good person in real life, and it just wouldn't be realistic if non of the good characters conduct a unforgivable spell, it was enough that Harry got out of using the Avada Kedavra. From verosomm at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:36:19 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:36:19 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173081 > Najwa: > I agree with this too, Katie. To have Hermione , of all people, not > use that brilliant brain of hers for the betterment of human and magic > kind would definitely be a waste. > > The issues I had with the epilogue was the confusion of everything. > For one, why wasn't Teddy Lupin living with the Potters? Isn't he > Harry's godson and an orphan? Also, why was Teddy at the platform? If > math serves me correctly, Teddy had to at least be 7 years older than > Harry's children, and considering James is at least a second year, > Teddy should have graduated by then. I think Hermione herself would want to be working outside the home, but please don't say that if she made the choice to stay home, with loving and nurturing her family as her only full-time job (or if Ron did, for that matter, but he doesn't have the personality for it), please don't say that would be a waste. That is completely disrespectful to women (and men) all over the globe who've made the same decision, and please don't think it's an easy one to make, either. I think Teddy probably lived with his grandmother since she's just lost husband, daughter and son-in-law and Harry's only (about to be) 18. And while Teddy's 19, I think he's just there to snog Victoire and say "bye." James tells his family Teddy told James he was "seeing Victoire off" and then basically to get lost. Veronica From melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:07:55 2007 From: melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com (melrosedarjeeling) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:07:55 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173082 > Tim replies: > > Actually, thinking about it a few days later, it does make sense. > Harry did die in that chapter. Because V was still alive, and had > Harry's blood, Harry could hold onto life, like V did when Harry was > a baby (he had most of the Horocuxes already made, so he could hang > onto life). My question is: if the protection of Lily's blood "expired" when Harry turned 17, why would Lily/Harry's blood in Voldemort continue to provide protection after the expiration date? melrosedarjeeling From mailowen at aol.com Thu Jul 26 20:39:11 2007 From: mailowen at aol.com (Debbie Owen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:39:11 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173083 > Sandra wrote: > Hello Alison! You're right, they were all "a given" right at the start > or at least very early on (I always wanted Hermione to be with > Harry, and still did right till the end!) but my point is that there's no > tenderness shown between any of them. I can't think of any > warm moments between R and H, no stumbled honest > expressions of their feelings, no first time they held hands (or > were seen to hold hands) and generally it's just one bickering > session agter another through all seven books. Would it have > hurt JKR to give us something special to feel nice with once in a > while? Just a line here or there, a moment shared between any > of the couples, a confession to a friend, or just something that > didn't involve flying into a bad mood? > (snip) Sandra, I don't think I can say anything to change your feeling of disappointment, but I just have to remind you of my one favorite tender moment between Ron and Hermione: when she invited him to Slughorn's Christmas party in HBP. At that moment, they become awkward, Harry tries to busy himself elsewhere, and they are "unnaturally polite" to each other for a few days after that (until the next fight and the Lavender interlude). Harry reflects on what would happen if they become a couple, etc. That counts as a "warm moment" in my book, even if it didn't last. I do agree that I wished their ultimate reconciliation had come earlier (or at least been more overt) than in the midst of the final battle. We didn't get a chance to enjoy them as a couple, relishing the security of their relationship. That was what I enjoyed so much about Harry's time with Ginny, whether people like the way it was written or not, it was nice that he had a period at school when he felt just like any other teenage boy in love. Debbie (long-time lurker) From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:52:52 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:52:52 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173084 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rowena_grunnionffitch" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adamjmarcantel" > wrote: He was good, but flawed, as are most of us... > > A hero can't be flawed? Contrarywise a flawed persona can't be heroic? > I don't think I agree. > > But then I think it's pretty obvious that by the battle of Hogwarts - > if not long before - it's no longer about Lily or protecting her son > but about defeating Voldemort forever. If it wasn't, if he was still > obsessed solely with Lily, then why did Snape tell Harry he must die? > > rowena_grunnionffitch > Adam: I probably should have broken that post up better, as I can see it reads not as intended. I meant to say that I agree with SSSusan and don't think Snape is a "hero" or "heroic". I think his last words "Look at me" were so he could see Lily's eyes as he died, showing (at least to me) that his overriding motivation was still Lily. End of point. Then, an additional point was that I thought Snape was good, but flawed. I didn't mean to imply that a flawed person can't be a hero. As much as I like him, I don't think Snape fits the bill for hero, but it was most definately NOT because he was flawed...if that were the case, there would be no heroes. I hope that made sense :0) From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:57:46 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:57:46 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173085 Re: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "strange_familiarities" wrote: Katie again: > > I also liked hearing that Hermione was involved in an overhaul at > the MoM. Seeing her simply as Ron's wife was sort of sickening to me. > "The most brilliant witch of her age" becomes just Mrs. Ronald > Weasley?? Yuck. Lisa: Just wondering here why anyone thinks that a woman who gets married "becomes just Mrs." Anybody? Why did anyone see her "simply as Ron's wife?" Are any of you with this opinion actually married yoursefl? Frankly, I've done the Single Career Girl thing; the Married Career Girl thing; and the Stay At Home Mom thing -- after having graduated in the top 5% of my college graduating class. Priorities can (and in most cases, should) change as our circumstances do, and adults (as we're all supposed to be) diminishing other women's choices is really offensive. > > Najwa: > I agree with this too, Katie. To have Hermione , of all people, not > use that brilliant brain of hers for the betterment of human and magic > kind would definitely be a waste. Lisa: Again -- just because she's married, she couldn't "use that brilliant brain of hers for the betterment of human and magic kind?" Do marriage vows render a woman's brain useless? News to me. Najwa again: > > The issues I had with the epilogue was the confusion of everything. > For one, why wasn't Teddy Lupin living with the Potters? Isn't he > Harry's godson and an orphan? Also, why was Teddy at the platform? If > math serves me correctly, Teddy had to at least be 7 years older than > Harry's children, and considering James is at least a second year, > Teddy should have graduated by then. Lisa: As has been previously pointed out, Teddy wasn't there to go to Hogwarts; he was seeing Fleur & Bill's daughter, Victoire, off to school. And he didn't live with Harry & Ginny because they are not his family. Teddy was obviously raised by his FAMILY, Tonks' mother. Godparents have no legal standing -- and what caring parent would choose to leave their infant with a 17-year-old boy over a perfectly capable grandparent? And how encumbering for Harry would THAT have been?! Veronica: please don't say that if she made the choice to stay home, with loving and nurturing her family as her only full-time job (or if Ron did, for that matter, but he doesn't have the personality for it), please don't say that would be a waste. That is completely disrespectful to women (and men) all over the globe who've made the same decision, and please don't think it's an easy one to make, either. Lisa: Well said, Veronica! From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:59:50 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:59:50 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173086 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dana" wrote: > Of course if you for a second would take off your Snape orientated > glasses, you would actually be able to read the text without the need > for me to type out the entire thing out the same book you hold in > front of you. > Snape's omission to confront Lily about any type of murder attempt on > either James or Sirius part means that it never was. Snape wasn't > tricked. Lisa: I'm confused. Since when does the information purportedly known by the victim exonerate the perpetrator's intent?? One has nothing to do with the other. If Sirius simply wanted to confirm what Snape thought he knew, he'd've said, "Yeah, he's a werewolf, so what? Dumbledore already knows, so tattling will do you no good, you git." Instead, he sets him up to be killed or turned into a werewolf. Intent is the key. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:01:27 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:01:27 -0000 Subject: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173087 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kmrhapsody" wrote: > > > eggplant wrote: Well until it is in the encyclopedia, it's still fluffy speculation to > me. Definitely fits with the feel of the epilogue itself, full of hot > air and nothingness. Lisa: Are you serious? Words directly from the author's mouth are "fluffy speculation?" Whose fluffy speculation? The AUTHOR's fluffy speculation? Wouldn't she KNOW, whether she's published those words or not? From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Jul 26 21:08:54 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:08:54 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173088 > Carol, wondering how JKR could fail to realize that Snape is her > > greatest creation Jen D.: > Ah you sparked me, Carol. I was totally taken aback by JKR's less- > glowing assessment of Snape whom so many idolize and love. Jen R.: I'm not trying to be facetious here in saying my guess is JKR considers Harry her greatest creation. He was the most unlikey hero to ever appear to someone in a vision at a train station. :) I like to think she saw the thin, spectacled boy before her and thought, 'him, *he's* the hero of my story?' but of course she didn't; she saw Harry and her sympathy was with him, has always been with him. She didn't even know who he was at first - just a boy. While Snape is a "gift of a character," my guess is JKR may come off as more blase about Snape because she's spent 17 years wrestling with who Snape is; she long ago formed her primary opinions about him (is my guess), since she had access to all the information and wasn't waiting for a big revelation. I expect after 17 years I'll finally have a handle on Snape as well. Jen R. From pjarrett at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 21:10:34 2007 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (patrick.jarrett) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:10:34 -0000 Subject: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173089 eggplant wrote: Well until it is in the encyclopedia, it's still fluffy speculation to me. Definitely fits with the feel of the epilogue itself, full of hot air and nothingness. Lisa: Are you serious? Words directly from the author's mouth are "fluffy speculation?" Whose fluffy speculation? The AUTHOR's fluffy speculation? Wouldn't she KNOW, whether she's published those words or not? Patrick: Just to be fair, JKR has changed her mind before between what she's said and what she's written. I'm not saying this isn't to be believed and is likely to change, I'm just saying that until we have it in a printed or semi-permanent medium it is difficult to take it to the same level as canon. -- Patrick From MorganAnnAdams at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:15:39 2007 From: MorganAnnAdams at yahoo.com (Morgan Adams) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:15:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: White peacocks? Message-ID: <778114.47723.qm@web32404.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173090 Did anyone else think the white peacocks in the Malfoy's yard were going to end up being a transfigured witch/wizard? I was sure they were someone under cover! --Morgan --------------------------------- Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From randomfrog at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 20:41:16 2007 From: randomfrog at gmail.com (randomfrog26) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:41:16 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173091 Najwa: > I agree with this too, Katie. To have Hermione , of all people, not > use that brilliant brain of hers for the betterment of human and magic > kind would definitely be a waste. > > The issues I had with the epilogue was the confusion of everything. > For one, why wasn't Teddy Lupin living with the Potters? Isn't he > Harry's godson and an orphan? Also, why was Teddy at the platform? If > math serves me correctly, Teddy had to at least be 7 years older than > Harry's children, and considering James is at least a second year, > Teddy should have graduated by then. randomfrog26: "Why isn't Harry raising Teddy?" has been brought up a few times. I think it's reasonable to infer that Teddy is being raised by his grandmother, Andromeda Tonks (Sirius' favorite cousin and Tonks' mother), who after all is his closest blood relation and, after losing her husband, daughter, and son-in-law in the Second War, probably would like somebody to be care for. The why-is-Teddy-at-the-platform question has been discussed in the past few days in this thread: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172273 The general consensus is that he was just there to say goodbye to Bill and Fleur's daughter, Victoire (who was probably in her 6th or 7th year). (JK Rowling confirms that Victoire is Bill & Fleur's eldest daughter here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323) From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Thu Jul 26 20:15:45 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:15:45 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173092 > > Joe: > > Snape/Pensieve - Remember, we are only seeing what Snape wanted > > Harry to see. This is Snape's edited version of things. Yes, a > > pensieve shows only true things, but it doesn't show EVERYTHING. It > > doesn't show what we might call "refuting evidence." rowena_grunnioffitch: Excuse me? Slughorn's attempt at falsification shows how impossible undetectable editing is and exactly how much control did a dying Snape have? Personally I think he gave Harry a little more than he meant to. Just as well he didn't survive, he'd have died of the humiliation of Harry knowing all. Besides, the fact that pensieve scenes are *NOT* from the subject's pov suggests a degree of objectivity. From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Thu Jul 26 20:46:42 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:46:42 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173093 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: > Ah you sparked me, Carol. I was totally taken aback by JKR's less- > glowing assessment of Snape whom so many idolize and love. And from > your post, you too seemed to have gathered that she is much more > situationally positioned in her ethics than previously realized. > Snape was only a hero because of his great love of Lily. Could her point have been that if Snape hadn't loved Lily he would have stayed a Death Eater? rowena_grunnioffitch From pjarrett at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 21:24:35 2007 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (patrick.jarrett) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:24:35 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173094 Daimauwr: If the Patronus is unique then the WW would soon run out of objects to imitate - considering the number of wizards and witches that have died since Hogwarts was established. Harry has the same as his father - the Stag, therefore one must presume that genetically this form can be passed down through generations. As there is no daughter in the Potter family then Lily's patronus must be up for grabs. Patrick: Respectfully, presuming anything is genetically based here is fallible logic. If it were so then if Ron's patronus is a dog, then logically Arthur Weasley's is a dog, as is Fred, George, Bill, Percy etc.. I admit we're not explicitly shown a case where this is disproven, due to the rarity of patronuses, it seems that having such a large cross-over would be dubious. Also if DD and Lupin both knew James' was a stag, they would have known Harry's was going to be a stag. Daimauwr: In OOP film we see some interesting forms - Hermione's otter, a hare, a dog (Ron's?) and we know that DD's was a phoenix. Due to his unrequited love for Lily his appropriation of her Patronus makes sense. Patrick: Just for clarification, as we're shown in the movies: Harry -> Stag Hermione -> Otter Ron -> Dog Luna -> Hare I can't recall any others. -- Patrick From pair_0_docks at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 20:49:47 2007 From: pair_0_docks at yahoo.com (pair_0_docks) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:49:47 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173095 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: >> This has also just been echoed by the JKR commentary on the Today Show: >> "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." << > >>Marika: >> Wow! I'm a bit surprised - and curious. It seems that Rowling and I have a different take on what a hero is. >> >> A person can be a hero (the way I see it) on many different levels. Snape is not one on a personal level, because he's not a good role model, but to me he is one on a national level.<< >> pair_0_docks: First post: I'd have to totally agree with what you have written about hero Snape. Interesting question about whether motivations- choices and/or consequences of choices earn us the label of hero. And even if he is purely motivated out of his love of Lily why wouldn't he still be considered heroic just because he "allegedly" (author in total control of her character or do character's take on a life of their own?) wouldn't have acted the way that he did if he was not? Also I am sorry to say but with how great a job Rowling did in the 1- 6 series, keeping us guessing, resolving the Snape debate ended up falling sort in my book (and I don't think intended...but maybe someone out there will want to argue for that...keeping these discussions going) I myself see too many inconsistencies with what she was doing with his character in the last book. Now I admit I am a huge "snape fan," but he didn't do everything "just for lily." At a minimum, we do see Snape providing protection to DD from his actions in HBP and other students who also suffered from DA. These are just a couple off the cuff I can think of at the moment but there certainly are more. Also, I thought that his reaction to Harry's predicment about having to face Voldy and death was a more caring response than DD. It is enjoyable reading other's reactions to the book! pair_0_docks From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Thu Jul 26 21:00:39 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:00:39 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adamjmarcantel" wrote: > I don't think Snape is a "hero" or "heroic". I think his last > words "Look at me" were so he could see Lily's eyes as he died, > showing (at least to me) that his overriding motivation was still > Lily. End of point. rowena_grunnionffitch: Couldn't he have just wanted the comfort of her memory in his last moments? I repeat: if Lily is still the be all and end all *WHY* is sorrowing lover telling her son to get himself killed??? The only reason I can think of is because, like DD and Harry himself, defeating Voldemort has become Snape's prime objective. BTW: Isn't Harry strongly motivated by the fact Voldy killed his parents, and was indirectly responsible for the death and suffering of assorted friends? From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Thu Jul 26 20:50:42 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:50:42 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173097 Frankly I am amazed by the number of people with whom this is not okay. Though how anybody could believe the protagonist of a coming-of-age series was going to die at the end is beyond me. Doesn't make mythic sense either. But people are actually *angry* that Harry not only lived but got married and had kids! Go figure.... rowena_grunnionffitch From gije81 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:01:09 2007 From: gije81 at yahoo.com (gije81) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:01:09 -0000 Subject: Hi! I am New! / Number of deaths Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173098 hello. I am new to this group. My name is Gije. I have a question, how many have died in the book? Not counting the various people in the battle itself but main characters? Seven I counted. gije. From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:35:58 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:35:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: =?windows-1252?B?cmVjOiAgTWlzc2luZyBmcm9tICdIYXJyeSBQb3R0ZXInIJYgYSByZWFs?= =?windows-1252?B?IG1vcmFsIHN0cnVnZ2xl?= Message-ID: <598425.77091.qm@web80508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173099 I want to recommend this critique piece on Book 7 "Missing from 'Harry Potter' ? a real moral struggle", written by Jenny Sawyer, as it shares exactly my problem with book 7 and the HP series in general and and put it better than I could ever do. http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070725/cm_csm/ysawyer quotes: "Successful storytelling rests on a few basic principles. One of them is this: A story is about someone who changes, who grows through a moral struggle. What is Harry's struggle? Exactly." "Throughout the series, but especially in book seven, even Harry's darkest moments ? of self-doubt, of disillusionment, of skepticism about his greatest mentor, Dumbledore ? never ring true. Was there any doubt that Harry would fulfill the task set out for him? The truth of the matter is that Harry the character had nowhere to go. And thus, the overarching moral dilemma of the series, the compelling inner crisis that begged resolution, had nothing to do with our beloved hero." "Back to that first principle of storytelling: A story is about someone who changes. And, puberty aside, Harry doesn't change much. As envisioned by Rowling, he walks the path of good so unwaveringly that his final victory over Voldemort feels, not just inevitable, but hollow. But there is one character who does face a compelling inner crisis: Snape. With all the debate ? and with all of Rowling's clues ? about whether he was good or bad, it's fair to say that the sallow-faced potions professor has entranced many readers. His character ached for resolution. And it is precisely this need for resolution ? our desire to know the real Snape and to understand his choices ? that makes him the most compelling character in the Potter epic. His decisions, not Harry's, were the linchpin. And his moment with Dumbledore after the death of Harry's parents, not Harry's last duel with Voldemort, is the authentic climax of the series For Harry, there was no choice. The way forward was clear, the conflict ? and journey ? external. We cared about Snape because this was not the nature of his story. Every action was weighted with the pain and subtext of his choices, or lack thereof. For Snape, there weren't ? there couldn't be ? any easy answers. And yet, in the end, his moral journey was overshadowed by this fact: It was merely one more plot device to propel Harry toward his pre-destined victory." you can read more in the link above. Joan From erikog at one.net Thu Jul 26 21:34:20 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:34:20 -0000 Subject: Rowling in USA Today: More extra info Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173100 There's an interesting article in USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2007-07-25-jk-rowling_N.htm Highlights: She's working on a kid's book and an adult book. No word on content. She seems to be burned out on fantasy right now. In re: what happens to the characters next-- Harry and Ron are Aurors. They have "revolutionized" the Ministry. Hermione works in the Dept. of Magical Law Enforcement, despite her dig at lawyers in DH. She has also changed her department. JKR said it is not the same Ministry as the ones the kids were fighting--they've changed it from within. "They are building a new world." Luna, btw, became some kind of naturalist, traveling the world. JKR does not rule out a pairing with Neville, but she didn't want to do that in the books--it would be too neat a finish, with everybody paired up. Tonks and Lupin's deaths were not in the original outline. Arthur Weasley, as noted, would have died in Book 5 by her original draft. JKR has notes on all the kids of the Weasleys and included the list in the original version of the epilogue. She felt it was too much, however, and pruned it. The epilogue is deliberately vague at points--she wanted it to be slightly vague, so you could imagine whom you wanted at the station with our kids. Krista From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:40:04 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:40:04 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173101 Magpie wrote: > I don't think anything was integrated, the personal redemption of brave Snape notwithstanding. I guess to me, as soon as Slytherin was introduced the way it was, that was obviously the problem that needed to be solved, the one Voldemort was just a symptom of. I felt the book did it backwards, getting rid of the metaphor without ever much considering the way I expected them to handle it. And looking at interviews after the fact, JKR never seemed to expect them to. I don't have a problem with self-interest, myself, but I wasn't on the same page about Slytherin either. Carol responds: I think that the epilogue reflects a natural, slow progression toward prejudice against slytherin. It's hard to wipe it out all at once, but if Snape received a posthumous Order of Merlin that's on display in the trophy case and has a portrait in the headmaster's office (after all, it allowed him to occupy it and DD's and Phineas Nigellus's portraits, at least, recognized him as the legitimate occupant), that will go a long way toward showing that Slytherins can be brave and loyal. The Sorting Hat, which has been preaching unity, is likely to keep on advocating that message. It would help if it stopped bringing in Salazar Slytherin's faults "power-hungry Slytherin" and Slytherin wanting only "those whose blood is purest." Snape, it could be made known to the Slytherins, was a half-blood. And Draco has undoubtedly learned some lessons about blood purity not making a wizard superior, which we can hope he passes on to his son. The next step is for Albus Severus and the other kids to treat Scorpius Malfoy civilly, even if they're not friends with him, just as they've seen Draco and Harry nod to each other. Contrast James's and Sirius's treatment of Severus (and Lily!) on the Hogwarts Express and Mr. Weasley's lifelong enmity with Lucius Malfoy (adult men fighting in a bookstore like boys on a playground). To return to the Sorting Hat, why not use a more or less neutral criterion like "ambition" for Slytherins, and eventually, when the prejudice has died down, allow Muggle-borns in if they feel comfortable there? Or pure-bloods like Percy, who have the ambition without the pure-blood prejudice? Waiting to sort the students and allowing them to mingle instead of sitting at their own tables would be a start. And how about more classes together, instead of just a few mixed Gryffindor-Slytherin classes, one mixed Gryffindor-Hufflepuff class, and none at all with the Ravenclaws? Harry at least knew the names of four Slytherins (six by fifth year). He didn't know the names of *any* Ravenclaws until the first DA meeting. (I wanted to get a least a glimpse of Theo Nott. At least he apparently didn't become a Death Eater.) You can't expect miracles, but it's a step in the right direction. And Hermione, we can be sure, is working for house-elf rights and an end to bigotry in her position in the MoM (confirmed by JKR in an interview). Teddy Lupin will be living proof that werewolves don't produce "cubs." Did anyone really expect a wholly revolutionized WW, with no prejudice and no problems? We don't have any such thing in the real world. Why would we see it in the WW, which is in some ways a reflection of our world? What we see in the epilogue is a WW at peace--the Hogwarts Express as it always was, diagon Alley presumably restored to normal, no harassment for Muggleborns (Hermione is in no danger), and a glimmer of an end to the division between the houses. Probably, these kids, unlike their parents, have a chance for the kids to get a good education that isn't quite so focused on survival--and a consistent, progressive DADA education. There's no DADA curse: JKR says there's a permanent DADA teacher (presumably a qualified person survived, maybe one who was kept from applying before by the rumor that the position was jinxed. The new Muggle Studies teacher can follow Charity Burbage's example, teaching that Muggles aren't so different from wizards. And can someone persuade Professor Binns to retire? The epilogue gives Harry what he wanted a chance to be Just Harry and have a happy family. No more being the Chosen One forced to fight Dark wizards whose powers are far beyond his. I hope, personally, that HRH had a chance to go back to Hogwarts a year late and finish their education, but they seem to have learned what they needed to learn somehow or they could not have gotten jobs as Aurors and/or high-ranking MoM officials ("Today show" interview). Carol, who just realized that she missed today's "Today" segment!!! From aslitumerkan at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 21:23:20 2007 From: aslitumerkan at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-9?Q?Asl=FD_T=FCmerkan?=) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:23:20 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] White peacocks? In-Reply-To: <778114.47723.qm@web32404.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <778114.47723.qm@web32404.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6467e1f0707261423s1753cd6eq55d78de72e64f629@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173102 Asl Tmerkan: I first thought that it was Malfoy's animagus form. It probably wasn't though, and I couldn't make any sense of it afterwards. Anyone knows what they were? Asl Tmerkan From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:46:33 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:46:33 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173103 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "patrick.jarrett" wrote: > > Daimauwr: > If the Patronus is unique then the WW would soon run out of objects to > imitate - considering the number of wizards and witches that have died > since Hogwarts was established. > > Harry has the same as his father - the Stag, therefore one must > presume that genetically this form can be passed down through > generations. As there is no daughter in the Potter family then Lily's > patronus must be up for grabs. > > > Patrick: > Respectfully, presuming anything is genetically based here is fallible > logic. If it were so then if Ron's patronus is a dog, then logically > Arthur Weasley's is a dog, as is Fred, George, Bill, Percy etc.. I > admit we're not explicitly shown a case where this is disproven, due > to the rarity of patronuses, it seems that having such a large > cross-over would be dubious. Also if DD and Lupin both knew James' was > a stag, they would have known Harry's was going to be a stag. Lisa: Just to clarify here -- we don't know what James' patronus was. He was an animagus and transformed into a stag, but that was not necessarily his patronus. Harry's patronus stag symbolized his father's animagus form. From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:45:09 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:45:09 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173104 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rowena_grunnionffitch" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adamjmarcantel" > wrote: > > > I don't think Snape is a "hero" or "heroic". I think his last > > words "Look at me" were so he could see Lily's eyes as he died, > > showing (at least to me) that his overriding motivation was still > > Lily. End of point. > > rowena_grunnionffitch: > <<>>I repeat: if Lily is still the be all and end all *WHY* is > sorrowing lover telling her son to get himself killed??? > > The only reason I can think of is because, like DD and Harry himself, defeating Voldemort has become Snape's prime objective. ><<>> I think I am running up on my 5 post limit, but that's ok. I think that if defeating VM was the primary objective, Snape would not have acted the way he did toward McGonagall(sp?) in the hall. He knew Harry was there (that's what I took, anyway) and I assume he knew what Harry's presence meant. He had to know the gig was up...he could have told Harry then, but he didn't. That would have been his hero turn. However, he was still playing the role of VM servant, a role he played to protect Harry, a protection he only gave to help save Lily. Yes, it was brave of him to get those memories to Harry, but it was also incredibly lucky Harry was even there to get them (and, for that matter, that Hermione was there to conjucture a cup). Had he not done that, then his protection of Harry, and thereby his penance for Lily's death, would have been for nothing. Overriding motivation: Lily. I know I am not being very objective, but that's my view. Adam, who, despite all of this, still admires Snape way more than I admire James or Sirius From darksworld at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:47:03 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:47:03 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: <46A8DE05.2080308@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173105 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > > Magpie: > Yeah, people are really silly for thinking that there could be a > moral implication to Unforgivable spells--especially one that's a > torture spell--when it's really just illegal. That must be the > problem people have with the spells--that they're illegal by > Ministry standards--since torture has no moral implications in > itself and is very effective for neturalizing enemies in fiction. > It's like those people who keep complaining about the use of torture > in real life--as Judge Scalia says, "Are you going to convict Jack > Bauer?" Besides, in GoF we were being told about the Ministry > approving of Unforgivables in the past. Now the Ministry doesn't > approve--so obviously if you're going to break the laws by keeping > Muggle-borns out of jail you have to also break the laws against > using Unforgivables. > > -m > Charles: Oh, can we bring real life into this? It's more like those people who want to hold the British government up as an example of morality when discussing what has not even actually been proven to happen at Guantanamo Bay. The British Government has been known to use torture right through the 1980's in the case of suspects believed to be involved with the IRA. Google Gerry Conlon if you want to know about just one story. Other spells can be used for torture in the books besides cruciatus, yet that is the one called unforgivable. Why? Because that is the one that the ministry decided earned you a life sentence in Azkaban. More below, from one who wasn't just trying (and failing) to make me look foolish. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lee Kaiwen wrote: > > Charles Walker Jr blessed us with this gem On 26/07/2007 19:11: > > > My point is that legality and morality are two different things. The > > unforgivables are called that because of legality, not morality. > > CJ: > I, for one, couldn't disagree more. We're talking about the KILLING > CURSE here, not jaywalking, as if murder were being outlawed just for > convenience. Charles: Actually, what I was talking about is the fact that the name unforgivable stems from the law, not from morality. If you are going to claim that killing is unforgivable from the good guys in any case, you need to book yourself a nice room with padded walls, because life is going to drive you crazy. > > > Charles Walker Jr: > >legality and morality are often at odds with each other, and that it > > is often difficult to discern which one is which. > > CJ: > Don't obfuscate, please. "Often" is a long way from "always". The UCs > are unforgivable precisely BECAUSE on these there IS absolute moral clarity. > > Put another way, the absolute legal finality (the "un" in > "unforgivable") of the UCs can only be a reflection of their absolute > moral finality. Charles: So we're to believe that the ministry got it right here? Are we also to believe that Werewolves are undeniably evil, all non-humans are to be subjugated, and that muggle-borns steal their magic from purebloods? > > >Charles Walker Jr: > > By the time Harry casts the first UC in DH we know that laws > > are pointless at this point. > > CJ: > More obfuscation. "Laws are pointless" is a statement of absolute > anarchy. What we know is, at most, that SOME laws may have become pointless. > Charles: Which laws would you have us obey? Are we to carry a list into the heat of battle and check against it before casting? Or should we consider turning in some muggle-borns? How about order members? Harry himself? He is "Undesirable No. 1" after all. That should get us safely back into the realm of legality. Yes it is a statement of anarchy. Anarchy is the only way to fight against a totalitarian institution. When that institution has fallen is the time to institute sensible laws. Further, the legality of an action does not directly relate to its morality. In the US, one can legally smoke tobacco but not marijuana. Does that mean that there is something morally better about tobacco? Or something morally corrupt about marijuana? Hardly. Some intersections have signs saying that no u-turn is allowed. Does that mean it is morally wrong to make a u-turn there? No. (It may well be foolish and dangerous, but not morally wrong.) > >Charles Walker Jr: > > Harry doesn't sit and torture people with the cruciatus curse, > > he uses it, rather effectively, to neutralize an attacker. > > CJ: > An attacker!? Amycus Carrow was Crucio'd by Harry for the offense of > spitting on McGonagall. Unless you're assuming "Amycus spun around" is > to be interpreted as threatening (a debatable point). But even that > hardly explains why a simple Expelliarmus wouldn't have sufficed. > Charles: It might well have. There was a heat of the moment situation there. Perhaps I spoke wrongly in calling him an attacker. He was, however an enemy, and a dangerous one. The enemy was neutralized, effectively, and with little to no lasting damage. Or are you telling me that Amycus Carrow, who had been torturing students for fun all year was no threat? CJ: > And since you've referred to GoF, I think we ought to take a look at the > passage that describes the alleged lifting of the ban on the UCs. On > pages 526-7 of the paperback, Sirius describes the situation to Harry It was part and parcel with an excessive ruthlessness > that left the "good" guys hardly distinguishable from the enemy. Charles: And as much as I like Sirius, I think we have to look at the source. Sirius was a man who was condemned to Azkaban by the person he is talking about. He also has very little life experience as an adult able to analyze things from that perspective. He has spent the vast majority of his adult life under the influence of dementors. What I may have said badly last night, and am not sure I can get it across to some at all, is that legality and morality are two different things. Legality pertains only to actions. Morality pertains to reasons. Not all killing is murder. Use of the AK in a war situation is quite a bit different from stepping into the Three Broomsticks and pointing your wand at someone and green-lighting their soul beyond the veil. Molly finishing Bellatrix on the battlefield is a hell of a lot different than Tommy boy finishing Dad, Grandma, and Grandpa for revenge. Harry using a short blast of crucio to incapacitate Amycus Carrow is a hell of a lot different from Bellatrix torturing Frank and Alice Longbottom to a lifetime stay at St. Mungo's (Note: that one might have been considered a war situation if LV's power had not already been broken and the war was considered over). Harry using the imperius on Bogrod and Travers is a lot different from LV,PP and BCjunior using the imperius to keep BCsenior imprisoned. But what all these have in common is that in each case, according to the law, the caster has earned a life sentence in Azkaban. I think any clear minded thinker will see the differences in these situations and would not want Molly or Harry in Azkaban. Then again, I've been wrong before. Charles, wondering why people are so dependent on legality to know right from wrong-and hoping it can be cured. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:48:21 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:48:21 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173106 > rowena_grunnionffitch: > > Couldn't he have just wanted the comfort of her memory in his last > moments? I repeat: if Lily is still the be all and end all *WHY* is > sorrowing lover telling her son to get himself killed??? > > The only reason I can think of is because, like DD and Harry himself, defeating Voldemort has become Snape's prime objective. Alla: I do not know, makes perfect sense to me. I mean, JKR said that Snape would not have cared for Harry well being at all, but for Lily. Not saying that anybody should believe it, but I most definitely do. So, why is it surprising that Snape as sorrowing lover tells Harry that he has to die? (He gives him memory, he does not tell him, but I guess it is same thing). I mean, if we had seen any evidence of Snape's affection ** for Harry as person**, because he loved Lily, then sure I would be surprised and thinking - yeah, defeat of Voldemort is his primary objective. By the way, I think of this last moment same way as you do. rowena_grunnionffitch: > BTW: Isn't Harry strongly motivated by the fact Voldy killed his parents, and was indirectly responsible for the death and suffering of assorted friends? > Alla: Whatever Harry is responsible for to me does not even comes close to Snape's responsibility for helping to make Harry's life what it was. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > >> Well, it's not entirely accurate, as Snape seems to have shown more > remorse than the scenario postulated, and was DDM rather than the OFH > which I favored--although TEWWW EWWW itself is more about the initial > conditions than any subsequent actions. But it did nail the idea that > he had a direct hand in Voldemort's actions towards Lily, and that he > was motivated out of an explicitly personal concern. This has also > just been echoed by the JKR commentary on the Today Show: > > "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see > Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected > Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." Alla: Squeeee. Take a bow from me Nora :) Nice to know how JKR sees him, very nice. And who would want Snape in love with them has a great answer now, doesn't it? Only if such witch wants to have Lily's fate, would she want Snape in love with them ? as in being reported to Dark Lord and be killed with your husband and leaving your baby alone. Oy, no thanks for me. Nora: > Unquestionably brave, but....EWWWW! Alla: Yes, EWWWWWW and more EWWWWW. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pair_0_docks" wrote: Also, I thought that his reaction to Harry's predicment > about having to face Voldy and death was a more caring response than > DD. > Alla: Sure, when I read it first time I wanted to strangle Dumbledore. Snape wanting Lily's son to live, while not caring about him, was not the perfect position, but better than DD's for me. But when I read DD and Harry's chat, I became absolutely convinced that DD was positive that Harry will live and everything changed again for me. From celizwh at intergate.com Thu Jul 26 21:42:16 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:42:16 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173107 Nora: > he was motivated out of an explicitly personal > concern. This has also just been echoed by the JKR > commentary on the Today Show: > "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a > hero? I don't see Snape as a hero... he's very brave, > but..." "Would he have protected Harry if he hadn't > loved Lily?" "No, not at all." houyhnhnm: This quote might make a little more sense in context (I can't seem to find it). Right now it has me a little confused about Rowling's moral philosophy. If a hero is someone who acts out of principle rather than personal concerns, who is a hero in Rowling's books? Not even Harry (although I liked Harry better in DH than in any book since PS). When Dumbledore lauded him for never being tempted by the Dark Arts, his response was, "Of course I haven't. He killed my mom and dad." Harry is motivated by vengeance for his parents. Neville is motivated by vengeance for his parents. (Hermione's actions towards her parents is the ultimate EWWWW for me.) I can't think of a single character for whom the driving force was not personal affection for a child, a friend, a spouse, or a benefactor. Who, in all the seven books, is motivated by principle? Rowling has made it abundantly clear that for her, loyalty and affection at the merely personal level are the highest good. So why, even now, does she withold her full approbation from the character who embodies her values more than any other? Because Snape is the Other. He was born to be The Other and nothing he could have done would have changed that. Rowling, in the end, is unable to do without an Other to devalue and stigmatize. EWWWW is right! From ida3 at planet.nl Thu Jul 26 21:52:32 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:52:32 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173108 Lisa: > I'm confused. Since when does the information purportedly known by the > victim exonerate the perpetrator's intent?? One has nothing to do with > the other. If Sirius simply wanted to confirm what Snape thought he > knew, he'd've said, "Yeah, he's a werewolf, so what? Dumbledore > already knows, so tattling will do you no good, you git." Instead, he > sets him up to be killed or turned into a werewolf. Intent is the key. Dana: First of all Sirius intent is never revealed and can therefore not be judged. But let me ask this question? How could Sirius possibly set Snape up to be killed by a werewolf if Snape already knew what Lupin was? My answer you can't trick someone into facing a werewolf unknowingly if the person actually knows he is going to face a werewolf by entering a tunnel, he had seen Lupin being escorted to by Madame Pomprey, on a full moon night? So it actually wasn't Sirius who played the trick but Snape himself who wanted to trick the marauders by finding out what they where up to and trying to expose their secret. What we know from the scene in Snape's memory is that 1) He knows about Lupin and his disappearances on full moon nights. 2) He knows James, Sirius and Peter sneak out at night. 3) He knows that he can find the answer to his obsessive questions behind the willow. Although this final theory will never be canon I'd say Sirius wanted to scare the living daylights out of Snape because he was aware of Snape's interests in Lupin. Tells Snape all he has to do is prod the knot and he can find out for himself. Snape already knows but is actually not interested in Lupin but in what James and Sirius are up to (as he wants to proof to Lily that they are not as perfect as everybody think they are). So Snape goes to the willow to find what the marauders are up to with werewolf Lupin as there must be something more to it as you can't just play with a werewolf on a full moon night. James finds out drags Snape out without Snape ever learning the truth about them being animagi. Snape is humiliated by being saved by the boy that is interested in his best friend and plays it for all it is worth by running to DD with the story that they tricked him in order to kill him. Snape is not yet a good occlumens at age 16 and thus DD detects he is lying. Snape spills the beans and DD uses that to keep Snape from telling anyone about Lupin's furry little problem. Snape does not want Lily to think James did something heroic because he still believes that he did it to hide a secret from being exposed. Snape's body relaxing when Lily calls James an arrogant toerag is an indication to me that he was not as upset about the whole ordeal as we get to see of him in PoA. The joke was supposed to be on Sirius but it backfired on Snape when he failed to get the marauders into trouble because of it. And as soon as JKR comes out and openly state that Sirius indeed send Snape to the willow in an attempt to murder him, it was never so and the trick never materialized because Snape already knew. And James saved Snape from his own stupidity instead. JMHO Dana Last post on the subject because I can't convince someone that does not want to be convinced anyway. Interpretation is very personal and we will just have to respectfuly agree to disagree on the subject. From colouringpurple at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 21:16:49 2007 From: colouringpurple at yahoo.com (jerri willmore) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:16:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: PERSONALLY I LIKE THE EPILOGUE Message-ID: <17220.77526.qm@web52507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173109 There has been a lot of epilogue bashing here, personally I really liked it and I especially liked the last sentence. We are discussing Tolkien. Actually he did write an epilogue to The Lord Of the Rings! It had Sam and his daughter Elanor (second fave T character) around 15 years after the book. His editor told him to not include it and it is actually better without it. But you can find it in the book "Return of the Shadow," I believe. Anyone here like Jo's epilogue? jerri From mariavaerewyck at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 21:51:21 2007 From: mariavaerewyck at yahoo.co.uk (mariavaerewyck) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:51:21 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173110 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vivamus42" wrote: One of the things I would have > liked explained a bit more in the King's Cross bit was that thing > under the seats. Was that the bit of LV that was in Harry, which > Harry now left behind to die when he returned to his body? Or, was > it the bit of LV that was in LV's body, that was semi-dead at the same > time? Harry's comment to LV later about it seems to imply the > latter, but the scene and DD's comments seem to imply the former. Maria here: I think that thing under the seats was the bit of LV in LV's body because when LV killed Harry it was actually his bit soul inside Harry that he killed as he didn't know that Harry became a horcrux when he tried to kill him 17 years ago. When I read that part and Harry was in limbo or in coma(more like, I guess) and he saw that thing under seat, it came to me directly as LV, and that what happened to him 17 years ago happened again.Then Harry decide to go back and as it came out LV was gone /passed out also for a while and just came around when Harry came back. LV killed his own bit of soul that was inside Harry. That's my take on it. Beside he doesn't even know whenever one of his horcruxes are being destroyed, he can't even feel his own bits and pieces of soul. He was even wondering/thinking about that. That for a person who did all those things to overcome death, deserves him right. I hope my post will pass. Thanks to all the posters I enjoyed reading all your posts. Maria From empress.najwa at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 21:31:02 2007 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (strange_familiarities) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:31:02 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173111 > > Lisa: > > Just wondering here why anyone thinks that a woman who gets > married "becomes just Mrs." Anybody? Why did anyone see her "simply > as Ron's wife?" Are any of you with this opinion actually married > yoursefl? Frankly, I've done the Single Career Girl thing; the > Married Career Girl thing; and the Stay At Home Mom thing -- after > having graduated in the top 5% of my college graduating class. > Priorities can (and in most cases, should) change as our > circumstances do, and adults (as we're all supposed to be) > diminishing other women's choices is really offensive. Najwa: I'm a mother and I've done the lot as well. I apologize for not saying things clearer, but what I had meant by it would be a waste was not that it would be a waste for her to be a stay at home mom, but that the wizarding world would be at a loss. I do apologize for it coming out offensively, but then again I had just accidently offended my own self that way. I did not mean to offend anyone. From kmrhapsody at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 21:55:08 2007 From: kmrhapsody at gmail.com (kmrhapsody) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:55:08 -0000 Subject: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173112 > Lisa: > > Are you serious? Words directly from the author's mouth are "fluffy > speculation?" Whose fluffy speculation? The AUTHOR's fluffy > speculation? Wouldn't she KNOW, whether she's published those words or > not? Huh? It is not the first time that she has said one thing, revised or changed it up at a later date. That is both her preogative and right as the author to do so. So as this was an off the cuff interview, I didn't give it a -ton- of weight. Perhaps I should clarify. For me, if it isn't written in the stories or supplemental publishings, I don't count it as canon. That interview didn't really tell me anything detailed or substantitative, so I didn't take it that seriously. kmrhapsody From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Thu Jul 26 22:06:11 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:06:11 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173113 > Carol responds: > I think that the epilogue reflects a natural, slow progression toward > prejudice against slytherin. Magpie: Why would that happen? It seems like if anything the events of the book would give far more reasons to mistrust them. Snape himself may have won himself an Order of Merlin, but he was a special case even to himself. Carol: > > The Sorting Hat, which has been preaching unity, is likely to keep on > advocating that message. It would help if it stopped bringing in > Salazar Slytherin's faults "power-hungry Slytherin" and Slytherin > wanting only "those whose blood is purest." Snape, it could be made > known to the Slytherins, was a half-blood. And Draco has undoubtedly > learned some lessons about blood purity not making a wizard superior, > which we can hope he passes on to his son. Magpie: I go with JKR's own thoughts on this as expressed in that interview to Emerson: "Well, the deeper answer, the non-flippant answer, would be that you have to embrace all of a person, you have to take them with their flaws, and everyone's got them. It's the same way with the student body. If only they could achieve perfect unity, you would have an absolute unstoppable force, and I suppose it's that craving for unity and wholeness that means that they keep that quarter of the school that maybe does not encapsulate the most generous and noble qualities, in the hope, in the very Dumbledore- esque hope that they will achieve union, and they will achieve harmony. Harmony is the word." I mean, the Hat was preaching unity for two books in canon and it didn't have any effect except for the other three houses to be united. Even Hermione didn't start reaching out to Slytherin. They encapsulate the not generous or noble qualities, but not actively working for this union was exactly what I thought was going to happen in the book but didn't. Carol: The next step is for Albus > Severus and the other kids to treat Scorpius Malfoy civilly, even if > they're not friends with him, just as they've seen Draco and Harry nod > to each other. Contrast James's and Sirius's treatment of Severus (and > Lily!) on the Hogwarts Express and Mr. Weasley's lifelong enmity with > Lucius Malfoy (adult men fighting in a bookstore like boys on a > playground). Magpie: Harry was never overly rude to Malcolm Baddock, but I don't know if that made the gap less. We don't know if people are still hissing newly-sorted Slytherins, but I never got the impression the twins were judged too harshly for doing that. Harry's son doesn't want to be in Slytherin. Harry's words to him sounded to me like a loving father saying the right thing to his kid--but also something that rather went against everything that the story had just said. I can only think he felt the need to be respectful to Snape in the same way Snape protected him because of Lily. For me the problem for me doesn't seem to be just about other houses treating Slytherins with less hostility. Slytherin and Slytherins seem to have their own problems that imo need to be worked on independently as well. And the way the right side was handled in the book left me thinking they didn't really have the ability to reach out the way it seemed necessary to me either. Carol: > To return to the Sorting Hat, why not use a more or less neutral > criterion like "ambition" for Slytherins, and eventually, when the > prejudice has died down, allow Muggle-borns in if they feel > comfortable there? Or pure-bloods like Percy, who have the ambition > without the pure-blood prejudice? Waiting to sort the students and > allowing them to mingle instead of sitting at their own tables would > be a start. And how about more classes together, instead of just a few > mixed Gryffindor-Slytherin classes, one mixed Gryffindor-Hufflepuff > class, and none at all with the Ravenclaws? Harry at least knew the > names of four Slytherins (six by fifth year). He didn't know the names > of *any* Ravenclaws until the first DA meeting. (I wanted to get a > least a glimpse of Theo Nott. At least he apparently didn't become a > Death Eater.) Magpie: I think these ideas would be great--but then, I consider Slytherin's position a serious problem. Carol: > You can't expect miracles, but it's a step in the right direction. And > Hermione, we can be sure, is working for house-elf rights and an end > to bigotry in her position in the MoM (confirmed by JKR in an > interview). Teddy Lupin will be living proof that werewolves don't > produce "cubs." Magpie: But what's a step in the right direction? I mean, they haven't done any of these things that we know of. Carol: > Did anyone really expect a wholly revolutionized WW, with no prejudice > and no problems? Magpie: I wasn't expecting a wholly revolutioned WW--definitely not. I admit I *was* expecting something that felt like a definitive step towards house integration, meaning a real reaching out and compromise on both sides. That's exactly what I felt JKR was putting her authorial foot down on on all sides. She really doesn't seem to consider it the big problem I do, more just the way things are--in her words, something we could hope would be better, but seems out of reach and not a priority to work for. Carol: What we see in the epilogue is a WW at peace--the Hogwarts > Express as it always was, diagon Alley presumably restored to normal, > no harassment for Muggleborns (Hermione is in no danger), and a > glimmer of an end to the division between the houses. Magpie: I saw the first, but not much the second. It seemed like the world was at peace, and there was less open hostility, but if things got bad again I'd expect that never-addressed crack to open up again. Carol: > The epilogue gives Harry what he wanted a chance to be Just Harry and > have a happy family. No more being the Chosen One forced to fight Dark > wizards whose powers are far beyond his. Magpie: That's the main thing I got from the epilogue, that Harry got to be Just Harry with a happy family. He no longer had to be the Chosen One because his assigned Dark Wizard had been defeated. -m From mariavaerewyck at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 26 22:04:35 2007 From: mariavaerewyck at yahoo.co.uk (mariavaerewyck) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:04:35 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus? In-Reply-To: <32768569.1185372773201.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173114 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > 3) As I've stated before, the moment that I saw the doe Patronus, the very first thing I thought of was "Snape!" I was dead certain that was Snape's Patronus, yet as near as I can tell, there was nothing in the canon to explain this. Can anybody here think of where I might have gotten the idea? > 4) Be that as it may, it is clear that Snape associated the doe with Lily. > > Bart Maria here: Like Bart, the moment I saw the doe, I thought directly that was Snape's Patronus because of his love for Lily, but I didn't think that was Lily's patronus, I was thinking more that that was Lily' animagus. Are we really certain that it was Lily's patronus, because it was not really stated in the book everybody just assumed. Of course we don't know if Lily was an animagi when she was alive, though I'm still thinking that the doe is her animagus. cheers. Maria From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 22:23:23 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:23:23 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173115 > >>Carol: > I think that the epilogue reflects a natural, slow progression > toward prejudice against slytherin. > Betsy Hp: But, the prejudice is fully justified as per JKR. There's nothing there to fix. Slytherins are bad and they need to be put up with, but why would anyone feel the need to not see them as bad when they are clearly all bad? > >>Carol: > Did anyone really expect a wholly revolutionized WW, with no > prejudice and no problems? > Betsy Hp: I for one did not. The WW is too deeply flawed to be fixed in one fell swoop. I did expect some steps taken in the right direction. But that didn't happen (because you can't fix evil, I guess?). So the WW is in a state much like Europe after WWI. Honestly, the WW seems even more ripe for a dark lord than ever. Which is kind of an icky ending, but there is it. Betsy Hp From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 22:36:50 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:36:50 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173116 > > Mindy says: > > > > I have another puzzling question.... Snape only became Hogwarts > > headmaster in September. How the heck did he get into Dumbledore's > > office in July???? Snape was already Headmaster in July. When Snape gave LV the date for Harry's move, Charity Burbage, the ex-Muggle Studies teacher, was already hanging upside-down over the table in Malfoy Manor. She never resigned; she was kidnapped when LV took over the school. Term starts Sept. 1, and the students don't arrive until then, but Snape had been Headmaster, and had access to DD's portrait, for most or all of the summer. Annemehr From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 22:36:47 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:36:47 -0000 Subject: Responding to the responses to a LONG collection of DH related thoug In-Reply-To: <8C99DD07680EB4F-A48-2375@webmail-de10.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173117 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at ... wrote: [snip] > Joe: > My point was not that the memories themselves had been sanitized or > edited, but that they had been chosen *selectively* for these > memories to convey to Harry precisely what Snape wanted. I meant to > underscore a difference between "the truth" and "the whole truth." > > Julie: > That is one interpretation, though I really think they were chosen > selectively by the AUTHOR to convey the real Snape to Harry and > to the readers. Snape has been perhaps the central ambiguity of the > series and would be the point of any more misdirection when this is > the final book, the end of the series? (Not that it will or should > stop anyone from molding Snape into a worse-or better-person than he > was of course!) Me, me, me: To say these memories selectively chosen by Snape also reflect JKR's views seems to me to be conjecture. Certainly, they MIGHT be. That JKR makes zero effort to follow up these memories with any refuting evidence could be taken as a nod towards this viewpoint. But to my mind it's just that: a nod, a hint, an indication. That Snape selected these memories to convey specific somethings about him to Harry is not arguable. What is open to speculation is whether JKR intended these memories to establish her view of the character. My point is not that Snape is X or Y, rather that we only know what Snape wanted Harry to see. > Joe: > What we see in the Epilogue (which was "okay, fine" for me) is based > on what Harry believes. I agree with Harry in that Snape was > EXTREMELY brave. Since life is a results-driven affair, I have no > major problem with why Snape behaved bravely. If he did so for noble > reasons or dysfunctional reasons is irrelevant to me. > > Julie: > I intepret the epilogue the same way as I do the Pensieve scene. This > is the final book, and I think it is not only Harry's but the author's > last word. We do not have to accept her interpretation or intent, but > there it is in any case. Me, once more: What I meant is that I am trying to avoid interpreting it at all, if by "interpreting it" we mean assigning a meaning to it based on our worldview, our understanding of the characters, etc. Some people will read "Harry, in a surge of emotion, flossed his teeth." and assume this means he always loved Hermione, whose parents were dentists, others will assume Honeyduke's ruined his teeth and he's worried he'll need magical dentures. My take is to let the character's words and actions stand on their own. Why did Harry name a son Albus Severus? Because "Severus" is the name of the bravest man Harry ever saw. No more, no less. > Joe: The Snape at the end still had a very stilted, distorted view of > love. If I had such a character (i.e., Snape at the end) in love > with me, I'd get the aurors to issue a restraining order. > Julie: > I'm a bit conflicted here. I don't think I'd want someone to love me > the way Snape loved living!Lily, because he is too damaged to express > it or act on it. Though if I died and he loved me enough to protect > my child, I'd be okay with that ;-) And I have to ask, what's the point > of a restraining order? Snape *never* goes near Lily once she breaks > it off with him. This whole dangerous stalker image if Snape is NOT > supported by canon, or by Snape's own personality (he hides his love > of Lily from her, he doesn't pursue her relentlessly with it). Me, contritely: OK, I mangled that one. I did NOT mean that Snape was a stalker. I meant that Snape was an unpleasant person, and I tried -- and failed -- to say that in a cute way. Mea maxima culpa. >> Joe: Snape always struck me as being too good a wizard >> for this sort of thing [cursing George's ear off] to be an >> accident, so that raised an eyebrow. > > Julie: > I'm okay with it now that it's canon, as it is proof that Snape can > do something good that has *nothing* to do with Lily. But I confess > when Molly said "It could have been worse" I was CONVINCED Snape took > the ear off on purpose to avoid something worse--Snape, you clever > spy, you avoid killing George and only take off his ear instead, so > you can keep your all-important cover with the DEs intact! This > especially would fit with portrait!Dumbledore's advice to Snape that > he must keep his cover during that attack at all costs. But, alas, I > must accept the nobler version ;-) Me: The nobler version is certainly plausible if one has a certain view of Snape. I can live with plausible. > Joe: The fact Snape was hostile to Lupin as far as POA > doesn't speak well for Snape. Snape had plenty of time to get it > through his hygienically challenged scalp that Lupin was not in on > that joke. But in this, Snape came across as petty and vindictive. > Which is good. A Snape who is pure and noble and mature and oozing > tortured longanimity is unidimensional at best...I've stepped in > deeper puddles than such a character. > > Julie: > I agree it is good. But I also think it probably was enough that Lupin > was part of the group that taunted him, even if Lupin perhaps never > took part in the actual taunting. He tacitly accepted it, thus tacitly > agreed that Snape deserved seven years of harassment (Snape's view). Me, all over again: But by the time of POA, Snape had had eleventy zillion years to realize the truth. Lupin was unfailingly cordial to him, and even after Snape was unpleasant to him, he never actually did anything about it. It speaks ill of Snape that by POA he hadn't seen the light, but it shows some emotional development that but DH he saved Lupin. > Joe: > I'm not sure that Harry is meant to be an omniscient spokeswizard. > I'd be grateful if you could walk me through it, because I don't see > it. (Not to say that Harry is necessarily wrong, just that I don't > think he necessarily speaks for JKR.) Oh, and Harry said Snape was > the bravest (not greatest, noblest, etc.). > > (I rather enjoyed Bookworm857158367's take on the Bloody Baron & > Snape, incidentally. As well as SSSusan's "His wasn't a conversion > based upon a total reordering of moral principles.") > > Julie: > Much as I said above, I don't see any reason JKR would neglect to speak > through the *hero*. He's the central person in the book, so why > wouldn't we take his last word as her last word? > And I too agree with Sssusan's assessment that Snape's was not a > conversion based upon a total reordering of moral principles. But > it was based on a reordering of *some* of his moral principles, IMO, > thanks to his long association with Dumbledore, and yes, his ability > to love, even if that love extended only to one other person (because > the latter gave him the ability to feel remorse and guilt and act > from it). Me, still: 1- To assume an author speaks through the hero is an assumption. It could very well be the correct assumption, but that is a speculation made by the individual reader. I don't follow the reasoning of "well, why wouldn't she?" If I'm to be convinced this is, indeed, the case (and I reiterate it very well might be), I'd like to be shown something concrete to that extent. 2- Snape loved Lily well before he signed up with Dumbledore. Did Dumbledore exploit the stunted, immature emotions (guilt and remorse borne of an unrequited and semi-obsessive love) of a former DE to bring about LV's final defeat? Probably. 3- My thinking on Snape's conversion is that relatively little reorienting of his moral compass took place. To whatever degree that happened, I doubt it was materially significant. > Julie: > I do think it's a bit convenient to blame Harry's new ability to crucio > on Voldemort's soul piece (and the locket was long destoyed by that time > wasn't it?). I found that scene uncomfortable myself, because I don't really > see any good explanation for Harry being willing to use a torture curse. > There are other magical ways to subdue people. And I'd really prefer my > good guys to abstain from enjoying torturing even their worst enemies, > though I do understand that in trying circumstances even the best of us > do want to inflict pain on others. Doesn't mean one has to give into that > impulse though. Me, yet again: I don't think it's a matter of convenience. It's a matter of what explanation will fit the facts. For a Crucio to "work" the caster has to really want to see the target in pain, and derive pleasure therefrom. That is, the person casting that curse has to have enough "evil in him" to make it work properly. Therefore, Harry had to have enough evil in him to make it work properly. The question is then: How did Harry get enough evil in him to make the Crucio work? Either he always has had that evil as part of his nature and he finally felt comfortable enough to give it voice, or the parasitic nature of the Scarcrux (compounded by the wearing of the locket?) brought that evil to bear. I don't see any other alternatives. Also, I think there is a lot of grey area between one zap of the Crucio to get Amycus out of the way -- granted, with a certain malicious desire -- and Crucio-ing the Longbottoms, literally, out of their minds. > rowena_grunnioffitch: > Excuse me? Slughorn's attempt at falsification shows how impossible > undetectable editing is and exactly how much control did a dying > Snape have? Personally I think he gave Harry a little more than he > meant to. Just as well he didn't survive, he'd have died of the > humiliation of Harry knowing all. Besides, the fact that pensieve > scenes are *NOT* from the subject's pov suggests a degree of > objectivity. Me, all over again: Let me try this a different way. The "Snape scenes" Harry saw are all true and unedited. Granted. Agreed. But Harry only got to see SELECTED scenes. The stuff he saw was all true, but it's not the whole truth, insofar as there are other scenes from other times and under other circumstances which Snape, for reasons best known to him and JKR, chose not to share. Obviously memories themselves cannot be convincingly edited, and they are not subjective. But in choosing which memories you share, that is, in editing the selection (NOT editing the individual memories that comprise that selection) you get to have the viewer see only what you intended. If Snape had a memory where he was dreamily caressing Lily's purse or was practicing the Imperius curse to get her to be his girlfriend (*not that he had!*) would we have seen THAT one? > rowena_grunnioffitch: > Frankly I am amazed by the number of people with whom this is not > okay. Though how anybody could believe the protagonist of a > coming-of-age series was going to die at the end is beyond me. > Doesn't make mythic sense either. But people are actually *angry* > that Harry not only lived but got married and had kids! Go > figure... Me: I'm happy he lived and had kids. After all *I* lived and had kids, so why not Harry? ;-) But I didn't know there was a groundswell of resentment that the Boy Who Lived, er, lived. (I agree with your mythic take, too.) On the Ron/Parseltongue thing - I can buy the whole "rue/basilisk" thing a lot easier than I can Ron managing to perfectly mimic the word "Open" in Parseltongue. As if the Chamber would just hear "open" in its lingo and say to itself "Oh, OK, must be another heir of Slytherin coming to check the place out. Better let him in." That rue thing makes more sense to me. -Joe From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Thu Jul 26 22:49:23 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:49:23 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470707261549w6dba3d06qa505e8f0dc95e006@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173118 Carol responds: Did anyone really expect a wholly revolutionized WW, with no prejudice and no problems? We don't have any such thing in the real world. Why would we see it in the WW, which is in some ways a reflection of our world? __________ Jeremiah: No. I certainly didn't... it would be nice, though... Not to get anyone's nickers in a knot... but I think that if we look at the "Christ Analogy" (I know... and the Horace analogy... and a myriad other death and resurection analogies from all over the world...) we can see that regardless of how special or divine or knowledgeable the individual is who dies they still leave a world that is wrought with conflicts and troubles. I think that the WW was left to it's "Traditions." Meaning the WW has said "yuck" to Slytherin House and they kinda like it. But it is all in fun to a point. The story, IMO, is one that shows us what heppens when the "poking-fun" gets out of control. There were cetain things I totally was opposed to but I read them and said, "Well, if you're gonna go that way, Jo, then let's go!" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Thu Jul 26 22:48:11 2007 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:48:11 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173119 rowena_grunnionffitch: > But then I think it's pretty obvious that by the battle of Hogwarts - > if not long before - it's no longer about Lily or protecting her son > but about defeating Voldemort forever. If it wasn't, if he was still > obsessed solely with Lily, then why did Snape tell Harry he must die? I'd agree with that. I think people are looking for this massive epiphany for Snape, and since JKR's actually given us an extremely slow development, they're thinking that he didn't change in the sixteen years since Lily's death. But that he can give Harry the information that Dumbledore thought Harry's death was necessary - that shows someone who can now see that defeating Voldemort is more important than keeping Lily's son alive. He's still trying to do that job when he's apparently figured out LV is about to kill him. Face white as a death mask, JKR says, and Snape doesn't beg for his life, but does ask to be allowed to find Harry Potter. The other point is that he doesn't give Harry just the memory with Snape and Dumbledore discussing 'Harry needs to die by LV's hand'. He gives Harry the whole truth, as Snape knows it. 'This is who I am, this is why I was protecting you, this is why Dumbledore was protecting you. And neither of us were doing it for Harry Potter, the person. We were doing it for other reasons.' And by giving these memories, he treats Harry as an adult. He doesn't tell Harry what to do; he gives him the truth, effectively tells him he doesn't owe his mentors anything, and then leaves it to Harry to make up his own mind. It's worth noting that the one thing Dumbledore never asked Snape to do was tell to tell Harry the truth. Pip!Squeak From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Thu Jul 26 22:47:43 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:47:43 -0000 Subject: PERSONALLY I LIKE THE EPILOGUE In-Reply-To: <17220.77526.qm@web52507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173120 jerri willmore wrote: > > There has been a lot of epilogue bashing here, personally I really liked it and I especially liked the last sentence. > > > Anyone here like Jo's epilogue? > > jerri > Anne Squires: Ear, ear! I do like the epilogue. We found out that the main character got what he always wanted, a loving family. True, many, many things were left unanswered; but that didn't really bother me. Sure, I'm curious; but I can live without knowing. Actually, since JKR will write an encyclopedia it looks like many questions will be answered after all. I was somewhat reminded of the ending of Gone With the Wind. In that novel many, many important questions are left unanswered. The fate of the main character and the main ship is left unresolved. Yet, I think it's one of the cleverest endings I have ever come across. Many are dismayed by the fact that the tradition of sorting into the four houses is still taking place. However, this tradition had been in place since the founding of the school a thousand years previously. I don't think it could easily be done away with in such a traditional society. I think the fact that Harry doesn't mind if his son is sorted into Slytherin speaks volumes. I think there will continue to be a rivalry between the houses. But, I think there is probably a lessening of the resentment against Slytherin House as the years go by. I don't think the Slytherins are evil. When I look at the Malfoys and what they went through, I see a family that will teach future generations against the evils of following false prophets. I feel fairly certain that Scorpius has been taught not to use the term, "Mudblood." I bet that Draco believes that pureblood mania nearly destroyed his family. I like to think of the Malfoys as a microcosm of the Slytherin experience. I bet many traditional Slytherin families have changed their tune. This change will positively affect the atmosphere and attitude one finds in the Slyth common room, imho. To change a portion of society's prejudices takes time. However, change can and does occur. It just takes a really long time. I think that it's a good thing to leave the houses so that tolerance can be learned in an atmosphere where the children of the Slytherins could be in the house and change it from within. If the house had been eliminated then it would have probably gone underground. Perhaps the sons and daughters of former Slytherins would have formed something along the lines of the DA. No, it's best for the house system to remain as it has, with everything out in the open. If children of war heroes such as Al Potter can end up in that house they can also effect a change. I am afraid to admit the following because I am afraid that I will be flamed; but I am reminded of my own family a little when I look at the Malfoys. I come from a family from what is called the Old South. My ancestors fought for the Confederacy. My grandparents and parents were brought up on stories of the "glory days" when the family owned a plantation (and slaves). No, as far as I know, no one was ever a member of the KKK; but it really wouldn't surprise me if I did learn that some skeleton in the family closet had been a member. However, it is my opinion that each generation has been less and less prejudiced, more and more tolerant. My sister has married an African American and the they have a wonderful child. I like to see a similar future for the Malfoys. Anne Squires From aorta47 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 22:39:21 2007 From: aorta47 at yahoo.com (aorta47) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:39:21 -0000 Subject: Snape: Beyond Good and Evil redux + Lily's eyes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173121 Message #149031 "What is done out of love always occurs beyond good and evil." -Friedrich Nietzsche Ok, maybe it was an obsessive love, but it was still love. I still think Snape's actions were for himself; they just happened to help Harry. And spot on to Luna in the above referenced message for predicting that Lily's eyes would cause Snape to do what he did. Mark From Ajohnson5 at oh.rr.com Thu Jul 26 22:57:23 2007 From: Ajohnson5 at oh.rr.com (April Johnson) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:57:23 -0400 Subject: new pet Message-ID: <036501c7cfd8$545c9e30$6601a8c0@april> No: HPFGUIDX 173122 I thought someplace it was said that Harry would have a new pet in book 7?? Maybe I'm just dreaming that I heard it someplace, but I was hoping that Fawkes would return as Harry's Pet. April [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Thu Jul 26 22:59:54 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:59:54 -0000 Subject: PERSONALLY I LIKE THE EPILOGUE In-Reply-To: <17220.77526.qm@web52507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173123 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, jerri willmore wrote: > > There has been a lot of epilogue bashing here, personally I really liked it and I especially liked the last sentence. > > We are discussing Tolkien. Actually he did write an epilogue to The Lord Of the Rings! It had Sam and his daughter Elanor (second fave T character) around 15 years after the book. His editor told him to not include it and it is actually better without it. But you can find it in the book "Return of the Shadow," I believe. > > Anyone here like Jo's epilogue? > > jerri > *raises hand* I liked it. It gave me an idea of how their lives are like "19 years later". I don't think it would have been appropriate to go into great detail what happened--that would be too soap opera-ish. I mean, I happy she spared me details of George sinking into depression and developing a firewhisky dependency or Lavender Brown having a gender identity crisis or Ginny deciding to marry Harry before or after she gives birth to their first child or a custody fight over Teddy between Andromeda Tonks and Harry . (Don't worry, I just made that stuff up!) >From the epilogue, I know that Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione have good lives after their ordeal. That's the best I can hope for any character in a book (or a real life person too!) If Rowling publishes the encyclopedia, as she is rumored to do, it will bring more insight to the Potterverse. But the DH epilogue was a fitting end to the series, imo. It left me thinking that Harry and the rest of the wizarding world had a 'happily ever after'. Milz From zanelupin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 23:11:56 2007 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:11:56 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173124 Nora: > > he was motivated out of an explicitly personal > > concern. This has also just been echoed by the JKR > > commentary on the Today Show: > > > "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a > > hero? I don't see Snape as a hero... he's very brave, > > but..." "Would he have protected Harry if he hadn't > > loved Lily?" "No, not at all." houyhnhnm: > This quote might make a little more sense in context > (I can't seem to find it). KathyK: The video is on the Today Show's website here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/ I can't yet find a full transcript for this interview but this is how I heard it (Snape info starts around 4:45 in the video): Vieira, reading an email: Was Snape always intended to be a hero? JKR: (inhales loudly) Is he a hero? You see, I don't see him really as a hero. He's spiteful. He's a bully. All these things are still true of Snape even at the end of this book. Um...but was he brave? Yes, immensely. Random Child sitting at her feet, identified as "Greta, 8": If Snape didn't love Lily would he still try to protect Harry? JKR: No. He definitely wouldn't have done. He wouldn't have been remotely interested in what happened to this boy. I hope that helps, as they say. KathyK From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 23:20:06 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:20:06 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered (wrong!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173125 > Neri wrote: > > > > > As much as I can make sense of Dumbledore's original plan, Snape > was to be killed by Voldemort and the Elder Wand end with no master. > > > Rowena(?) replied: > > I don't think that's quite right. DD himself says he intended > Snape to have the Elder Wand, and is disapointed it didn't work out > that way, (Kings Cross Station chatper). Personally I find this rather > touching evidence both of DD's trust in Snape, leaving him something > so powerful and perilous, and his concern for him. (Unsigned post > so I hope I got the atribution correct.) > > > Carol responds: > I've been thinking about this > Clearly, DD intended Snape to be > the master of the wand and keep it safe (one part of the plan was to > make sure that neither Draco or a true Death Eater got it), but that > can't be the whole plan. Clearly, he didn't expect Snape to die. The > moment of regret for his fate in King's Cross would have been the most > horrible hypocrisy if that were the case. > > What, then, did Dumbledore want Snape to do? I think he wanted Snape > to disarm him before killing him so he would be not only the master > but the possessor of the wand (which LV at that point would not have > known). Annemehr: I've been thinking about this, too. In Kings Cross chapter, DD did say he intended Snape to have the wand, but gave no further details. I'm not at all sure he intended for Snape to be its master. During the final confrontation in the Great Hall, Harry said to LV: "Aren't you listening? /Snape never beat Dumbledore!/ Dumbledore's death was planned between them! Dumbledore intended to die undefeated, the wand's last true master! If all had gone as planned, the wand's power would have died with him, because if had never been won from him!" [DH ch. 36, p. 742 US] I know some may be leery of accepting Harry's word for it, but he has logic on his side: you can't be said to have bested someone when you were working together for a common goal. So, as best I can make out, Snape was intended to help DD break the power of the wand, not to be master of the Death Stick. Which leaves Snape set up to be killed by Voldemort in his own quest to be its master. Canon and logic appreciated, if I'm missing something. ;) Annemehr From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Jul 26 23:21:01 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:21:01 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: <24889568.1185473343270.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173126 > Dungrollin: > >2. Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to side-along apparate to > >Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters? > > Bart: > I'm sure the spell would account for that; that's kind of an obvious workaround the secret keeper. Dung: I think you misunderstood me; since DD's death Snape was a secret- keeper, when he went to 12GP he had his tongue tied so couldn't give out the secret to the DEs, but what was to stop him apparating with some DEs the same way Hermione apparated with Yaxley. But anyway, I'm absolutely *not* sure the spell would account for it. When did tongue- tying hexes stop people apparating? > Dungrollin: > >3. What was Wormtail doing at Snape's house at the beginning of Half- > >Blood Prince? > > Bart: > I thought that was obvious: Spying on Snape. Morty STILL didn't quite trust Snape. Dung: Obvious? Why did we need to see it? In what way did it further anything in the story? What does it explain in retrospect? > Dungrollin: > >6. Why did you write in Quidditch Through the Ages that no wizards > >can fly without brooms unless their animagus form can fly? > > Bart: > Quidditch Through the Ages is a metabook (a real world copy of a fictional book), and, within its continuity, it was written at a time when this was believed to be correct. Dung: Do you mean it was a mistake, or do you mean she lied for no apparent reason? > Dungrollin: > >8. Was it Harry's sacrifice (willingness to die) which made him able to block Voldemort's AK with an Expelliarmus, or was it the fact that he was the master of the Elder Wand? > > Bart: In giving himself up for sacrifice, Harry, plus the extra protection, ensured that only the Morty piece was exposed to the AK spell. This was WHY DD couldn't let Harry (or even Snape) know that it would work; if Harry knew he wasn't going to die, then, paradoxcially, he would have. > In any case, Harry wasn't expected to gain mastery of the wand, only the knowledge (and ability to use the stone). Dung: No, I meant in the duel at the end. Harry blocked Voldy's Ak with an Expelliarmus, whereas he didn't try to defend himself in the forest. 1. AK is meant to be unblockable 2. Harry blocked it 3. Which of the two plot devices allowed that? (Seems to me one of them is superfluous.) > Dungrollin: > >11. Harry can't be an auror, because he can't risk anybody else > >becoming the master of the Elder wand, so what was his job after > >Hogwarts? > > Bart: > In case you hadn't noticed, Harry had a small fortune from his parents, a large fortune from Sirius, not to mention his interest in George's successful business. So, he probably lives off investments; JKR has also stated that he give occasional lectures at Hogwarts, and it's not impossible that he does so elsewhere, as well. Dung: Huh. In that interview she said that actually he's now head of the Auror office, but she didn't want to tell us in the book. (?!?) Bit dangerous, isn't it? If Harry *ever* loses a duel (even if it's not to the death), his plan to leave the Elder wand with no master is foiled. > Dungrollin: > >13. Why didn't it occur to Tom Riddle that other students must have > >found the Room of Requirement if it was full of their hidden > >possessions? > > Bart: > Look up "psychopath". I'm being serious. Dung: You mean it's synonymous with "idiot"? I'm sorry, I can't be bothered to look it up, normally I don't need to look up technical terms not even mentioned in the text in order to find childrens books comprehensible. I thought, psychopathic as he was, Voldy was meant to be quite clever. Argh. I'm sorry, I don't mean to snipe at you. I'm cheesed off (or can you tell?). I shouldn't need to have an in-depth understanding of psychopaths to understand Voldemort's behaviour. He makes a mistake, thinking that he's the only person to have discovered the deeper secrets of Hogwarts, when it's not that secret at all, and we don't get an explanation in the text. I shouldn't have to research psychopaths to get it. > Dungrollin: > >14. If DD planned to be the last master of the Elder Wand, why did he leave clues for Harry to unite the Deathly Hallows? > > Bart: > I don't think he did; I think he left clues for Harry to know about them, but to NOT try to unite them. Dungrollin: Why? Harry didn't need to know about the Hallows in order to use the ring and the cloak, DD could have left him a note explaining what the ring did without calling it a Hallow. DD just put the clues in his way to tempt him, hoping his clues weren't interpretable enough to give Harry enough time to actually be tempted. The whole thing is absurd. I was expecting a symbolic "temptation" for Harry at some point, but one that was expressly put there by DD to tempt him for no adequately explained reason? And one that he barely agonised over, and one that we, the readers, had no worries at all that he would succumb to (he was only even tempted because he thought DD wanted him to chase them, not because he was interested himself) because DD has been telling us since book 1 that Harry has a teflon soul. There was no moral struggle, it was a pointless plot device that went nowhere. The link that Joan posted in message 173112 puts it very well: http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070725/cm_csm/ysawyer > Dungrollin: > >15. In the Hospital Wing at the end of Half-Blood Prince, why didn't it occur to Lupin or McGonagall that Snape might have repented over the death of Lily? Surely they were aware, like Lily's friends, that they'd been friends at Hogwarts? > > Bart: But it is also clear from the events in SWM that the Marauders were not aware of HOW good friends he was with Lily; she was probably a little embarrassed to admit being that good a friend of a member of the Death Eaters crowd, especially on seeing that, at that age, she didn't particularly like the Marauders, either. Dungrollin: Yeah, nobody knew, apparently. Even Slughorn didn't notice. Sure. That's what she wrote, so it's true. Still rings false to me, the Marauders saw her defend him at least once, and James and Sirius saw them together on the Hogwarts Express in the first year. And then it became secret. Hey-ho. From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 23:28:09 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:28:09 -0000 Subject: Harry Ain't Perfect, but he IS a Good Person/The Series has Morality Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173127 I hear a lot of people taking issue with the lack of character arc, and/or the lack of a moral purpose in the series, and in DH in particular. I really strongly disagree, and I didn't realize how strongly until just now. I will try not to babble... Harry Potter is a good kid. Let's forget Voldemort exists, just for a moment. Harry is just a basically good person. He is a loyal friend. He stands up for the little guys - like Neville, Luna, and Hagrid. He is polite to adults, generally respectful of teachers (except when he suspects them of being evil, in which case I think a little rudeness is justified), and he understands the difference between good and bad. This is a kid I would want to babysit my children, or teach at my school. He has a deeply loving nature, and he is, at his root, a kind and nice person. He isn't perfect. He occasionally breaks rules, shouts at teachers, gets inappropriately angry, and yes, in DH, he uses Unforgiveable Curses. That, in a nutshell, is exactly why I like him, and exactly why the series is powerful. If Harry were like Snape, I would not relate to him. He would be too close to the Dark Side for me to empathize with him, and I wouldn't have stuck with the books long enough to get to DH. Maybe some would have wanted a darker, more easily tempted protagonist, but not me. I appreciated Snape's character arc as an important, but peripheral, story. I would not have wanted to read books where Snape was my protagonist. On the other hand, if Harry were less dark and more morally perfect, I would REALLY not like him, and the books would be really trite and irritating. I would never be able to relate to a holier-than-thou figure who never was wrong, or nasty, or did something they shouldn't have done. Bor-ring! Harry has both light and dark in him, like all of the best characters in the series. But this doesn't mean they lack morality. Nor does it mena that they lack a good story. Harry has definitely struggled against himself at many moments...not only against the darkness within him, but also against the pull of normalcy, the pull of inertia. Many times, he wanted to quit fighting, as we all do sometimes in real life, but like Harry, we press on. I don't understand how people can not see the moral points in this story! 1 - Friendship and Love conquer all. Ok, Harry was saved by Love, he is kept alive by Love, and he willingly sacrifices himself for the love of his friends...How is that not moral and ethical? Just because he doesn't actually die doesn't mean that the point wasn't made. When you love people as intensely as Lily loved Harry, or as Harry loves Ron, Hermione and all the others, it makes you a better person and it makes the world a better place. That point was well made, at least in my eyes. 2 - Choices Make Us Who We Are I know many people thought JKR ruined this point by making Voldy a sociopath. I don't think so. First of all, I *don't* see the little Tom Riddle that we meet in HBP as a sociopath. He is an orphaned child who can do wierd things, and he wasn't shown how to use his powers soon enough. He wasn't ever loved. Unlike Harry, who was conceived in love, born in love, and had someone die for him, Tom Riddle had NEVER had a loving touch. I felt VERY sory for that kid, and Dumbledore certainly gave him latitude to make different choices, but he did not. Dumbledore's choices are often bad ones, and he was certainly a selfish person when he was young...but he CHOSE to change, and he did so. I don't see Dumbledore as a master manipulator, at least in a malevolent sense. He knew Harry had to fight Voldemort and he tried to give him the tools to defeat him without giving too much away. Had Dumbledore simply handed Harry everything, Harry would not have had the confidence and the strength to do what he did. Harry needed to get there on his own. 3 - The World Isn't Perfect, but We can try to Make it Better. No one every said that defeating Voldy would make the world a sunshiney place. No one ever said that in the RW, either. But it's the trying that counts. It's people's hearts being in the right places. It's people working together for a greater good. And evil will never entirely go away, but we have to keep trying. Perserverence was a really big theme in these books, and Harry and the Order never gave up, never stopped fighting. They believed they could make the world better, and they never lost that purpose...but no one ever said it would be perfect. That wasn't the point, anyway. The point was the trying. 4 - Discrimination is Wrong Like many of you, I was also disappointed in the continuation of the Sorting in the epilogue. I had hoped that after seeing everyone in the Great Hall all together, children would no longer be pigionholed and catagorized. However, that singular thing does not erase the screamingly loud message throughout the rest of the series. From the formation of SPEW to the Charge of the House Elves in DH, from Hagrid's revelation about his giant blood to Grawp's bravery in DH, and from Draco Malfoy's "mudblood" comment in CoS to the hunting of half-bloods and Muggle-borns in DH, JKR has nearly beaten us to death with the idea that prejudice and hatred are very, very bad things. And I think that the continuation of Sorting in the epilogue has a lot more to do with that fact that the epilogue was written a long time ago and no editor had the you-know-what's to stand up to JKR and tell her it was lousy, than it did with JKR trying to send us the message that nothing had changed. In the end, HRH are good kids. They're smart, resourceful, and much better people than a lot of adults I know. They are also sometimes self- involved, nasty, and just plain wrong. This doesn't mean they are less worthy of being heroes, or that we should like them less. They're very real people, and they are why I think the series is so darned powerful. And it certainly isn't lacking in moral/ethical messages. Ok...whew. I'll shut it up now. : ) Cheers, KATIE From cincimaelder at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 23:31:15 2007 From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:31:15 -0000 Subject: White peacocks? In-Reply-To: <6467e1f0707261423s1753cd6eq55d78de72e64f629@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173128 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Asl? ? T? ?merkan" wrote: > > Asl? T?merkan: > I first thought that it was Malfoy's animagus form. It probably wasn't > though, and I couldn't make any sense of it afterwards. Anyone knows what they were? > > Asl? T?merkan > I thought she just put it in there in the beginning so that we would know they were at Malfoy's house when they were captured. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Thu Jul 26 23:32:31 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:32:31 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173129 > > Magpie: > > Yeah, people are really silly for thinking that there could be a > > moral implication to Unforgivable spells--especially one that's a > > torture spell--when it's really just illegal. That must be the > > problem people have with the spells--that they're illegal by > > Ministry standards--since torture has no moral implications in > > itself and is very effective for neturalizing enemies in fiction. > > It's like those people who keep complaining about the use of torture > > in real life--as Judge Scalia says, "Are you going to convict Jack > > Bauer?" Besides, in GoF we were being told about the Ministry > > approving of Unforgivables in the past. Now the Ministry doesn't > > approve--so obviously if you're going to break the laws by keeping > > Muggle-borns out of jail you have to also break the laws against > > using Unforgivables. > Charles: > Oh, can we bring real life into this? Magpie: Sorry, we won't bring real life into it--so I'll snip further discussion of real life torture. Which is fine, because I disagree with your stance on the fictional level as well. I think that the Unforgivables were presented with moral implications in canon and were not just arbitrarily illegal. I also don't see any connection between ignoring the Ministry's laws on discriminating against Muggle-borns and thinking Crucio is a fine thing to do. What I was also mostly disagreeing with was the idea that anyone who had a problem with Harry's use of Crucio was doing so because they were following Ministry guidelines. It seems to me that obviously their concerns are based on their own ethical feelings about the curse and Harry's character and not any worry about the curses being illegal. That's why it seemed so bizarre to bring in the Ministry's laws on Muggle-borns as if it was in any way connected. Charles: > > Other spells can be used for torture in the books besides cruciatus, > yet that is the one called unforgivable. Why? Because that is the one > that the ministry decided earned you a life sentence in Azkaban. More > below, from one who wasn't just trying (and failing) to make me look > foolish. Magpie: Whether or not the Unforgivables get you a lifetime in prison is a different issue than the one people brought up about Harry that I read. I agree with you that it seems a bit superstitious to just name these three spells unforgivable--but I thought your characterization of the problem people equally made people look foolish. I just don't think the problem with unforgivables ever had to do with the fact that the Ministry named them unforgivable. You seemed to be dismissing the idea that torture had ethical implications at all independent of the Ministry's labelling this one particular spell Unforgivable. And I'm still disagreeing with the way you seem to be (and correct me if I'm wrong) first pointing out that the Ministry's views on the law can be wrong, and yet also talking about it like the only consideration about this stuff is what the Ministry thinks. For instance, by saying: > Charles: > Which laws would you have us obey? Are we to carry a list into the > heat of battle and check against it before casting? Magpie: I thought the problem people had with Harry casting Crucio was that they figured he carried around his own morality (not a book of laws) with him, and that morality was tied to his not wanting to torture. They thought, given what the attitude towards this was before in canon, that their hero's not wanting that was part of what made him a hero. Obviously this was not true for Rowling, but I've yet to see anyone who was disturbed by Harry's Crucio being disturbed because he broke a Ministry law. (Hell, I've been saying for years that the whole "anyone who throws an Unforgivable goes to jail forever because they're considered so bad" wasn't true anyway.) It seems like you're arguing two things here--one is arguing that law =/=morality. The other is defending the use of torture. I think people have more trouble with the second than the first. People who have trouble with Harry's Crucio that I've seen seem to be objecting to it on those terms, especially because of the scene in which its presented--unlike the use of Imperio (which in itself is a different spell with different implications) earlier. > Charles, wondering why people are so dependent on legality to know > right from wrong-and hoping it can be cured. Magpie: I don't think any of them are. Maybe I'm not following the thread clearly, but I don't see anybody making this argument, just your arguing against it. People are responding by talking about why they think the Unforgivables should be illegal based on morality, but I just really don't think anybody is worried about their legality. -m From sudeeel at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 23:37:56 2007 From: sudeeel at yahoo.com (sudeeel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:37:56 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: >He didn't know the names > of *any* Ravenclaws until the first DA meeting. sudeeel responds: Actually, he knew the names of Padma Patil, Cho Chang and Luna Lovegood before the first DA meeting. sudeeel From pam_rosen at yahoo.com Thu Jul 26 23:19:33 2007 From: pam_rosen at yahoo.com (Pamela Rosen) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:19:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: =?windows-1252?B?UmU6IFtIUGZvckdyb3dudXBzXSByZWM6ICBNaXNzaW5nIGZyb20gJ0hh?= =?windows-1252?B?cnJ5IFBvdHRlcicgliBhIHJlYWwgbW9yYWwgc3RydWdnbGU=?= Message-ID: <966545.28585.qm@web30806.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173131 Joan wrote: I want to recommend this critique piece on Book 7 "Missing from 'Harry Potter' ? a real moral struggle", written by Jenny Sawyer, as it shares exactly my problem with book 7 and the HP series in general and and put it better than I could ever do. http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070725/cm_csm/ysawyer Pam: My email box has over 1000 HP for Grownups mails in it, most of which I have not opened because I haven't finished the book yet, but by now it is virtually impossible not to know what happened, so the book becomes more about how it happens and not what happens. But I wanted to respond to this one. First of all, I don't think that JKR set out to write a morality play. Just as I get frustrated with people who snub certain children's toys because they are not educational, I got frustrated with this essay. Not everything is supposed to be a lesson. Not everything is supposed to have a moral. That being said, I think Ms. Sawyer is only partially right. Looking from the perspective of classic literature, she correctly identifies the problem that Harry does not have an inner struggle. But nor do I think that Harry's destiny was pre-determined (except by JKR herself) or we wouldn't have spent two years talking about it. Though the book may have an obscured moral, it has real, tangible morals that a child can understand. A perfect example happened this week. My 8-year-old son idolizes the baseball player Barry Bonds. (For those of you not in the US, Bonds is a player who is about to break the world record for hitting the most home runs, but is under a cloud of scandal for allegedly using performance-enhancing drugs.) My son asked about this, rather distraught, and I immediately went to a Harry Potter moral. I asked him to remember what Dumbledore said about it being our choices that define us, rather than our abilities. I don't think my son really grasped that before. But when I said, 'Bonds has great abilities, but he made a bad choice, and that's really sad, because he's not doing that anymore and he's still hitting home runs. That means he had the ability all along and never needed to take the drugs. If he had just believed in his abilities and made the right choice, people would only ever talk about how great he is and not about a mistake he made." When presented with that analogy, my son was able to take a moral right out of Harry Potter and apply it to understanding something in his own life. That's just one example. I can think of hundreds. So maybe there's no one big moral of the books, but there is a lot of small, but deep ones that help children through the mysteries and magic of their own lives. Pam, who is hoping the elves don't delete her post because she mentioned baseball. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Thu Jul 26 23:46:53 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:46:53 -0000 Subject: White peacocks? In-Reply-To: <6467e1f0707261423s1753cd6eq55d78de72e64f629@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173132 > > Asl? T?merkan: > I first thought that it was Malfoy's animagus form. It probably wasn't > though, and I couldn't make any sense of it afterwards. Anyone knows what they were? > > Asl? T?merkan > Anne Squires: Your question prompted me to google peacock symbolism. I found something very, very interesting. All of the following quotes come from a site about peacock symbolism: http://www.khandro.net/animal_bird_peacock.htm I'm going to copy and paste just afew things I found to be particularly significant to DH, imo, of course. "In the iconography of European alchemy and hermaneutics, the peacock represents the soul. In Christianity, it stands for immortality and the incorruptibility of the soul.." "The motif of two peacocks, one on each side of the Tree of Life, is a well-known feature of Persian decorative arts. A pair of peacocks stands for the "psychic duality of man" similar to the role played by the Gemini in western astrology, says Cirlot (A Dictionary of Symbols.)" "Among the Muslims of Java in Indonesia there is a myth about how the peacock guarding the gates to Paradise ate the devil, and that is how he managed to get inside. This myth makes a unity of the duality of good and evil, and also explains the bird's mysterious iridescent colour. It also incorporates the Indian notion of the incorruptibility of the peacock." And most significantly of all, "Since a potentially deadly emotion such as anger is depicted as a serpent, and the peacock is immune, the peacock also symbolizes victory over poisonous tendencies in sentient beings." Thus, to summarize, the peacock symbolizes an immortal, incorruptible soul. It also represents the defeat of the devil, the triumph of good over evil. It symbolizes immunity to serpents and poisonous tendencies. Wow! who knew? I think an albino peacock might represent the idea that in the very dark, disturbing scene there is a element of purity, hope, that which is good. We find out later that DD had given Snape the information that is discussed in the meeting. Although everything looks bleak and lost, Albus, which means white, is involved and there is hope for the coming battle against evil. Anne Squires From ida3 at planet.nl Thu Jul 26 23:59:58 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:59:58 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173133 Dung: No, I meant in the duel at the end. Harry blocked Voldy's Ak with an Expelliarmus, whereas he didn't try to defend himself in the forest. 1. AK is meant to be unblockable 2. Harry blocked it 3. Which of the two plot devices allowed that? (Seems to me one of them is superfluous.) Dana: I'll give it a shot in trying to answer this question. First Harry was not suppossed to fight LV in the forest so the AK there could "kill" him. Very simple very clean cut. In the dual Harry explains to Voldemort that the Elder wand is not his (LV) but actually belonged to Harry himself. The wand Harry is holding is also his as Olivander told him at Bill's house that the wand he took van Draco would choose to serve him. So the two wands both belonging to Harry would not duel each other because a master of the wand can't be taken out by his own wand (well unless you are Lockhart and use a broken wand). So what you actually saw was a reduced version of the brother wand thingy in GoF where AK and EX connected. In this case Harry himself, unlike LV, is holding a wand that is rightfully his and therefore his spell is stronger then the AK comming out of LV's wand. JMHO Dana From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 00:00:49 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:00:49 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173134 Pip!Squeak: > The other point is that he doesn't give Harry just the memory with > Snape and Dumbledore discussing 'Harry needs to die by LV's hand'. > He gives Harry the whole truth, as Snape knows it. 'This is who I > am, this is why I was protecting you, this is why Dumbledore was > protecting you. And neither of us were doing it for Harry Potter, > the person. We were doing it for other reasons.' SSSusan: Yes. Another way of seeing the "Look at me" line from Snape -- other than his desire to see Lily's eyes again -- is that he is telling Harry, "This is who I am -- LOOK at me." It's an invitation, something many of us never would have believed Snape capable of offering. Pip!Squeak: > And by giving these memories, he treats Harry as an adult. He > doesn't tell Harry what to do; he gives him the truth, effectively > tells him he doesn't owe his mentors anything, and then leaves it > to Harry to make up his own mind. > > It's worth noting that the one thing Dumbledore never asked Snape > to do was tell to tell Harry the truth. SSSusan: And I would mention that, unless a reread of this section shows me something I've missed, Snape gave Harry *more* of the truth than DD himself ever did. DD did *not* share his belief that Harry would need to die -- or at least that the soul bit within him would have to, because he didn't tell Harry about that soul bit -- which means, imo, that Harry was not fully informed about what choice he was facing. As I've said before, to me that means his choice was less of real choice. SNAPE gave him the whole picture, all the information Harry wanted (and had asked for in the past) and needed if he were to be able to make a fully-informed choice. DD told Harry at the end of OotP that he had told him 'everything,' but in fact he had not. And even if he discovered more *after* that talk at the end of OotP, he didn't *update* his 'everything' once he found out more about those horcruxes, did he? Snape, otoh, did give him everything he knew. THAT much I give Snape a lot of credit for. Siriusly Snapey Susan From k12listmomma at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 23:54:15 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:54:15 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW References: Message-ID: <00c501c7cfe0$46090a50$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 173135 > colebiancardi: > yep, I saw that interview and thought, wow oh wow. So, what is the > definition of a hero, I wonder? I was expecting, at the very least, > that Snape is an Anti-Hero, which plays off well with Harry's Hero. > And basically, is JKR stating that placing Snape in Slytherin doomed > and sealed his fate as a bad person with no redeeming qualities > whatsoever, if he didn't *love* Lily? So, the House System, which is > still in play 19 years later, helped formed and cement any biases and > *badness* that those unfortunate enough to get placed in Slytherin. > No redemption. You cannot atone. > > What type of message is that? I guess JKR is cementing the idea that > Snape did not mature in the last 16 years since Lily's death. That > there is nothing but Lily. That was my rant earlier about the lack of > personal growth & maturity and making atones and moving on. She > doesn't give certain characters that possibility, based on that > interview this morning. > > not pleased at all. > > Their was ONLY one person that started out nasty with horrible biases, > which he picked up from his parents, whom we see change & mature. And > he didn't even DIE at the end. And that person was a Muggle - Dudley. > > I guess Muggles have a leg-up on atonement and rejecting biases that > they were taught. They get a second chance and they get to live. If we knew more information, we might have a second- Draco Malfoy. Clearly his mum changed her mind and helped out Harry by not giving away that he was still alive, and we have it that the trio saved his life TWICE. Because he's not detailed in the epilogue, except to get a "brief" hint that he wasn't hated, we don't know if he did a 180 also, or at least became a decent man after all. Both friendships with Dudley and Draco would have been proper to see in that epilogue, I think, just to cement those changes and healing. Shelley From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 00:13:05 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:13:05 -0000 Subject: James's age Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173136 Did anyone besides me notice that James Potter is referred to in OoP as being fifteen, the same age as Harry, in SWM, but that all of the characters whose ages we know would actually have been sixteen in that scene? James and Remus were born in March; Severus and Lily in January. none of them has a summer birthday like Harry. (Snape says that Sirius was sixteen at the time of the so-called Prank, which seems to have occurred shortly before the worst memory, and he has a 75% chance of being right since unless Sirius had a summer birthday, he, too, would have been sixteen.) So JKR seems to know that Sirius and Severus were sixteen, but she has the adult Black and Lupin refer to James as fifteen at the time. How could they misremember James's birthday? Are they trying to excuse him by making him seem younger than he was, or is JKR herself just thinking of Year 5 as age fifteen? She says somewhere that Hogwarts students take their OWLS at age fifteen, but three-quarters of the students would actually be sixteen. Or maybe she hadn't given him a birthday yet and was thinking of him as being the same age as Harry. It could have something to do with having a July 31 birthday herself, I suppose, and forgetting that Harry is younger than most of the students in his year. (In PoA, she has Dumbledore, who, of course, couldnt be expected to keep track of students' birthdays, refer to Harry and Hermione as "two thirteen-year-old wizards," but Hermione has been fourteen since September, about eight or nine months. Oh, dear, maths! I don't suppose it matters, but it's a continuity error. I suppose she should change James's birthdate in DH if she wants to correct it. The part where Harry says indignantly, "I'm fifteen!" won't work if she changes James's age in the scene to match the age on his tombstone. Carol, sorry to post on such a minor point but I was afraid it would count as a spoiler on OT Chatter From ida3 at planet.nl Fri Jul 27 00:20:23 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:20:23 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173137 SSSusan: > And I would mention that, unless a reread of this section shows me > something I've missed, Snape gave Harry *more* of the truth than DD > himself ever did. > > DD did *not* share his belief that Harry would need to die -- or at > least that the soul bit within him would have to, because he didn't > tell Harry about that soul bit -- which means, imo, that Harry was > not fully informed about what choice he was facing. As I've said > before, to me that means his choice was less of real choice. SNAPE > gave him the whole picture, all the information Harry wanted (and > had asked for in the past) and needed if he were to be able to make > a fully-informed choice. Dana: Just for argument sake. What if Snape did not give the memory to Harry so he could go kill himself but that it was a last attempt of Snape to keep Lily's sacrifice high? For this Snape would need Harry to see that what he did was all for Lily, so her son could live but DD wanted to sacrifice Harry for the greater good? Snape does not know that the wand was not rightfully his. He doesn't know that LV with this specific wand is not now more powerful then Harry could ever imagine and that the boy's hours are numbered. (Snape never thought much of Harry anyway and thinks in his last moment that LV with this wand will be unbeatable) So instead of wanting Harry to march of to his death he actually wanted to safe Harry's life one more time. Snape did not know that Harry had a lot more information and understanding of what he was supposed to do with the information that DD wanted Snape to give to Harry. Snape then wants to look at Lily's eyes one more time before he dies believing he has done the last final deed to keep Lily Potter's son safe and not let her sacrifice be in vain. Just a thought Dana From canigs1 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 00:07:55 2007 From: canigs1 at yahoo.com (canigs1) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:07:55 -0000 Subject: DH:Harry/Lily's Eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173138 > Julie: > > Yes, Snape did it all for Lily, and every time he had to remember > why > > he was doing what he was doing, he could find Lily's eyes in Harry. > > > > And on his death bed, he wasn't looking at Harry's eyes, he was > > looking at Lily's eyes. > > lala: > Sorry but i'm pretty sure that every time snape looked at harry he > saw james and thats why he hated him. it was only when snape was > dying that he looked at him and agknowleged lilys eyes properly. > > > Well, I thought that maybe the reason Snape was so despicable towards Harry for 6 years was because not only did he see Lily's eyes when he looked at Harry, but he saw hatred in those eyes - Harry's hatred of Snape. Snape was daily reminded of Lily's disappointment in his choices. Amy From heiloo at aol.com Fri Jul 27 00:21:56 2007 From: heiloo at aol.com (susan4508) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:21:56 -0000 Subject: Favorite Moment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173139 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "clairvoyant812" wrote: > My favorite moment in the book - Molly dueling Bellatrix and becoming > Molly Triumphant. So we know where Ginny inherited her ability. Not my daughter, you bitch! That was just great, and the timing was perfect. I was flying through the pages, worried about who would be the next to die, and that line made me laugh out loud. Definitely one of my favorite parts as well. Susan From melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 00:15:36 2007 From: melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com (melrosedarjeeling) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:15:36 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173140 Caius Marcius: > There are two Biblical quotes in chapter 16, the Godrics Hollow > graveyard. > .... > The second is the inscription of the tomb of James and Lily Potter. > > The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. > Now Melrose: I'm surprised that I'm not seeing more discussion on the various HP boards of what seemed to me the very obvious allegory in this book of the final days of Christ's life. I'm not a Christian now, but I was raised in a protestant religion and I felt like the parallels were almost painfully obvious. Someone who knows this stuff really well could probably find even more, but these jumped out at me: *Endless camping = 40 days temptation in the wilderness *Resentment against DD = 'my god, my god why hast thou forsaken me' kind of experience *Snape cuts off George's ear = disciple cuts off ear of high priest's servant during Christ's arrest *Ron leaves the quest = disciples falling asleep in the Garden of Gethsemane *Malfoy denies the good side 3 times and is saved 3 times( 1 by DD/Snape in HBP, 1 in the ROR, 1 by the trio under the cloak) = Peter denying Christ 3 times and being forgiven *The most obvious: Harry has to lay down his own life to save others and (sort of) dies and (sort of) comes back to life = Christ death and resurrection. Everyone might not agree that *all* of these are intended as a Christian allegory, but I suspect most would agree that the central point of the book, and indeed the whole series, is Harry sacrificing his life for others in a dead-on parallel to Christ's crucifixion. It now seems clear to me that this is JKR's main theme in telling Harry's story. For me this theme is, meh, not so interesting, but it helps explain why she made some of the choices she did, and that I, for one, found disappointing (and that others have already pointed out in different posts). Curious to know what others think. If this was her goal, was she successful? -MelroseDarjeeling From heiloo at aol.com Fri Jul 27 00:16:32 2007 From: heiloo at aol.com (susan4508) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:16:32 -0000 Subject: PERSONALLY I LIKE THE EPILOGUE In-Reply-To: <17220.77526.qm@web52507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173141 > jerri: > There has been a lot of epilogue bashing here, personally I really > liked it and I especially liked the last sentence. > Anyone here like Jo's epilogue? Yes, I liked it. While it left some questions unanswered (What happened to Luna? Did George get married? Did he continue the joke shop on his own? What happened to the Dursleys?), the epilogue very clearly gives us a snapshot into a very different wizarding world. It's stable, peaceful, and secure. And Harry has a family, he has love, and he has friends, which he didn't at the start of the series. It's not a perfect ending, but it's definitely satisfying. Susan From juli17 at aol.com Fri Jul 27 00:35:43 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:35:43 EDT Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173142 Magpie wrote: I mean, the Hat was preaching unity for two books in canon and it didn't have any effect except for the other three houses to be united. Even Hermione didn't start reaching out to Slytherin. They encapsulate the not generous or noble qualities, but not actively working for this union was exactly what I thought was going to happen in the book but didn't. Julie: This is exactly why I do find the lack of resolution on House unity to be a real flaw in DH. This is from my perspective of course. We were told several times throughout the earlier books that Unity of the Houses was necessary for Hogwarts to survive and prosper, or words to such effect. Not only from the Sorting Hat but from Dumbledore. There is even Dumbledore's remark to Snape about students perhaps being sorted to soon (honestly I'm not 100% sure what to make of that remark, but I'll still use it as an indication that the subject of sorting and whether it is truly in the students' best interests was still on the table even in DH). Then the *entire* Slytherin table deserts Hogwarts. Ouch. That really hurt when I read it. I will agree that Harry telling little AlSev that being sorted into Slytherin wasn't a bad thing is a tiny step in the right direction. But very, very tiny. I really wanted a payoff on the whole House Unity issue. And we got essentially nada. Again my opinion, Julie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Fri Jul 27 00:58:03 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:58:03 EDT Subject: Questions for JKR Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173143 > Bart: > Look up "psychopath". I'm being serious. Dung: You mean it's synonymous with "idiot"? I'm sorry, I can't be bothered to look it up, normally I don't need to look up technical terms not even mentioned in the text in order to find childrens books comprehensible. I thought, psychopathic as he was, Voldy was meant to be quite clever. Argh. I'm sorry, I don't mean to snipe at you. I'm cheesed off (or can you tell?). I shouldn't need to have an in-depth understanding of psychopaths to understand Voldemort's behaviour. He makes a mistake, thinking that he's the only person to have discovered the deeper secrets of Hogwarts, when it's not that secret at all, and we don't get an explanation in the text. I shouldn't have to research psychopaths to get it. Julie: In some ways maybe psychopath is synonymous with idiot. It must be synonymous with egomaniac, because *that* definitely describes Voldemort. He cannot look past himself to allow the concept that anyone else can be as smart as him, as deceitful as him, as *anything* as him. As far as he's concerned he's surrounded by a bunch of unintelligible bugs. While he may intellectually understand that other people are motivated by different things than he is, like Lily by love for her son, he doesn't consider it pertinent to his life, thus he always underestimates what his enemies are capable of. Take young Snape as an example. Here Voldemort has this highly intelligent, highly skilled and at the moment presumably fully loyal DE asking for something. For something it would cost Voldemort absolutely NOTHING to deliver. Save Lily, the mother of that prophecy child, because I love her. And what does he do? Stupify her and kill the child, to keep his perhaps most valuable DE contented and loyal? No, he kills her after she refuses to step aside. Really, how dare she?! Anyone with half a brain, who could think at all outside his own needs and experiences, who could *strategize* worth crap, would have given Snape what he wanted, as it came with no downside whatsoever. Instead Voldemort gets turned to vapor, Snape goes to Dumbledore, and the stage is set for Voldemort to take the road that leads directly to his own doom. So yes, he's an idiot. I really don't understand how he managed to get so much power in the first place. Of course, it's equally astounding how Hitler conquered half of Europe when he was also a psychopathic egomaniac, so there you go... Julie, wanting to rant a bit or something... ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 01:01:59 2007 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:01:59 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173144 Am I simply late to the discussion? Has someone else brought up the fact that Harry has control of all three Deathly Hallows when Voldemort hits him with AK in the forest? Dumbledore can talk all he wants about blood; the Deathly Hallows are why Harry survives. Nick From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 00:52:08 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:52:08 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173145 Dana: > Just for argument sake. What if Snape did not give the memory to > Harry so he could go kill himself but that it was a last attempt > of Snape to keep Lily's sacrifice high? > So instead of wanting Harry to march of to his death he actually > wanted to safe Harry's life one more time. Snape did not know that > Harry had a lot more information and understanding of what he was > supposed to do with the information that DD wanted Snape to give > to Harry. > > Snape then wants to look at Lily's eyes one more time before he > dies believing he has done the last final deed to keep Lily > Potter's son safe and not let her sacrifice be in vain. SSSusan: But. But. But I never said that Snape gave Harry the information *hoping* he would march off to his death! That's not what I was saying at all. I was saying that Snape was both following DD's instructions (providing the information DD said Harry needed at the 'right time') AND actually, in doing so, sort of giving Harry a gift -- the gift of providing more full & complete information than DD had *and* more full & complete information than he had to (all the background with Lily). I think it was a very brave thing for Snape to have done. I didn't see it as selfishly motivated as so many of the things he had done were. I guess that's the only place where I quite see that you & I differ. You are saying, I think, that Snape may have done this as *another* thing that was *only* out of devotion/dedication to Lily, whereas I believe he did it for more than just that reason -- including because DD wanted & asked him to do so. Sorry if I've not addressed things well. I am not sure I fully understand what you were saying. But, to clarify, I did NOT think Snape gave those memories to Harry because he, out of cruelty, wanted Harry to go kill himself. I didn't think I'd implied anything of the kind. Siriusly Snapey Susan, out of posts for the day! From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 01:16:03 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:16:03 -0000 Subject: Favorite Moment (Molly vs Bellatrix) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173146 In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "clairvoyant812" wrote: > My favorite moment in the book - Molly dueling Bellatrix and becoming Molly Triumphant. So we know where Ginny inherited her ability. Susan: > Not my daughter, you bitch! That was just great, and the timing was perfect. I was flying through > the pages, worried about who would be the next to die, and that line > made me laugh out loud. Definitely one of my favorite parts as well. -- Inge: That exact moment was definitely wrong to me. But then again, I NEVER liked Molly - on the contrary, she has been a constant annoyment to me all the way. I would much have preferred her to simply back off for once and leave that moment to Neville, to do that much justice to his parents. And - her line there, it just seemed way too Ripley-like - as taken directly out of an Alien-movie. And Molly was just never a Ripley. From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 01:23:06 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:23:06 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173147 > > > > Now Melrose: > I'm surprised that I'm not seeing more discussion on the various HP > boards of what seemed to me the very obvious allegory in this book of > the final days of Christ's life. I'm not a Christian now, but I was > raised in a protestant religion and I felt like the parallels were > almost painfully obvious. Someone who knows this stuff really well > could probably find even more, but these jumped out at me: > > *Endless camping = 40 days temptation in the wilderness > *Resentment against DD = 'my god, my god why hast thou forsaken me' > kind of experience > *Snape cuts off George's ear = disciple cuts off ear of high priest's > servant during Christ's arrest > *Ron leaves the quest = disciples falling asleep in the Garden of > Gethsemane > *Malfoy denies the good side 3 times and is saved 3 times( 1 by > DD/Snape in HBP, 1 in the ROR, 1 by the trio under the cloak) = Peter > denying Christ 3 times and being forgiven > *The most obvious: Harry has to lay down his own life to save others > and (sort of) dies and (sort of) comes back to life = Christ death > and resurrection. > > Everyone might not agree that *all* of these are intended as a > Christian allegory, but I suspect most would agree that the central > point of the book, and indeed the whole series, is Harry sacrificing > his life for others in a dead-on parallel to Christ's crucifixion. It > now seems clear to me that this is JKR's main theme in telling > Harry's story. > > For me this theme is, meh, not so interesting, but it helps explain > why she made some of the choices she did, and that I, for one, found > disappointing (and that others have already pointed out in different > posts). > > Curious to know what others think. If this was her goal, was she > successful? > > -MelroseDarjeeling > Anne Squires: King Herod tried to have the Christ child killed because he had been told by the Wise Men that the stars foretold a new "King of the Jews." The parallel to Voldemort trying to kill baby Harry based on a prophecy is obvious. Marry and Joseph fled to another land to protect their child. Harry was placed in another world, the Muggle world, to protect his life. To me the Deathly Hallows themselves could represent the temptations that Christ faced in the wilderness. I'm speculating, but perhaps--- Satan tempted Christ three times. The second (in some accounts the third) temptation was to defy death by throwing himself off the temple. DH = 3, temptations = 3, DH = become master of death, 2nd temptation = become master of death Harry did learn of the Deathly Hallows and their meaning while he was camping out, iow, in the wilderness. But maybe this reading of the Deathly Hallows is just wild speculation on my part. Anne Squires From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 01:28:08 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:28:08 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173148 houyhmmmmm: > Rowling has made it abundantly clear that for her, > loyalty and affection at the merely personal level > are the highest good. So why, even now, does she > withold her full approbation from the character who > embodies her values more than any other? Because > Snape is the Other. He was born to be The Other > and nothing he could have done would have changed that. > Rowling, in the end, is unable to do without an Other > to devalue and stigmatize. > > EWWWW is right! Alla: Well, maybe not. Not in my view anyways, because context that Kathy provided down thread is even better than I hoped. JKR says that she never really saw him as a hero, he is spiteful, he is bully, but he is immensely brave, yes? So to me that is precisely why Snape is not a hero - not because he is **other**. You mean other in general philosophical sense or other just in Slytherin house? Because I believe that Snape is not a hero, because even at the end of the book he is spiteful bully, because he never made an effort to see Lily's child for loyal, selfless, courageous person he is, to get to know him at least. Because he treated Neville Longbottom the way he did. I really think that Snape not making an effort to treat those kids **nicely** is one of the major reasons JKR does not see him as hero and slaps him with justice of being food for Nagini, while Hagrid of all people gets to live. I said it on another list, but did not finish discussing there ;). I think that JKR really places a lot on being a **nice** person as in being genuinely nice to others and Hagrid being nice is deemed more worthwhile to live than Snape, even though I find Hagrid as character to be rather blah, as I also mentioned. Despite the fact that Snape did all that brave deeds in the name of Lily Potter and saving the world. So, yeah my opinion. Alla. From severnblue at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 01:23:11 2007 From: severnblue at comcast.net (cjmatt66) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:23:11 -0000 Subject: Reference to Easter foreshadowing? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173149 Hi, I am new - hope I am posting correctly. Did anyone else notice the references to Hogwarts' "Easter break" in Book 7? I know they had Christmas break in Harry's world, celebrated in a purely secular way (until the Muggles' Christmas Eve at church also new in 7) - but this was the first time I noticed anything about Easter. Also, marking Mad Eye's "grave" for his magical eye with a cross... I was startled by it when I read that part. Wondering if the pseudo Christian references were a foreshadowing for Harry's self-sacrifice and semi-resurrection? If so, all those who have been calling for Harry Potter boycotts etc. on account of wizardry and anti-Christianity are going to have some rethinking to do! cjmatt66 From sherriola at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 01:31:13 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:31:13 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46a94ae5.01098c0a.5a41.27bb@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173150 > Charles, wondering why people are so dependent on legality to know > right from wrong-and hoping it can be cured. Magpie: I don't think any of them are. Maybe I'm not following the thread clearly, but I don't see anybody making this argument, just your arguing against it. People are responding by talking about why they think the Unforgivables should be illegal based on morality, but I just really don't think anybody is worried about their legality. -m Sherry: Thanks, magpie. I never even thought about the so-called legality or illegality of Harry doing Cruciatus. I thought about exactly what you said. The hero isn't supposed to torture, especially because he has experienced it personally, and I was shocked and saddened that he could so easily inflict it on someone else. I didn't care when he tried and failed to do it to Bella in OOTP, because he failed, and his godfather had just been killed before his eyes. But to torture someone over spitting? Even knowing he was under incredible stress and fear didn't excuse it for me. It made me highly uncomfortable. But I never thought about the ministry's laws for a minute in my reaction. One of the reasons Harry is my favorite character and why I love him is that he is a mix of good and bad, does the right thing, does the wrong thing, saves his enemies from death, saved Dudley from the dementors, acts rashly, sees his father and godfather as flawed but still loves them and everything else. His using the torture curse didn't make me not care for him still, but it did disappoint me and make me wonder how his soul could still be supposedly pure. Sherry From leslie41 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 01:51:26 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:51:26 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173151 As for JKR's comment on the Today Show regarding Snape, I find it very interesting, fascinating in fact, but pretty much irrelevant. Though it makes for excellent television, *any* author's opinion on their own text is only of limited value. Authorial intent is not even considered in any serious literary criticism. What's considered is what's actually in the text. If Rowling, for example (and I don't know if she's spoken about this or not) swore up and down that Harry, and his journey, weren't somehow analagous with Christ's, there's still plenty of evidence in the text for many to interpret it as such. I'm sure Jane Austen would be horrified to hear that anyone was making a Freudian interpretation of her work. She'd roll over in her grave. Does that mean that we don't make Freudian interpretations of her work? No. And not just because she's dead. Because authorial commentary and opinion on a text, or on an interpretation of a text, is pretty much worthless. But for argument's sake (and I don't necessarily agree, mind you), let's agree with Rowling and say that even at the end Snape is motivated purely by love for Lily. So? Rowling's idea of "heroism" seems to the standard Christian ideal of "doing good for the right reasons". Any dip into any heroic literature at all will reveal that most heroes do no such thing. Would Achilles have fought in The Iliad if Patroklos had not been killed? No. Does that make him less of a hero? Obviously not. He's manifestly the greatest hero in all of Ancient Greek myth. Want more examples? I got a million of 'em. It's dangerous for us to take what Rowling says about her own characters too seriously. She's not the best person to ask, any more than a mother is the best person to ask about the behavior of her children. She does not have the perspective required. From carla.mcculley at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 01:35:21 2007 From: carla.mcculley at comcast.net (Carla (Ball) McCulley) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:35:21 -0000 Subject: Too quick and a sell out Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173152 I probably won't check any posts until I've finished the book, but I only have 50 or 60 pages left and I really feel betrayed. I won't include spoilers, but I feel cheated. This book should have been 2 books with more detail. I don't understand why 7 is such a magical number with authors, but I don't care how many books it takes....tell the story. Don't sell out at the end because you have made your fortune. Does anyone else feel this way? Empty deaths for shock and effect....no back stories to explain the over simplified plot devices. The previous 6 books were brilliant. Did she grow so tired of Harry and those we love so much that she just did whatever to get away from it? I hear she cried. Well so did those dedicated fans who expected the same thoughtfulness, consideration, and love that the other books contained. There better be one hell of an epilogue to make up for the shabby treatment of the characters I've come to love and cherish so much. This book hurt my heart. It's like losing friends for no other cause but financial gain. Nothing noble there. And to me, these characters were noble. Carla From rkdas at charter.net Fri Jul 27 01:54:58 2007 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:54:58 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173153 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rowena_grunnionffitch" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" > wrote: > > Ah you sparked me, Carol. I was totally taken aback by JKR's less- > > glowing assessment of Snape whom so many idolize and love. And from > > your post, you too seemed to have gathered that she is much more > > situationally positioned in her ethics than previously realized. > > Snape was only a hero because of his great love of Lily. > > > Could her point have been that if Snape hadn't loved Lily he would > have stayed a Death Eater? > > rowena_grunnioffitch That is entirely the point, that he was damaged goods before and after. His love for Lily, his desire to redeem something of worth from his actions gave him what little value as a human that he had. Those of us that wanted him to be more than that, wanted him to be a truly worthy character, a Sydney Carton, we were, I was, taken aback that his arc could be dealt with in such a pragmatic and almost flat way. Snape loved Lily. Snape betrayed Lily and James. Snape lived the rest of his life trying to make up for that. That's all. It kept hiim from being a death eater, which he surely would have stayed save his remorse. And that's it. It's very unnerving the effort some of us put into understanding Snape and that's all there is basically. I find it calls for a re-examination of many things. Jen D. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 02:06:19 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:06:19 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > As for JKR's comment on the Today Show regarding Snape, I find it > very interesting, fascinating in fact, but pretty much irrelevant. >> It's dangerous for us to take what Rowling says about her own > characters too seriously. She's not the best person to ask, any more > than a mother is the best person to ask about the behavior of her > children. She does not have the perspective required. > Alla: Well, deciding how much JKR's perspective worth is up to individual reader obviously. But my thing is that I am taking author's words as additional support for my view, that is all, nothing more nothing less. If authoritarial intent is irrelevant to your interpetation, well, that's your interpetation. Mine is that I like what she says. Hey, I was majorly majorly wrong about DD!M Snape, but she managed to do him the way to make so many people with different views completely happy including me. You said that what is in the text matters, that IS my point though. To me everything she said IS already in the text, I see it there. and what she said is just reinforces to me that it is in the text indeed. His despicable treatment of Harry IS in the text as I interpret it, him telling Dumbledore "Him?" and that I take to mean that he could care less about Harry and Rowling simply confirmed it for me. So, what I am trying to say _ I see Snape **no hero** in the text, and what JKR says just reinforces it to me. I mean his bravery is there too obviously, but to me for mostly wrong, selfish reasons. He does the right thing but for the wrong reasons to me, yes. Alla. From mariabronte at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 02:06:01 2007 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:06:01 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173155 I'd like to weigh in on this topic as it's one I find very interesting; JKR definitely intended to reference and on some level re interpret the meaning of the Christian story in this series. Think also about the two biblical quotations people mentioned previously in this thread; isn't much of the story in this book about Harry learning to practice the meaning of these passages; the last enemy to be defeated IS death and Voldemort's heart/soul, unlike most of the others who die in this book, cannot 'move on' because his treasure is his horcruxes and his soul is split between and bound within them, and thus bound to this world, unable to move onto the next. I know there has been discussion about this particular reference before, but I'd like to return to it again now that the series is finished. I'm sure I remember reading on this list or elsewhere that JKR knows and likes C.S Lewis' work. Keeping that in mind, consider the quote below, from Lewis, regarding the use, in fantasy fiction, of Christian symbols and metaphors: "I thought I saw how stories of this kind could steal past certain inhibitions which had paralyzed much of my own religion in childhood. Why did one find it so hard to feel as one was told one ought to feel about God or about the sufferings of Christ? I thought the chief reason was that one was told one ought to. An obligation to feel can freeze feelings. And reverence itself did harm. The whole subject was associated with lowered voices, almost as if it were something medical. But supposing that by casting all these things into an imaginary world, stripping them of their stained-glass and Sunday school associations, one could make them for the first time appear in their real potency? Could one not thus steal past those watchful dragons? I thought one could." Now turn your minds to the long known translation of the Hogwarts motto, which is "Never tickle a sleeping dragon". My feeling is that this can be read as a subtle nod to Lewis, and the sleeping dragon that JKR warns against tickling can be equated, at least partly, with the watchful dragons C.S Lewis is using as an image in his discussion. Since, like the Narnia stories, it is perfectly possible to enjoy the HP series without bothering about any of this Christian or mythological imagery on a conscious level I think that JKR, like Lewis, has succeeded in stealing past the watchful/sleeping dragons. The Christian and mythological imagery is recast and reformulated in the Potterverse, so that the significance, although clear upon re reading, is not immediately apparent. Mari. From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 01:52:41 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:52:41 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707261852t30a7b60ey98503cad9bec5c0e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173156 Ken: I, a Baptist with no languages beyond English, once stood at the front of a Catholic Church with a hundred of my closest friends and sang: Quoniam tu solus Sanctus, Quoniam to solus Sanctus, Tu solus Dominus, Tu solus Altisimus, Jesu Christe, Jesu Christe. as well as the rest of the bass part of Vivaldi's Gloria in D. It was a much bigger job that imitating one word and while we had far more time to learn it than Ron did, it was not particularly hard. I can sing a song for you in Portuguese too, although I could not begin to spell the lyrics correctly. I can believe that Ron managed to spit out one word in Parseltongue. He probably spoke it with a terrible accent! Lynda: Maybe that's it. I don't have a problem with Ron's mimicing in parseltongue either, and I often sing in languages I don't understand. Latin, Italian, German, Chinese, Japanese. All with my friends in front of audiences of various sizes so that none of us feels singled out--except for the solos of course. Point is, memorizing odd (to our own ears) sounds or approximating them is possible. Eventually some people even learn them. After singing Mozart's Requiem Mass in two different choirs, plus various sections of the same piece three more times, I finally even started understanding what it was I was singing. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kjones at telus.net Fri Jul 27 02:16:28 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:16:28 -0700 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW Message-ID: <46A9557C.7090808@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173157 rowena_grunnionffit ch: Couldn't he have just wanted the comfort of her memory in his last moments? I repeat: if Lily is still the be all and end all *WHY* is sorrowing lover telling her son to get himself killed??? KJ writes: Maybe Snape wanted to warn Harry that Dumbledore had set him up to die. After all, Snape was truly loyal only to Lily's memory, not Dumbledore. He had promised to keep Harry alive only because of her, not so that Dumbledore could sacrifice him when convenient. Snape, if that was what he had in mind, never understood Harry or Lily. I think that Snape only wanted to see Lily's eyes as he died. KJ From adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 02:21:20 2007 From: adamjmarcantel at yahoo.com (adamjmarcantel) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:21:20 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173158 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" > wrote: > > > > As for JKR's comment on the Today Show regarding Snape, I find it > > very interesting, fascinating in fact, but pretty much irrelevant. > > >> It's dangerous for us to take what Rowling says about her own > > characters too seriously. She's not the best person to ask, any > more > > than a mother is the best person to ask about the behavior of her > > children. She does not have the perspective required. > > > > Alla: > > Well, deciding how much JKR's perspective worth is up to individual > reader obviously. > > But my thing is that I am taking author's words as additional > support for my view, that is all, nothing more nothing less. > > If authoritarial intent is irrelevant to your interpetation, well, > that's your interpetation. > <<>> >To me everything she said IS already in the text, I see it there. > and what she said is just reinforces to me that it is in the text > indeed. > > His despicable treatment of Harry IS in the text as I interpret it, > him telling Dumbledore "Him?" and that I take to mean that he could > care less about Harry and Rowling simply confirmed it for me. > > So, what I am trying to say _ I see Snape **no hero** in the text, > and what JKR says just reinforces it to me. > > I mean his bravery is there too obviously, but to me for mostly > wrong, selfish reasons. He does the right thing but for the wrong > reasons to me, yes. > > Alla. > Ah, I have made it to 5th post of the day so it will have to be my last. I would have to say that I agree that it is up to each individual to determine how seriously to take the author's views. However, suppose I painted a four-legged animal and noone quite knew what it was (which wouldn't be a stretch if you would see my artistic ability!). If I told someone it was a dog, I would like to think they would say "Oh, it's a dog" rather than "Adam, we can't take your word about what you painted...your view is irrelevant. I see a zebra, so it's a zebra" Now, I don't pretend to be an art/movie/literary/whatever critic, but if that is their approach, I am quite satisfied to be a commoner. I take JKR's view on what her creation is at face value...just like Alla, I can clearly see in canon where she is coming from. Adam, who expects his gold star for keeping within the five post a day limit ;0) From aceworker at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 02:27:06 2007 From: aceworker at yahoo.com (career advisor) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:27:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: ACcchhsssssaaaa! Message-ID: <364238.14741.qm@web30207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173159 > Libby wrote: > > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's ability to fake Parseltongue . > > Here's my take on it. Of all there adventures together, the one that sticks in Ron's mind the most, were those desperate few minutes when he and Harry were trying to save Ginny from the chambers of secrets. It is a defining moment. Hermione his new friend was for all intents and purposes dead, his baby sister might be dead, Lockheart was a coward and the cave-in mean he could not help Harry try to resuce his sister. Suppose he had to stand there while your house is on fire and let your neighbor save your sister. Ever moment of that was probably etched in his mind just as much as Harry's memorites of his attacks on his parents (which since he is 1 yr old at the time, he probably only has because of the piece of Voldy's soul that used to be in there). Or two, she's setting us up for book eight set twenty years in the future. Just in case she wants to write another one. See when Ron destroyed that Horcrux he didn't exactly a little piece got lodged in his head; so now....he knows Parseltonuge and doesn't even realize it. --------------------------------- Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 02:14:24 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:14:24 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707261914y4536181dq533267a3e6f5e13@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173160 guzuguzu: With reference to DH, the Prince's Tale: Does anyone else find it completely implausible that that Harry would not have known if Snape and Lily were "best friends" for at least five years of their lives? Especially since they both hated James? Lynda: No. Harry only knew his mother for a year after his birth. The Dursleys didn't tell him anything about who his mother's best childhood friend was. Neither did Sirius, Remus, Hagrid or anyone else who would have/might have known about the relationship. Not implausible at all. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 02:45:23 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:45:23 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173161 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > As for JKR's comment on the Today Show regarding Snape, I find it > very interesting, fascinating in fact, but pretty much irrelevant. > > Though it makes for excellent television, *any* author's opinion on > their own text is only of limited value. Authorial intent is not > even considered in any serious literary criticism. What's considered > is what's actually in the text. Actually, authorial intent has made something of a comeback since the days of Wimsatt and Beardsley, especially for those of us who do historically related work as opposed to New Criticism, but also in more abstract philosophical senses. But that's a complete tangent, and I'm sure that my field has engaged differently with the issues than some others. Where I find Rowling's comments useful is in what I like to think of as a calculus of effort regarding interpretation. Step back a few books to pre-OotP (what a fun time that was onlist!). At this time, Snapetheories ran wild, and many of them were devoted to explaining his seemingly nasty behavior to the students as part of a plan, something with an explicit reason. Now, this takes some work. You have to strap a lot of "this is what is in the text, BUT this is what it will actually be revealed as being a part of..." onto things. At the time, this was work worth doing, in part because there were several books to go and a few reveals would do a lot. Unfortunately, what's come around now is that given the lack of a reveal, the amount of work starts to seem (to me) superfluous. It reminds me of a student doing analysis on something with a relatively steady style like Handel and coming up with strange chords that take a lot of work to explain, while if you read it in a different key, it's very easy. I've always used Rowling's comments as a heuristic--what lines of inquiry and explanation are likely to get actual payoff, and which are not. YMMV, but I tend to discard lines of inquiry that don't get any actual realization. > Rowling's idea of "heroism" seems to the standard Christian ideal > of "doing good for the right reasons". Any dip into any heroic > literature at all will reveal that most heroes do no such thing. > > Would Achilles have fought in The Iliad if Patroklos had not been > killed? No. Does that make him less of a hero? Obviously not. It manifestly depends on your definition of heroism, which I think is all that Rowling was saying in the first place--that she didn't see him as a hero, especially within the framework she constructed in the novels. We, of course, are free to make whatever arguments that we wish, so long as we also define our terms. -Nora goes hunting for wherever she put her volume of Iser From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 02:42:11 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:42:11 -0000 Subject: ACcchhsssssaaaa! In-Reply-To: <364238.14741.qm@web30207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173162 > > Libby wrote: > > > I'm curious if anyone was as surprised/dismayed at Ron's > ability to fake Parseltongue . > > > > Career Advisor wrote: > Here's my take on it. Of all there adventures together, the one that sticks in Ron's mind the most, were those desperate few minutes when he and Harry were trying to save Ginny from the chambers of secrets. It is a defining moment. > > Hermione his new friend was for all intents and purposes dead, his baby sister might be dead, Lockheart was a coward and the cave-in mean he could not help Harry try to resuce his sister. > > Suppose he had to stand there while your house is on fire and let your neighbor save your sister. Ever moment of that was probably etched in his mind just as much as Harry's memorites of his attacks on his parents (which since he is 1 yr old at the time, he probably only has because of the piece of Voldy's soul that used to be in there). Anne Squires: That makes a lot of sense to me. Also, Ron would have heard Harry open the locket horcrux using parseltongue. I'll bet every moment, every single second, of rescuing Harry and the sword then destroying the horcrux stands out clearly in Ron's memory. In addition to that, didn't Harry try to open the snitch repeatedly while he was on the run with Ron and Hermione? I'll bet Ron heard Harry say "open" hundreds of times in parseltongue as he tried to open the snitch. Anne Squires From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Jul 27 02:49:53 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:49:53 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173163 MelroseDarjeeling: > Everyone might not agree that *all* of these are > intended as a Christian allegory, but I suspect most > would agree that the central point of the book, and > indeed the whole series, is Harry sacrificing his life > for others in a dead-on parallel to Christ's crucifixion. > It now seems clear to me that this is JKR's main theme > in telling Harry's story. > For me this theme is, meh, not so interesting, but it > helps explain why she made some of the choices she did, > and that I, for one, found disappointing (and that > others have already pointed out in different posts). > Curious to know what others think. If this was her > goal, was she successful? houyhnhnm: I felt certain of this when I read "HE'S ALIVE!". It would explain the absence of a real moral struggle. Harry was the Chosen One all along. I cannot address whether or not she was successful in developing this theme since I am not a Christian. It does explain the choices she made. I, too, was disappointed, but I can't say it was wholly unexpected. From Schlobin at aol.com Fri Jul 27 02:38:33 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:38:33 -0000 Subject: questions I need help answering Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173164 Okay, so WHY did Snape need to tell Voldemort when Harry was being moved from the Dursleys? WHO did Snape tell Voldemort was the source of his intelligence about Harry being moved? (Mundungus) Was Grindelwald ever the master of the Elder Wand? I think so, since there were rumors of his having a wand of great power, if yes, how did Professor Dumbledore defeat him...? It was supposed to make the bearer invincible...???? I don't get what Dumbledore meant in Chapter 35 (King's Cross)... Harry: "Why did you have to make it so difficult?" Then Professor Dumbledore said "I am afraid I counted on Miss Granger to slow you up, Harry." What does that mean? Susan McGee (Over 40? Interested in a low volume list - check out Harry Potter for Grownups Over 40..email me at SusanGSMcGee at aol.com) From Jenanydot at aol.com Fri Jul 27 02:38:56 2007 From: Jenanydot at aol.com (jenanydot) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:38:56 -0000 Subject: White peacocks? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173165 > Anne Squires: > Thus, to summarize, the peacock symbolizes an immortal, > incorruptible soul. It also represents the defeat of the > devil, the triumph of good over evil. It symbolizes immunity > to serpents and poisonous tendencies. Wow! Who knew? > I think an albino peacock might represent the idea that in > the very dark, disturbing scene there is a element of purity, > hope, that which is good. We find out later that DD had given > Snape the information that is discussed in the meeting. Although > everything looks bleak and lost, Albus, which means white, is > involved and there is hope for the coming battle against evil. Very interesting information...I wonder if Rowling knew all this while when she was adding the peacocks? I never questioned them as being a symbol of anything larger; I suppose I've always viewed peacocks more as a symbol of vanity than anything else, and it seemed likely that the Malfoys would have something as rare as an albino peacock (I'm assuming that they're rare) to show off the opulence of their lifestyle. However, with this new information about peacock symbolism...well, I like Anne's interpretation better than my own original one, now. ~Mandy (who is a very new lurker and first time poster) From chaomath at hitthenail.com Fri Jul 27 02:55:22 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:55:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8B1124A8-D865-427A-8048-32052904F385@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173166 MelroseDarjeeling wrote: > Everyone might not agree that *all* of these are intended as a > Christian allegory, but I suspect most would agree that the central > point of the book, and indeed the whole series, is Harry sacrificing > his life for others in a dead-on parallel to Christ's crucifixion. It > now seems clear to me that this is JKR's main theme in telling > Harry's story. > > For me this theme is, meh, not so interesting, but it helps explain > why she made some of the choices she did, and that I, for one, found > disappointing (and that others have already pointed out in different > posts). > > Curious to know what others think. If this was her goal, was she > successful? You make a compelling argument that JKR successfully incorporated Christian mythology for many plot points, and perhaps several overall themes of the series. It didn't make for a successful final book, in my opinion, but perhaps that's because I'm no fan of Christianity. Does my negative reaction mean that it was successful for those who approve of the Christian message? If I ever reread DH, I'll be trying to work out whether or not the ungainly portions exist because she was forcing things to some external framework. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From aceworker at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 02:56:27 2007 From: aceworker at yahoo.com (career advisor) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:56:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Another inconsistency? Message-ID: <741370.3990.qm@web30212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173167 Toner wrote: > I thought Fenrir had a dark mark? > > During the tower scene at the end of HBP, a group of DEs join DD, > Harry and Draco up on the top of the tower, and the rest of the OotP > can't get up the stairs due to some magical wall except for Snape. At > the time, the reasoning for this was that only people with Dark Marks > could go through the invisible wall. > > However, in DH, Fenrir cannot enter the Malfoy Manor, even though it > appeared you needed a Dark Mark to go through the gate (like Snape and > Amycus in the first chapter). The Dark Mark is just a spell isn't it. Which means it can be removed. If Voldy needed Fenrir to have a Dark Mark for a specefic mission, he can give him one, no problem and then remove it latter. What happended to Mos Morde in this book anyway. The Dark Mark wasn;t cast into the sky once this entire book, not even during the final battle. --------------------------------- Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kitnkids at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 02:54:24 2007 From: kitnkids at comcast.net (faery_wisdom) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:54:24 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173168 > Joe: > Questions which still linger... > > How does the (by my scoring anyway) third best wizard in the world, > Snape, "accidentally" curse off George's ear? > "Remember my last?" Whatever happend to a clarification of THAT? > What did *Lupin* ever do to earn Snape's wrath? (Being friends with > James & Sirius doesn't count for much here.) > Why did Lupin go from being one of the most self-posessed and serene adults to near-unhinged in DH? > Why didn't Neville get burned by the flaming hat? (I'm guessing it > was because Neville was a "true Gryffindor" and the hat was Godric's) > If Grindelwald wasn't the true master of the Elder Wand -- as he > swiped it from Gregorovitch -- how is it that DD became the true > master? This assumes that at some point DD found the true master of > the Elder Wand and disarmed him, allowing him to win the duel. Beautiful post Joe, of course that may be due to my residing in the same camp as you. Rather than duplicate what you've already eloquently stated a couple of comments to the above Q's and Snape's patronus. Remember in OP that Tonk's Patronus changes form due to her pining after Lupin? What's to say Snape's patronus did not change to a doe after Lilly's death? The sectumpsempra curse used to blow George's ear off is actually explained in the Pensieve. Snape was cursing a death eater who swerved / swooped at the last minute - so it was truly an accident. Can't recall which book of the last three, but I do remember a convo about not being able to take back or divert curses and that's a particularly nasty one. Second point there is that had he targeted George he probably would have lost a hell of a lot more than just an ear. Remeber my last is clarified for me when we realize that Petunia wrote to Dumbledor to attempt entering Hogwarts, and more than once from the sound of it. We know DD left her a letter when he dropped Harry off so it stands to figure he explained in that letter (his last) the importance of Harry calling her house home. The festering bitterness Snape clearly feels towards the Marauder's combined with Lupin's acceptance of Snape's coveted professorship explains his wrath toward Lupin. Especially when you consider that he was forced to make the potion meant to keep Lupin from his transformation and that Lupin and Harry Bond as well as they do. As far as the unhinging of Lupin in DH I can only ask, do you have children Joe? How many former husbands have you heard of who turned into someone else once the couple went from newly weds to expecting? It fits given that he had more than staunchly opposed any relationship between himself and Tonks to begin with. Whatever served to sway his opinion changed the second he realized they were having a baby. Lupin's greatest fear is that his affliction would cause harm to those he loved, and the ultimate harm would be to pass it on through birth to a son. Harry's treatment of him in Grimauld certainly seems to rehinge him for the remainder of the book. I'm just sorry he had to die! I think you answered the hat question yourself. I didn't concern myself with that so much b/c it was a classic Voldy thought he knew how to get rid of another pesky brat, but wait - he's come out unscathed and WITH the sword of Gryffindor. So is it a Voldy failed to understand the magic behind the object / person / act yet again? I'm inclined to think so. Lastly, I read the Elder wand stolen by Grindelwald part differently. I thought that DH states that Grindelwald did become master of it when he stole it, and then when DD was forced to face his fears and duel Grindy he won it when he beat Grindelwald in the infamous duel. DD was master until Malfoy managed to disarm him. That part works brilliantly for me. DD tells Snape that sometime in the next year the right moment for his death will present itself. He hasn't uttered a word, but soon as Malfoy disarms him we get the "Severus, please." DD admits to Harry in King's cross that he believed LV would seek the Elder wand at some point. Makes me think that when Malfoy unwittingly earns mastership by disarming him DD sees it as a perfect time to have Snape euthanize him as only he will know Malfoy is true master of teh wand. Your list of unanswered questions is great!! I would add one more to the list, unless someone caught this. Who performed magic at a later than expected age under desperate circumstances? Kit From Schlobin at aol.com Fri Jul 27 03:01:43 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:01:43 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173169 I think we underestimate how much of a "closed circle" the houses and the groups of friends were..... I don't think Remus, Peter or Sirius ever knew that Lily was a friend of Snape's. Lily obviously didn't think much of James so she steered clear of the other three as well. She certainly wasn't discussing her friendship with Severus with them. Finally, when she and James got together, they might have discussed it, but I think it's totally credible that James never discussed it with the other three. Lily might have said that she and Severus had been friends, but that that friendship had fallen apart as it became increasingly obvious that Severus was becoming a Death Eater. Susan McGee (If you are over 40, and interested in a low volume list, check out Harry Potter for Grownups Over 40 by emailing me at SusanGSMcGee at aol.com) From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 03:20:29 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:20:29 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173170 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > As for JKR's comment on the Today Show regarding Snape, I find it > very interesting, fascinating in fact, but pretty much irrelevant. > > Though it makes for excellent television, *any* author's opinion on > their own text is only of limited value. Authorial intent is not even > considered in any serious literary criticism. What's considered is > what's actually in the text. Ahhh, this would go along with the quote: I personally think the truth about Snape is self-evident to anyone who isn't deluding themselves. DH is out, folks, and trying to twist Snape into a bad guy, or undermine his heroism, in the end will not wash with the text. So, you would be saying that JKR is deluding herself about her own character? Perfectly possible I suppose. Nevertheless, it does strike me as an example of the phenomenon you have decried before -- i.e. a complete and steadfast refusal to acknowledge any statement or evidence that does not match with your preferred take on Snape's character. You also said in an earlier quote that JKR obviously meant us to view Snape as good -- as good and probably better than Dumbledore. Well, I suppose that would mean she does not have a terribly high view of DD either? Of course that would contradict with her earlier statements about him -- epitome of goodness and so forth. So was she lieing or deluded again? If we are not going to allow arguments from authorial intent, perhaps we shouldn't worry about what she obviously wants. Or, if we are going to worry about what she wants, I suppose we have to accept that Snape is, indeed, not a hero. Rather, he is an emotionally stunted, morally weak man who would never have protected Harry without the driving force of a rather sick obsession. Indeed, as I recall she did not even cry at his death, as she did at the deaths of Sirius and Dumbledore. Or are authorial tears also worthless? Lupinlore, who is getting to like JKR more and more From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Jul 27 03:29:06 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:29:06 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173171 Alla: > Because I believe that Snape is not a hero, because > even at the end of the book he is spiteful bully, > because he never made an effort to see Lily's child > for loyal, selfless, courageous person he is, to get > to know him at least. > [...] > I said it on another list, but did not finish discussing > there ;). I think that JKR really places a lot on being > a **nice** person as in being genuinely nice to others > and Hagrid being nice is deemed more worthwhile to live > than Snape, even though I find Hagrid as character to be > rather blah, as I also mentioned. houyhnhnm: So Snape is not good in spite of "all that brave deeds in the name of Lily Potter and saving the world" because he was not *nice* to Harry. Even I wouldn't accuse Rowling of being that banal. On the other hand, if HP is a Christian allegory with Harry standing in for Christ, then it all makes a kind of sense. Severus Snape accepted Dumbledore's condemnation without argument and without complaint, without bargaining, without excuses. He promised "anything" and that "anything" was no light penance. He remained faithful to his promise for seventeen years, even to his death. His fidelity was essential to Harry's victory over Voldemort, yet the state of his soul remains in doubt because he did not acknowledge his Savior. Then the contact between the green eyes and the black eyes takes on a whole other significance. Maybe in that last split second he was saved. I'm sorry but as someone who was raised Unitarian/Universalist this is completely unpalatable to me. I'm not knocking Rowling's story or the people for whom it is meaningful, but it's not for me. I think I need to find a twelve step program and a new hobby. From mindycl at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 03:26:17 2007 From: mindycl at gmail.com (Mindy) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:26:17 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173172 > melrosedarjeeling: > My question is: if the protection of Lily's blood "expired" when > Harry turned 17, why would Lily/Harry's blood in Voldemort continue > to provide protection after the expiration date? Mindy: I dont think his mother's protection has expired - the protection at the Dursleys expires when he turns 17. From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 03:32:34 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:32:34 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lily as friends- How could Harry not know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173173 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanmcgee48176" wrote: > I think we underestimate how much of a "closed circle" the houses and the groups of friends were..... I don't think Remus, Peter or Sirius ever knew that Lily was a friend of Snape's. Lily obviously didn't think much of James so she steered clear of the other three as well. She certainly wasn't discussing her friendship with Severus with them. va32h: You know, I am starting to agree. At first I also thought it was unlikely that none of the Marauders would know about Lily/Snape. But then it occurred to me that Harry pays very little attention to anyone but Ron and Hermione. I'm sure Dean and Seamus have other friends, but Harry wouldn't know. Hermione has relationships with other girls that he knows little or nothing about. I don't see James or Sirius being any more perceptive or curious than Harry - all three of them tend to be self centered. Lupin might have known something, but been reluctant to say anything about it for any number of reasons. In HBP, when Harry tells the group in the infirmary that Dumbledore's ironclad reason for trusting Snape was remorse, Lupin cries out "Snape said he was sorry about JAMES" (paraphrasing, but the important part is that he only expressed surprise that Snape would claim remorse about James, suggesting that Lupin wouldn't find it shocking if Snape felt remorse about Lily.) By the time Lupin meets Harry, Harry's hatred of Snape is in full steam, so perhaps Lupin just figured that it would only enrage/confuse Harry more to tell him about the Lily friendship. va32h From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 03:06:03 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:06:03 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173174 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "strange_familiarities" wrote: > > > > ***Katie replies:*** > > Harry as an Auror makes total sense. As JKR was anxious to > point out through the entire series (EXCEPT the epilogue), the world > isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters. After Voldemort's > death, there are still going to be nasty, bad wizards out there that > need to be caught. Aurors will still be needed, and that is what Harry > always wanted to do, once fake Moody had put the idea in his head. > Also, Harry, I think, would be unable to settle down into a banal > family life. Yes, he would relish his time with Ginny and his kids, > but he would need more. > > Najwa now: > I agree with Katie. Law enforcement is always necessary, and Harry > definitely would do nicely as an auror. > Ken: I have to disagree with both of you. Oh you are perfectly correct about the need for law enforcement. And you are correct that Harry has the gift for doing the magic and the moral compass to be a good law enforcement agent. But you are forgetting that Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. If Harry really meant to end its power by dying a natural death, undefeated by another wizard, then he simply cannot become an auror. The risk of losing his wand in a confrontation is just too great. It is one of the high points in the conclusion of this series when Harry demonstrates the depth of his understanding of wandlore and the depth of his moral sense by making this decision. If Rowling goes on to write an encyclopedia in which Harry becomes an Auror she will be marring her own work. The Harry I see at the end of DH has moved beyond being an auror. I agree that Harry needs a meaningful job in the WW, but he must not take that kind of job. Ken From Jenanydot at aol.com Fri Jul 27 03:36:51 2007 From: Jenanydot at aol.com (jenanydot) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:36:51 -0000 Subject: Molly's curse - something other than AK? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173175 First of all, forgive me if this has been discussed already and I missed it - I've tried to look through the list and find mention of this specific point, but I haven't found anything yet. When Molly defeats Bellatrix (which, by the way, is my new favorite moment of the entire series - but I'm a huge fan of Molly's), we aren't told specifically what curse she uses. I've been having a discussion about this with some of my coworkers, and no one seems to be able to come to an agreement on it. Some people are saying that they believe she DID use Avada Kedavra, and that Rowling simply didn't write the curse out because it was implied. Others are arguing that just because AK is The Killing Curse doesn't mean it's the ONLY curse that can kill someone; things like where the curse hits on the body could have a great deal to do with whether or not any particular curse is fatal. Personally, I think it's likely that Molly used some other powerful curse to finish Bellatrix off. I think that if she specifically used Avada Kedavra, Rowling would have said so. Also, it's stressed that Molly's curse hits Bellatrix in the heart: "Molly's curse soared beneath Bellatrix's outstretched arm and hit her squarely in the chest, directly over her heart." It seems to me that because Rowling is so specific as to WHERE the curse hits, Molly may very well have used a different curse, one that is only fatal if it hits a fatal mark. The lack of any mention of a green light, which has been so prevalent throughout the series whenever a Killing Curse was used, also strikes me as odd if Molly indeed used that particular curse. It does say that both women were fighting to kill, but...I don't know, it seems an odd picture in my mind to see them both standing there throwing Avada Kedavra's at one another willy-nilly. They're both powerful witches; I'm sure a whole arsenal of curses were at their disposal. Does anyone else find my theories valid, or am I just reading too much into the placement of the curse? ~Mandy From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 03:37:32 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:37:32 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173176 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Magpie wrote: > > I don't think anything was integrated, the personal > redemption of brave Snape notwithstanding. I guess to me, as > soon as Slytherin was introduced the way it was, that was obviously > the problem that needed to be solved, the one Voldemort was just a > symptom of. I felt the book did it backwards, getting rid of the > metaphor without ever much considering the way I expected them to > handle it. And looking at interviews after the fact, JKR never seemed > to expect them to. I don't have a problem with self-interest, myself, > but I wasn't on the same page about Slytherin either. > > Carol responds: > I think that the epilogue reflects a natural, slow progression toward > prejudice against slytherin. It's hard to wipe it out all at once, but > if Snape received a posthumous Order of Merlin that's on display in > the trophy case and has a portrait in the headmaster's office (after > all, it allowed him to occupy it and DD's and Phineas Nigellus's > portraits, at least, recognized him as the legitimate occupant), that > will go a long way toward showing that Slytherins can be brave and loyal. > Ken: I agree with Carol. In its understated way I think the epilogue says a lot about how things are changing. Snape turned out to be good and a vital part of the fight against Voldemort. Slughorn was there at the end and we don't *really* know that no other Slytherins straggled back with him. Five horcruxes were destroyed by Gryffindors, the remaining two by Slytherins. There came a point where everything depended on Narcissa choosing right over easy. She chose right, can you imagine what would have happened to the Malfoys if Harry had failed after she lied for him? What was that squeeze she gave him anyway? Involuntary twitch or sign of affection and encouragment? Phineas (does a portrait count?) certainly played a key role. Harry and Draco acting civil towards each other? Harry telling his son it is ok to be a Slytherin? Harry naming his son Severus? Ron joking about Rose marrying Scorpius? Things have changed folks. A vague epilogue doesn't give you the certain resolution to the house split that many of you wanted, it does allow you to imagine that any resolution you hoped to see has/is/will take place. Ken From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 03:48:52 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:48:52 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173177 > Magpie: > I wasn't expecting a wholly revolutioned WW--definitely not. I > admit I *was* expecting something that felt like a definitive step > towards house integration, meaning a real reaching out and > compromise on both sides. That's exactly what I felt JKR was > putting her authorial foot down on on all sides. She really doesn't > seem to consider it the big problem I do, more just the way things > are--in her words, something we could hope would be better, but > seems out of reach and not a priority to work for. Jen: Like you, I expected there to be some move toward unity and wondered not only why it didn't happen but why the insistence on showing just how far-fetched that idea was? I've had many answers over the last few days, most mirroring thoughts already posted here. Then tonight for some reason I recalled a seminar with artists representing various creative pursuits. The discussion was something like: 'the responsibility to the public vs. responsibility to the personal creative process.' Of course no consensus was reached as to how much moral responsibility a person creating any work holds when it comes to offering their creation to the public. Thinking about the questions raised at that event however, I wondered if the authorial voice and JKR's voice really are one in the same throughout the entire story? Does JKR look at the WW and think 'I really see no difference' when considering how the Slytherins played out or is it possible she too found herself angered by the WW even though she technically created it and should be able to manipulate it to include a more palatable ending for Slytherin House? I could see how the possibility exists that the world JKR created moved in a direction that she herself wasn't in favor of and yet, that's what seemed to be the reality of the choices the people in this particular world would make. In the interview being quoted about the hope for harmony, I didn't get the sense that JKR was talking about her own morality so much as how she viewed the morality of the WW. I don't think those have to be one in the same by any stretch although it's possible she will defend her choice to the death. Then I will chalk this post up to a Babbling Beverage. Jen R. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Jul 27 03:48:18 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:48:18 -0000 Subject: DH: The silver doe as Lily's patronus?+Lilly's eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173178 > MusicalBetsy here: > Here's what I don't understand - DD seemed surprised that Snape's > patronus was STILL a doe. Am I understanding this correctly? But > isn't the patronus how the Order communicated? Potioncat: I'm responding the thread in general, and I hope I haven't re-stated something already said. It seems to me a Patronus doesn't reflect the inner person, but rather, represents the person's source of strength such as a parent- figure, patron, or protector. As Harry was first casting his, it was his father he was calling upon, although the happy memory IIRC was of Hermione and Ron. Most of us expected Snape's Patronus to represent DD and were looking for a Phoenix or Bumblebee. Others expected Lily to be the source, and were anticipating a unicorn. (I don't recall what other forms were offered up for Lily.) So I recognized the silver doe at once. The fact that it didn't speak was a dead give-away. We had already seen several times in DH that the Patronus speaks with the caster's voice. As for DD's surprise that Snape's Patronus is a doe. I don't think that is what's going on. Look at these lines from The Prince's Tale: DD: " Have you grown to care for the boy after all?" "For him?" shouted Snape. "Expecto Patronum!" (Description of silver doe) DD's eyes are full of tears: "After all this time?" "Always," said Snape. DD wasn't surprised at the form of the Patronus; he was surprised at the intensity of Snape's feelings for Lily. Snape's point in casting the Patronus had been to demonstrate that he was doing everything for Lily, not for Harry. I read some where up-thread that Snape's Patronus changed when Lily died. We don't know that. Although we learned in HBP that a Patronus's form can change; we never knew what Snape's Patronus was to begin with. According to JKR's site, Expecto Patronum is not taught at Hogwarts. So witches and wizards must learn it after leaving school. Perhaps only certain professions have reason to learn it. It may be that DD taught the Order members how to cast it. He certainly taught them how to communicate with it. So Snape may not have learned how to cast one until after Lily died. Does anyone recall a statement in DH where Snape says Lily's Patronus was a doe? I've seen it mentioned, and I thought I read it too, but I can't find it. I'm not sure why the two of them would have the same Patronus, or how Snape would know what hers was. I suppose it's possible that he learned to cast one then later learned it was the same form as hers. Harry didn't learn the reason for his stag until DD told him. It's not clear to me if everyone in the WW understands the Patronus form's symbolism, but it's clear that DD and Snape do. (Based on PoA and HBP) I wonder what Lupin and Black made of Snape's Doe Patronus? Potioncat From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 03:46:39 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:46:39 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173179 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: If we are not going to allow arguments from authorial intent, perhaps we shouldn't worry about what she obviously wants. Or, if we are going to worry about what she wants, I suppose we have to accept that Snape is, indeed, not a hero. Rather, he is an emotionally stunted, morally weak man who would never have protected Harry without the driving force of a rather sick obsession. Indeed, as I recall she did not even cry at his death, as she did at the deaths of Sirius and Dumbledore. Or are authorial tears also worthless? va32h: I think I understand what JKR wants us to think, but I can't agree that she always does a good job of convincing us. I didn't cry over the death of Sirius, for example. I was sorry that Harry lost someone he loved, but Sirius never came across as anything but an arrogant a-hole to me. James as well. I definitely "get" that JKR wants us to like these characters, but find scant evidence that they are indeed likable. The best that can be said for James is that well, his son turned out to be very good, so he must have genetically contributed to that. And Hagrid and Dumbledore liked him, and I like those characters so he was probably okay. But in the text, we see James and Sirius being bullies and jerks. James dying for his family isn't an example of his great character - protecting your child is the bare minimum that we should expect from a parent. I'm not going to be falling-over impressed with something that ought to be the natural instinct of anyone who has a child. And I understand that JKR doesn't want us to like Snape - but she hasn't made him completely unlikable. Perhaps it does sound presumptous to say that I disagree with the author's own assessment of her characters. But since she has chosen to share them with an audience, they are our characters as well. And I won't ignore what I consider valid textual evidence just because the author says "well I didn't mean it that way." va32h From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 03:52:29 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:52:29 -0000 Subject: questions I need help answering In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173180 Susan McGee 48176 wrote: > > Okay, so WHY did Snape need to tell Voldemort when Harry was being > moved from the Dursleys? Anne Squires: To ensure that LV continue to believe that Snape was 1. still loyal to him and the DEs and 2. had access to credible information about the Order of the Phoenix. Thus, Snape would continue to be LV's right hand man and be placed at Hogwarts where he could protect the students as best as he could from the Carrows. Also, there he could easily consult with DD's portrait. Snape had access to the sword so that he could send it to Harry. DD knew that Harry would eventually go to Hogwarts where Snape could reveal the essential info. about Harry having to sacrifice himself. But, in order for all of this to take place, Snape had to be at Hogwarts. > > WHO did Snape tell Voldemort was the source of his intelligence about > Harry being moved? (Mundungus) Anne: No idea. I thought he might have said Dung. I also thought he might have said that Lupin was secretly on the side of the werewolves. > > Was Grindelwald ever the master of the Elder Wand? I think so, since > there were rumors of his having a wand of great power, if yes, how > did Professor Dumbledore defeat him...? It was supposed to make the > bearer invincible...???? Anne: I'll admit the wand thing confuses me a bit. Here's my reading of the whole thing: I think DD was just more skilled. Thus, he defeated Grindlewald. Grindlewald was master of the wand, yes; this didn't mean he was invincible though. I don't think the wand makes one invincible anyway or else it would have stayed in the same family. It's clear that it had a very bloody past and had been taken in duel after duel. I think that in order for the wand to make one invincible, one had to have all three Hallows. The reason the Elder wand did not kill Harry was because Harry was it's true master at the time of the duel. And also because LV had Harry's blood in his veins. As long as LV was alive, Harry could not die. It had nothing to do with the fact that the wand was a Hallow. At that point in the story Harry had lost the stone/ring. Harry was not the master of the Deathly Hallows. > > I don't get what Dumbledore meant in Chapter 35 (King's Cross)... > > Harry: "Why did you have to make it so difficult?" > > Then Professor Dumbledore said "I am afraid I counted on Miss Granger > to slow you up, Harry." > > What does that mean? > > Susan McGee > Anne Squires: Here's my interpretation: I think DD did not want Harry to go off half cocked after the Horcruxes. He wanted harry to be slow and methodical in his quest. DD wanted Harry to learn that he was a Horcrux at the right time, not a moment too soon. Therefore he gave Harry the Hallows mystery as a distraction. DD knew that Hermione would want to investigate the Hallows and he was absolutely correct. She is the reason they went to the Lovegood's. I think that's what DD is saying here. But,--- However, I also think Harry had to know the legend of the Hallows. I think it was essential knowledge for our hero. I think that when Harry took that walk into the woods it was important that he had rejected the power of the Hallows. He rejected the Hallows of his own free will. He completely accepted death, thus getting LV to destroy one of his Hxes. Harry had a "get out of jail free" card; but he didn't use it. He had the cloak, he had the ring/stone, he was master of the wand. Yet, he dropped the ring on his way to the confrontation. He was no longer master of the three. This made his sacrifice all the more powerful, imho. All of this is just my interpretation, of course. I think this is my fifth post for the day, so adios. Anne-- who hopes I haven't confused the matter even more From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 03:49:03 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:49:03 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered (wrong! -- or is it?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173181 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" wrote: > > > > Annemehr: > > I've been thinking about this, too. In Kings Cross chapter, DD did > say he intended Snape to have the wand, but gave no further details. > I'm not at all sure he intended for Snape to be its master. > > > > > So, as best I can make out, Snape was intended to help DD break the > power of the wand, not to be master of the Death Stick. Which leaves > Snape set up to be killed by Voldemort in his own quest to be its > master. > > Canon and logic appreciated, if I'm missing something. ;) > > Annemehr Exactly. In the King's Cross chapter, Harry asks if DD meant for Snape to "end up" with the wand. The question of him being the wand's master never comes up. Then we have Harry's statement in the final battle about how DD meant to be the last master of the wand. As you say, the only logical way to put all this together seems to be that Snape was supposed to end up with a masterless wand. That, in turn, seems to set him up to be killed by Voldemort, as anyone with even a passing knowledge of the way the Dark Lord's mind works would know he would inevitably kill Snape in an attempt to master the wand in his own right. To make matters even more stark, Snape has no knowledge of the Hallows, and thus could not even put forth any arguments to defend himself (not that Voldemort would have listened to him, in any case). And having no knowledge of the Hallows and their powers, he could not even have used the wand's advantages to defend himself even if he had been the master. So there seems to be no way for Snape to have avoided death short of cutting and running the moment he got his hands on the wand -- or else cutting and running the moment Voldemort got his hands on the wand. That does not seem to have been a part of the plan, given DD's vision of Snape remaining at Hogwarts as Voldemort's Headmaster. I suppose we could come up with various scenarios, but all of them seem to lead inevitably to Voldemort killing Snape in an attempt to master the wand. Once Voldemort got the wand, knowing as he did that Snape had killed Dumbledore and believing as he did that the wand's mastery passed by killing, Snape's fate was sealed. And even if Voldemort had known that the wand could be passed in another way, it doesn't seem part of his psychology to let Snape live. After all, he would assume that no one who had ever held that much power and lost it would rest easy until they got it back again -- thus he would inevitably kill Snape as a safety measure. And if he found out the wand was masterless, he would kill Snape out of pure rage. In short, given what we know of the plan, there just doesn't seem to be any realistic way for Snape to survive once he had killed DD. Lupinlore From mindycl at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 03:36:47 2007 From: mindycl at gmail.com (Mindy) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:36:47 -0400 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle Part III Message-ID: <40CFB78925CC47FB8554BC8F5EA59018@ShimonMoshesPC> No: HPFGUIDX 173182 This is my final post with DH questions... I'm sure many of them may have been asked, but I cannot read through 950 messages in one shot... so whoever wants to kindly take the time out to try to address these, I would really be grateful to you. Some of these are not so much questions as they are points to ponder and discuss. {deep breath... here we go}: 1. How did Hermione get her parents back from Australia - can you perform magic on someone thousands of miles away? 2. Where did the evacuees from Hogwarts go once they got to Hogsmeade - wasn't there a curfew? How did they get all those children home? The Knight Bus? The Hogwarts Express? 3. How did Harry return the wand to DD - did he split the tomb open too? 4. Does anyone else think Dean ended up with Luna, after they spent so much time together at Shell Cottage? 5. Do you think Hermione and the others ended up getting new wands? Do you think Ollivander went back into business in the 'new world'? 6. Why is it that LV killed Gregorovitch and Grindelwald with impunity but let Ollivander live? 7. Why was there no dark mark over all the places where LV killed people, such as the Shrieking Shack, the Malfoy Manor, etc.? 8. What was the fate of the Carrow siblings? Did they stay suspended in their net indefinitely or do you think someone took "care" of them right away? 9. Can you imagine if Harry hadnt lost Hedwig & the firebolt? It would've made his wanderings a lot easier... Smart move of JK to destroy it early on, although he could've gotten a new owl while at the Burrow, so he could have at least communicated with the Weasleys... then again do you think those letters were traceable? Anyhoo, thus ends all of Mindy the Muggle's curious questions. I rest my case. :). From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 04:01:02 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:01:02 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173183 > Ken: > > I agree with Carol. In its understated way I think the epilogue says a lot > about how things are changing. Snape turned out to be good and a > vital part of the fight against Voldemort. Slughorn was there at the end > and we don't *really* know that no other Slytherins straggled back with > him. Five horcruxes were destroyed by Gryffindors, the remaining two > by Slytherins. Magpie: Slytherin *played* their part. They didn't *do* their part the way other houses did. I just don't understand the logic of saying that Slytherin was distrusted in the beginning of the book because it was the Dark Lord's house, but after this adventure, when Slytherin students all left the way they did, things naturally change because of one Death Eater whose personal grudge against the Dark Lord helped. I would think the Battle of Hogwarts became a part of the history of the house from that day on, with every house knowing that. Ken: There came a point where everything depended on > Narcissa choosing right over easy. She chose right, can you imagine > what would have happened to the Malfoys if Harry had failed after she > lied for him? What was that squeeze she gave him anyway? Involuntary > twitch or sign of affection and encouragment? Phineas (does a portrait > count?) certainly played a key role. Magpie: Again, Slytherin played a part. Narcissa made a better choice, but it's not like she was choosing between right and wrong and chose right. They weren't part of the celebration, but nobody killed them either. After the storyline for Slytherin in the books I just don't see how this problem was supposed to be solved by it explicitly *not* being solved. Ken:> > Harry and Draco acting civil towards each other? Magpie: The Gryffindors stare at Malfoy and he nods to them--progress, but no, doesn't seem like there's much reason to celebrate that change. They're not beating each other up and spitting at each other. That's not that great. Ken:> > Harry telling his son it is ok to be a Slytherin? Magpie: Harry loves his son no matter what. Harry followed that line telling him why he would not be in Slytherin. He doesn't want to be. Show vs. tell. Harry's telling. Meanwhile his kids worried about being in Slytherin 19 years after the story--where's the big change? Ken:> > Harry naming his son Severus? Magpie: Harry has a personal debt to Severus Snape--the Slytherin who earned the compliment that maybe he was Sorted too soon. Ken: > Ron joking about Rose marrying Scorpius? Magpie: Would Ron have objected to the idea of a Weasley marrying Sirius? He came from a Slytherin family too. Look, I see that everybody is generally in a better mood and is therefore jokier about Slytherin where they used to be deadly serious, but no, I don't see this as any big change coming from Slytherin and Gryffindor coming together. Ken: > > Things have changed folks. A vague epilogue doesn't give you the certain > resolution to the house split that many of you wanted, it does allow you > to imagine that any resolution you hoped to see has/is/will take place. Magpie: Yes, just as it allows people to imagine all those brave Slytherins fighting when we're told they all left, and all those great Slytherin healers that JKR just somehow "avoided" telling us about (while giving interviews about how they encapsulate the less than noble qualities of the house and Snape isn't really a hero even though she had Harry name his kid after him). Speaking of the Battle of Hogwarts, you know the Slytherin I think would be most remembered in history? Not Snape, whose story Harry delivered in the past tense to explain why Voldemort made a mistake. Not Narcissa Malfoy whose search for her son helped Harry out (and who wasn't associated with the school at the time). I think the Slytherin who would be most remembered would be Pansy Parkinson. -m From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 04:02:18 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:02:18 -0000 Subject: Molly's curse - something other than AK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173184 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jenanydot" wrote: > > First of all, forgive me if this has been discussed already and I > missed it - I've tried to look through the list and find mention of > this specific point, but I haven't found anything yet. > > When Molly defeats Bellatrix (which, by the way, is my new favorite > moment of the entire series - but I'm a huge fan of Molly's), we > aren't told specifically what curse she uses. I've been having a > discussion about this with some of my coworkers, and no one seems to > be able to come to an agreement on it. Some people are saying that > they believe she DID use Avada Kedavra, and that Rowling simply didn't write the curse out because it was implied. Others are arguing that just because AK is The Killing Curse doesn't mean it's the ONLY curse that can kill someone; things like where the curse hits on the body could have a great deal to do with whether or not any particular curse is fatal. > > Personally, I think it's likely that Molly used some other powerful > curse to finish Bellatrix off. I think that if she specifically used Avada Kedavra, Rowling would have said so. Also, it's stressed that Molly's curse hits Bellatrix in the heart: > > "Molly's curse soared beneath Bellatrix's outstretched arm and hit her squarely in the chest, directly over her heart." > > It seems to me that because Rowling is so specific as to WHERE the > curse hits, Molly may very well have used a different curse, one that is only fatal if it hits a fatal mark. The lack of any mention of a green light, which has been so prevalent throughout the series > whenever a Killing Curse was used, also strikes me as odd if Molly > indeed used that particular curse. > > It does say that both women were fighting to kill, but...I don't know, > it seems an odd picture in my mind to see them both standing there > throwing Avada Kedavra's at one another willy-nilly. They're both > powerful witches; I'm sure a whole arsenal of curses were at their > disposal. > Does anyone else find my theories valid, or am I just reading too much into the placement of the curse? va32h: No, I don't think you are reading too much - I thought the same thing myself. When we first met the Unforgivables in GoF, what was stressed about the Killing Curse was that it was unblockable. I got the impression that it was that quality - unblockableness- that made it truly Unforgiveable. That there were other curses that could be fatal, but they had countercurses, so at least your opponent had a fair chance to defend themselves. But having said that - it has always been a feature of JKR's magic that you have to aim. So the description of Molly's curse hitting Bella's heart may just be a more descriptive way for JKR to say that Molly's curse hit her target. (the target being Bella in general). va32h From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 04:10:32 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:10:32 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > Alla: > I think that JKR really places a lot on being > > a **nice** person as in being genuinely nice to others > > and Hagrid being nice is deemed more worthwhile to live > > than Snape, even though I find Hagrid as character to be > > rather blah, as I also mentioned. > > houyhnhnm: > > So Snape is not good in spite of "all that brave deeds > in the name of Lily Potter and saving the world" because > he was not *nice* to Harry. Even I wouldn't accuse > Rowling of being that banal. Banal? What in the name of God's Green Goodness is banal about it? You seem to imply that being nice is an easy thing of no moral significance. I'd say that's far from the truth. In fact, the daily grind of being nice to people is one of the most morally significant thing a person can do, and one of the most difficult. Nice is not the same as good? Oh yes, I would and do say, it is. Or more to the point nice is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being good. It is possible for a nice person to be a manipulative schemer. But it is impossible, I think, for a nasty person to be good. As to whether Rowling is or isn't saying that, I don't know. It might be a good thing to address to her in a web chat. But I do have to say that she has said a lot of other things people have said would be incredibly banal -- such as that Harry and company are justified in their various moments of summary justice, that OBHWF would become a reality, that Snape loved Lily, and many other things. Lupinlore From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 04:16:50 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:16:50 -0000 Subject: Random DH questions from a lowly Muggle Part III In-Reply-To: <40CFB78925CC47FB8554BC8F5EA59018@ShimonMoshesPC> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173186 Oh I'll have a go, for my last post of this 24 hours. Mindy asks: > 1. How did Hermione get her parents back from Australia - can you perform magic on someone thousands of miles away? va32h answers: I would guess that she and Ron took a lovely vacation to Australia. The would travel by plane, which would terrify Ron, but make him the envy of Mr. Weasley, who would volunteer to take them to the airport and become fascinated with the luggage conveyor. (to cite some canon, she does say that she will "find them" and fix their memories, so that implies she'll go to wherever they are. Mindy asks: > 2. Where did the evacuees from Hogwarts go once they got to Hogsmeade - wasn't there a curfew? How did they get all those children home? The Knight Bus? The Hogwarts Express? va32h here: Well the curfew is probably irrelevant, since the DEs in Hogsmeade would have been summoned up to fight in the battle themselves. They probably hung out at the Hog's Head until their parents could come and get them via apparition or broom. Mindy asks: > 3. How did Harry return the wand to DD - did he split the tomb open too? va32h answers: Well, did anyone close it up after Voldemort ransacked it? (Gruesome thought). Perhaps Harry will snap it in two and bury it in the ground near the tomb. Or throw it in the lake. The Giant Squid is now the Master of the Elder Wand. Eek! Mindy asks: > 4. Does anyone else think Dean ended up with Luna, after they spent so much time together at Shell Cottage? va32h answers: Possibly. Shipping isn't my thing, but oh why not? Shared trauma is a very bonding experience. Mindy asks: > 5. Do you think Hermione and the others ended up getting new wands? Do you think Ollivander went back into business in the 'new world'? va32h answers: Yes and yes. Mindy asks: > 6. Why is it that LV killed Gregorovitch and Grindelwald with impunity but let Ollivander live? va32h answers: Voldemort would need Ollivander around to continue to make wands for his DE (remember, Ollivander's first task in captivity was to make Pettigrew a wand). Sure, Voldy likes to kill people just for fun, but he also plans on living forever, and he can't do that without a continuous supply of Death Eaters and the various accoutrements that they need. Mindy asks: > 7. Why was there no dark mark over all the places where LV killed people, such as the Shrieking Shack, the Malfoy Manor, etc.? va32h answers: Because the Dark Mark was used when the Death Eaters were still operating an undercover, terrorist sort of organization. Now that they are openly in charge of everything, such tactics are not necessary. Alternate explanation - the Environmental Protection Agency complained that excessive Dark Marks were lowering air quality and fined the DE 400 galleons per Dark Mark cast. Mindy asks: > 8. What was the fate of the Carrow siblings? Did they stay suspended in their net indefinitely or do you think someone took "care" of them right away? va32h: Oh they just hung around until the battle was over, and then they were hauled off to Azkaban. Mindy asks: > 9. Can you imagine if Harry hadnt lost Hedwig & the firebolt? It would've made his wanderings a lot easier... Smart move of JK to destroy it early on, although he could've gotten a new owl while at the Burrow, so he could have at least communicated with the Weasleys... then again do you think those letters were traceable? va32h here: Not easier - harder. Hedwig is very recognizable as Harry's owl and Harry is well known for his flying ability. Both would be as giant red arrows pointing "Chosen One - This Way". I'm sure that all communication by owl was monitored. From distorted_illusion at juno.com Fri Jul 27 03:41:59 2007 From: distorted_illusion at juno.com (kodeendreemz) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:41:59 -0000 Subject: Too quick and a sell out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173187 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carla (Ball) McCulley" wrote: > Does anyone else feel this way? Empty deaths for shock and > effect....no back stories to explain the over simplified plot devices. The previous 6 books were brilliant. Did she grow so tired of Harry and those we love so much that she just did whatever to get away from it? I hear she cried. Well so did those dedicated fans who expected the same thoughtfulness, consideration, and love that the other books contained. There better be one hell of an epilogue to make up for the shabby treatment of the characters I've come to love and cherish so much. This book hurt my heart. It's like losing friends for no other cause but financial gain. Nothing noble there. And to me, these characters were noble. kodeendreemz: I completely agree... this book was too much tell and not enough show. There were very few emotionally engaging parts ... I wish she would of handled this book differently. Badly executed. From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 04:20:52 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:20:52 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173188 > houyhnhnm: > > This quote might make a little more sense in context > (I can't seem to find it). Right now it has me a little > confused about Rowling's moral philosophy. If a hero > is someone who acts out of principle rather than personal > concerns, who is a hero in Rowling's books? > > Not even Harry (although I liked Harry better in DH than > in any book since PS). When Dumbledore lauded him for > never being tempted by the Dark Arts, his response was, > "Of course I haven't. He killed my mom and dad." > > Harry is motivated by vengeance for his parents. > Neville is motivated by vengeance for his parents. > (Hermione's actions towards her parents is the ultimate > EWWWW for me.) I can't think of a single character > for whom the driving force was not personal affection > for a child, a friend, a spouse, or a benefactor. Who, > in all the seven books, is motivated by principle? > > Rowling has made it abundantly clear that for her, > loyalty and affection at the merely personal level > are the highest good. So why, even now, does she > withold her full approbation from the character who > embodies her values more than any other? Because > Snape is the Other. He was born to be The Other > and nothing he could have done would have changed that. > Rowling, in the end, is unable to do without an Other > to devalue and stigmatize. > > EWWWW is right! > lizzyben: I think JKR has a secret that she is desperately worried that readers will figure out; so worried that she has to tear down Snape at every possible opportunity, loudly proclaim how *horrible* he is, how his sacrifices & actions are never heroic, how he's unloveable, how he's against everything she values & believes in. The secret is, JKR is Snape. And she knows it. She's just worried we'll realize it too. Oh, I'm onto you, JKR. For all her talk about how she values Gryffindor qualities of courage, bravery, etc., deep down, JKR is worried that she's a Slytherin at heart. So she takes all her worst qualities, assigns them to a house of evil, and rejects them as evil & unredeemable. She tries to distance herself from this "evil", claiming it's totally opposite to who she is, wanting only to quietly cut this house off as the projected "other" that represents everything wrong, everything she hates in herself. Snape, as head of Slytherin, is the ultimate representative of those qualities, so she hates him the most. JKR has stated that Hermione & Dumbledore come from herself, and qualities she herself has. Well, so does Snape. He, like JKR, worked as a school teacher for many years. He, like JKR, is surrounded by children every day, and spends his days cooking, teaching, guarding. Except Snape gets to express all the horrible things JKR would think, but could never say aloud. His impatience, his temper, his bitterness at wasting his creativity & brilliance at a job teaching incompetents, his anger & deep hatreds, his smothered pathetic longing for love & affection, his resentments & cruelty - that's all JKR; it's all of her worst qualities united in one character. Snape is everything she hates about herself. No wonder she rejects him. How could anyone value, love or accept those qualities? It's classic shadow projection. Snape's her shadow. And JKR's ego can't handle acknowledging or integrating those facets of herself, so she projects them onto another, a scapegoat, that she can distance from herself & destroy. Now, a courageous novelist would have found a way to integrate & accept this shadow figure into the work. (I.E., Harry & Snape collaborating, Draco helping the Trio, Slytherins working w/the other houses to stop the Death Eaters.) But JKR does not. Instead, she finally manages to shut Snape up, & allows her idealized heroes to take the forefront. She lets Snape die horribly w/o ever confronting or communicating w/Harry. She lets the Slytherins run away before the last battle w/o ever integrating w/the rest of the school. And then ends the novel with a lame platitude about how Slytherins aren't all bad (except they are). It is a pretty good novel, but JKR so bungled the ending that it practically ruins the whole thing. It's like she was simply afraid to go there, afraid to risk her ego to get some emotional truth. And the implications of JKR's world-view are pretty bleak. She really was interested in creating stereotypes, not overcoming them; in dehumanizing the "other", not accepting it. And when I think of how many horrible things have come from dehumanizing the other, it makes this series seem almost malicious. Because in her novels, some people *are* considered "less human" than others, simply because of a convenient label, and this means that anything the hero does to the "less human" group is A-OK. And that's just scary. Because this is the same kind of mindset that leads to genocides or persecution of minority groups in real life. JKR condemns this mindset when it comes to Muggles, yet tacitly supports it for Slyths. So torturing Slyths is totally justified! JKR condemns the "Muggle-born Registration Commission", but she'd probably be OK w/a "Slytherin-born Registration Commission" & not even see the irony. I've lost so much respect for JKR after this novel. She'll preach superficial lessons in tolerance & understanding, but when it comes to really understanding & integrating differences, she refuses. She would rather cut off & attempt to destroy those qualities in herself, and attempt to cut off a whole segment of the population as less human. And that's beyond scary. lizzyben "We still attribute to the other fellow all the evil and inferior qualities that we do not like to recognize in ourselves, and therefore have to criticize and attack him, when all that has happened is that an inferior "soul" has emigrated from one person to another. The world is still full of betes noires and scapegoats, just as it formerly teemed with witches and werewolves" C. G. Jung From ciraarana at yahoo.de Fri Jul 27 04:19:02 2007 From: ciraarana at yahoo.de (ciraarana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:19:02 -0000 Subject: Parseltongue and Ron WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707252133i6cba46c9w3a4e9d21a679180c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173189 Karina: I've been suspecting that Parseltongue is learnable since Dumbledore didn't ask Harry for translation of the Morfin's memory wherein he and Voldemort spoke exclusively in Parseltongue. Lynda: It didn't bother me either, because any language is learnable, really, if someone has enough initiative. Cira: But if it was learnable, why isn't half of Slytherin House speaking Parsel already? I rather think that Salazar would have loved the idea of distunguishing his students from all others by having them using a "secret language". From leslie41 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 04:27:05 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:27:05 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173190 Nora: Where I find Rowling's comments useful is in what I like to think of as a calculus of effort regarding interpretation. Step back a few books to pre-OotP (what a fun time that was onlist!). At this time, Snapetheories ran wild, and many of them were devoted to explaining his seemingly nasty behavior to the students as part of a plan, something with an explicit reason. Now, this takes some work. You have to strap a lot of "this is what is in the text, BUT this is what it will actually be revealed as being a part of..." onto things. At the time, this was work worth doing, in part because there were several books to go and a few reveals would do a lot. Unfortunately, what's come around now is that given the lack of a reveal, the amount of work starts to seem (to me) superfluous. It reminds me of a student doing analysis on something with a relatively steady style like Handel and coming up with strange chords that take a lot of work to explain, while if you read it in a different key, it's very easy. Leslie41: That's an interesting point. The essay I linked to yesterday by Orson Scott Card is fascinating because it posits that Rowling herself didn't know much about Snape, or certainly about his role in the end, when she began the book. I'll link it again here, because it's the very best piece of writing I've ever read about Snape's character, bar none. Not unsurprising, considering who wrote it. http://www.intergalacticmedicineshow.com/cgi-bin/mag.cgi? do=issue&vol=i5&article=_card-essay Nora: It manifestly depends on your definition of heroism, which I think is all that Rowling was saying in the first place--that she didn't see him as a hero, especially within the framework she constructed in the novels. Leslie41: That's fine for her. She can think what she likes. But her voice will not be the most important one to determine the meaning of her work. I would say that Snape is a hero in the framework she's constructed. Lupinlore: So, you would be saying that JKR is deluding herself about her own character? Perfectly possible I suppose. Nevertheless, it does strike me as an example of the phenomenon you have decried before -- i.e. a complete and steadfast refusal to acknowledge any statement or evidence that does not match with your preferred take on Snape's character. Leslie41: Actually, authors, even the best among them, very often delude themselves about their characters. I think the analogy between a parent and a child is very apt. Mediocre authors, as we all know, are often incredibly deluded about the relative merits of their own work. Even authors roundly accepted as superior are not reliable commentators on their own work. That, I would assert, is pretty much an accepted fact. As for defending Snape, I think I have a very reasonable view of him. Some have decried Lily, blaming her for "abandoning" him, for not being "there" for him or accepting his apology. I think what Lily did was perfectly correct. I'm fully willing to acknowledge Snape's many failures, bad deeds, surliness, etc. But may I ask, *Lupinlore*, when can we be expecting your latest evaluation of Lupin's character? You know, the Lupin that prowls the grounds of Hogwarts as a teenager, month after month, endangering his fellow students despite the fact that he's already had many close calls? The Lupin that marries Tonks, gets her pregnant, and then complains about it, making even Harry himself sick to his stomach? The Lupin that, er Severus Snape *saves*. Oh, Lupin is nice. I would much prefer him as a friend. Would like to be his friend, if such a thing were possible (I don't think I could say that about Snape). But Lupin makes these kinds of mistakes again and again and keeps making them, until the very end of the series. Snape is nasty to his students, but Lupin, by his own admission, puts them in mortal danger, both as a student himself and later as a teacher. Nothing I'm saying about him is something he would not agree with himself. Just before he goes out and does it all again, of course. That's Lupin. And so long as you elevate Lupin, and post criticism of Snape under that name, I am unfortunately forced to conclude that you have failed to systematically analyze and accept what an weak, cowardly failure his deeds often prove him to be. Not always. He dies well. But often. And I will take any criticism of Snape that you have to make in that vein. From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 04:44:40 2007 From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (ameliagoldfeesh) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:44:40 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction and a thought or two Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173191 Hi, I used to lurk in here a lot up to about OotP when both my life and HPfGUs got too busy for me. I've been here since Nov. 2001 and I'd just like to say thank you and "good job" to the list elves and everyone who keeps this place running. This site spoiled me to all other Yahoo groups by its remarkable high standards in discussion and posting. I think DH is the best of the seven books by far. I didn't mind the Epilogue and didn't realize it would work up so many people. I like how she left so much open at the end. If everything had been too neat and tidy I'd been worried that she never planned to write another word about the Potterverse. I also didn't mind the extended camping scenes. To me it really gave a feeling that Harry was trapped without a clue of what the heck to do other than stay alive and hope something would point him in the right direction. I could see it as almost nightmarish and claustrophobic *and* the whole wizarding world was depending on him and he *didn't* have a clue nor anyone older and wiser to look to that he knew of. The thing that disappointed me the most has been said by previous posters: the fate of Slytherin House and the House System. I thought it would at least lead up to a few or even one, Slytherin who would obviously stay behind at Hogwarts and not evacuate. I had thought I'd seen that as one of the main themes, thought JKR was leading us down that path, with the talk of House unity, the Sorting Hat talking about it and the talk of doing what is right over what is easy. I would have even accepted Draco redeeming himself and being a not so horrible Slytherin of Harry's age (even though I could never stand him and *loved* seeing the Malfoys brought so low in this book- talk about reaping the whirlwind). I had to come back to this list again because as I was reading the book I was remembering all the old theories. What?! It IS Puppetmaster!Dumbledore and TEWW EWWW and LOLLIPOPS and PINE and some MAGIC DISHWASHER- not to mention Bloody Ambushes. *L* Wonder if it torked JKR off occasionally to see how many things the theorizers got right long before she wrote about them. Dumbledore is probably what shocked me most. I'll have to do a reread to see what I think of him. Also, though I was sure, I was positive, at the end of HBP that Snape did everything on AD's orders, JKR had me wondering about Snape. I was so surprised at the undramatic and the "you're in the way, I don't need you anymore" manner of death that it didn't hit me he was for sure good until the Headmaster's office opened at the password of "Dumbledore." One of my favorite lines in this book is from pure nostalgia. It is when the Trio are at the Whomping Willow and Hermione says, "Are you a wizard, or what?" to Ron. Took me back to the first book when I couldn't believe I was reading a little kids book that was going to be so obvious and straightforward...until it *wasn't* Snape as the villain. A Sawyer --also known as a Goldfeesh (Who hoped, if Hagrid was going to die, it would have been when Aragog's children carried him off and was a somewhat disappointed when he turned up alive and well) From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 04:57:30 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:57:30 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173192 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "faery_wisdom" wrote: > Beautiful post Joe, of course that may be due to my residing in the > same camp as you. Rather than duplicate what you've already > eloquently stated a couple of comments to the above Q's and Snape's > patronus. Me: Right off, I can see you are clever, wise and insightful. > Remember in OP that Tonk's Patronus changes form due to her pining > after Lupin? What's to say Snape's patronus did not change to a doe > after Lilly's death? Me, again: Oh, I know THAT, my question was how Snape came to have, not a different patronus than he had before, but the same patronus Lily had. Wish the mechanics were explained. > The sectumpsempra curse used to blow George's ear off is actually > explained in the Pensieve. Snape was cursing a death eater who > swerved / swooped at the last minute - so it was truly an accident. > Can't recall which book of the last three, but I do remember a convo > about not being able to take back or divert curses and that's a > particularly nasty one. Second point there is that had he targeted > George he probably would have lost a hell of a lot more than just an > ear. Me, still: The latter part of your statement sits better with me. My basic point wasn't "Ha! That was no accident!" but rather that it struck me as odd that someone as skilled as Snape would have that accident. > Remeber my last is clarified for me when we realize that Petunia > wrote to Dumbledor to attempt entering Hogwarts, and more than once > from the sound of it. We know DD left her a letter when he dropped > Harry off so it stands to figure he explained in that letter (his > last) the importance of Harry calling her house home. Me, yet again: Agreed. I just wanted more detail on this. Not that I'll get it, but I can still dream. > The festering bitterness Snape clearly feels towards the Marauder's > combined with Lupin's acceptance of Snape's coveted professorship > explains his wrath toward Lupin. Especially when you consider that he > was forced to make the potion meant to keep Lupin from his > transformation and that Lupin and Harry Bond as well as they do. Me, some more: Again, agreed. What I meant is that this outlook on Snape's part isn't, you know, exactly a glowing report on his emotional maturity up to that point. > As far as the unhinging of Lupin in DH I can only ask, do you have > children Joe? How many former husbands have you heard of who turned > into someone else once the couple went from newly weds to expecting? Me: Um...did I mention the unhinging of Lupin? Mind you, I thought his behavior was a bit strange and my fear was that we'd get a Hell of a double-cross from JKR, to the effect Lupin was a Voldemort agent. (I have two young sons, and Lupin's behavior is something outside my first- and second-hand experience.) > It fits given that he had more than staunchly opposed any > relationship between himself and Tonks to begin with. Whatever served > to sway his opinion changed the second he realized they were having a > baby. Lupin's greatest fear is that his affliction would cause harm > to those he loved, and the ultimate harm would be to pass it on > through birth to a son. Harry's treatment of him in Grimauld > certainly seems to rehinge him for the remainder of the book. I'm > just sorry he had to die! Me, continuing: My fondness for Lupin -- abated somewhat by his portrayal in The Medium Which Must Not Be Named -- stemmed from the serenity with which he dealt with Snape's antagonism and goading. > I think you answered the hat question yourself. I didn't concern > myself with that so much b/c it was a classic Voldy thought he knew > how to get rid of another pesky brat, but wait - he's come out > unscathed and WITH the sword of Gryffindor. So is it a Voldy failed > to understand the magic behind the object / person / act yet again? > I'm inclined to think so. Me, keeping on: I can see that. Not exactly a certainty, but 'twill do, 'twill serve, so I'll go with that until something better comes along. > Lastly, I read the Elder wand stolen by Grindelwald part differently. > I thought that DH states that Grindelwald did become master of it > when he stole it, and then when DD was forced to face his fears and > duel Grindy he won it when he beat Grindelwald in the infamous duel. > DD was master until Malfoy managed to disarm him. That part works > brilliantly for me. DD tells Snape that sometime in the next year the > right moment for his death will present itself. He hasn't uttered a > word, but soon as Malfoy disarms him we get the "Severus, please." DD > admits to Harry in King's cross that he believed LV would seek the > Elder wand at some point. Makes me think that when Malfoy unwittingly > earns mastership by disarming him DD sees it as a perfect time to > have Snape euthanize him as only he will know Malfoy is true master > of teh wand. Me, at it again: It's the Grindelwald "mastery" of the wand that threw me. Stealing it wouldn't bestow mastery, so perhaps something else happened...but then how was DD able to defeat the wizard with the unbeatable wand IF he really was its master? Unless he wasn't, and DD had already bested whoever THAT was. > Your list of unanswered questions is great!! I would add one more to > the list, unless someone caught this. Who performed magic at a later > than expected age under desperate circumstances? Me: The general consensus, albeit monumentally unsatisfying to me, is that it was Merope. Yawn. Just like the Charity Burbage thing. I'd feel a squajillion times better if JKR had bothered to plant her name before, even just once as a throwaway. The whole Christian thing - First, in the interest of full disclosure, I must out myself as a practicing, orthodox, yells-bells- smells high church Catholic. Now that's out there, I admit to having caught a lot of what I'll call "Christian-friendly" moments in DH. I caught them, snickered to myself and kept going. I didn't stop and say "Aha! An allegory! Huzzah! Soon the whole world will get it!" In my mind, the Narnia books are far more overtly Christian and far more allegorical. (Cynical people might say those were thrown in *specifically* to shut up those who kept hollering about how pointing at things with a stick and saying things in Latin was a Satanic activity. Not I, y'understand, but cynical people.) I believe these books CAN be interpreted through a Christian prism, just as easily as through a non-Christian prism. While there are allusions to Christianity, I didn't think of those as particularly clumsy or obvious or obnoxious. We didn't see Harry trying to baptize a dying Dobby or demanding that LV accept Christ, just like we didn't see Dumbledore sacrificing rats to Baal or Hagrid summoning the minions of Satan to make his pumpkins grow. Mind you, I derive enormous (and, admittedly, perverse) pleasure in seeing both ends of the spectrum getting their dander up over this. That one side thinks the books are now awful because of all that "Christ stuff," while the other thinks they are awful because of all that "occult stuff" gives me no end of glee. Not particularly charming of me, but like DD & Snape, I'm complex and difficult to categorize. I am even more delighted by the readers who are utterly unable to see Snape proudly standing in that no-man's land between Noble Hero and Craven Villain. In being unable to see him as he is, they shoot off into impressive contortions that'd give a yoga master fits of envy. Why they insist of pigeonholing Snape into their pre-chosen cubbyhole of hero or villain, I have no idea. But it's interesting to observe. This evolves into being able to excuse Behavior X in Character A, but finding it inexcusable in Character B; or in general to an inability to see shades of grey in the characters. Granted, some characters are charcoal grey and others a pale dove grey, but still. (Yes, this analogy may break down, but not before I arrive at my desired destination therewith.) The one real disappointment I had in DH is the seeming lack of redeeming qualities from Slytherin as a group. But can you do? -Joe From jellocat at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 04:02:41 2007 From: jellocat at comcast.net (Jellocat) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:02:41 -0400 Subject: Reference to Easter foreshadowing? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173193 cjmatt66 wrote: > Did anyone else notice the references to Hogwarts' "Easter break" in > Book 7? I know they had Christmas break in Harry's world, celebrated > in a purely secular way (until the Muggles' Christmas Eve at church > also new in 7) - but this was the first time I noticed anything about > Easter. I noticed that, too, and was wondering throughout my reading what other metaphors and references would show up. I always had a sense that JKR was setting Harry up to be a Christ-figure of sorts. I?m not a Christian, but it was painfully obvious. Simply calling Harry the ?chosen one,? a sort of Messiah of the Wizards, was enough. I knew Harry wasn?t going to die because of that metaphor ? and knew if he did, he would?ve been resurrected. > Also, marking Mad Eye's "grave" for his magical eye with a cross... I > was startled by it when I read that part. It surprised me as well. Other than the Christmas celebrations they had, I didn?t think they subscribed to any particular faith ? especially the house elves? (Harry etches a cross on Dobby?s headstone) > Wondering if the pseudo Christian references were a foreshadowing for > Harry's self-sacrifice and semi-resurrection? If so, all those who > have been calling for Harry Potter boycotts etc. on account of > wizardry and anti-Christianity are going to have some rethinking to do! I doubt it because they?ll never read it? and I live in the land of Mallory. Oi! Jellocat From juli17 at aol.com Fri Jul 27 05:34:30 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 05:34:30 -0000 Subject: Whither Fawkes? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173194 I haven't seen Fawkes mentioned here, so I am wondering if I am the only one who expected Fawkes to reappear in DH? I do realize Fawkes flew away in HBP, and that he belonged to Dumbledore. But while Dumbledore is dead in DH, his work is not done. I really thought Fawkes might return to play a part in helping complete Dumbledore's nearly two decades long task of ridding the WW of Voldemort by attaching himself to Harry, or even to Snape. I even hoped if he attached himself to Harry, then after the final battle he might hang around and become Harry's rumored "new pet" (using the term "pet" loosely, as I don't think Fawkes was anyone's pet). So, anyone else have expectations about Fawkes' role in DH? Julie From Mhochberg at aol.com Fri Jul 27 05:36:35 2007 From: Mhochberg at aol.com (Mhochberg at aol.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:36:35 EDT Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173195 Ken: I have to disagree with both of you. Oh you are perfectly correct about the need for law enforcement. And you are correct that Harry has the gift for doing the magic and the moral compass to be a good law enforcement agent. But you are forgetting that Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. If Harry really meant to end its power by dying a natural death, undefeated by another wizard, then he simply cannot become an auror. The risk of losing his wand in a confrontation is just too great. It is one of the high points in the conclusion of this series when Harry demonstrates the depth of his understanding of wandlore and the depth of his moral sense by making this decision. If Rowling goes on to write an encyclopedia in which Harry becomes an Aurorshe will be marring her own work. The Harry I see at the end of DH has moved beyond being an auror. ~~~ Mary: Remember the scene in the headmaster's office after the battle with Voldemort in the Great Hall? Harry uses the Elder Wand to repair his own wand. He says he will restore the Elder Wand to Dumbledore's tomb and use his original wand. He will not use the Elder wand so it cannot be "taken" from him. He will use his own wand. As long as the Elder wand remains in the tomb while Harry is alive, he can use another wand in his work as an auror. It is only when Harry dies, without losing the Elder wand, will its chain of power be broken. If someone takes his Phoenix core wand from him, it will not matter to the Elder Wand. As far as it is concerned, it is Harry's wand and the Phoenix wand a temporary substitute. ---Mary ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From shagufta_naazpk2000 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 06:43:26 2007 From: shagufta_naazpk2000 at yahoo.com (shagufta_naazpk2000) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:43:26 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173196 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AmanitaMuscaria" wrote: > > > Hi Katie - I don't understand - why would Harry be saying 'open' in > Parseltongue to the snitch? The snitch was 'set' by Dumbledore, who > may or may not have been able to understand Parseltongue, but we've > been given no indication that he could speak it. The reason the > snitch didn't open when Scrimgeour (like JKR's pronunciation - > skrimjaw) placed in Harry's hand was, as Harry explains to Ron and > Hermione, that he'd caught it in his mouth ... > Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria > Hi Harry does try using Parseltongue to open the snitch,in desperation, after trying everything else. Its in the chapter called Deathly Hallows i think Of course it doesn't say whether Ron heard him then, but he did hear him opening the locket. cheers Shagufta From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jul 27 06:57:54 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:57:54 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173197 Geoff: I've just started on a second read of DH having had two or three days for my high and low feelings to stabilise after the first go. Second time around, you always start to notice things that slipped past you on the first and I picked up again on a few lines I chuckled at previously, one of which is an extension of a quote already made. They both occur in the chapter where Harry leaves Priver Drive: '"This is different, pretending to be me-" "Well, none of us really fancy it Harry," said Fred earnestly. "Imagine if something went wrong and we were stuck as specky, scrawny gits forever." Harry did not smile.' (DH "The Seven Potters" p.46 UK edition) I did! '"You can't do it if I don't cooperate, you need me to give you some hair" 'Well, that's the plan scuppered," said George. "Obviously, there's no chznce at all of us gettign a bit of your hair unless you cooperate." "Yeah, thirteen of us against one bloke who's not allowed to use magic; we've got no chance," said Fred. "Funny," said Harry. "Really amusing."' (ibid. p.47) 'Fred and George turned to each other and said together, "Wow - we're identical!" "I dunno, though, I think I'm still better-looking," said Fred, examining his reflection in the kettle.' (ibid. p.49) I do so love the twins' deadpan humour. :-) From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 06:58:35 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:58:35 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173198 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ken Hutchinson" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "strange_familiarities" > wrote: > > > > > > > ***Katie replies:*** > > > Harry as an Auror makes total sense. As JKR was anxious to > > point out through the entire series (EXCEPT the epilogue), the world > > isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters. After Voldemort's > > death, there are still going to be nasty, bad wizards out there that > > need to be caught. Aurors will still be needed, and that is what Harry > > always wanted to do, once fake Moody had put the idea in his head. > > Also, Harry, I think, would be unable to settle down into a banal > > family life. Yes, he would relish his time with Ginny and his kids, > > but he would need more. > > > > Najwa now: > > I agree with Katie. Law enforcement is always necessary, and Harry > > definitely would do nicely as an auror. > > > > Ken: > > I have to disagree with both of you. Oh you are perfectly correct about > the need for law enforcement. And you are correct that Harry has the > gift for doing the magic and the moral compass to be a good law > enforcement agent. > > But you are forgetting that Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. > > If Harry really meant to end its power by dying a natural death, > undefeated by another wizard, then he simply cannot become > an auror. The risk of losing his wand in a confrontation is just too > great. It is one of the high points in the conclusion of this series > when Harry demonstrates the depth of his understanding of wandlore > and the depth of his moral sense by making this decision. If Rowling > goes on to write an encyclopedia in which Harry becomes an Auror > she will be marring her own work. The Harry I see at the end of DH > has moved beyond being an auror. > > I agree that Harry needs a meaningful job in the WW, but he must not > take that kind of job. > > Ken > From ciraarana at yahoo.de Fri Jul 27 06:32:13 2007 From: ciraarana at yahoo.de (ciraarana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:32:13 -0000 Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173199 Kia ora! I'm new to this list, and although I've tried to read my way through the DH posts, I gave up at one point. So, if anything that I say here has already been said before, I humbly beg your forgiveness. The following questions are from the list I made after the first reading of DH. If anybody can answer them, I'd be grateful. (I excluded most of the unanswerable questions, like What happened to the Dursleys?) Q: Who is the one who, according to Rowling, performs magic quite late in life? Q: Did the Sorting Hat burn completely? What or who is Sorting now? Q: Why didn't Snape know about the Horcurxes? He's a Dark wizard. Voldemort is boasting about his near immortality. Snape is a clever man. Why didn't he know?? Q: Where is Snape's portrait?? He was Headmaster of Hogwarts. We saw how their portraits pop up after their death. And I'm sure Harry would have noticed Snape's portrait. So, where is it?? Q: How could Dumbledore have known Draco's mission before Draco did? Q: Snape wasn't yet teaching at Hogwarts when he approached Dumbledore with the plea to keep Lily safe (otherwise they wouldn't have met at the hilltop). So, when did that interview take place? And why did it take Voldemort so long to find the Potters? They only went into hiding a week before they were murdered. Q: Snape approached Voldemort with the plea to not kill Lily? And Voldemort agreed? He agreed to not kill a "Mudblood"?? (And he did agree, didn't he, because he gave Lily the choice to step away.) Looking at Voldemort's policy ... Are we supposed to accept that? Q: Snape wasn't yet teaching at Hogwarts when he approached Dumbledore with the plea to keep Lily safe (otherwise they wouldn't have met at the hilltop). So, when did that interview take place? And why did it take Voldemort so long to find the Potters? They only went into hiding a week before they were murdered. Q: The Polyjuice Potion. It only lasts for an hour. That was important in GoF. And in this book it's never even once mentioned! And some of the adventures took longer than an hour. Is this a new version of Polyjuice? Why aren't we told so? Q: The prophesy business. What a mess. Dumbledore's and Trelawney's accounts clashed ? if what Dumbledore said was true about the evening of the Prophesy, there was no way Trelawney could have known the eavesdropper was Snape. But she knew. And Snape still only reported the first part. How does that all fit?? Q: Harry peering in on Voldemort. Excuse me, but Voldemort is the one who is in control of the connection. During HBP, he kept it shut. And now, suddenly, Harry can creep in again? Without Voldemort noticing? (Okay, perhaps Harry didn't always notice when Voldemort came to peek into his mind in OotP, and perhaps now Voldemort doesn't know Harry's there.) And Voldemort didn't even once use the connection to try something like he did with Sirius? He never used it to look in on Harry and see where the boy was? You know, to better catch him, and all that. I half-expected it for the first several hundred pages. It never happened. And I can't understand why not. Q: The Trace. Rubbish. Excuse me, but it is. I mean, in CoS Harry is accused of having used the Hover Charm. The Ministry didn't know it wasn't him. Somewhere, I think at the end of HBP, Dumbledore even told Harry that the Ministry can only detect that magic is performed, but not by whom. And now we are introduced to the Trace, which allows the Ministry to tell exactly who performed which spell?? No. Doesn't make sense. Or is it a new ministry policy and I simply missed that bit? Q: If Expelliarmus changes the wand's allegiance then nobody from the DA is still using their own wand. No wizard or witch who has ever been taught that spell at Hogwarts would be using their own wand (although considering the DADA teacher problem ) But wouldn't Harry have won Voldemort's wand in the graveyard scene in GoF? Answers are welcome. Even if you only tell me I'm stupid and missed something. (At least then I could stop wondering.) Toodles, CiraArana From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 07:09:16 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:09:16 -0000 Subject: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173200 "patrick.jarrett" wrote: eggplant wrote: Well until it is in the encyclopedia, it's still fluffy speculation to me. Definitely fits with the feel of the epilogue itself, full of hot air and nothingness. NO! Eggplant did NOT write that! In the Potter universe JKR is the Commander In Chief. Eggplant From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 07:16:51 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:16:51 -0000 Subject: Why refuse the Elder Wand? (was: Harry as Auror) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173201 Ken Wrote: > Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. > If Harry really meant to end its power > by dying a natural death, undefeated by > another wizard, then he simply cannot > become an auror. The risk of losing his > wand in a confrontation is just too great. You know, that is the one and part of JKR's wonderful story that just doesn't make sense to me. If you don't like the Elder Wand then just snap it in two; but why would you even want to destroy it? That wand served Dumbledore well for half a century, I am certain that wand did a lot of good in that time, and I see no reason it would be a less faithful servant to Harry. Call me the reincarnation of Voldemort if you want to but it would only take me about one heartbeat to decide to keep it! Power is not always a bad thing; as a matter of fact I rather like power. Eggplant From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 07:47:03 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:47:03 -0000 Subject: Whither Fawkes? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173202 "julie" wrote: > So, anyone else have expectations > about ' role in DH? Yes, I too thought Fawkes would return, especially after Hedwig was killed,(I wonder if Crookshanks died too) I figured JKR killed the owl to make room for Fawkes, but now I see why it was foolish of me to think so, because JKR flat out tells us Fawkes will not return. From Half Blood Prince: "The phoenix had gone, had left Hogwarts for good, just as Dumbledore had left the school, had left the world .. had left Harry" Eggplant From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 08:20:06 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:20:06 -0000 Subject: Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173203 Carol: > We're given no alternate version, so Severus's idea that James > saved him because he got cold feet must be right, and the worst > memory has to be, as the LOLLIPOPS people have always argued, > because he slipped and called her a Mudblood and she refused to > forgive him even when he slept outside the Gryffindor common room > and abjectly begged her to do so. That, and not the worst memory, > must have been the turning point. His despair caused him to join > his "friends" because he felt he had not other choice. Lily is > prejudging him, assuming that because *they* have become Death > Eaters, he has done so, too, but I think she's mistaken. Not only > does he still love her (not a silly crush like Harry's on Cho at > the same age: she's all he cares about other than DADA and maybe > Potions, apparently), but she's the one who says, "You've chosen > your way. I've chosen mine." (DH Am. ed. 676). There's no evidence > that he's done anything worse than turning a blind eye to his > friends' Death Eater ambitions. Clearly, he's not like them, nor is > there any evidence that he routinely uses the word "Mudblood" or > she would not have been shocked by it. Jen: There are a couple of important points missing from the interpretation above. For one thing, Lily doesn't seemed shocked by Snape calling her a Mudblood because she's already aware he uses that term for all Muggleborn witches and wizards save her: "No - listen, I didn't mean -" " - to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?" (chap. 33, p. 676, Scholastic). In addition, Lily expresses that she's "made excuses for you for years," and says "I can't pretend anymore." Perhaps she isn't operating with every bit of information about Snape's life in that moment, but it doesn't sound like Lily has made a snap judgement based on one incident, either. She's apparently seen enough evidence 'over the years' for her to have reached the conclusion that she can't pretend Snape is other than a person who has grown to have *something* in common with those sympathetic to Voldemort. But my main objection to the above interpretation is the idea that Lily holds even an iota of responsibility for Snape's choice to join the DEs. Even if her decision to turn her back on him was premature and made without the whole story (and as I said above, there's evidence this was not the case), Snape and Snape alone made the decision to follow Voldemort. In fact, my understanding was Lily was the only thing tethering Snape to a different path, and her awareness of that fact was one reason she made a point of talking to him about his friends and defending him to others. Lily's comment about reaching a parting of the ways with Snape came across as a defeat to me rather than a rash act: After many years of seeing good in Severus and wanting to be friends with him despite the objections of others, Snape had finally acted in a way that opened Lily's eyes to realize she couldn't *make* him change the path he was on. Jen From leahstill at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 08:32:31 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:32:31 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173204 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Mhochberg at ... wrote: > >> ~~~ > Mary: > Remember the scene in the headmaster's office after the battle with > Voldemort in the Great Hall? Harry uses the Elder Wand to repair his own wand. He > says he will restore the Elder Wand to Dumbledore's tomb and use his original > wand. He will not use the Elder wand so it cannot be "taken" from him. He will > use his own wand. > > As long as the Elder wand remains in the tomb while Harry is alive, he can > use another wand in his work as an auror. It is only when Harry dies, without > losing the Elder wand, will its chain of power be broken. > > If someone takes his Phoenix core wand from him, it will not matter to the > Elder Wand. As far as it is concerned, it is Harry's wand and the Phoenix wand > a temporary substitute. > > ---Mary Leah I am sorry, but I think it might matter. Draco Malfoy becomes master of the Elder Wand by his 'expelliamus' of DD' s wand on the Astronomy Tower. The Elder Wand is not taken by Draco but buried with DD. Harry takes Draco's own wand from him. This according to Harry, has made Harry master of the Elder Wand, because he has removed a wand from Draco. Harry might not be right, he might win over VM because this is what VM believes and that slows up his reflexes, but we don't know that. That's why if this really is the conclusion, I would have preferred a peaceful old age death scene for Harry. Leah From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Fri Jul 27 08:20:54 2007 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:20:54 +0200 Subject: Molly's curse - something other than AK? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A9AAE6.5090801@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 173205 jenanydot: > Personally, I think it's likely that Molly used some other > powerful curse to finish Bellatrix off. I think that if she > specifically used Avada Kedavra, Rowling would have said so. > Also, it's stressed that Molly's curse hits Bellatrix in the > heart: > "Molly's curse soared beneath Bellatrix's outstretched arm > and hit her squarely in the chest, directly over her heart." Vincent : I agree with you. It reminds me of Sirius's death, I don't think he was killed by an AK curse, but he died nonetheless. Speaking of Sirius, I'm mildly disapointed that we didn't get explanations for the veil thingy where he disappeared. If it's nothing, why not just getting him killed by a good ol' AK and be done with it. It seems like quite a complication for something that's not explained later. From dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jul 27 08:50:12 2007 From: dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk (Tim Regan) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:50:12 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: References: <24889568.1185473343270.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <024301c7d02b$26bb51d0$7431f570$@co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 173206 Hi All, I love this thread, partly because Dung gets her own theory wrong (IMHO)! Dung said: >>> Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters? <<< Bart posited: >>> I'm sure the spell would account for that; that's kind of an obvious workaround the secret keeper. <<< Dung countered: >>> I think you misunderstood me; since DD's death Snape was a secret-keeper, when he went to 12GP he had his tongue tied so couldn't give out the secret to the DEs, but what was to stop him apparating with some DEs the same way Hermione apparated with Yaxley. But anyway, I'm absolutely *not* sure the spell would account for it. When did tongue-tying hexes stop people apparating? <<< Dung, I love this inconsistency that you uncovered. I started a thread about it: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/172949 http://tinyurl.com/39fj8g Back to Dung's question for JKR: "Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters?" Maybe he didn't; perhaps he forgot or overlooked the possibility. Both are possible but lame, so let's assume that Voldemort did ask Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters. Snape then had to use his fantastic ability to think under pressure, and his skills in Occlumency, to feign a reason. Snape knows more spells, curses, and jinxes than we do. Why assume he could not explain his way out of Voldemort's request? No, the real inconsistency Dung discovered is only apparent if you add another level of indirection to the question. Here is what we should ask JKR: "Why didn't the Order assume that Voldemort would tell Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters?" Now the problem is revealed. The Order assumed that the tongue-tying curse and the jinxes they placed on Grimmauld Place were safe enough. They did not worry about the trio hiding out there. Why? What made the Order so sure that Voldemort, Snape, and a phalanx of Death Eaters wouldn't side-along apparate to the front doorstep, inside the Fidelius Charm? The reason the Death Eaters couldn't get to Grimmauld Place was that Snape was not really on their side, but the Order did not know that, and so their actions were inconsistent. While I'm at it let me deal with some other 'inconsistencies', that I do not believe are anything like as tight as Dung's inconsistency above. Dung: >>> Why did you write in Quidditch Through the Ages that no wizards can fly without brooms unless their animagus form can fly? <<< Quidditch Through the Ages is a school text book. There are two possibilities. Firstly it is wrong. Kennilworthy Whisp (its author) may not have known of the magic Voldemort used to fly or he may of chosen to ignore it to simplify matters for his young readership. My muggle school text books, especially in chemistry, were full of simplifications that I latter found to be untrue. The second possibility is that Voldemort invented the spell he uses to fly after the publication of Quidditch Through the Ages. Kennilworthy Whisp was telling the truth, and if he's still around to write a second edition he'll have the opportunity to add the additional information. There's another 'inconsistency' I don't buy, but it's from another thread. Toner pointed out: >>> I thought Fenrir had a dark mark? During the tower scene at the end of HBP, a group of DEs join DD, Harry and Draco up on the top of the tower, and the rest of the OotP can't get up the stairs due to some magical wall except for Snape. At the time, the reasoning for this was that only people with Dark Marks could go through the invisible wall. However, in DH, Fenrir cannot enter the Malfoy Manor, even though it appeared you needed a Dark Mark to go through the gate (like Snape and Amycus in the first chapter). Also, he couldn't summon LV because he didn't have a Dark Mark and was relying on one of the Malfoys or Bellatrix to call him. From the situation and Fenrir's attitude, he certainly would've called LV if he could. <<< I think Toner also spots the way out: >>> I guess you just explain away the magical wall in the tower under some other context, but I'd thought I'd bring it up anyway. <<< And Maeg added: >>> I'm not sure about the Dark Mark, but I thought Fenrir Greyback's inability to enter Malfoy Manor was due to his low status because he's a werewolf. <<< We don't know Fenrir cannot enter Malfoy Manor. We see people enter twice. (DH chapter 1) >>> The high hedge curved with them, running off into the distance beyond the pair of impressive wrought-iron gates barring the men's way. Neither of them broke step: in silence both raised their left arms in a kind of salute and passed straight through as though the dark metal were smoke. <<< (DH chapter 23) >>> One of the snatchers strode to the gates and shook them. 'How do we get in? They're locked, Greyback, I can't - blimey!' He whipped his hands away in fright. The iron was contorting, twisting itself out of the abstract furls and coils into a frightening face which spoke in a clanging, echoing voice: ' State your purpose!' 'We've got Potter!' Greyback roared triumphantly. 'We've captured Harry Potter!' The gates swung open. <<< So it is "one of the snatchers" not Fenrir Greyback who fails to pass the gates. But as Toner says we do find out that Fenrir lacks the Dark Mark. (DH chapter 23) >>> Harry thought he knew why Greyback was not calling Voldemort. The werewolf might not be allowed to wear Death Eater robes when they wanted to use him, but only Voldemort's inner circle were branded with the Dark Mark: Greyback had not been granted this highest honour. <<< But Toner's right, we don't know much about the magical wall. (HBP chapter 27) >>> Harry's heart leapt: so these four had not eliminated all opposition, but merely broken through the fight to the top of the Tower, and, by the sound of it, created a barrier behind them <<< So the assumption that the barrier works by detecting the Dark Mark is incorrect. That's an inconsistency in our understanding, not in the canon. And then someone (the post is unsigned) said: >>> The Dark Mark is just a spell isn't it. Which means it can be removed. If Voldy needed Fenrir to have a Dark Mark for a specific mission, he can give him one, no problem and then remove it latter. <<< I don't like the unsigned posters explanation. The Dark Mark seems both a mark of 'honour' and a badge of fear, not something to be changed when convenient. Cheers, Dumbledad. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mac_tire at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 08:38:59 2007 From: mac_tire at hotmail.com (pattiemgsybb) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:38:59 -0000 Subject: James's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173207 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Did anyone besides me notice that James Potter is referred to > in OoP as being fifteen, the same age as Harry, in SWM, but > that all of the characters whose ages we know would actually > have been sixteen in that scene? > I don't suppose it matters, but it's a continuity error. I > suppose she should change James's birthdate in DH if she wants > to correct it. The part where Harry says indignantly, "I'm > fifteen!" won't work if she changes James's age in the scene > to match the age on his tombstone. mac_tire: Can I make a very silly point related to your thoughtful post? What is the deal with the middle-aged man in the Mirror of Erised in the film of SS/PS? This has always driven me nuts. Harry's father died at a very young age; when Harry was a baby, his parents were very young adults. And while fictional characters are often younger in the afterlife than they were at the time of their death (Remus and Sirius are a good example), they are never older -- they do not age in the afterlife to parallel what their ages would've been had they lived. Now in regard to the point you've carefully made: first of all, will you do my taxes next year? I would never have been able to put together the information you've gathered! But my only guess is that it's akin to the "first year = 11 years old," etc. thing that you touch on. That, or the fact that JKR is notoriously weak at arithmetic. Though even if it was unintentional, it's true that saying James was only 15 makes his behavior just a little bit more excusable, especially if wizards are "of age" two years later rather than only one. mac_tire From maccanena at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 09:52:31 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:52:31 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Stan Shunpike Imperiused or DE? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1f40e2480707270252m3ed739d2j26a39395ac0f1317@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173208 On 7/26/07, casmir2012 wrote: > > When Harry was flying on the Motorbike and turned to see Stan Shunpike > with the DE's, it was never fully explained whether he was a DE or just > under some spell. > > What do you think? I think Stan has a blank look about him, and Harry guesses he has been imperiused. Since Voldemort has taken control of Azkaban and released his Death Eaters, he seems to have released a few more extra people who were there and placed them under the imperius curse to do his biding. That's why Harry doesn't try to hurt him, just disarms him, because he knows that Stan is not in control of his actions and doesn't deserve to die. Maria From maccanena at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 09:56:23 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:56:23 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1f40e2480707270256r56f94167x92917271d2ac3e5b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173209 Cariad wrote: > > Can't remember who suggested it but it was a super idea, Hugo was named for > Hermione's fav Muggle writer, Victor Hugo. Except she omitted his first > name as Ron would not have appreciated it! Maria now: Yes, I have seen that theory and I think it's really cute, I completely agree. But it does not explain Rose. What other favorite author of Hermione could be blamed for Rose? Any guesses? While i like this theory, I still think there is another reason behind those particular choices of names. Maria From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 09:59:06 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: <024301c7d02b$26bb51d0$7431f570$@co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173210 dumbledad: > I love this thread, partly because Dung gets her own theory wrong (IMHO)! > > Dung said: > > >>> Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters? <<< > > Back to Dung's question for JKR: "Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to > side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters?" Maybe he didn't; perhaps he forgot or overlooked the possibility. Both are possible but lame, so let's assume that Voldemort did ask Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters. Snape then had to use his fantastic ability to think under pressure, and his skills in Occlumency, to feign a reason. Snape knows more spells, curses, and jinxes than we do. Why assume he could not explain his way out of Voldemort's request? > > No, the real inconsistency Dung discovered is only apparent if you add another level of indirection to the question. Here is what we should ask JKR: "Why didn't the Order assume that Voldemort would tell Snape to side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters?" Now the problem is revealed. The Order assumed that the tongue-tying curse and the jinxes they placed on Grimmauld Place were safe enough. They did not worry about the trio hiding out there. Why? What made the Order so sure that Voldemort, Snape, and a phalanx of Death Eaters wouldn't side-along apparate to the front doorstep, inside the Fidelius Charm? The reason the Death Eaters couldn't get to Grimmauld Place was that Snape was not really on their side, but the Order did not know that, and so their actions were > inconsistent. > Dungrollin: Actually, I agree with you completely, I was just trying to simplify to get the plot-hole across! Dumbledad: > > There's another 'inconsistency' I don't buy, but it's from another thread. > Toner pointed out: > > >>> I thought Fenrir had a dark mark? During the tower scene at the end of > HBP, a group of DEs join DD, Harry and Draco up on the top of the tower, and > the rest of the OotP can't get up the stairs due to some magical wall except > for Snape. At the time, the reasoning for this was that only people with > Dark Marks could go through the invisible wall. Dumbledad: > I think Toner also spots the way out: > > >>> I guess you just explain away the magical wall in the tower under some > other context, but I'd thought I'd bring it up anyway. <<< Dungrollin: Yeah, but it's *lame*. How about this for an inconsistency: Why didn't Voldemort become the master of the Elder wand when he AKed Harry in the forest? Because he didn't kill him? DD didn't kill Grindelwald, either, neither did Harry kill Malfoy. Needs some bending over backwards to wriggle out of IMO. Dungrollin From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Fri Jul 27 09:13:41 2007 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:13:41 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James's age In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46A9B745.3060208@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 173211 > mac_tire: > Can I make a very silly point related to your thoughtful post? > What is the deal with the middle-aged man in the Mirror of Erised > in the film of SS/PS? This has always driven me nuts. Harry's > father died at a very young age; when Harry was a baby, his > parents were very young adults. And while fictional characters > are often younger in the afterlife than they were at the time > of their death (Remus and Sirius are a good example), they are > never older -- they do not age in the afterlife to parallel > what their ages would've been had they lived. Vincent : No, but the miror of erised does not reflect facts, but desires. Harry is 11 when he sees the mirror, and he sees himself and his parents as they would be at that moment, had they not be killed. He therefore sees himself as a 11 year old boy surrounded by his 31 y.o. parents. I think. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Jul 27 10:55:26 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:55:26 -0000 Subject: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo... In-Reply-To: <1f40e2480707270256r56f94167x92917271d2ac3e5b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173212 > Maria now: > > Yes, I have seen that theory and I think it's really cute, I > completely agree. But it does not explain Rose. What other favorite > author of Hermione could be blamed for Rose? Any guesses? > > While i like this theory, I still think there is another reason behind > those particular choices of names. > > Maria Potioncat: I'm glad my little joke has made the rounds. My suggestion for Rose was that Ron had pretended to name her after his Aunt Rose, but it was really for Rosmerta. The names Rose and Hugo stand out because they don't make sense, while the others do. And maybe that's all JKR was doing. She names characters that should never have names----cough*Florence*cough. From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jul 27 11:51:02 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:51:02 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173213 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "shagufta_naazpk2000" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AmanitaMuscaria" > wrote: > > > > > Hi Katie - I don't understand - why would Harry be saying 'open' > in > > Parseltongue to the snitch? The snitch was 'set' by Dumbledore, > who > > may or may not have been able to understand Parseltongue, but > we've > > been given no indication that he could speak it. The reason the > > snitch didn't open when Scrimgeour (like JKR's pronunciation - > > skrimjaw) placed in Harry's hand was, as Harry explains to Ron and > > Hermione, that he'd caught it in his mouth ... > > Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria > > > > Hi > Harry does try using Parseltongue to open the snitch,in desperation, > after trying everything else. Its in the chapter called Deathly > Hallows i think > > Of course it doesn't say whether Ron heard him then, but he did hear > him opening the locket. > > cheers > Shagufta > You're quite right, I'd forgotten that bit and picked it up on my second reading. I still don't particularly like it. I very much like Ron in DH, though; he comes out with some great lines, and I found his desertion very believable. It will be interesting, when we get to that time, how the Medium Whose Name We Dare Not Speak manages to put Ron's words in Hermione's mouth... or will they leave out the whole Camping Trip Of Doom? I also wonder how the series will read to newcomers to it? What JKR's done with having her characters slowly grow up through the books, I think, is pretty unusual. Having at least some of her readership grow up during the series too makes me wonder what age level the series will be pitched at. I shall start on a full read-through on the weekend, and I'm looking forward to it immensely. Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 11:58:21 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:58:21 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173214 vah: > And I understand that JKR doesn't want us to like Snape - but she > hasn't made him completely unlikable. > > Perhaps it does sound presumptous to say that I disagree with the > author's own assessment of her characters. But since she has chosen to > share them with an audience, they are our characters as well. And I > won't ignore what I consider valid textual evidence just because the > author says "well I didn't mean it that way." > Alla: I think what LL meant and I cannot speak for him is that it is perfectly fine interpretation to disregard author's intent, etc. But if you ( generic you), Leslie or anybody else will make an argument that not only you see in the text that Snape is a hero, which I understand, disagree but understand, but JKR really **wants** us to see him as hero, then my answer will be _ No, she really does not. She said so herself. Especially when earlier Leslie made an argument that folks who do not see Snape as true, noble misinterpret the books drastically ( Sorry, I am paraphrasing, not quoting). And that's my argument. I am not misinterpreting anything, I am ** interpreting**, just as you are, and I believe I have strong reasons for such interpretation, I see what JKR said in the text, but now I also have her words that that is how she views Snape as additional support. Does that make sense? I totally respect your interpetation, I just disagree that your interpetation is stronger than mine, since author allegedly had something different in mind, you know? Leslie41: you elevate Lupin, and post criticism of Snape under > that name, I am unfortunately forced to conclude that you have failed > to systematically analyze and accept what an weak, cowardly failure > his deeds often prove him to be. Not always. He dies well. But > often. And I will take any criticism of Snape that you have to make > in that vein. > Alla: What's Lupin has to do with Snape again? Yeah, he is weak and cowardly for the most part of DH. I follow this thread carefully and did not notice LL or anybody else denying it or bringing Lupin for comparison at all? Do not mean to sound snippy, but what's your point, really? That somehow changes evaluation of Snape's character? From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 12:06:35 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:06:35 -0000 Subject: Harry Ain't Perfect, but he IS a Good Person/The Series has Morality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173215 >>>>GINORMOUS SNIPPAGE>>>> > I don't understand how people can not see the moral points in this > story! > > 1 - Friendship and Love conquer all. > Ok, Harry was saved by Love, he is kept alive by Love, and he > willingly sacrifices himself for the love of his friends...How is that > not moral and ethical? Just because he doesn't actually die doesn't > mean that the point wasn't made. When you love people as intensely as > Lily loved Harry, or as Harry loves Ron, Hermione and all the others, > it makes you a better person and it makes the world a better place. > That point was well made, at least in my eyes. > > 2 - Choices Make Us Who We Are > I know many people thought JKR ruined this point by making > Voldy a sociopath. I don't think so. First of all, I *don't* see the > little Tom Riddle that we meet in HBP as a sociopath. He is an orphaned > child who can do wierd things, and he wasn't shown how to use his > powers soon enough. He wasn't ever loved. Unlike Harry, who was > conceived in love, born in love, and had someone die for him, Tom > Riddle had NEVER had a loving touch. I felt VERY sory for that kid, and > Dumbledore certainly gave him latitude to make different choices, but > he did not. > Dumbledore's choices are often bad ones, and he was certainly a > selfish person when he was young...but he CHOSE to change, and he did > so. I don't see Dumbledore as a master manipulator, at least in a > malevolent sense. He knew Harry had to fight Voldemort and he tried to > give him the tools to defeat him without giving too much away. Had > Dumbledore simply handed Harry everything, Harry would not have had the > confidence and the strength to do what he did. Harry needed to get > there on his own. > > 3 - The World Isn't Perfect, but We can try to Make it Better. > No one every said that defeating Voldy would make the world a > sunshiney place. No one ever said that in the RW, either. But it's the > trying that counts. It's people's hearts being in the right places. > It's people working together for a greater good. And evil will never > entirely go away, but we have to keep trying. Perserverence was a > really big theme in these books, and Harry and the Order never gave up, > never stopped fighting. They believed they could make the world better, > and they never lost that purpose...but no one ever said it would be > perfect. That wasn't the point, anyway. The point was the trying. > > 4 - Discrimination is Wrong > Like many of you, I was also disappointed in the continuation > of the Sorting in the epilogue. I had hoped that after seeing everyone > in the Great Hall all together, children would no longer be pigionholed > and catagorized. However, that singular thing does not erase the > screamingly loud message throughout the rest of the series. > From the formation of SPEW to the Charge of the House Elves in > DH, from Hagrid's revelation about his giant blood to Grawp's bravery > in DH, and from Draco Malfoy's "mudblood" comment in CoS to the hunting > of half-bloods and Muggle-borns in DH, JKR has nearly beaten us to > death with the idea that prejudice and hatred are very, very bad > things. And I think that the continuation of Sorting in the epilogue > has a lot more to do with that fact that the epilogue was written a > long time ago and no editor had the you-know-what's to stand up to JKR > and tell her it was lousy, than it did with JKR trying to send us the > message that nothing had changed. >>>snippage>>> > > ****KATIE, REPLYING TO HERSELF BECAUSE SHE FORGOT TO ADD ONE OTHER POINT: Moral/Ethical Point #5: AUTHORITY IS NOT TO BE TRUSTED, AT LEAST WHEN IT IS MORALLY CORRUPT >From Quirrell to Pius Thicknesse(I LOVE this guy's name), JKR makes a real point of showing us that being in a position of authority does not automatically mean that someone is trustworthy or deserves respect. While this may be arguably a "moral" point, it's definitely an important philosophical point. HRH learn very early on that people in power are often really bad folks, or at the very least, really deluded folks. Percy is the example of the person that trusts what the establishment tells him, to the detriment of his own family, and the safety of the world. Fudge's refusal to believe that Voldy was back really resonated with me, since OotP came out right after the Iraq War began, and the idea that sometimes people just refused to believe the truth that was right in front of them...that was very powerful for me. Anyway, I just wanted to put that in there. Forgot on the first go round. Incidentally, I wonder if JKR named Harry, ROn, and Hermione on purpose so that their initials were "Her/His Royal Highness"? Just occurred to me. Cheers, Katie From rvink7 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 12:09:23 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:09:23 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173216 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lizzyben04" wrote: > > > > > > lizzyben: > > I think JKR has a secret that she is desperately worried that readers > will figure out; so worried that she has to tear down Snape at every > possible opportunity, loudly proclaim how *horrible* he is, how his > sacrifices & actions are never heroic, how he's unloveable, how he's > against everything she values & believes in. The secret is, JKR is > Snape. And she knows it. She's just worried we'll realize it too. Renee: I'm snipping the rest of the post, because I don't think it ought to be repeated on this list. But simply have to react to it. Lizzyben, was it your intention of accusing JKR of being a racist and a Nazi? If not I seriously advise you to rethink this post. Ad hominem arguments never contribute to a healthy discussion, and you're crossing the line here quite thoroughly. List Elves, sorry if I seem to step into your shoes, but I couldn't remain silent. Ren?e From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 12:30:40 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:30:40 -0000 Subject: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo... In-Reply-To: <1f40e2480707270256r56f94167x92917271d2ac3e5b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173217 > > Cariad wrote: > > > > Can't remember who suggested it but it was a super idea, Hugo was named for > > Hermione's fav Muggle writer, Victor Hugo. Except she omitted his first > > name as Ron would not have appreciated it! > > Maria now: > > Yes, I have seen that theory and I think it's really cute, I > completely agree. But it does not explain Rose. What other favorite > author of Hermione could be blamed for Rose? Any guesses? > > While i like this theory, I still think there is another reason behind > those particular choices of names. > > Maria > Anne Squires: I have wondered if Hugo is a nod to the fact that JKR has won the Hugo Award. From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 12:34:45 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:34:45 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173218 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Leslie41: > That's an interesting point. The essay I linked to yesterday by > Orson Scott Card is fascinating because it posits that Rowling > herself didn't know much about Snape, or certainly about his role in > the end, when she began the book. I'll link it again here, because > it's the very best piece of writing I've ever read about Snape's > character, bar none. Not unsurprising, considering who wrote it. > > http://www.intergalacticmedicineshow.com/cgi-bin/mag.cgi? > do=issue&vol=i5&article=_card-essay I've seen it many times before, and I don't agree with a lot of the subtle tone markers in his take on things, particularly the use of 'justification' for various of Snape's actions. So I will respond that I found this stringing out of canon not 100% what I would say, but extremely useful: http://maeglinyedi.livejournal.com/300639.html > Leslie41: > But may I ask, *Lupinlore*, when can we be expecting your latest > evaluation of Lupin's character? > And so long as you elevate Lupin, and post criticism of Snape under > that name, I am unfortunately forced to conclude that you have > failed to systematically analyze and accept what an weak, cowardly > failure his deeds often prove him to be. Not always. He dies well. > But often. And I will take any criticism of Snape that you have to > make in that vein. If I had a dollar for every time I'd seen this argument onlist... No, seriously, for shame. Pulling out the "tu quoque!" to attack a listie's ideas about one character seems to me to be a serious failure of argument, as if we necessarily had to address all characters when we were speaking about one. This slides on the fine edge of going after a poster rather than engaging with the ideas. -Nora tries to keep a certain idealism about listening to ideas regardless of who they come from From caaf at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 12:39:44 2007 From: caaf at hotmail.com (Cyril A Fernandes) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:39:44 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173219 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: Cyril here: > > dumbledad: > > >>> Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to side-along apparate to > Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death Eaters? <<< > > > > Back to Dung's question for JKR: "Why didn't Voldemort tell Snape to > > side-along apparate to Grimmauld Place with a gang of Death > Eaters?" Maybe he didn't; perhaps he forgot or overlooked the > possibility. Cyril: Well, it's my first post after DH, and I want to first say I LOVED THE BOOK :) This was one of the questions that came in my mind on my second reading - and the way I understood it was that it is MoldyVoldy's own fault that it did not happen. LV was himself not directly looking for Harry. He had put his DE and even Nagini at different locations to look out for Harry, but he himself was looking for the Elder Wand for a large part of the storyline. Given the treatment of Rowle, after letting Harry escape from the Tottenham Court cafe, I am sure that the DE were a lot more careful before calling LV, and were not going to do it on a whim. The few times they did was only more trouble for them. As for whether they dared ask Snape to take them into Grimmauld Place - it is easy for him to say that he had already checked it. After all, we do know that wh was the one who searched it. Unless LV himself asked Snape to take him in (and he was to busy to do that on just hope that Harry is there) I am doubtful if anyone else would have been able to force Snape to do it. The strength of Snape's word with LV is apparent in the first chapter, and no one else was going to challenge him that easily. LV's own methods were part of the reason he was easily overthrown. Besides the example above, another one that comes to mind is Narcissa lying to LV about Harry's death. He did not trust his people really, and tortured them when they failed him. So different from DD, who trusted Snape completely, because he knew what Snape wanted, and knew that he was ready to give his life for that desire. Among many of the scenes that have already beeen mentioned as outstanding in the book, the one that often comes to mind is Harry telling LV that Snape was DDM - exactly the opposite of what Malfoy was telling DD about Snape being LV's man at the end of HBP. I loved this scene, and the entire ripping apart of LV's persona by Harry - particularly calling him Riddle. Just loved it... loved it all. Cyril, wanting to start another read, but needing to timeshare with the rest of the family :) From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 12:50:48 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:50:48 -0000 Subject: Inconsistancy about the time of going into Hiding? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173220 Wrong time for this post, I guess, since I do not have the books at hand right now and can't look things up. Will post anyway and hope somebody can clear up if I'm mistaken or not :) We've been told earlier (dont even remeber in which book) that Lily and James went into hiding only about a week (or few weeks?) before the actual attack took place. But I'm certain that "somewhere" in DH it is described that they "have now been in hiding for some 3 months" (or close to that). Am I wrong about that? Inge From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 12:50:38 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 05:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sectumsempra inconsistancies. Message-ID: <263347.10787.qm@web55708.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173221 Why is it that in HBP, when Harry uses sectumsempra on Draco, Snape is able to repair the damage. But in DH, when Snape uses it, and ends up cutting off George's (I can't get to my book right now, and can't remember for sure if it was Fred or George so sorry if I'm wrong) we are told that they wouldn't be able to fix his ear because it was Dark Magic. Do you think it was just because they were unaware of the spell, and didn't now the counter spell for it, or did I miss something? Chancie --------------------------------- Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 12:52:35 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:52:35 -0000 Subject: Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173222 Carol: > > His despair caused him to join his "friends" because he felt he > > had not other choice. Lily is prejudging him, assuming that > > because *they* have become Death Eaters, he has done so, too, but > > I think she's mistaken. Not only does he still love her (not a > > silly crush like Harry's on Cho at the same age: she's all he > > cares about other than DADA and maybe Potions, apparently), but > > she's the one who says, "You've chosen your way. I've chosen > > mine." (DH Am. ed. 676). There's no evidence that he's done > > anything worse than turning a blind eye to his friends' Death > > Eater ambitions. Clearly, he's not like them, nor is there any > > evidence that he routinely uses the word "Mudblood" or she would > > not have been shocked by it. Jen: > But my main objection to the above interpretation is the idea that > Lily holds even an iota of responsibility for Snape's choice to > join the DEs. Even if her decision to turn her back on him was > premature and made without the whole story (and as I said above, > there's evidence this was not the case), Snape and Snape alone made > the decision to follow Voldemort. > > In fact, my understanding was Lily was the only thing tethering > Snape to a different path, and her awareness of that fact was one > reason she made a point of talking to him about his friends and > defending him to others. SSSusan: I *totally* agree with what Jen is saying here. I really have no idea, Carol, where you have gotten some of the things you are alleging here, sorry. How is it you know that Snape hadn't yet turned towards his friends & their DE activities? How is it you know he only did so because Lily essentially abandoned him (which your remarks seem to imply)? How is it you know that all he's done is turn a blind eye to some of the things they've done? (He certainly didn't seem upset at ALL by Mulciber's use of Dark Magic just for grins, now did he?) IMO, these scenes from Snape's memories were included by JKR to provide **just that evidence** that Snape HAD been drifting towards his 'little Death Eater friends.' I cannot fathom where it has been shown that he was doing no such thing, nor that he hadn't yet done anything beyond turning a blind eye! Rather, it appears to me that what Jen has stated is the case -- Lily appears to be all that's tethering Snape to a different path. It appears to me that Snape simply didn't have the courage (or interest?) to choose that different path! Even with how much he 'loved' her. Lily, in fact, says they *have chosen* their different paths, past tense, not that she suspects he's about to choose his different one. It seems to me that she stuck around longer than she would have ordinarily ['I've defended you for years'], out of loyalty to him from their long friendship... just as it struck me that he didn't mean to call *her* (only her) 'Mudblood' out of 'respect' for their long friendship. She stuck with him 'for years.' If she was only just beginning to suspect and to worry, she would have asked him what was going on. But when she speaks with him, she speaks about things that *have happened,* about things she doesn't like seeing in him. And when she says, "You can't wait to join You-Know-You, can you?" [paraphrased], he doesn't deny it! No, the memories show that the point had arrived when it was no longer any good pretending that at the CORE there wasn't something very, very wrong with what Severus was doing, in Lily's view. It wasn't a suspicion of things to come; it was a being fed up with what had already come. One final remark. As to Snape loving Lily, and not in a 'silly crush' kind of way, as had been the case with Harry concerning Cho... I will agree with you that Snape loved Lily, but I don't think it was something to glorify. It sounds as if Harry is being insulted with that remark, that he only had this 'puppy love' kind of thing, whereas Snape had 'REAL Love' about Lily. But it just wasn't healthy! It was an *obsessive* love, not what I would term 'real love.' Siriusly Snapey Susan From caaf at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 12:52:55 2007 From: caaf at hotmail.com (Cyril A Fernandes) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:52:55 -0000 Subject: Fenrir's Dark mark (was Re: Another inconsistency?) In-Reply-To: <741370.3990.qm@web30212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173223 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, career advisor wrote: Cyril here: > > Toner wrote: > > > I thought Fenrir had a dark mark? > > > > During the tower scene at the end of HBP, a group of DEs join DD, > > Harry and Draco up on the top of the tower, and the rest of the OotP > > can't get up the stairs due to some magical wall except for Snape. At > > the time, the reasoning for this was that only people with Dark Marks > > could go through the invisible wall. > > > > However, in DH, Fenrir cannot enter the Malfoy Manor, even though it > > appeared you needed a Dark Mark to go through the gate (like Snape and > > Amycus in the first chapter). > > The Dark Mark is just a spell isn't it. Which means it can be removed. If Voldy needed Fenrir to have a Dark Mark for a specefic mission, he can give him one, no problem and then remove it latter. What happended to Mos Morde in this book anyway. The Dark Mark wasn;t cast into the sky once this entire book, not even during the final battle. > > Cyril: Well, from what I remember of that scene on top of the tower, some had made it up, and the barrier was probably cast afterwards. So Fenrir was probably on the other side of the barrier, and did not need to go through it. Cyril - trying to read hundreds of posts nearly as quickly as he read DH. From ida3 at planet.nl Fri Jul 27 13:05:39 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:05:39 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173224 SSSusan: > But. But. But I never said that Snape gave Harry the information > *hoping* he would march off to his death! That's not what I was > saying at all. Dana: I was not trying to contradict you. I was just wondering about his motivation for giving the memories in reflection of the scene we witnessed. SSSusan: > I was saying that Snape was both following DD's instructions > (providing the information DD said Harry needed at the 'right > time') AND actually, in doing so, sort of giving Harry a gift -- > the gift of providing more full & complete information than DD had > *and* more full & complete information than he had to (all the > background with Lily). Dana: That is what I actually was wondering about. Was Snape??s intention to give DD??s instructions to Harry or did he want to make Harry see that DD did nothing more then use Harry (and inevitably Snape himself)? To some point I agree that Snape give Harry more information by providing him with his memories but these memories (although objective in themselves) were still highly selective. Snape only gave Harry the information to support Snape??s own motivations for doing what he has done but the memories do not provide anything that would make Harry have a change of heart about who the person Snape himself is. So I have to wonder if Snape??s attempt was actually to make Harry doubt DD??s judgment as Snape himself clearly has done throughout the books and to stimulate Harry to up hold what Snape has been working for in all these years, to not make Lily??s sacrifice to be in vain. Clearly Harry does the opposite of what Snape wants him to do and it turns out to be the correct choice. All memories are both projections on the character of Lily and of DD. Snape shows Harry that his mother is a person worth fighting for and at the same time shows that DD doesn??t seem like the person Harry took him for. That DD has been running Harry??s show from the beginning and that he hasn??t done everything he possibly could to keep Harry, his mother (or honor her sacrifice) or his friends safe. So in other words Snape gave up his life in service of his mother while DD had been working to destroy it. That it was DD who betrayed Harry (or essentially Lily) and not Snape, who has been loyal to Lily from the moment LV threatened her life. That is somewhat my point that Snape actually did not give the memories to help Harry come to a decision to give his life for the greater good but that he wanted Harry to do the opposite, to live because his mother sacrificed herself so he could life. To no longer follow the directions DD has set out for him. SSSusan: > I think it was a very brave thing for Snape to have done. I didn't > see it as selfishly motivated as so many of the things he had done > were. Dana: I was not implying that Snape was not brave to give these memories to Harry but I do think his motivations were selfish to some extent. He only wanted to safe Harry so his service to Lily had not been in vain, while Harry not sacrificing himself meant that LV would not be defeated. If you look at the scene where LV tells Snape, in not so many words, that he is going to kill him to release the power of the wand then it is not hard to imagine that Snape figured Harry could not beat LV anyway. Snape never figured out the true essence of what Lily stood for as she would have sacrificed herself for the greater good and not just for Harry alone. The memories helped Harry see what Snape actually did not understand himself ?? that there are things worth dying for. Snape indeed took risks but let people meet their fate if it meant risking his own life to safe that person. That for me hasn??t changed I still feel that Snape felt his own life and thus his cover, was at all times more important if it did not involve Harry personally. Taking the UV after DD already asked him to kill him proves that to me and the Emeline Vance thing still leaves a bad taste in my mouth as she is indeed dead and no where in canon is Snape??s involvement in her death contradicted as he himself claimed. SSSusan: > I guess that's the only place where I quite see that you & I > differ. You are saying, I think, that Snape may have done this as > *another* thing that was *only* out of devotion/dedication to Lily, > whereas I believe he did it for more than just that reason -- > including because DD wanted & asked him to do so. Dana: Well I do not yet have a fully convicted opinion of everything given to me so I just go with reading people??s reactions and think what more viewpoints and meanings the text could provide. When I looked at the DD aspect of Snape??s memories I was truly appalled about DD??s behavior. When Snape came to DD to ask him for Lily??s protection DD asks Snape what he is willing to do for it in return, which gives the impression that without it, DD would not have helped Snape. Then we see DD telling Snape that he could not safe the Potters because they chose to put their trust in the wrong person. (which still disgusts me after seeing the Order and the MoM being able to keep LV out of the Tonks??s family home and the same with the Weasley??s and we know from PoA that DD was still worried after the Fidelius Charm was put in place). And then comparing their mistake with Snape??s own mistake to believe LV would spare Lily. With other words if they only had trusted me none of it would have happened which gives of the sent of pure arrogance about his own abilities, while he actually did nothing major to keep the Potters safe. But if you look closely Snape with adding the memory of him taking the last part of Lily??s letter to Sirius, adds why the Potters did not trust DD enough to make him their SK or why they did not tell him about the switch plan (Everyone would become SK if the SK himself dies and DD clearly had knowledge of the Potters whereabouts, the switch plan was put in place to prevent DD from becoming a SK himself if Sirius died, they made Sirius Harry??s legal guardian to prevent DD getting his hands on their son. The piece of that letter shows that DD was friends with Grindewald and thus this was the reason for the choices the Potters made. The theory that DD asked Snape to kill him did not sit well with me (as I obviously expressed many times) but there it was. In the initial read it doesn??t seem that DD is asking Snape to kill him to safe Draco and I think it is precisely the impression this memory was supposed to give. That DD only asks Snape to kill him and split his soul so he can die a painless death. (Of course on closer inspection one can see that DD expected Snape to be ordered by LV to do it anyway if Draco failed but Snape??s objections about splitting his soul give just enough ambiguity to cloud DD??s motives to ask this of Snape). Of course at this time JKR had already seeded doubt about DD??s motivations and we already knew about the stone inside the ring. So it seemed DD died because he was too greedy and in the process forgot the curse LV placed on the ring and not for the greater good. Then we see that DD withheld information from Harry that he always intended Harry to die and DD??s seemingly cold reaction to Snape??s objection. We then get to see that it was DD who gave Snape the order to betray the Order??s plan to LV. One has to wonder if Snape attempt to safe Lupin is because he could not be sure if Lupin was protecting the real Harry or not and Harry??s chances on his own would decrease considerably. What Snape is overall showing about DD is that he used Snape to further his plans and that DD was heartless and willing to sacrifice everyone. I think that the moment LV told Snape about where he got the wand Snape realized that DD had set him up when he asked him to kill him. When LV mentions getting the wand from DD??s grave Snape face turns so white that Harry was surprised there was still living someone inside it. I think that in that moment Snape made his decision that he wanted to prevent Harry facing LV and why he bagged LV to go look for him, LV said Harry would come to him to save his friends from dying. So it seems that Snape had come to the conclusion that DD wanted Harry out of the way so LV could further his plans. That in fact DD had always been working to undo Lily??s sacrifice, because it had destroyed LV in the process. So to me it seems that Snape was actually trying to set up Harry against DD and that if LV was going to live anyway that the part of LV??s soul attached to Harry??s might as well remain where it is now. Remember Snape did not care about Harry??s wellbeing so he essentially did not care if the soul part was parasitic or not as long as Harry stayed alive so was Lily??s sacrifice. SSSusan: > Sorry if I've not addressed things well. I am not sure I fully > understand what you were saying. But, to clarify, I did NOT think > Snape gave those memories to Harry because he, out of cruelty, > wanted Harry to go kill himself. I didn't think I'd implied > anything of the kind. Dana: No, I agree with you he indeed did not give the memories to Harry so Harry could go kill himself. I initially did imply (I know you didn??t and was not trying to imply you did) Snape gave the memory to send Harry to his death because I thought Snape would want to take his revenge on LV killing Lily, at all coast but I think that is not why he gave those memories. It seems he gave them because he stopped believing that he and DD were working for the same cause and that he chose to follow his own course of action until the very end to up hold Lily??s sacrifice at all coast. I think he had already decided this partly when DD said to him that Harry needed to die and this explains to me why he came out when LV was alerted Harry was at Hogwarts and why he wanted to go and look for Harry when he was facing LV, even bagging for it while LV clearly indicates that there is no need for it because Harry will come to him. DD never shared the rest of the prophecy with Snape and Snape never believed that Harry could defeat the Dark Lord. So the only thing that was on Snape??s mind when he shared his memories with Harry is to stop Harry trying to defeat LV but instead live because Lily wanted him to live. Or so Snape thought. I think it is this why JKR does not want to refer to Snape as a hero because she never intended Snape giving these memories to Harry to safe the WW or to defeat LV but only to preserve Lily??s sacrifice even at coast of Harry??s wellbeing. So in the strictest sense of what I??m trying to imply here, is that Snape betrayed DD for his own piece of mind with total disregard for Harry??s well being besides him staying alive and with disregard to the faith of others. I have to admit that I have great trouble with seeing the epitome of goodness in DD??s character as JKR wanted to portray him. Not trusting that DD is always right will doom your faith and I??m not sure I see the morality in this view or if I even want to see it. So I??m not sure (eventhough I am totally sure about what Snape??s character was supposed to mean) if I can believe in a story where standing up against DD is the biggest evil of all. JMHO Dana From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 13:09:14 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:09:14 -0000 Subject: Sectumsempra inconsistancies. In-Reply-To: <263347.10787.qm@web55708.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173225 Chancie wrote: > > Why is it that in HBP, when Harry uses sectumsempra on Draco, Snape is able to repair the damage. But in DH, when Snape uses it, and ends up cutting off George's (I can't get to my book right now, and can't remember for sure if it was Fred or George so sorry if I'm wrong) we are told that they wouldn't be able to fix his ear because it was Dark Magic. Do you think it was just because they were unaware of the spell, and didn't now the counter spell for it, or did I miss something? > > Chancie Anne Squires: Molly eventually stopped George's bleeding. We aren't told which spells, if any, that she used. Snape with the singing/chanting spell was also able to stop Draco's bleeding. However, iirc, while Harry sliced up Draco very badly he never cut a body part off of him. I think if Harry had cut off a finger for example, Snape wouldn't have been able to repair that injury beyond stanching the bleeding. Anne Squires From dougsamu at golden.net Fri Jul 27 13:15:16 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:15:16 -0400 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all Message-ID: <9CD958B5-7836-4743-B444-BD9E9EDD81B8@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173226 Mary: If someone takes his Phoenix core wand from him, it will not matter to the Elder Wand. doug; Harry needed only to disarm Draco, who was not wielding the Elder wand at the time, to become master of the Elder wand. ___ __ From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 13:22:06 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:22:06 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173227 Dana: > To some point I agree that Snape give Harry more information by > providing him with his memories but these memories (although > objective in themselves) were still highly selective. Snape only > gave Harry the information to support Snape??s own motivations for > doing what he has done but the memories do not provide anything > that would make Harry have a change of heart about who the person > Snape himself is. SSSusan: But I would say that that's just what Harry *did* have -- he did have a major change of heart about Snape and what kind of person he was! He told everyone that Snape was one of the bravest people he knew, didn't he? He named a child after him. He took all that Snape showed him to heart. I fail to see how these are not indications of a change of heart in Harry. I would also argue that while, yes, the selection of memories was subjective, Snape gave him some pretty amazing things. He didn't try to hide who he was from Harry. After having made DD promise to never tell anyone -- esp. Harry -- about Lily, he *gave* that to Harry. You could be correct that Snape also had a desire to cause Harry to doubt DD's judgment. I don't agree, but you could be right. I know you see Snape's *motive* in sharing as suspect, but regardless, I believe the shared memories (for whatever reason) decidedly did lead to Harry's genuine change of heart about Snape. Dana: > That is somewhat my point that Snape actually did not give the > memories to help Harry come to a decision to give his life for the > greater good but that he wanted Harry to do the opposite, to live > because his mother sacrificed herself so he could life. To no > longer follow the directions DD has set out for him. SSSusan: Again, this is possible, though I don't believe it myself. But I can grant you the possibility! :) Sorry that I don't have time to address your other points, Dana. Hopefully others here will! Siriusly Snapey Susan From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:21:34 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:21:34 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: <8B1124A8-D865-427A-8048-32052904F385@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173228 > >>MelroseDarjeeling wrote: > > Everyone might not agree that *all* of these are intended as a > > Christian allegory, but I suspect most would agree that the > > central point of the book, and indeed the whole series, is Harry > > sacrificing his life for others in a dead-on parallel to Christ's > > crucifixion. > > > > Curious to know what others think. If this was her goal, was she > > successful? > >>Maeg: > You make a compelling argument that JKR successfully incorporated > Christian mythology for many plot points, and perhaps several > overall themes of the series. It didn't make for a successful final > book, in my opinion, but perhaps that's because I'm no fan of > Christianity. Does my negative reaction mean that it was successful > for those who approve of the Christian message? > Betsy Hp: In a word? No. In a bit of irony I've had reason to study the crucifixion this week and I have to strongly disagree with MelroseDarjeeling's contention that Harry's death scene paralleled it at all. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that what occurs in DH is not only not very Christian, it's actually in opposition to everything Christ taught and demonstrated. Of course this is my opinion and I'm sure (very sure! ) others will differ. But, speaking for myself, here's the problems I have with attempts to parallel Christ's crucifixion with Harry's death. Just on a non-theological basis, Jesus was surrounded by the living, not the dead. His disciples were there, they protested when he was taken and in fact Peter attempted to fight the soldiers leading Jesus away. (A move Jesus rebuked, healing the soldier Peter had wounded.) In contrast, Harry seperates himself from his friends and speaks to the dead. He goes to his death at the orders of a *very* human man, not the word of God. And he leaves his friends fighting and killing those around them. So visually the scenes are completely different, IMO. On a more theological level (which is where things always get hairy, so again, my own opinion here), while Jesus submitted himself to the base laws of men to prove the Christ *above* those laws (to demonstrate a higher law, if you will), Harry went to die because he had a bit of evil in him and death seemed the only solution. Harry even had his beloved dead around him encouraging him to do it. Jesus sacrificed; Harry suicided. And of course, the kicker for me is that Harry is not Jesus Christ. Not even close. Looking at Jesus's actions (healing the Centurion's servant, protecting the adulteress, healing the woman with an issue of blood, taking on a tax collecter as his disciple, speaking with the non-elect, healing the woman of Canaan's daughter) and at his words (the parable of the Good Samaritan, the entire Sermon on the Mount) shows that Jesus was inclusive and compassionate. There's also the story of Saul's conversion into Paul that shows that with Christ redemption is always possible. You are not locked into the person you thought you were at age eleven. DH gives us a completely different view. Instead of inclusion we get regulated and codified exclusion. Compassion is limited only to a rarified few. And redemption is an impossibility. You are who you were born to be and only the elect are blessed. These were ideas supported and promulgated by folks in the *name* of Christianity, yes. Calvinism is one example. I think there was a very Hogwarts-type breakdown of who was worthy and who was not in the Medieval ages. Gryffindors were the Christian nobility, Hufflepuffs were the peasantry, Ravenclaws were the philosophers and scientists and artists, and Slytherin were the nonbelievers or Muslims and Jews. But I do personally reject the idea that such theories have any bearing on Christianity (except in a sort of historical interest kind of way, like an astronomer looking at old theories based on the earth being the center of the solar system). So I also cannot see any example of the Christ within DH and therefore the series. That's my opinion anyway. Betsy Hp From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 13:24:33 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:24:33 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173229 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Mhochberg@ wrote: > > > >> ~~~ > > Mary: > > > > As long as the Elder wand remains in the tomb while Harry is > alive, he can > > use another wand in his work as an auror. It is only when Harry > dies, without > > losing the Elder wand, will its chain of power be broken. > > > > If someone takes his Phoenix core wand from him, it will not > matter to the > > Elder Wand. As far as it is concerned, it is Harry's wand and the > Phoenix wand > > a temporary substitute. > > > > ---Mary > > > Leah > > I am sorry, but I think it might matter. Draco Malfoy becomes > master of the Elder Wand by his 'expelliamus' of DD' s wand on the > Astronomy Tower. The Elder Wand is not taken by Draco but buried > with DD. Harry takes Draco's own wand from him. This according to > Harry, has made Harry master of the Elder Wand, because he has > removed a wand from Draco. Harry might not be right, he might win > over VM because this is what VM believes and that slows up his > reflexes, but we don't know that. > > That's why if this really is the conclusion, I would have preferred > a peaceful old age death scene for Harry. > > Leah > Ken: You are right, Leah, and there is no need to hedge your conclusion. Harry specifically asked Ollivander about this because he had realized at that point that Draco might have become the master of the Elder wand by disarming Dumbledore and he then was its current master by virtue of having disarmed Draco. All this was just his and Ollivander's best guess until the final spell that Voldemort cast. At that point Harry's suspicion was verified by events. The elder wand was his and it refused to do Voldemort's bidding, or rather it executed his command against him instead of Harry. Remember that the AK is supposed to be unblockable yet Harry has blocked two of Voldemort's. Once was due to the exceptional case of having a brother wand. The second can only be due to Harry's theory over ownership of the elder wand being correct. Remember that Draco never so much as touched the elder wand so he could never have had it physically taken from him. It was taken from him in the magical sense and Harry must avoid this possibility at all costs if he is to end its terrible power. Hiding the wand in Dumbledore's tomb will not prevent Harry from losing mastership of it. Only leading a quiet, non-confrontational life will do that. Harry has earned that life, in his own words he has "had enough trouble for a lifetime". Ken From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 13:27:05 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:27:05 -0000 Subject: Inconsistancy about the time of going into Hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173230 I wrote myself: > Wrong time for this post, I guess, since I do not have the books at > hand right now and can't look things up. Will post anyway and hope > somebody can clear up if I'm mistaken or not :) > > We've been told earlier (dont even remeber in which book) that Lily > and James went into hiding only about a week (or few weeks?) before > the actual attack took place. > But I'm certain that "somewhere" in DH it is described that they "have > now been in hiding for some 3 months" (or close to that). > > Am I wrong about that? Now me again, after getting hold of DH: Ok, so I found the "somewhere" in DH from where I read, that Lily and James may have been in hiding for much longer than a few weeks before the attack. It's in the chapter "Kreacher's Tale", in Lily's letter to Sirius. It states: "James is a getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell...." Lily sends this letter to Sirius to thank him for the birthday present Sirius sent to Harry. Harry's birthday is July 31st... The attack was on October 31st... Would Lily wait some 2? months to send a *thank-you* letter to Sirius? Or do I read her statement about James getting frustrated about being shut up, wrong? Inge From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:28:46 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:28:46 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173231 > lizzyben: > > It's classic shadow projection. Snape's her shadow. Annemehr: I agree, totally. That's why Snape stands in such stark relief above the background of the story, because he's so *real.* JKR says he's nasty, horrible, -- but just compare him to the true, banal evil that Voldemort represents, and you see the difference. The shadow self is, in general, not necessarily evil. It contains parts of you that you've learned to *disapprove of,* which may include such lovely things as a wish to be a musician instead of getting a "real" job. Snape apparently contains many things of which JKR disapproves, but plenty of us find okay or even admirable. I'm left wishing for the book this could have been, if only... Annemehr From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:30:44 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:30:44 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173232 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lizzyben04" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > lizzyben: > > > > I think JKR has a secret that she is desperately worried that readers > > will figure out; so worried that she has to tear down Snape atevery > > possible opportunity, loudly proclaim how *horrible* he is, how his > > sacrifices & actions are never heroic, how he's unloveable, how he's > > against everything she values & believes in. The secret is, JKR is > > Snape. And she knows it. She's just worried we'll realize it too. > > Renee: > > I'm snipping the rest of the post, because I don't think it ought to > be repeated on this list. But simply have to react to it. > > Lizzyben, was it your intention of accusing JKR of being a racist and > a Nazi? If not I seriously advise you to rethink this post. Ad hominem > arguments never contribute to a healthy discussion, and you're > crossing the line here quite thoroughly. > > List Elves, sorry if I seem to step into your shoes, but I couldn't > remain silent. > > Ren?e > lizzyben: Of course not. I'm sorry if my post wasn't clear; I was trying to get a handle on some concepts that I'm not really expressing very well. I'm saying that all authors put some of their self into their characters - as JKR has acknowledged about Hermione or Lupin. And I think Snape & the Slytherins represent a part of JKR too, a part that she would rather condemn & judge instead of integrating or understanding. I'm talking about things from a psychological perspective, *not* a social perspective. Shadow figures are present for all of us, representing the things we don't like about ourselves - the key is to integrate the shadow into the rest of the personality; because if we do not, we'll end up projecting that shadow instead & trying to destroy it. (this is vague Jungian stuff) And there's something about the total condemnation of a house of "emotion", combined w/Harry's statements that he likes that Ginny doesn't ever cry, JKR's refusal to ever allow Harry to cry - it's like she's saying that emotion, itself, is bad? I'm just at a loss to understand the way JKR resolved the House system. Were fans really begging JKR to make Slytherin *more* evil & unredeemable? IMO, it seems like fans were begging for a good Slytherin, a redemption for the House. JKR never gave it - and her total condemnation of anything resembling Slytherin-ness is just, odd, to me. I don't get it. I don't get why she did it. It seems to be an internal need to cut off & destroy those qualities, instead of understanding them. So yeah, I think parts of Snape come from JKR, as do all of her characters. The problem is that JKR never managed to integrate the "shadow" House, the shadow figure into the overall narrative. And IMO the novel suffered for it. And the overall message of the novels *is* scary to me, because it seems to say that we can just instantly judge people as less worthy, almost less human, based on a label. While JKR condemns that mindset in the text for Muggles, she supports exactly that type of thinking when it comes to Slytherins. All of them, 25% of the population, are totally immoral & evil? The way JKR's world is set up right now, Harry & co could probably justify some Slytherin registration commission - you've got to make sure those evil Slyths don't attempt world domination again, right? And that's the paradox at the heart of her novel, where the subtext seems to create a message that runs against the surface message of the text. It preaches against stereotypes & dehumanization, while actually *reinforcing* exactly that in how Slytherins are portrayed. lizzyben From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:34:32 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <780160.63005.qm@web30004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173233 Melanie: How does it ring false to you? I mean Lily was a nice girl who probably had a lot of classes with Snape (being so talented in Potions and all that). They probably figured that she was just defending a boy that was getting teased by his fellow classmates. Also take it from the prospective on Snape..he is probably just as embarrassed that he is friends with a muggle born. I mean if you were in Slytherin wouldn't you feel that way? --------------------------------- Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From solar_saramax at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:07:21 2007 From: solar_saramax at yahoo.com (Sara) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:07:21 -0000 Subject: JKR Cut Ron & Hermione Like a Movie Edit ...UNbelievable! ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173234 Major Plot-Transition Flaw Not Believable @ End ...pages 661 Prince's Tale & 731 Flaw in the Plan... (U.S. Edition) At the climax ending for the entire HP series when Voldemort gives the one-hour deadline (pg.660) to turn over Harry or everyone will die ultimatum, I think the storyline really had to be flawless. Did JKR make a major error in this ultimate ending of the HP series? I just could not believe or ever buy into the idea that Ron and, especially, Hermione could ever abandon Harry at the story's total crisis point while desperately rushing to view Snape's memories in Dumbledore's pensieve. How could Hermione or Ron possibly strip themselves away from Harry at this ultimate crisis point? All three heroes (already) just witnessed multiple violent deaths and bizarre injuries with the horrific psychological impact of the "blood bath" impacting all their Hogwart's friends, family, and rivals... BUT, if Harry didn't succeed "now", then everyone was going to die... there already was the break-up & reunion with Ron... forever committed Hermione would never have peeled off to comfort Ginny, nor should have Ron when -everything- was riding their razor's edge for their shared success to save everyone from certain death. Ron and Hermione were Harry's remaining "family" that would fight to "the end" and stay at his side without "questioning" the dead. At the end of the entire HP series I faithfully wanted the three heroes to fight the good fight together no matter what, for they had finally achieved that deep and ultimate forever bond between them. Ron and Hermione required extremely credible reasons to not be at Harry's side; all three definitely knew to mourn the dead by honoring the immediate living crisis. My criticism is that JKR should have placed some believable storyline where Ron & Hermione were forced to allow Harry to go on alone without any other choice or option they could have taken. Even a physical barrier or blocking mechanism would have sufficed, though a fully reasoned approach would have enhanced the story wonderfully for many interpretive standpoints of why Harry had to go on alone without them. (Ron and Hermione could still have remained behind with good reason to mourn the dead and comfort the living.) The hero's journey would still have been fulfilled for Harry's perfection without taking away from their shared hero's journey. Why "movie edit" the fantastic bond & the hero & heroine everyone loves and found in Ron and Hermione's hero's journey too ...to the very end! A missed opportunity to do justice to, and immortalize, all three heroes ...it had to be 3! It had to be believable why Ron & Hermione were no longer at Harry's side. Does JKR separate them like a movie edit pg.661 & reunite them on pg.746 without "good reason" or concluding fulfillment of the hero & heroine in Ron & Hermione? Wasn't there a far better storyline possible for JKR to allow Ron and Hermione their "room of requirement", an exit of perfection too? All three each a hero exiting correctly in their final chapter of character development. Why miss the "transfiguration" of the three as one too? Harry would still have gone on just as he did, but I believe it would have made an ending vastly more fulfilling and satisfying for the readership and achieve the necessary fulfillment and "story's perfection" for Ron and Hermione too. What do you think? Was there a missed opportunity to make the ending more believable? Regards to all. Sara From rkelley at blazingisp.net Fri Jul 27 13:33:19 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Ricky & LeAnn) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:33:19 -0500 Subject: Reference to Easter foreshadowing? Message-ID: <00b501c7d052$b3dd50f0$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> No: HPFGUIDX 173235 I have already made a rather lengthy post on the subject of Christian references in the last book which point to Harry as the Christ figure, but I have a few more to add in addition to his refusal to use the killing curse, offering aid to his enemies, sacrificing himself to save the world from evil, being resurrected, and those who follow him are protected from Voldemort's spiritual evil. During the time between his first "death" and his return, where did he meet his mentor/father-figure? King's Cross. Also it seems to me that Wormtail closely resembles Judas Iscariot, who sold out Jesus' whereabouts for 30 pieces of silver and then died by his own hand. I've already mentioned the similarity I saw between Jesus and John the Baptist' baptism of him, when Harry plunged into the lake and Ron pulled him back to the surface. As I mentioned before, the Potter surname also recalls for me the Christian reference to, "He is the potter, we are the clay," and the similarity to Jesus' vocation as a carpenter. At first I had trouble with the way the Malfoys seemed to easily slip back into good graces of the wizarding world after the atrocities committed by Lucius and family. However, Lucius did serve time in Azkaban for his crimes. After further thought I realized that for me their story also served to illustrate that even those who repent at the eleventh hour are forgiven and accepted by Jesus. My husband also pointed out that the first book's title, PS/SS, could also refer to everlasting life, which of course is one of the basic Christian tenets for those who follow Jesus. Those who followed Harry could also be seen as disciples, evoking images for me of Percy the government official/Matthew the tax collector, Seamus/Doubting Thomas, and Wormtail/Judas as I already mentioned. Percy also illustrates the parable of the prodigal son. I too, live in the Bible Belt of America, but not all Christians are radical conservatives bent on stamping out Harry. The pastor of our Methodist church is a Harry fan, and has used quotes from the Potter books in several sermons to illustrate modern applications of biblical teaching. IMO the strength of the HP books is that people of all beliefs or non-belief can take something from each book and reinforce the morals of our own background teachings. The true magic is that we all can learn things from Harry that will make us better people if we are willing to apply them. Anders From csh at stanfordalumni.org Fri Jul 27 13:34:38 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:34:38 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered (wrong! -- or is it?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173236 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: >... > In short, given what we know of the plan, there just doesn't seem to > be any realistic way for Snape to survive once he had killed DD. Just as, as has been suggested in this thread, Dumbledore never intended Harry to be slaughtered (he of course needed to convince Snape that he did--otherwise, Snape could not have convincingly conveyed the information that Harry needed to sacrifice himself), I won't believe that Dumbledore wanted Snape to be slaughtered like a pig: Dumbledore knew that there was a possibility that Voldemort would go after the Elder Wand, and that Voldemort would think that Snape was its last master. However, if Voldemort were thinking clearly, he would have realized that the Elder Wand could be passed without killing the previous owner. If he thinks that the progression is Gregorovich/Grindlewald/Dumbledore/Snape, then he should have realized this fact since Gregorovich and Grindlewald were still alive. Of course, Voldemort eschews logic and feels someone has to pay for his inability to master the Elder Wand. If Harry defeated Snape before Voldemort got to the Elder Wand, I'm sure Harry would not have killed Snape. Note that it is at that point that Snape would reveal to Harry his need to sacrifice himself to destroy the bit of Voldemort's sole inside of him. Once Harry defeated Snape, then Voldemort would think that Harry was the master of the Elder Wand, so Snape would be safe. So either way, I don't think Snape was doomed after killing Dumbledore, regardless of whether Snape's action made him master of the Elder Wand. Chuck Han From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Fri Jul 27 13:39:17 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:39:17 -0000 Subject: Snape's Harry Hate and a What If Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173237 Well, 'hate' might not be the most accurate descriptive term, so perhaps "vehement dislike" is better. Anyhow... After reading DH, I'm inclined to think that Snape's dislike of Harry is one of three things: 1. He blames Harry for Lily's death. For if she had not protected him and stepped aside or was rendered alive but unable to stop Voldemort, Lily would (perhaps) still be alive. 2. Harry's physical resemblance of James is a constant reminder that James was the one who Lily married and had a child with. 3. An unhealthy combination of #1 and #2. Another point to ponder is what if Lily survived along with Harry. Would Lily have married Snape or would she have cast him aside? And if Lily did marry Snape, would Snape be better than, equal to, or worse than other fictional step-parents, such as Snow White's step-momma, Cinderella's step-momma, Hansel & Gretel's step-momma, etc.? Milz From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:41:03 2007 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:41:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <886319.77042.qm@web55106.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173238 Carol wrote, (in brief): His despair caused him to join his "friends" because he felt he had not other choice [followed by positing that Lily had already written him off as having joined his DE friends]. Jen countered with: > But my main objection to the above interpretation is the idea that > Lily holds even an iota of responsibility for Snape's choice to > join the DEs. [snippnig and pruning] > In fact, my understanding was Lily was the only thing tethering > Snape to a different path, and her awareness of that fact was one > reason she made a point of talking to him about his friends and > defending him to others. SSSusan agreed with Jen: IMO, these scenes from Snape's memories were included by JKR to provide **just that evidence** that Snape HAD been drifting towards his 'little Death Eater friends.' [chopping and cutting] Rather, it appears to me that what Jen has stated is the case -- Lily appears to be all that's tethering Snape to a different path. It appears to me that Snape simply didn't have the courage (or interest?) to choose that different path! Even with how much he 'loved' her. akh finally gets to her point: Weighing on the side of Jen and SSSusan, I read the scenes much as they did, that Snape was going to have to choose between his DE friends and Lily. Again, that "choices" theme is central to the trajectory of Snape's life. I also think this is a test of courage that was foreshadowed in PS/SS when Neville attempts to stop HRH from leaving to find the Stone. Dumbledore awards Neville for having the greater courage of standing up to his friends. We see the consequences of the failure of such courage in Snape, which might also explain why he's so sensitive to being called a coward, especially when it comes to actions associated with Lily. He WAS once too cowardly to stand up to his Slytherin friends, and he paid for it the rest of his life. akh, who's awed to be contributing, however briefly, to a discussion among three of her favorite posters! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ladymela99 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:42:59 2007 From: ladymela99 at yahoo.com (Melanie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo... In-Reply-To: <1f40e2480707270256r56f94167x92917271d2ac3e5b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <512774.20205.qm@web30011.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173240 My reply: Is it possible that Rose and Hugo are Hermione's parents? I don't think we know thier names. Melanie --------------------------------- Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From beatrice23 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:43:35 2007 From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:43:35 -0000 Subject: Why refuse the Elder Wand? (was: Harry as Auror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173241 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > Ken Wrote: > > > Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. > > If Harry really meant to end its power > > by dying a natural death, undefeated by > > another wizard, then he simply cannot > > become an auror. The risk of losing his > > wand in a confrontation is just too great. > > You know, that is the one and part of JKR's wonderful story that just > doesn't make sense to me. If you don't like the Elder Wand then just > snap it in two; but why would you even want to destroy it? That wand > served Dumbledore well for half a century, I am certain that wand did > a lot of good in that time, and I see no reason it would be a less > faithful servant to Harry. Call me the reincarnation of Voldemort if > you want to but it would only take me about one heartbeat to decide to > keep it! Power is not always a bad thing; as a matter of fact I > rather like power. > > Eggplant > Beatrice: It is like Dumbledore says at one point in the series people have a tendency to want what is bad for them. As the wand is so powerful, it is inevitable that someone or several someones will try to overpower Harry inorder to master the wand. Not only does it make Harry a marked man - something that he has been since an infant - but imagine that wand in the hands of Draco Malfoy or someone like him. True Dumbledore used it for good and so would Harry, but it is better that it pass into nothingness than be mastered by one who would continue its bloody legacy. From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 13:44:35 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:44:35 -0000 Subject: Why refuse the Elder Wand? (was: Harry as Auror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173242 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > Ken Wrote: > > > Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. > > If Harry really meant to end its power > > by dying a natural death, undefeated by > > another wizard, then he simply cannot > > become an auror. The risk of losing his > > wand in a confrontation is just too great. > > You know, that is the one and part of JKR's wonderful story that just > doesn't make sense to me. If you don't like the Elder Wand then just > snap it in two; but why would you even want to destroy it? That wand > served Dumbledore well for half a century, I am certain that wand did > a lot of good in that time, and I see no reason it would be a less > faithful servant to Harry. Call me the reincarnation of Voldemort if > you want to but it would only take me about one heartbeat to decide to > keep it! Power is not always a bad thing; as a matter of fact I > rather like power. > > Eggplant > Ken: I have no answer as to why Harry just didn't destroy it. Sometimes authors get so focused on their story that they fail to see trivial solutions to problems. And then later on they have to dance around in interviews and invent a lame reason why the illogical is logical. This is a good observation though, if Harry really does want to become an auror then all he has to do is to destroy the elder wand. The only reason I can see to keep it intact is that it is an important historical artifact. A broken, useless elder wand would have as much value as a museum exhibit as a whole one though. A whole but powerless elder wand buried in a tomb has no value as an artifact even. The elder wand was a good tool in Dumbledore's hand because he was a good man. Harry is as good if not "gooder" but for Harry to use it is to place it at even more risk of passing at full power to an evil successor since the possession of an "unbeatable" wand tempts the owner to seek confrontations, not avoid them. You are Boromir, Dumbledore is Gandalf, Harry is Frodo, I will play Sam and just say that Mr. Frodo is right, the wand's power needs to be destroyed, not used. In reality the solution for the elder wand is the same as for the one ring: it must be physically destroyed. Harry's intentions are noble but he will end up "pulling an Isildur" if he isn't extremely careful -- and lucky. Destroying the wand would lift a lifelong burden from Harry and allow him to pursue the career he wants. Ken From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:49:30 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:49:30 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173243 > Dungrollin: > > How about this for an inconsistency: > Why didn't Voldemort become the master of the Elder wand when he AKed > Harry in the forest? > > Because he didn't kill him? DD didn't kill Grindelwald, either, > neither did Harry kill Malfoy. Needs some bending over backwards to > wriggle out of IMO. Well, if Harry's correct in his explanation to LV in the Great Hall, Snape would never have become master of the wand by killing DD, because he would not have *defeated* DD; it was something they planned between them. I think a very similar reason would apply when LV AKed Harry in the Forest: it wasn't a defeat of Harry, because it's what Harry wanted for him to do. Annemehr, still trying to work out exactly what she said... From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:50:59 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:50:59 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173244 <<>> MelroseDarjeeling wrote: Everyone might not agree that *all* of these are intended as a Christian allegory, but I suspect most would agree that the central point of the book, and indeed the whole series, is Harry sacrificing his life for others in a dead-on parallel to Christ's crucifixion. Betsy Hp: <<>> In a bit of irony I've had reason to study the crucifixion this week and I have to strongly disagree with MelroseDarjeeling's contention that Harry's death scene paralleled it at all. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that what occurs in DH is not only not very Christian, it's actually in opposition to everything Christ taught and demonstrated. Of course this is my opinion and I'm sure (very sure! ) others > will differ. But, speaking for myself, here's the problems I have > with attempts to parallel Christ's crucifixion with Harry's death. > > Just on a non-theological basis, Jesus was surrounded by the living, > not the dead. His disciples were there, they protested when he was > taken and in fact Peter attempted to fight the soldiers leading Jesus > away. (A move Jesus rebuked, healing the soldier Peter had wounded.)> > In contrast, Harry seperates himself from his friends and speaks to the dead. He goes to his death at the orders of a *very* human man, not the word of God. And he leaves his friends fighting and killing those around them. > > So visually the scenes are completely different, IMO. > > On a more theological level (which is where things always get hairy, so again, my own opinion here), while Jesus submitted himself to the base laws of men to prove the Christ *above* those laws (to > demonstrate a higher law, if you will), Harry went to die because he had a bit of evil in him and death seemed the only solution. Harry even had his beloved dead around him encouraging him to do it. Jesus sacrificed; Harry suicided. > > And of course, the kicker for me is that Harry is not Jesus Christ. Not even close. Looking at Jesus's actions (healing the Centurion's servant, protecting the adulteress, healing the woman with an issue of blood, taking on a tax collecter as his disciple, speaking with the non-elect, healing the woman of Canaan's daughter) and at his words (the parable of the Good Samaritan, the entire Sermon on the Mount) shows that Jesus was inclusive and compassionate. <<>> That's my opinion anyway. > > Betsy Hp > KATIE REPLIES: I usually avoid the Chirstianity threads on this list, mostly because, being someone who was raised Catholic and went to twelve years of Catholic school, left the church and practiced Wicca for a while, and then married a practicing Buddhist...my views are a bit...different. But I really felt the need to respond to this thread, and I hope I do not offend in doing so. I agree that there are parallels that *can* be made to the Christian story. However, I do not believe that these are "Christian" books, at least in the sense of a Narnia. JKR has said that her morality is based in Christianity - but that doesn't mean that these books are supposed to send some Christian message out to the world. It means that the way she learned her personal morals and ethics were in the context of being a Christian. Just like someone who is raised Hindu will have ethics and morals that are contextually Hindu...incidentally, I wonder why it is that Christians often claim that *any* redemptive or moral tale is Christian? Is redemption copyrighted by Christianity? Why can't HP be books about personal truth, love, and redemption without being Christianized? As for the Biblical quotes...she also used a quote from Aeschylus...who was a pagan. So...the idea that Biblical quotes somehow prove this is a Christian tract don't hold much water with me. Further more, Harry's conquering of death seems eminently UNChristian to me. Isn't God supposed to be the only one to conquer death? IF (and I don't think she was) writing some Christian morality play, she blasphemed pretty good by having Harry basically play God at the end. I just don't ever see the whole idea of these being Christian books. And,as I have said before, that would pretty much take the magic right out of them for me if I believed that. Just my opinion! I am NOT trying flame anyone or offend anyone. I have been told before that I am insulting Christians by arguing these points, and I certainly don't mean to do that. My family is all Catholic, and I certainly love and respect them. I just strongly feel that these are NOT Christian books in any literal sense, other than the writer being Christian...which most writers in the UK probably are, right? Ok. No more posting on Christianity threads. I just had to say that. Thanks for letting me, and I hope no one is offended by my opinion, Cheers, Katie From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 13:49:03 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:49:03 +0800 Subject: =?gb18030?Q?Re=3A_=5BHPforGrownups=5D_rec=3A__Missing_?= =?gb18030?Q?from_=27Harry_Potter=27_=A8C_a_real_moral_stru?= =?gb18030?Q?ggle?= In-Reply-To: <966545.28585.qm@web30806.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <966545.28585.qm@web30806.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <46A9F7CF.8060202@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173245 Pamela Rosen blessed us with this gem On 27/07/2007 07:19: > Joan wrote: > "Missing from 'Harry Potter' : a real moral struggle", written by > Jenny Sawyer, This is a point -- I wish I could find the discussion in my archives -- I made as far back as book four. Without the grey, without the moral struggle, Harry Potter just is not compelling. I think Ms. Sawyer is correct: JKR kept Snape ambiguous as a plot device, nothing more. I didn't realize she had expressed puzzlement over Snape's attraction; but her confusion helps explain why his storyline ended in such a colossal train-wreck in the final book. Having failed to discern the essence of Snape's character, it's no wonder she didn't know what to do with him. > But nor do I think that Harry's destiny was pre-determined (except by > JKR herself) or we wouldn't have spent two years talking about it. I think I disagree. We spent two years talking about it only because we didn't realize his destiny was predetermined. > Though the book may have an obscured moral, it has real, tangible morals > that a child can understand. I've come to the conclusion that HP has not so much an obscure moral as it does obscured morals. Yes, children do recognize the moral issues involved, but in this case that's not necessarily a good thing. I've already mentioned the experience I had with my son who, at ten year of age, was already able to recognize the moral cloud hanging over Harry's use of the Unforgivable Curses: "But I thought they were bad?", he said. So how could good guys be using them? CJ, Taiwan From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 27 13:58:26 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:58:26 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all Message-ID: <12643828.1185544706247.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173246 From: Ken Hutchinson >If Harry really meant to end its power by dying a natural death, >undefeated by another wizard, then he simply cannot become >an auror. The risk of losing his wand in a confrontation is just too >great. It is one of the high points in the conclusion of this series >when Harry demonstrates the depth of his understanding of wandlore >and the depth of his moral sense by making this decision. If Rowling >goes on to write an encyclopedia in which Harry becomes an Auror >she will be marring her own work. The Harry I see at the end of DH >has moved beyond being an auror. > >I agree that Harry needs a meaningful job in the WW, but he must not >take that kind of job. Bart: In my line of work (actually, a couple of them), I frequently run into situations that, on the face, cannot be true, yet they are. I therefore have to take a step back and say, "OK, assuming that I am seeing what I am seeing, how can this happen?" I agree with your assessment. And, sometimes, a situation in canon is, in fact, impossible (such as the order of appearance of the victims out of Morty's wand in GOF). However, here, I think it's possible to create a scenario where both we and JKR are right. Now, I am not saying that this is exactly what JKR had in mind; in fact, I'd be quite surprised if I was right on. However, this is ONE way that it could have taken place; I assume that there are others. First of all, let's see where Harry is at the end of the main event. Hogwarts has been badly damaged, but by no means destroyed. There has just been a civil war in Wizarding England (hmmm....nobody will understand WE, and WWE sounds too much like professional wrestling, and WGB sounds too much like a radio station. How about WW!GB?). So, the following problems are left over (not interesting enough for a sequel, but good for fanfic): 1) The Ministry is in a shambles. It's not known who were collaborators, who were imp'd, who were innocent dupes stuck in a bad place (hi, Percy!), and who were trying to fix things from within (hi, Arty!). It's been established that there is no sure way to determine if someone has been imp'd, except if they were acting WAY out of character. 2) The WW!GB economy is in a shambles. We will have to leave that aside for the moment, because we know too little about the economy. 3) Hogwarts needs major repairs, and a few new staff members. So, first of all, I see some international cooperation coming in, and not all of it altruistic. However, I do see a massive effort to rebuild Hogwarts in time for the fall. Most of the teachers survived. However, things will be chaotic at first. Harry, certainly Hermione, and almost certainly Ron, will want to complete their educations. However, Harry is in an interesting place. His symbolic value to the Ministry, if anything, is much higher (because of situation #1 and #2), and, with OOP people in charge, it is a good bet that his position would be real as well as symbolic, especially since Harry will probably STILL make that a condition. As I have mentioned before, Harry is currently one of the wealthier members of WW!GB society, having combined the small Potter fortune with the large Black fortune. I'm not saying he's richer than the Malfoy's, but he's certainly on the same order. Meaning that he can live on investments for the rest of his life (George, if he wants to stay in business, will probably end up with Harry as a trusted and completely silent partner). So, he doesn't need to have any kind of salaried position. Therefore, I definitely see him working for the Ministry on a consulting basis (which means that the Dolly the Pink is heading for Azkaban). I could even see Harry helping out with DDA classes, but by no means full time. His experiences with Prof. Snape have, one hopes, taught him that there is still a LOT he can learn. In any case, this could lead to Harry being involved with the Aurors, first on an advisory basis, and later on an administrative basis, without ever having to actually interact with the perps. Ron would probably make a good Archie Goodwin (with a little memory training), for the fanfic minded. And, based on past history, Ron will probably actually feel sorry that Harry doesn't get to get in on the action, which will help avoid "second fiddle" syndrome. In any case, as I said, this is just ONE scenario that fits the known facts. There are certainly many more. (As far as Hermione goes, she was always more of a researcher than a theorist or an engineer; I think that law is an excellent use of her talents, in spite of her protestations. Bart From heiloo at aol.com Fri Jul 27 13:16:54 2007 From: heiloo at aol.com (susan4508) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:16:54 -0000 Subject: Sectumsempra inconsistancies. In-Reply-To: <263347.10787.qm@web55708.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173247 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Chancie wrote: > > Why is it that in HBP, when Harry uses sectumsempra on Draco, Snape > is able to repair the damage. But in DH, when Snape uses it, and ends > up cutting off George's (I can't get to my book right now, and can't > remember for sure if it was Fred or George so sorry if I'm wrong) we > are told that they wouldn't be able to fix his ear because it was Dark > Magic. Do you think it was just because they were unaware of the > spell, and didn't now the counter spell for it, or did I miss > something? Snape also says in HBP that he invented the curse, so he would obviously know the coutner-curse. It was probably the first time Mrs. Weasley had encountered it. Susan From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 14:07:09 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:07:09 -0000 Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173248 "ciraarana" wrote: > > Kia ora! > > The following questions are from the list I made after the first > reading of DH. If anybody can answer them, I'd be grateful. (I > excluded most of the unanswerable questions, like What happened to the > Dursleys?) > Anne SquiresL I thought I'd try some of your excellent questions. Just my take on things, of course. I know I could be misinterpreting things. > > Q: Did the Sorting Hat burn completely? What or who is Sorting now? Anne: I thought the hat did not burn up. It's a magical object and I think it withstood LV's attempt to destroy it. > > Q: Why didn't Snape know about the Horcurxes? He's a Dark wizard. > Voldemort is boasting about his near immortality. Snape is a clever > man. Why didn't he know?? Anne: DD explains in HBP that even among Dark Wizards the knowledge of the Horcruxes is very, very rare. IIRC. Snape (or the other DEs)not knowing about Horcruxes did not bother me. > > Q: Where is Snape's portrait?? He was Headmaster of Hogwarts. We saw > how their portraits pop up after their death. And I'm sure Harry would > have noticed Snape's portrait. So, where is it?? Anne: I think the portrait is indeed there. I know it's not mentioned, but I still think it's there. Harry was in the office the first time to see the memories in the pensieve and all the portraits are described as being empty. The second time Harry had to get is final debriefing from DD. He was focussed on discussing the Horcruxes. Also, I think everyone who participated in the final battle was still in shock, HRH included. > > Q: How could Dumbledore have known Draco's mission before Draco did? Anne: Snape told him about it. "Scowling Snape said, "The Dark Lord does not expect Draco to succeed. This is merely punishment for Lucius's recent failures." DH, US edition, p. 682 The Dark Lord had obviously discussed the plan with Snape. Snape told DD. Note: I'm very curious to know why do you think Draco hasn't yet been told of this mission at this point? Did I miss something? > > Q: Snape wasn't yet teaching at Hogwarts when he approached Dumbledore > with the plea to keep Lily safe (otherwise they wouldn't have met at > the hilltop). So, when did that interview take place? And why did it > take Voldemort so long to find the Potters? They only went into hiding > a week before they were murdered Anne: Not sure. > > Q: Snape approached Voldemort with the plea to not kill Lily? And > Voldemort agreed? He agreed to not kill a "Mudblood"?? (And he did > agree, didn't he, because he gave Lily the choice to step away.) > Looking at Voldemort's policy ... Are we supposed to accept that? Anne: Yes, we are. I think LV is a sociopath. Who can fathom what goes on in the mind of a person like that? > Q: The Polyjuice Potion. It only lasts for an hour. That was important > in GoF. And in this book it's never even once mentioned! And some of > the adventures took longer than an hour. Is this a new version of > Polyjuice? Why aren't we told so? Anne: We are shown in GoF that PJ potion can last for a year if the pjed person keeps taking drinks of the potion. I think maybe (not sure about this) that this is what's going on here. > > Q: The prophesy business. What a mess. Dumbledore's and Trelawney's > accounts clashed ? if what Dumbledore said was true about the evening > of the Prophesy, there was no way Trelawney could have known the > eavesdropper was Snape. But she knew. And Snape still only reported > the first part. How does that all fit?? Anne: I agree that the two accounts don't match up. I'll have to think about this for a while. Someone is confused, confunded or lying. I think it could be a Flint. Possibly. > > Q: Harry peering in on Voldemort. Excuse me, but Voldemort is the one > who is in control of the connection. During HBP, he kept it shut. And > now, suddenly, Harry can creep in again? Without Voldemort noticing? > (Okay, perhaps Harry didn't always notice when Voldemort came to peek > into his mind in OotP, and perhaps now Voldemort doesn't know Harry's > there.) And Voldemort didn't even once use the connection to try > something like he did with Sirius? He never used it to look in on > Harry and see where the boy was? You know, to better catch him, and > all that. I half-expected it for the first several hundred pages. It > never happened. And I can't understand why not. Anne: I think DD tells HHarry that the soul bit in Harry has been growing stronger and stronger since LV came to power. This soul bit gave Harry access to LV's movements and thoughts; yet, LV didn't know. After his DoM possession of Harry I think LV was determned to never willingly go into Harry's head again. Experiencing Harry's grief was just too painful. I think it's possible Harry was also protected by the fact that he grieves so much in this book. LV is obsessed with finding a wand to defeat Harry throughout the book. That's all he thinks about in DH until he realizes his horcruxes are being destroyed. I think he knows Harry will come to him in the end so he doesn't need to be in Harry's head. Also, I think LV thinks it's likely his DEs will capture Harry. > > Q: The Trace. Rubbish. Excuse me, but it is. I mean, in CoS Harry is > accused of having used the Hover Charm. The Ministry didn't know it > wasn't him. Somewhere, I think at the end of HBP, Dumbledore even told > Harry that the Ministry can only detect that magic is performed, but > not by whom. And now we are introduced to the Trace, which allows the > Ministry to tell exactly who performed which spell?? No. Doesn't make > sense. Or is it a new ministry policy and I simply missed that bit? Anne: Mad-eye describes the Trace as being able to detect magic performed near an underage wizard. I don't think the Trace can specifically tell who preformed the magic. If you think about it this Trace only restricts Muggle raised underage wizards from doing magic out of school. At any rate, until Harry is inside of the Order/Ministry wards then the Ministry can trace him if anyone performs magic near him. That's my understanding. I acknowledge that the Trace seems a bit convoluted. > > Q: If Expelliarmus changes the wand's allegiance then nobody from > the DA is still using their own wand. No wizard or witch who has ever > been taught that spell at Hogwarts would be using their own wand > (although considering the DADA teacher problem ) But wouldn't Harry > have won Voldemort's wand in the graveyard scene in GoF? Anne; I think the wand has to be taken in an adversarial situation as opposed to a practice or learning situation. > > > Answers are welcome. Even if you only tell me I'm stupid and missed > something. (At least then I could stop wondering.) > > Toodles, > CiraArana > Anne Squires: I had fun trying to answer your questions. I hope my answers make sense and don't make me look stupid. From unicornspride at centurytel.net Fri Jul 27 15:14:17 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:14:17 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Parseltongue and Ron WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) References: Message-ID: <002001c7d060$cf2dedc0$0202a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 173249 > Karina: > > I've been suspecting that Parseltongue is learnable since Dumbledore > didn't ask Harry for translation of the Morfin's memory wherein he and > Voldemort spoke exclusively in Parseltongue. > > Lynda: > > It didn't bother me either, because any language is learnable, really, > if someone has enough initiative. > > > Cira: > > But if it was learnable, why isn't half of Slytherin House speaking > Parsel already? I rather think that Salazar would have loved the idea > of distunguishing his students from all others by having them using a > "secret language". Lana: If everyone starts doing it, whaat makes it "special"? What makes SS's abitily rare? Nothing. When you can do something like that i think you wouldn't want everyone else to be able to do it. Sound like Salazar to me. Lana From lexac at mail.com Fri Jul 27 14:22:49 2007 From: lexac at mail.com (Lexa_C) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:22:49 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173250 In discussion about the underlying morality of the Potterverse and the continuation of the House system - and the problematic nature of both - I've seen the idea come up more than once that despite the anti Muggle-registration stance of the books, given what seems the inherent sketchness and evilness of Slytherins, it'd be easy to argue FOR a Slytherin- registration system. I ask you, is that not what the Housing system *does*? Isn't Slytherin House, itself, the kind of registration system theorized? -Alexa From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 14:23:04 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:23:04 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173251 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > > I think the Slytherin who would be most remembered would be Pansy > Parkinson. > Somehow I think Tom Riddle will be remembered more than Pansy Parkinson. Some see the glass half full, others half empty, as an engineer I tend to see the glass as being twice as big as it needs to be. You seem determined to see the glass as bone dry. I think that is your choice more than the author's intention or an over active imagination on my part. Slytherin has a real problem and in spite of that problem there were Slytherins who, however late, however begrudgingly, were able to make the right choices. That is the basis of reconciliation. I cannot hold the students of Slytherin house at the time of the final battle to the same standards as I hold other houses since, like the Hitler Youth or Young Pioneers, they were only doing as they had been taught. The oldest of them are only approaching the age where the best of us begin to question the wisdom of our elders and to rise above their limitations. In my view it is not the house system that is problematic, it is not the age at which the students are sorted that is problematic, it is the criteria by which they are sorted. Every house needs the brave, the ambitious, the wise, and the team player. The hat should abandon the founder's prejudices and make sure that each house gets some of each. The final events and the epilogue tell me that healing is taking place. True healing of such a deep divide will take a generation or two. The kind of instant resolution you seem to have been expecting would have been a contrived and unsatisfying conclusion for my taste. I choked a bit over Kreacher's sudden conversion, the thing that won me over there was his "once more for luck, Master?" line. What was ultimately believable in one elf would have been unacceptably saccharine in the whole of Slytherin house. It will take time to heal the split that was started by Slytherin himself. Ken From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 14:06:42 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:06:42 -0500 Subject: =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Re:_[HPforGrownups]_rec:_Missing_from_?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?'Harry_Potter'_=96_a_real_moral_struggle?= In-Reply-To: <46A9F7CF.8060202@yahoo.com> References: <966545.28585.qm@web30806.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46A9F7CF.8060202@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707270706h79b99fdble8831464a05b5d22@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173252 CJ, Taiwan: > I've come to the conclusion that HP has not so much an obscure moral as > it does obscured morals. Yes, children do recognize the moral issues > involved, but in this case that's not necessarily a good thing. I've > already mentioned the experience I had with my son who, at ten year of > age, was already able to recognize the moral cloud hanging over Harry's > use of the Unforgivable Curses: "But I thought they were bad?", he said. > So how could good guys be using them? montims: a good lesson for your son - good guys do bad things, bad guys do good things. NOBODY is good all through or bad all through. I think this is a very good moral to be drawn from JKR's septology... There are too many images of perfection - supermodel bodies, everloving families, eversmiling friends, etc, etc - held out to susceptible people who feel failures because they don't match up, and lose their tempers sometimes, or eat too much chocolate... Time for a reality check. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 14:26:11 2007 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:26:11 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173253 > > Dungrollin: > > > > How about this for an inconsistency: > > Why didn't Voldemort become the master of the Elder wand when he AKed Harry in the forest? > > > > Because he didn't kill him? DD didn't kill Grindelwald, either, > > neither did Harry kill Malfoy. Needs some bending over backwards to wriggle out of IMO. Annemehr: > Well, if Harry's correct in his explanation to LV in the Great Hall, Snape would never have become master of the wand by killing DD, because he would not have *defeated* DD; it was something they planned between them. > > I think a very similar reason would apply when LV AKed Harry in the > Forest: it wasn't a defeat of Harry, because it's what Harry wanted for him to do. > Dung: But Harry didn't know that he was going to come back, he thought he was going to die, and Voldy thought (or hoped) he was going to die. It would have been the end of the only one who could (according to the prophecy) get rid of Voldy for good. Now if *Voldy* had been in on it too, I could see your reasoning. Look at it this way: if Snape had been ESE! and killed DD *not* because DD wanted him to, but because he wanted to further Voldemort's agenda, or because he truly hated DD, Snape *would* have become the master of the wand, wouldn't he? Speaking of which, did Grindelwald "come quietly" or not? 'Cause if he did, DD couldn't have gained mastery of the wand. Maybe I'm just confused. From chnc1024 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 14:43:06 2007 From: chnc1024 at yahoo.com (Chancie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:43:06 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173254 > Betsy Hp: Just on a non-theological basis, Jesus was surrounded by the living, not the dead. His disciples were there, they protested when he was taken and in fact Peter attempted to fight the soldiers leading Jesus away. (A move Jesus rebuked, healing the soldier Peter had wounded.) In contrast, Harry seperates himself from his friends and speaks to the dead. He goes to his death at the orders of a *very* human man, not the word of God. And he leaves his friends fighting and killing those around them. On a more theological level (which is where things always get hairy, so again, my own opinion here), while Jesus submitted himself to the base laws of men to prove the Christ *above* those laws (to demonstrate a higher law, if you will), Harry went to die because he had a bit of evil in him and death seemed the only solution. Harry even had his beloved dead around him encouraging him to do it. Jesus sacrificed; Harry suicided. And of course, the kicker for me is that Harry is not Jesus Christ. Not even close. Looking at Jesus's actions shows that Jesus was inclusive and compassionate. There's also the story of Saul's conversion into Paul that shows that with Christ redemption is always possible. You are not locked into the person you thought you were at age eleven. DH gives us a completely different view. Instead of inclusion we get regulated and codified exclusion. Compassion is limited only to a rarified few. And redemption is an impossibility. You are who you were born to be and only the elect are blessed. But I do personally reject the idea that such theories have any bearing on Christianity (except in a sort of historical interest kind of way, like an astronomer looking at old theories based on the earth being the center of the solar system). So I also cannot see any example of the Christ within DH and therefore the series. That's my opinion anyway. Betsy Hp > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Chancie: While you are of course intitled to your opinion Betsy Hp, I wonder if perhaps you have over looked quite a few points. In the garden, when Jesus prayed, he was discussing his impending crusifiction with GOD, Who is definatly alive, and in a way so are Lily, James, Sirius, and Lupin. As Hermione states in the grave yard, when Harry questions the quote on his parent's Tomb. "The last enemy to be conqured is death" it doesn't mean cheating death it means LIVING AFTER DEATH! If you are a beliver in Christianity, as am I, then I'm sure you can see the difference. Harry is NOT surounded by death, but Life and Love...Still see an inconsistincy there? I also see the "Harry had a bit of evil in him" MUCH differently. When Jesus was on the Cross, he was carrying the sin of the world, so that they might be saved. Harry sacrificed himself, to "kill the sin" in him. I don't believe Harry "suicided", I think he definatly sacrificed! He went in knowing that he would die, but that in his death many would be saved because Evil could FINALLY be defeated! I also believe there are numerous accounts of Harry's compassion, look at how he saved Draco and spared Stan Shunpike just to name a few. He's even ridculed by Lupin for it telling him he should have killed him! As far as the "redemption limited to few" there are PLENTY of instances in the Bible where people COULD have chose to follow God, and decided not to. That's not that they HAD to remain in their sin, they CHOSE to! We see that you can RESTORE THE SOUL by remorse, something that you also need to RESTORE THE SOUL from sin in Christianity! You have to Repent, and see sin the way God does, beliving that you were wrong, and then accepting him for who he is, God-infalible, perfect, and almighty. In addition to those IMHO many consistancy's with Harry Potter, and Jesus, there is also the clearest example to me at least. When Voldy and Harry are dueling in the end. Harry makes the comment that (sorry don't have my book, so I may not get the quote exactly right) NO ONE could be hurt because of his sacrifice! This is IMO again a VERY clear picture of how Jesus's blood a protection from "The Evil One"!!! While we still can make mistakes, and big one's at that, DEATH/EVIL can never overcome us, because Jesus took that punishment already! Ok, I think I've said enough for now; I'll step off of my soap box. Chancie From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 14:45:36 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:45:36 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173255 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > > Jen: Like you, I expected there to be some move toward unity and > wondered not only why it didn't happen but why the insistence on > showing just how far-fetched that idea was? Call this hopeless fanwanking, but I got the impression that what was being shown was how bad things had gotten in wizarding society. I was frankly a little taken aback by Phineus Nigellus calling Hermione a Mudblood, for one thing, although he's of an earlier generation--a former Headmaster, still carrying on that kind of idiocy? It was telling how quickly people in the Ministry went over to the Muggle-born Registration idea, too. So clearly the rot runs deep in wizarding society. But Slughorn did strike me as different, in how he fought for Hogwarts and in how he'd behaved when he was a professor. So what I drew out of this was an argument for how Voldemort's ascension and networking had done a lot of damage to Slytherin House. Nineteen years later, when there's been some purging done (not indicated so overtly in the book but noted in interview, so I'll run with it), things have a chance to be different. Expecting mass revelations in the middle of battle is good melodrama, but I can see why JKR didn't go with it. -Nora shrugs and throws this one out there From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 14:47:48 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:47:48 -0000 Subject: That Whole Christian Thing (plus assorted others) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173256 I'm of the opinion that JKR included some parallels/allusions to Christianty. This is different than saying these books are allegories for the Crucifixion of Christ, etc. And yet! She also included some elements that are clearly non-Christian. Something that has always struck me interesting is that JKR enjoys glittering ambiguities, and derives an enormous amount of authorial satisfaction from leaving things as open for interpretation as can be. Me? I don't think it's wrong to note the Christian or non-Christian elements, but it's somewhat flawed to leap from noticing these elements to a tidy little summary judgment of the series. "Fliwick levitated a menorah during the Battle of Hogwarts, therefore the septology is nothing but Hebrew apocalyptic literature." I'm fairly confident this is not a viable option left us. What seems logical to me is that having a broad array of these "traces" sprinkled generously throughout the book gives the readership that much more to resonate within them. In that sense, there is much genius at work. The Christian reader can "click" with some things, the Classics* reader with others, etc. To squeeze almost 4000 pages into one facile explanation strikes me as a disservice and also something of a worrisome mark of refusing to see the world through a prism alien to one's own. (That said, it's OK if, after seeing things through a different perspective you still manage to see good reason for keeping your own.) Just one man's opinion, -Joe * I mean, c'mon, that whole COS ending was pretty much Orpheus going down to Hades to get Euridyce back. From mjanetd at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 15:05:14 2007 From: mjanetd at yahoo.com (mjanetd) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:05:14 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173257 Why was Colin Creevey still at school during the battle at Hogwarts? Wasn't he and his brother muggleborn? I remember their father was milk- man. Why would they allow mud-bloods at school when they were taking wands away from muggle-born adults? And another question. Someone mentioned in another thread that the Dursley's died when Diggle's house blew up. I've only read DH once so the little details are vague. I'd hate to think the Dursleys died. Janet From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 15:18:23 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:18:23 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173258 Magpie: > > I think the Slytherin who would be most remembered would be Pansy > > Parkinson. > > Ken: > Somehow I think Tom Riddle will be remembered more than Pansy > Parkinson. Magpie: Maybe. But I think Pansy would be pretty up there. Whether or not she was known by name. Ken: Some see the glass half full, others half empty, as an > engineer I tend to see the glass as being twice as big as it needs to > be. You seem determined to see the glass as bone dry. Magpie: I think I'm just looking realistically at what the book said to me. If you start off with this house of antagonists, and consistently show them being a certain way, and in the end make that sort of a side issue, I just don't see why there's any reason I should write in an ending where integrating Slytherin into the school is the outcome. It's like just assuming that everybody likes werewolves or that Goblins can now carry wands just because that would be good. The epilogue takes place 19 years after the events of the book, and the most we've got to show for it is a platitude Harry gives in response to his son being worried he'll wind up in Slytherin, having iirc been teased by his brother that he would do so. That establishes something about Slytherin there. Harry does not respond with his new ideas about how good Slytherin is--nor should he, because there aren't any. He says, "If you're in Slytherin, that would be Slytherin's gain. And you're named after a Slytherin who was very brave--the quality of the house the rest of your family is Sorted for. Oh, but if it really matters, I've never told anyone, but I also worried about being Slytherin as a boy but the hat lets you choose against it." Bone dry? No. But big turnaround in the view of Slytherin isn't there either. Nor do I think it was ever considered something that needed to happen by the author. Ken: I think that is > your choice more than the author's intention or an over active > imagination on my part. Slytherin has a real problem and in spite of > that problem there were Slytherins who, however late, however > begrudgingly, were able to make the right choices. Magpie: Yes, I know that--and I saw how it happened. I completely acknolwedge the limited roles of those Slytherins. I also see a difference between them and the values of the people who are part of the circle of heroes. Ken: That is the basis > of reconciliation. I cannot hold the students of Slytherin house at > the time of the final battle to the same standards as I hold other > houses since, like the Hitler Youth or Young Pioneers, they were only > doing as they had been taught. Magpie: But given what I read of the books, and judging them from the values I get from the books, that just really doesn't seem like the basis for reconciliation at all. It's the basis of not condemning them completely, but not yet reconciliation. Which is why I think in the end we're looking at a scene 19 years after the fact that doesn't to me look like so much progress. Perhaps it's like Slytherin pre-Tom Riddle (though I don't know if you can ever really go back to that completely). Ken: The oldest of them are only approaching > the age where the best of us begin to question the wisdom of our > elders and to rise above their limitations. Magpie: That's an optimistic view of how they could change--and one that I share, but it's basically the same view I started out the series with. I don't know if it will happen or not, or if it will happen to the extent it needed to happen. Ken: > In my view it is not the house system that is problematic, it is not > the age at which the students are sorted that is problematic, it is > the criteria by which they are sorted. Every house needs the brave, > the ambitious, the wise, and the team player. The hat should abandon > the founder's prejudices and make sure that each house gets some of each. Magpie: I agree--but the house system isn't being questioned in the text much, is it? Voldemort tries to burn that hat to make everybody Slytherin (he claims) but the hat is saved. We don't hear about any big overhaul of how the Sorting happens either. It seems exactly the same as it was when Harry started out. Another author might have handled this configuration very differently and just had different priorities. She might have had Harry sort into Gryffindor, Ron in Hufflepuff and Hermione in Ravenclaw--with an antagonist in Slytherin that Harry eventually got along with perhaps. But that's not the way Rowling went. People have over the years pointed out that Ron brings the Hufflepuff qualities with his loyalties, and Harry's Slytherin-ish and Hermione's Ravenclaw--but the fact remains that they're all Gryffindors. And that's not surprising, because courage is the all-important virtue. When I saw the four houses I immediately thought that integrating them all equally will be a priority, but I just don't see any evidence that this is a priority in the story JKR wrote. Ultimately the story was far more coherent without that priority. Ken: > The final events and the epilogue tell me that healing is taking > place. True healing of such a deep divide will take a generation or > two. The kind of instant resolution you seem to have been expecting > would have been a contrived and unsatisfying conclusion for my taste. Magpie: I did not want an instant resolution. I wanted a definite thing done within the story that based on the values consistently presented made integration possible. I did not see that. Whatever might happen over a generation or two seems like obviously not part of the story. In a generation or two perhaps House Elves will be freed or goblins will carry wands or werewolves will be accepted by everyone--but I didn't see a definitive step towards that in the canon. As far as I can see Slytherin is in a similar position as it was at the beginning of canon--it's not like it was ever not part of the school with the potential for connection. It still has that potential. Ken: > I choked a bit over Kreacher's sudden conversion, the thing that won > me over there was his "once more for luck, Master?" line. What was > ultimately believable in one elf would have been unacceptably > saccharine in the whole of Slytherin house. It will take time to heal > the split that was started by Slytherin himself. Magpie: It will take time and, imo, a new story, because that wasn't the point of this one. Anything could happen in the future, but Harry Potter was Chosen to defeat Voldemort, not heal that split. It presumably improved post-Voldemort. The silly things have been saved from themselves, but they did not save themselves on the level of the other houses. They are not wholly condemned. That's where they seem to stand to me. Kreacher's turnaround may be saccharine, but his devotion to Harry does seem pretty common on the good side. (And then there's also my own subjective problem, which is that to me integration naturally included the kind of change on the good side that wasn't coming either, making the whole thing even more lopsided and difficult.) -m From scraft at dustshield.com Fri Jul 27 14:15:08 2007 From: scraft at dustshield.com (Scott) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:15:08 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: <9CD958B5-7836-4743-B444-BD9E9EDD81B8@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173259 > Mary: > If someone takes his Phoenix core wand from him, it will not matter > to the > Elder Wand. > doug; > > Harry needed only to disarm Draco, who was not wielding the Elder > wand at the time, to become master of the Elder wand. Scott: The whole point is that in order for someone else to take ownership and become master of the elder wand, they would not only have to disarm Harry (take his wand) but they also need to know where the elder wand is; at this point Harry is the only one to know where Voldy got the wand. That is why Harry does not come out and say that he is putting it back in Dumbledore's tomb, he is putting it back in the place where it was hidden. The only ones bedsides Harry that knew where it was are all dead. So as long as Harry does not reveal to anyone where it is hidden, the ownership of the wand will die with him. Scott From nightmasque at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 14:32:07 2007 From: nightmasque at yahoo.com (Feng Zengkun) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:32:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] rec: Missing from 'Harry Potter' a real moral struggle In-Reply-To: <966545.28585.qm@web30806.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <101201.38146.qm@web52604.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173260 Joan wrote: > I want to recommend this critique piece on Book 7 > "Missing from > 'Harry Potter' a real moral struggle", written by > Jenny Sawyer, > as it shares exactly my problem with book 7 and the > HP series in > general and and put it better than I could ever do. > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070725/cm_csm/ysawyer > Pam: > Not > everything is supposed to be a lesson. Not > everything is supposed to have a moral. That being > said, I think Ms. Sawyer is only partially right. > Looking from the perspective of classic literature, > she correctly identifies the problem that Harry does > not have an inner struggle. But nor do I think that > Harry's destiny was pre-determined (except by JKR > herself) or we wouldn't have spent two years talking > about it. Though the book may have an obscured > moral, it has real, tangible morals that a child can > understand. > Feng now: I don't think that was the point about the essay, i.e. I don't think the essay was saying that the series has no morals to impart. Certainly there are plenty of morals we can glean from the series; friendship is important, do not judge a book by its cover (whether this was accomplished is up for debate, though), etc etc etc. I think the essay was emphasising that, as you pointed out, Harry has no inner struggle - the choices he has to make are easy because everything is so black and white for him. In this respective, there is no 'moral struggle' for Harry to grapple with: his options are to defeat Voldemort or not, and that choice is ridiculously easy to make. Compare with this with, say, Lord of the Rings. Frodo's quest to destroy the One ring is fraught with a moral conundrum: destroy it and Sauron is rid, but at the same time magic departs from the world. Don't destroy it and magic is preserved, but you risk its abuse by the likes of Sauron (I am remembering LotR correctly... right?). So in this respect I agree with the article; Snape, and I would say Dumbledore too, are the more interesting characters, because they have had to make hard choices, harder than the ones Harry has had to face throughout the series. Because for them each decision meant sacrificing something, the decisions they made in the end are more resonant. Not so for Harry. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 15:31:07 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:31:07 -0000 Subject: JKR Cut Ron & Hermione Like a Movie Edit ...UNbelievable! ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173261 "Sara" wrote: > How could Hermione or Ron possibly > strip themselves away from Harry at > this ultimate crisis point? It's easy to get separated from your companions in the chaos of war, especially if you just found out your brother was killed. Or perhaps knowing the history Snape had with Harry they sensed that those memories were for Harry alone, he certainly didn't invite them to watch them with him. Harry is a very private person, he always has been, he doesn't share all his thoughts with his friends. And after Harry had viewed those memories he took pains not to meet his two best friends again because he knew they would use force if necessary to stop him from doing what had to be done. No weepy goodbye scene for Harry, he's just not the type. Eggplant From zanelupin at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 15:34:21 2007 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:34:21 -0000 Subject: JKR Cut Ron & Hermione Like a Movie Edit ...UNbelievable! ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173262 Sara wrote: > My criticism is that JKR should have placed some believable > storyline where Ron & Hermione were forced to allow Harry to go on > alone without any other choice or option they could have taken. > Even a physical barrier or blocking mechanism would have sufficed, > though a fully reasoned approach would have enhanced the story > wonderfully for many interpretive standpoints of why Harry had to go > on alone without them. (Ron and Hermione could still have remained > behind with good reason to mourn the dead and comfort the living.) > The hero's journey would still have been fulfilled for Harry's > perfection without taking away from their shared hero's journey. > Why "movie edit" the fantastic bond & the hero & heroine everyone > loves and found in Ron and Hermione's hero's journey too ...to the > very end! A missed opportunity to do justice to, and immortalize, > all three heroes ...it had to be 3! > > It had to be believable why Ron & Hermione were no longer at Harry's > side. Does JKR separate them like a movie edit pg.661 & reunite > them on pg.746 without "good reason" or concluding fulfillment of > the hero & heroine in Ron & Hermione? KathyK: I'm sorry but I'm quite certain that it was *Harry* who slipped off and "abandoned" Ron and Hermione (if you want to look at things that way). And Harry going it alone is not at all out of character, IMO. There was not much conversation between the three of them as they returned to the castle from the Shrieking Shack. Harry shared no plan to immediately find Dumbledore's portrait or the Pensieve . Instead, the three all went to the Great Hall, where everyone else was gathering and met with their loved ones mourning some more loved ones. Understandably, IMO, Ron and Hermione joined the Weasley family. Harry, who "could not bear to join the Weasleys, could not look into their eyes, when if he had given himself up in the first place, Fred might never have died," was the one who left Ron and Hermione and the Great Hall behind without a word as to where he would go or what he would do.* At that point, he just wanted to escape from those whose suffering he felt responsible for. Harry wanted to be alone, away from even his own thoughts. He went to the Headmaster's office and plunged into Snape's memories. Once Harry learned what he had to do, allow Lord Voldemort to kill him, he was certain this was something he had to do alone. He made no attempt whatsoever to find Ron or Hermione. In fact, he was determined not to see them or discuss this with them, using the Invisibility Cloak to move through the castle unseen. Harry made the choice to go it alone. Even if Ron and Hermione *did* want to find him (which we would not see, anyhow), they would not be able to. Sara says above, "...storyline where Ron & Hermione were forced to allow Harry to go on alone without any other choice or option they could have taken." I believe that is exactly what JKR accomplished by keeping Harry, Hermione and Ron completely in character. Harry decided for Hermione and Ron that they could no longer accompany him on this journey. Sara, I'm curious what you mean by a "fully reasoned approach" to this flaw you perceive? I am having difficulty thinking of another way Harry going it alone could have been handled. Because this bit as JKR wrote it really works for me. KathyK *(DH, Ch 33, Scholastic p 662) From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 15:47:50 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:50 -0000 Subject: HP as an Anti-Establishment Tract, OR the MoM is Evil Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173263 So, the more I am reading posts and thinking things over, the more I feel that - far from being a treatise about conservative Christian theology - the series is about undermining the corrupted establishment and more philosophically, about the relationship between authority and evil, and the nature of hypocrisy. Dolores Umbridge stands as the most foul and loathsome character in the series, more because she pretends to be something she isn't, than for her evil deeds. Voldy is loathsome, too, but he relishes it and revels in it. You can (almost) respect that. At least he's honest. Umbridge is more disgusting because she has kitten plates on her walls and wears pink cardigans. She masquerades as the exact opposite of what she really is. Taken socio-politically, this can be seen as a metaphor for the traditional established world order. Governments and religions pretend to be our friends, to be looking out for the good of the people, but in reality is crushing individuality, choosing our morality for us, telling us what to believe while lying to us constantly, and persecuting people who don't fit in with the establishment's idea of what is acceptable. This is definitely what has gone on in the septology, with incresing brutality and hypocrisy until it culminates in DH in an actual "witch hunt", pardon the pun. The MoM is initially seen as a bumbling, harmless bureaucracy. It's motives become more sinister in OotP, as we discover that Lucius Malfoy has some serious influence over Fudge. In HBP, the MoM is definitely seen as our enemy, trying to recruit Harry, even as it lies to the public about Voldemort's true power and works against Dumbledore. In DH, it finally falls completely under Voldy's control - in the form of a MoM puppet named, appropriately enough, Pius(Pious) Thicknesse(in the UK, being thick means being stupid). Umbridge is basically let loose to perpetrate the kind of interregation that Jews were subjected to before being sent to concentration camps. Umbridge is definitely (to me), a Hitler-esque figure, pretending to have good intentions, but really just full of hate and racism. Harry, Ron, and Hermione(especially Hermione), remind me of social justice crusaders, the Progressives of the late 19th and early 20th century, or just plain old protesters. They repeatedly make comments about not being able to trust the media, trust the MoM, or have faith in the magical political and judicial processes. They are fighting against tyranny - not just by an evil man, but by a corrupt and hypocritical bureaucracy. The MoM is, in some ways, worse than Voldy. At least people REALIZE that Voldy is evil, but they tend to have faith in their government. JKR is very blatently telling us not to. All the interviews I have read with JKR, and knowing the charities she supports, such as Amnesty International, leads me to believe that she has a lot of social justice beliefs. To me, this is clearly the thrust of at least the final 3 books. Thoughts?? Cheers, Katie From leslie41 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 15:52:27 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:52:27 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173264 Nora: No, seriously, for shame. Pulling out the "tu quoque!" to attack a listie's ideas about one character seems to me to be a serious failure of argument, as if we necessarily had to address all characters when we were speaking about one. This slides on the fine edge of going after a poster rather than engaging with the ideas. Leslie41: Well, there I would have to disagree. Names are incredibly important, most especially the names we give ourselves. They are often a profound statement of not only our interests, but what we admire, and with whom we identify. Lupinlore has and continues to make a statement with his name, and any perusal of his posts will show that his choice is apt in terms of what he admires. For example: If I name myself ""nsynclover" and then visit a discussion board on music and attack the Beatles, well would a Beatles fan be untoward in criticizing me on the basis of my name, even if I'd never brought up nsync? Not in that context, no. To admire Remus Lupin and excoriate and loathe Severus Snape seems to me to reveal a basic refusal to come to terms with the characters of both men, and anyone guilty of that to me demonstrates that their opinions on Severus Snape are suspect. And again, I don't think Snape is blameless and holy or anything like that. I don't like him and I don't think he's likeable. Many Snape lovers criticize Lily for abandoning him, but I think she was right and probably gave him more slack than he deserved. Nor do I deny that he has a sadistic streak when it comes to his students. But to criticize Snape's snapping at his students while admiring a man that put the entire population of Hogwarts in danger, well that to me makes no sense. And to attempt to undermine his courage and sacrifice, and attempt to diminish his contribution (which Snape haters are all doing right as we speak) to me makes no sense. Though I take issue with some of the assertions in the article you cited, I agree with much of it. Most especially at the end where the author cites that "Snape eventually redeems his poor choices and mistakes." Alla: I totally respect your interpetation, I just disagree that your interpetation is stronger than mine, since author allegedly had something different in mind, you know? Leslie41: I respect your opinion as well, but authorial intent can't be used as a support for your argument, because it's irrelevant. From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 15:53:15 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:53:15 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173265 > Annemehr: > > Well, if Harry's correct in his explanation to LV in the Great > Hall, Snape would never have become master of the wand by killing DD, > because he would not have *defeated* DD; it was something they > planned between them. > > > > I think a very similar reason would apply when LV AKed Harry in the > > Forest: it wasn't a defeat of Harry, because it's what Harry wanted > for him to do. > > > > Dung: > But Harry didn't know that he was going to come back, he thought he > was going to die, and Voldy thought (or hoped) he was going to die. > It would have been the end of the only one who could (according to > the prophecy) get rid of Voldy for good. Now if *Voldy* had been in > on it too, I could see your reasoning. Annemehr: I think the key is that Harry and LV had the same goal: for LV to AK Harry, so LV did not defeat Harry in any way, meaning he did not gain mastery. Whether or not Harry actually properly died is a separate issue. (Of course, DD, who sent Harry to die, knew he wouldn't be properly dead anyway because of the shared blood bearing Lily's protection, so it's kind of a non-issue, too.) Dung: > > Look at it this way: if Snape had been ESE! and killed DD *not* > because DD wanted him to, but because he wanted to further > Voldemort's agenda, or because he truly hated DD, Snape *would* have > become the master of the wand, wouldn't he? > Annemehr: Yep -- but ONLY if DD DIDN'T actually want him to kill him. Just for fun, here's another angle. Suppose the plan for Snape to kill DD is on, but then to DD's great surprise, when Draco appears on the tower he AKs DD immediately. In that case, I'm figuring Draco is now the master of the Elder Wand because, regardless of the fact DD planned to die that night, he didn't want it to be Draco. Or suppose, the night before the Epilogue happens, Harry is brushing up little James's Expelliarmus skills, and James manages to disarm Harry. Then, James does not become the master of the Elder Wand, because Harry wanted James to be successful at the lesson. I think. Dung: > Speaking of which, did Grindelwald "come quietly" or not? 'Cause if > he did, DD couldn't have gained mastery of the wand. Annemehr: Don't get me started on that one. Legend says it was a great duel, but Skeeter's book alleges something funny going on -- and here, I'm inclined to believe Skeeter's put in at least a grain of the truth. Wish JKR had bothered to have Harry ask KingsCross!DD how he'd won a duel against the unbeatable wand when he had the chance. Annemehr From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Fri Jul 27 15:57:34 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:57:34 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173266 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mjanetd" wrote: > > Why was Colin Creevey still at school during the battle at Hogwarts? > Wasn't he and his brother muggleborn? I remember their father was milk- > man. Why would they allow mud-bloods at school when they were taking > wands away from muggle-born adults? > > And another question. Someone mentioned in another thread that the > Dursley's died when Diggle's house blew up. I've only read DH once so > the little details are vague. I'd hate to think the Dursleys died. > > Janet > RE: Muggle-borns at Hogswart Perhaps they continued to allow them there in order to keep an eye on them...So that Hogswarts became a type of Warsaw Ghetto for Muggle-born students. If they just let these children go back to their Muggle families, they wouldn't be able to monitor them or "examine" them. The Muggle-borns were suspected of stealing magical powers and how they stole it was a question that the DEs wanted "answered". Something tells me is a thinly veiled allusion to human experimentation, similar to the kind that Mengele did at Auschwitz---that Muggle-borns were tortured under the excuse of determining how they stole magical powers. Neville admitted that the Carrows tortured students and that Michael Corner was tortured for freeing a first year student. Moreover, the professors tried not to send anyone for disciplining as much as possible. So I guess the professors and the DA pure bloods and half-bloods protected the Muggle borns as much as possible, perhaps even to the point of saying that they committed the offense and not the accused Muggle-born. RE: Dursley's I think the Dursley's are the 3 Muggle deaths reported by Potterwatch. Milz From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 15:56:47 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:56:47 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_rec:__Missing_from_'Harry_Potter'_=96_a_real_moral_struggle?= In-Reply-To: <101201.38146.qm@web52604.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173267 Feng Zengkun wrote: > Harry has no inner struggle - the > choices he has to make are easy because > everything is so black and white for him. > In this respective, there is no 'moral > struggle' for Harry to grapple with: his > options are to defeat Voldemort or not, > and that choice is ridiculously easy to make. Ridiculously easy?! It's easy to march into the Forbidden Forest to be murdered by a maniac? What Harry did was moral and as you read his thoughts as he walked to his doom it sure seemed to be a struggle to me. It takes no courage to know what the right thing to do is, but it can be a struggle to actually do it. I read that article yesterday and I still can't make heads or tails of it. Eggplant From mosu22 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 15:34:59 2007 From: mosu22 at yahoo.com (Monica) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:34:59 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173268 > Betsy Hp: > Just on a non-theological basis, Jesus was surrounded by the > living, not the dead. His disciples were there, they protested > when he was taken and in fact Peter attempted to fight the soldiers > leading Jesus away. (A move Jesus rebuked, healing the soldier > Peter had wounded.) In contrast, Harry seperates himself from his > friends and speaks to the dead. He goes to his death at the orders > of a *very* human man, not the word of God. And he leaves his > friends fighting and killing those around them. Monica: Hi! First ever post, but I've been reading what I can in between lab work and whatnot. I see the point here, but on the other hand, at the time of Jesus' crucifixion, he was not surrounded by the living. They all abandoned him (save his beloved apostle) because of their fear. He met his mother, but his apostles were very gone at this point. Betsy Hp: > On a more theological level (which is where things always get > hairy, so again, my own opinion here), while Jesus submitted > himself to the base laws of men to prove the Christ *above* those > laws (to demonstrate a higher law, if you will), Harry went to die > because he had a bit of evil in him and death seemed the only > solution. Harry even had his beloved dead around him encouraging > him to do it. Jesus sacrificed; Harry suicided. Monica: Did he? Or did he surrender himself to death to rid the world of another horcrux, the very embodiment of evil? I will agree that he is certainly not divine, and has good and bad within himself, making his sacrifice quite different than that of Jesus. Nevertheless, his sacrifice was to eliminate the personification of evil, i.e. Voldemort. BetsyHp: > DH gives us a completely different view. Instead of inclusion we > get regulated and codified exclusion. Compassion is limited only > to a rarified few. And redemption is an impossibility. You are > who you were born to be and only the elect are blessed. On the > other hand, when Harry confronts Riddle, he calls out to him as > Riddle, the human being who must have had some good within him. He > gives him the chance to repent or to feel remorse, rather than > killing him outright. Harry saw Voldemort's humanity through the > evil, but Voldemort chose not to accept that compassion, which, > IMO, left Harry with no choice but to battle. Sparing the life of > Voldemort would have just perpetuated evil in this world. Monica: As far as the house system, I likewise think the ending could have wrapped things up a little better by unifying Hogwarts instead of allowing it to remain divided. Or perhaps a group of Slytherins fighting the death eaters. But Malfoy, the quintessential Slytherin of Harry's day, was redeemable, in his readmittance to wizarding society. Perhaps that says something? Monica From aida_costa at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 15:40:02 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:40:02 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173269 lizzyben: >For all her talk about how she values Gryffindor qualities of >courage, bravery, etc., deep down, JKR is worried that she's a >Slytherin at heart. So she takes all her worst qualities, assigns >them to a house of evil, and rejects them as evil & unredeemable. >And the implications of JKR's world-view are pretty bleak. She really >was interested in creating stereotypes, not overcoming them; in >dehumanizing the "other", not accepting it. >I've lost so much respect for JKR after this novel. She'll preach >superficial lessons in tolerance & understanding, but when it comes >to really understanding & integrating differences, she refuses. She >would rather cut off & attempt to destroy those qualities in herself, >and attempt to cut off a whole segment of the population as less >human. And that's beyond scary. You eloquently expressed what I couldn't find the words to say! I no longer have much respect for her, either. I concede that it's *her* series and an author can publish whatever s/he wants - BUT, JKR has been so vocal *outside* of her writing about morals, values, tolerance, etc. that I wish she would've made an unbiased attempt to address those issues in her work. If she had kept her mouth shut in interviews about her views and let her writing speak for itself, I would not be inclined to criticize her. As it stands - what tolerance??? Is her point in keeping Slytherin House 'evil' that the world will always have bad people and we need to accept that? That may be true, but what kind of message is it that children with an 'evil' bent should continue to be corralled together under that banner at 11 years old? So a person's core values and personality are immutable? No one can change? What utter BS!!! Aida, who still loves the series, but if she ever has kids will not champion the series as a decent morality tale, only as fantastic entertainment. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jul 27 16:02:47 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:02:47 -0000 Subject: James's age In-Reply-To: <46A9B745.3060208@free.fr> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173270 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Vincent Maston wrote: > > > mac_tire: > > Can I make a very silly point related to your thoughtful post? > > What is the deal with the middle-aged man in the Mirror of Erised > > in the film of SS/PS? This has always driven me nuts. Harry's > > father died at a very young age; when Harry was a baby, his > > parents were very young adults. And while fictional characters > > are often younger in the afterlife than they were at the time > > of their death (Remus and Sirius are a good example), they are > > never older -- they do not age in the afterlife to parallel > > what their ages would've been had they lived. > > Vincent : > > No, but the miror of erised does not reflect facts, but desires. > Harry is 11 when he sees the mirror, and he sees himself and his > parents as they would be at that moment, had they not be killed. > He therefore sees himself as a 11 year old boy surrounded by his > 31 y.o. parents. I think. Geoff: Just to be picky, his parents were 21 when they were killed. However, at that point, he didn't know how old they were and hadn't got any photos - until Hagrid got some for him at the end of PS so either his imagination or the Mirror supplied a suitable image. From leahstill at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 16:00:23 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:00:23 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173271 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > >> Scott: > > The whole point is that in order for someone else to take ownership and become master of the elder wand, they would not only have to disarm Harry (take his wand) but they also need to know where the elder wand is; at this point Harry is the only one to know where Voldy got the wand. That is why Harry does not come out and say that he is putting it back in Dumbledore's tomb, he is putting it back in the place where it was hidden. The only ones bedsides Harry that knew where it was are all dead. So as long as Harry does not reveal to anyone where it is hidden, the ownership of the wand will die with him. > > Scott Leah: To gain the Elder wand in the magical sense, as I understand it, you only have to take the wand used by its master. If you then didn't know where the Elder Wand was, to take physical possession, that passing of ownership wouldn't do much good (or harm), but ownership would still have passed. The subsequent master might discover the wand etc etc.There is an analogy with LOTR where the ring slips from the hand of Isildur but is recovered from the river centuries later by Deagol. The likelihood of an unbroken chain of transmission of the wand and its discovery by someone in that chain is not great, but it exists. Probably the wand has indeed been rendered 'safe', but without seeing Harry's undefeated death as Master, we can not know for sure. Leah From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Jul 27 16:13:45 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:13:45 -0400 Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions Message-ID: <001001c7d069$1bffa230$28c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173272 "ciraarana" wrote: > Q: The Polyjuice Potion. It only lasts for an hour. That was important > in GoF. And in this book it's never even once mentioned! And some of > the adventures took longer than an hour. Is this a new version of > Polyjuice? Why aren't we told so? Anne replied: "We are shown in GoF that PJ potion can last for a year if the pjed person keeps taking drinks of the potion. I think maybe (not sure about this) that this is what's going on here." I think what ciraarana meant was that Fake Crouch had to remember to take the potion every hour: "But I think, in the excitement of tonight, our fake Moody might have forgotten to take it as frequently as he should have done ... on the hour ... every hour ... we shall see." GoF Can Ed pg 592. In DH, particularly with Harry as Barny Weasley, and Harry and Hermione in Godric's Hollow, we only see them taking one big swig: "Harry had taken a large dose of Polyjuice Potion and was now the double of a..." (DH CanEd Pg 115) and "...so it was late afternoon when they finally swallowed Polyjuice Potion(DH Can Ed pg 263).....He could tell that it was almost dawn by the stillness and the quality of the cold" (DH Can Ed pg 282). DuffyPoo aka CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 16:14:53 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:14:53 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173273 > Alla: > I totally respect your interpetation, I just disagree that your > interpetation is stronger than mine, since author allegedly had > something different in mind, you know? > > Leslie41: > I respect your opinion as well, but authorial intent can't be used as > a support for your argument, because it's irrelevant. Alla: Who makes the determination though that authoritarial intent is irrelevant? Is it irrelevant because it does not support your interpetation or is it irrelevant for any other reasons? We are going into tennis match territory, so I am going to bow out pretty soon, but I just do not get it. If you think that author lacks a proper perspective to claim what is her own creation, well that is your right, but it just seems to be that you cannot make such determination for other people. Maybe you are not doing it, but it reads like that to me. If you say that author's intent is irrelevant **to you**, Ok, makes sense to me. I had also read books, where I took out of them something totally different that author wanted me to see. But if you are saying that **author's intent is irrelevant, period**, then NO, sorry, I do not buy it. Because to me, **nobody** knows Snape better than JKR, because she created him. Nobody **has to** take her word in the interviews of who he is, but **I** think it is very relevant, and will take her word for it more than anybody else's. And it is not like I was not surprised by her revelations - I would never ever considered Snape to be brave, I would definitely thought of him as coward after book 6. JKR says and **shows** in the text that he is brave, okay then - I take her word for it. But JKR also tells and shows in the text to me that he is **no hero** that he is **spiteful and bully** and I also happily take her word for it. Nobody has to do it, But I am. JMO, Alla. From severussnape at shaw.ca Fri Jul 27 16:16:47 2007 From: severussnape at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:16:47 -0000 Subject: HP as an Anti-Establishment Tract, OR the MoM is Evil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173274 Katie wrote: > the series is about undermining the corrupted establishment and more philosophically, about the relationship between authority and evil, and the nature of hypocrisy. dan: This is evident since the start of book one, when the Dursley's become the epitome of the unexamined, banal life. They risk nothing, their life is uninterrupted sameness. As opposed to our hero, who life will be unsettled, startling, anything but banal, and who will have to continually risk everything. > Dolores Umbridge... masquerades as the exact opposite of what she really is. You will also note thatthe books feature disguise prominently- the head of Quirrell in PS/SS, the diary and polyjuice in CoS, animagi (and Black's innocence) in PoA, Moody/Crouch in Gof, Harry's head in OotP (and Umbridge, as you pointed out), and so on. > Governments and religions pretend to be our friends, to be looking out for the good of the people, but in reality is crushing individuality, choosing our morality for us, telling us what to believe while lying to us constantly, and persecuting people who don't fit in with the establishment's idea of what is acceptable. I direct you to my posts on this list - where I have talked about this a number of times over the years, especially since the publication of OotP. I identify Rowling as rather anarchist. dan From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Jul 27 16:23:17 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:23:17 -0400 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts Message-ID: <000e01c7d06a$70e2a1c0$28c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173275 Janet asked: "Why was Colin Creevey still at school during the battle at Hogwarts? Wasn't he and his brother muggleborn? I remember their father was milk- man. Why would they allow mud-bloods at school when they were taking wands away from muggle-born adults?" You're right, Janet, he shouldn't have been at the school. Janet again: "And another question. Someone mentioned in another thread that the Dursley's died when Diggle's house blew up. I've only read DH once so the little details are vague. I'd hate to think the Dursleys died." In the chapter where the Dursley's leave #4, it does not disclose where they are going. They may not have been going to Diggle's house. CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Fri Jul 27 16:22:28 2007 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:22:28 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173276 >> And that's just scary. Because this is the same kind >> of mindset that leads to genocides or persecution of >> minority groups in real life. JKR condemns this mindset >> when it comes to Muggles, yet tacitly supports it for >> Slyths. So torturing Slyths is totally justified! JKR >> condemns the "Muggle-born Registration Commission", but >> she'd probably be OK w/a "Slytherin-born Registration >> Commission" & not even see the irony. I've lost so much >> respect for JKR after this novel. She'll preach superficial >> lessons in tolerance & understanding, but when it comes >> to really understanding & integrating differences, she >> refuses. She would rather cut off & attempt to destroy >> those qualities in herself, and attempt to cut off a whole >> segment of the population as less human. And that's beyond scary. >> lizzyben >> "We still attribute to the other fellow all the evil >> and inferior qualities that we do not like to recognize >> in ourselves, and therefore have to criticize and attack >> him, when all that has happened is that an inferior >> "soul" has emigrated from one person to another. The >> world is still full of betes noires and scapegoats, >> just as it formerly teemed with witches and werewolves" >> C. G. Jung Renee: > Lizzyben, was it your intention of accusing JKR of > being a racist and a Nazi? If not I seriously advise > you to rethink this post. Ad hominem arguments never > contribute to a healthy discussion, and you're crossing > the line here quite thoroughly. houyhnhnm: I can't speak for lizzyben, but I don't think it even crossed her mind to accuse Rowling of being a Nazi. It is certainly not how I interpreted her message. (And I find the veiled threat of sicking the list elves onto someone who posts an idea someone else finds threatening very scary indeed.) Here's where *I* think the Nazi bit comes in. For decades after World War II, there was an argument advanced in Anglo-American culture that Nazism arose in Germany because of some inherent defect in the German people. Germans were the Other. They were the Slytherins. It Can't Happen Here because we're not like that. We're Gryffindors. Everything we do is good. I don't think anyone makes that argument today, not out loud anyway, but the attitude still exists sub-consciously. That is why it offends me when people Wave the Bloody Shirt of Nazism. I consider it a convenient way of casting one's own responsibility for eschewing evil back into the past and onto the Other. From melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 16:29:43 2007 From: melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com (melrosedarjeeling) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:29:43 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173277 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "MelroseDarjeeling: wrote: Thanks all for many thoughtful replies. I appreciate that views are so diverse. Responding to some that sparked insights for me: Mari wrote: Since, like the Narnia stories, it is perfectly possible to enjoy the HP series without bothering about any of this Christian or mythological imagery on a conscious level I think that JKR, like Lewis, has succeeded in stealing past the watchful/sleeping dragons. The Christian and mythological imagery is recast and reformulated in the Potterverse, so that the significance, although clear upon re reading, is not immediately apparent. Now MelroseDarjeeling: Love the quotation from C.S. Lewis. To me this view of JKR's intentions is the way the books make the most sense. (Not that there aren't other ways to look at it, or other mythologies referenced.) I think the books are one answer to those perennial Christian questions of how can Jesus be both fully human and fully divine? And if he was fully human, how could he have chosen freely to sacrifice himself? How can that sacrifice be fully appreciated? Telling the story of a "normal" boy who's been selected for a special mission, which gradually reveals itself to be allowing himself to be killed in order to save others is one way to get at those questions. Of course, if you're not a Christian then those questions aren't as interesting, which leads to Houyhnhnm wrote: I felt certain of this when I read "HE'S ALIVE!". It would explain the absence of a real moral struggle. Harry was the Chosen One all along. Now MelroseDarjeeling: Yeah, to me this explains why Harry never really has to learn anything, he just has to respond appropriately to his instincts, which are always right. This was a continual disappointment to me through the books (especially the latter ones). But as JKR is fully capable of writing complex characters, I have to assume this was a choice she made, not a failure of technique. So to me this also is evidence of her theme. (I know many, many readers would disagree.) Katie wrote: I agree that there are parallels that *can* be made to the Christian story. However, I do not believe that these are "Christian" books, at least in the sense of a Narnia. JKR has said that her morality is based in Christianity - but that doesn't mean that these books are supposed to send some Christian message out to the world. It means that the way she learned her personal morals and ethics were in the context of being a Christian. Just like someone who is raised Hindu will have ethics and morals that are contextually Hindu...incidentally, I wonder why it is that Christians often claim that *any* redemptive or moral tale is Christian? Is redemption copyrighted by Christianity? Why can't HP be books about personal truth, love, and redemption without being Christianized? Now MelroseDarjeeling: Katie, I'm in complete sympathy with you there! I was raised Christian, but am an atheist nowadays. I see the story of Christ, and even the theology of monotheism and the creation story, within the context of mythologies that all humans all over the world have created for themselves through the millenia (ala Joseph Campbell and the hero's journey, I suppose). So it's not that I'm particularly keen to assign a Christian meaning to these books. It's just that I thought that by the end of DH you really couldn't ignore it if you are interested in the author's own intentions in writing. (Again, not that it's not possible to find moral meaning in the book independent of that.) -MelroseDarjeeling From verosomm at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 16:31:20 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:31:20 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <000e01c7d06a$70e2a1c0$28c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173278 > Janet again: > "And another question. Someone mentioned in another thread that the > Dursley's died when Diggle's house blew up. I've only read DH once so > the little details are vague. I'd hate to think the Dursleys died." > > In the chapter where the Dursley's leave #4, it does not disclose where they are going. They may not have been going to Diggle's house. > > CathyD > Hi, I'm the one who thought the Dursleys died, but someone told me privately (because he'd already posted 5 times that day) that the book specifically stated that the Dursleys went WITH Dedalus (and Hestia) but not to his house. I was very happy to be refuted as I didn't want them dead either. So I'm sorry about my misinterpretation. Veronica From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 16:38:28 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:38:28 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173279 > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mjanetd" wrote: > > > > Why was Colin Creevey still at school during the battle at Hogwarts? > > Wasn't he and his brother muggleborn? I remember their father was > milk- > > man. Why would they allow mud-bloods at school when they were taking > > wands away from muggle-born adults? > > > > And another question. Someone mentioned in another thread that the > > Dursley's died when Diggle's house blew up. I've only read DH once > so > > the little details are vague. I'd hate to think the Dursleys died. > > > > Janet > > > > RE: Muggle-borns at Hogswart > > Perhaps they continued to allow them there in order to keep an eye on > them...So that Hogswarts became a type of Warsaw Ghetto for Muggle-born > students. If they just let these children go back to their Muggle > families, they wouldn't be able to monitor them or "examine" them. > > The Muggle-borns were suspected of stealing magical powers and how they > stole it was a question that the DEs wanted "answered". Something tells > me is a thinly veiled allusion to human experimentation, similar to the > kind that Mengele did at Auschwitz---that Muggle-borns were tortured > under the excuse of determining how they stole magical powers. > > Neville admitted that the Carrows tortured students and that Michael > Corner was tortured for freeing a first year student. Moreover, the > professors tried not to send anyone for disciplining as much as > possible. > > So I guess the professors and the DA pure bloods and half-bloods > protected the Muggle borns as much as possible, perhaps even to the > point of saying that they committed the offense and not the accused > Muggle-born. > > RE: Dursley's > I think the Dursley's are the 3 Muggle deaths reported by Potterwatch. > > Milz > Anne Squires: I am sorry; but, I have to disagree with your reading of Colin Creevey's presence during the battle. Right before the first attack Neville says that he had used the spelled galleons to contact the Order and the DA. Then, to use his words, "it snowballed from there." The ROR was full of people arriving to fight. I think that's when Colin arrived. He had been in the DA. Later the underage wizards were told to leave; but people obviously came back into the castle (Draco et al). In DH all muggleborns are being hunted down. Only half bloods and purebloods were allowed to attend Hogwarts. There weren't any muggleborns there. That doesn'r mean that students didn't need protecting from the Carrows; but those students who were tortured by the Carrrows weren't muggleborns. On another note: I would like to see the cannon that Diggle's house blew up. I never saw that. In the Potterwatch broadcast they say a Muggle family of five was found dead in their home. The Muggle authorities were reporting that it was from a gas leak. Potterwatch says they were victims of the Killing Curse. Nothing was blown up. If two of the dead were Diggle and Hestia Jones, it seems to me this would have been reported by the MoM as a warning to people who were helping Potter and the Order. Anne Squires From dougsamu at golden.net Fri Jul 27 16:41:16 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:41:16 -0400 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all Message-ID: <06D40C99-7D8F-401F-9489-335809325F80@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173280 Scott: The only ones besides Harry that knew where it was are all dead. So as long as Harry does not reveal to anyone where it is hidden, the ownership of the wand will die with him. doug: Reasonable enough, but still it isn't airtight. The knowledge of the Hallows is extant. Pointless to pursue the theoretical exceptions as to how the wand could be taken again, but the original point made was that it was a very unwise choice for Harry to become an Auror because it exposed him to risks of death at the hands of another. The only hidden knowledge at that point is where the wand is. There are likely enough clues - character wise - to point to some obvious locations. ___ __ From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 16:43:33 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:43:33 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173281 I've seen many complaints about the Worst Camping Trip Ever! (on this and other forums) and while I can't disagree that those parts were boring, I wonder if there was a reason for them to be boring? My husband has been in the military his entire adult life, and had several tours overseas to various...ah...arenas of conflict shall we say. Many of his letters home talked about the endless frustration of being encamped. Not knowing exactly what was going on, constantly anticipating an attack, soldiers tend to be anxious, irritable and foul-tempered. According to my husband, the chief way to relieve boredom is to pick fights with each other. (The second most popular way to relieve boredom, according to him, is indiscriminate sexual activity). Anyway, after reading DH and many of the comments about the excessive camping scenes, I talked to him about it, and he agreed that it was a fair thematic representation of that aspect of war. The tendency toward risky behavior is also accurate - after a few weeks or even months of patrolling, loading and unloading equipment, setting up and tearing down camp, getting shot at is a welcome break in the monotony. Soliders would actually volunteer for dangerous missions because they'd rather be doing something dangerous than nothing at all. I don't know if JKR intended to make a comparison between the trio's situation and that of a solider, but it is there. I also think that all the camping scenes allow us to really feel the frustration that the trio are experiencing. They don't know where they are going or what they are doing - we don't know where JKR is going with her narrative. Hermione and Ron are disappointed in Harry, they thought he knew what he was doing. I confess I was disappointed with JKR - I thought this book had been planned for 17 years, why all the filler? The trio are frustrated and bored, the readers are frustrated and bored. In short - the camping trip is a metaphor for our experience of reading DH. Now is that an interesting coincidence or utter brilliance on the part of JKR or neither? va32h From chaomath at hitthenail.com Fri Jul 27 16:47:58 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:47:58 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173282 On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:30 AM, lizzyben wrote: > Of course not. I'm sorry if my post wasn't clear; I was trying to get > a handle on some concepts that I'm not really expressing very well. > I'm saying that all authors put some of their self into their > characters - as JKR has acknowledged about Hermione or Lupin. And I > think Snape & the Slytherins represent a part of JKR too, a part that > she would rather condemn & judge instead of integrating or > understanding. I'm talking about things from a psychological > perspective, *not* a social perspective. > > Shadow figures are present for all of us, representing the things we > don't like about ourselves - > I'm just at a > loss to understand the way JKR resolved the House system. Were fans > really begging JKR to make Slytherin *more* evil & unredeemable? IMO, > it seems like fans were begging for a good Slytherin, a redemption for > the House. JKR never gave it - and her total condemnation of anything > resembling Slytherin-ness is just, odd, to me. I don't get it. I don't > get why she did it. It seems to be an internal need to cut off & > destroy those qualities, instead of understanding them. So yeah, I > think parts of Snape come from JKR, as do all of her > characters. The problem is that JKR never managed to integrate the > "shadow" House, the shadow figure into the overall narrative. And IMO > the novel suffered for it. Not just the final novel, but the whole series. Specifically because JKR broke the promises she made with her readers in the earlier novels (e.g., it's our choices (i.e., actions) that define us & the world is not separated into good and evil). It was those themes that I found particularly redeemable, and now it's clear that I had totally misinterpreted how important they were. I feel like I was lied to. And no, I don't feel that she had to demolish the house system to achieve integration. The houses serve a useful purpose in allowing each child a place, a home away from home where their talents will be cherished and expanded. Rivalry does not have to equal hate, and rivalry can actually unify the rivaling groups (if done properly). > And that's the paradox at > the heart of her novel, where the subtext seems to create a message > that runs against the surface message of the text. It preaches against > stereotypes & dehumanization, while actually *reinforcing* exactly > that in how Slytherins are portrayed. Yeah, talk about congitive dissonance! All you have to do is look at the fate of the characters to see how she solved it -- look at what the author does, instead of what she says. lizzyben wrote in another post: "And the implications of JKR's world-view are pretty bleak. She really was interested in creating stereotypes, not overcoming them; in dehumanizing the "other", not accepting it. And when I think of how many horrible things have come from dehumanizing the other, it makes this series seem almost malicious." Me (Maeg): Nicely said. This is why I'm so creeped out by DH. Everything is now made clear, and it's something I really, really don't agree with. Call me a die-hard liberal, but I hate the "Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others" mentality. Or maybe it's the American in me? We hold meritocracy in much higher regard than the Brits (with their monarchy and open class system). Perhaps I just don't get it because I'm not a product of British public schools where bloodline is still a legitimate way to decide who is worthy and who is not. [Note: this is not meant as a slam; I know that the US system is not a true meritocracy and we have severe societal problems with our pseudo-monarchy and underground class system. I just believe that the idea of equality is a touchstone for American thinking. I'm probably not explaining this very well.] Lupin is another example of the twisted thinking behind dehumanization. If you're unfortunate enough to have a father with an affliction that makes him less than human, it's better for you if he's dead. And better still if your mother, who made such a terrible mistake in loving him and conceiving a child by him, is dead, too. That way you can be raised by a "proper" wizarding family so we can conveniently forget your tainted past and therefore you'll be happy. Assuming you're turn out to be a wizard, not a werewolf.... The only heroic role for Lupin is death? That's just a big bowl of wrong. Maeg, who never realized that she could be so Jungian (better that than Freudian, I suppose ) From verosomm at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 16:50:32 2007 From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:50:32 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173283 va32h: I confess I was disappointed > with JKR - I thought this book had been planned for 17 years, why all > the filler? The trio are frustrated and bored, the readers are > frustrated and bored. In short - the camping trip is a metaphor for > our experience of reading DH. > > Now is that an interesting coincidence or utter brilliance on the > part of JKR or neither? > > I think utter brilliance... we readers are getting listless with "nothing" happening, frustrated the trio is cold and hungry, annoyed with those things affecting Ron so readily, etc. etc. We are really in the tent with them, imo. Veronica From leslie41 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 16:53:38 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:53:38 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173284 > Alla: > > Who makes the determination though that authoritarial intent is > irrelevant? Is it irrelevant because it does not support your > interpetation or is it irrelevant for any other reasons? Well, it's a free country, and everyone has the right to believe anything they like! So of course me saying that "authorial intent is irrelevant" doesn't mean you have to believe it too. I say it because I am actually an English professor with a Ph.D. in literature, who has been teaching full time and publishing for seventeen years. I say it as an editor of three books of literary criticism. Those that utilize authorial intent in their criticism usually only do so for curiosity's sake, or as an aside. There is a subset of literary critics that may do more than that, but the vast majority of them realize that authorial intent is meaningless. There are many reasons for this, some of them practical, and some not so. Firstly, in most cases we don't have any idea of what the "authorial intent" actually is. We may not even (as in the case with texts that I routinely teach, Beowulf, Gilgamesh, and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight) even know the identity of the author at all. If we know who the author is we may have sketchy knowledge of him or her, or have no surviving authorial opinion on their own text. But let's put that aside and say that in such cases where we *do* have authorial opinion, we should perforce take it seriously. No, no, and no. The author's opinions should only be taken seriously if and when they jibe with the actual text itself. Many authors underrate their own work and on their deathbeds actually demand that it be destroyed (Virgil was one of these; there are others). Many repudiate it (Chaucer was one of these). In many other cases we have testaments from authors about characters in which we see that the author's view of the characters does not jibe with the character on the page (Joyce was one of these). And, er...authors lie. Authors often tell themselves and others what they think is there instead of what actually is there. Again, the parent/child relationship of an author to text to me seems to indicate that whatever they say about the text should be immediately viewed as suspect, as suspect as any other person's opinion of the text until it has been proven with thoughtful, supported textual analysis. Yes, of course this is just my honest opinion. And my honest opinion is no better than anyone else's, despite my degrees and my experience, unless I can support it. But if you are asking why authorial intent is irrelevant, *that*, because of my training and my experience, I am certainly in a position to know and to explain. Take it or leave it, as you wish. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Jul 27 17:06:25 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:06:25 -0000 Subject: Locket and Umbridge In-Reply-To: <002501c7ce2e$20764db0$ecc25a45@dtv.gfed.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173285 --- "Jenni Merrifield" wrote: > 5. DISAPPOINTMENTS: > > a. The fact that Umbridge was the ministry worker who > took the locket from Mundungus felt a little bit too > tidy and contrived. I had the opposite reaction on that one, because I took Umbridge's possession of the locket as a potential explanation for a mysterious loose end from book 6. Early in HBP, if you will recall, when Harry does his first week of detentions, Umbridge touches Harry's hand and his scar hurts as if he were close to Voldemort. At the time he worries that Voldemort could be possessing her. The implication I took, knowing that she ended up with the locket, was that she might have acquired it early in book 6, so that by the time of the detention scene it had begun to possess her, in the subtle way that it does with the trio in book 7. In that case, some of Umbridge's over-the-top evil (beyond the bureaucratic power-mongering) might be directly attributable to Voldemort, and not just to the environment that he was creating. I'd be interested whether anyone else had similar thoughts. -- Matt From redwooddawn at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 17:10:18 2007 From: redwooddawn at hotmail.com (redwooddawn) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:10:18 -0000 Subject: goat charming? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173286 I am rereading the book and am still not sure what is insinuated by goat charming, since it seems to have a slightly ridiculed connotation. redwooddawn From mjanetd at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:02:55 2007 From: mjanetd at yahoo.com (mjanetd) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:02:55 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173287 Veronica wrote: > Hi, I'm the one who thought the Dursleys died, but someone told me > privately (because he'd already posted 5 times that day) that the book > specifically stated that the Dursleys went WITH Dedalus (and Hestia) > but not to his house. I was very happy to be refuted as I didn't want > them dead either. So I'm sorry about my misinterpretation. Well, that's a relief. I really enjoyed hating the Dursleys all these years and was surprised at how upset I got to think they were killed. Janet From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 17:11:45 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:11:45 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173288 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maeg wrote: >> Not just the final novel, but the whole series. Specifically because JKR broke the promises she made with her readers in the earlier novels (e.g., it's our choices (i.e., actions) that define us & the world is not separated into good and evil). It was those themes that I found particularly redeemable, and now it's clear that I had totally misinterpreted how important they were. I feel like I was lied to. > > And no, I don't feel that she had to demolish the house system to > achieve integration. The houses serve a useful purpose in allowing > each child a place, a home away from home where their talents will be cherished and expanded. Rivalry does not have to equal hate, and rivalry can actually unify the rivaling groups (if done properly). va32h: I agree - when I first finished the book I was left feeling shocked, betrayed, angry even. And since I read the leaked version (yes, bad me) I had actually quite convinced myself that it was just a hoax - that this could not be the real book, because if it was, I had completely misunderstood everything in the series. After all the effort that Dumbledore (and JKR) put into sparing Draco's soul in HBP - where the holy heck is the payoff for that? Draco's just a stinking Slytherin so he can't appreciate their efforts? Call me presumptuous - but I think a much better, meaningful ending to the the final Harry/Voldemort showdown would be for Harry to have never had his wand broken in the first place, and to have never taken Draco's wand. When Harry tells Voldemort that Draco is the true master, all eyes in the Great Hall turn to Draco...Voldemort says fine, he'll just kill Draco first, and turns to do so, and in that split second, Draco throws his own wand to Harry declaring "I surrender to you Harry Potter" and just misses the killing curse. Harry meanwhile catches Draco's wand and drops his own, Voldemort turns in a howl of rage at being thwarted yet again, and tries to curse Harry, and then the rest of it plays out as it did in the actual version. Later, during the whole "victory feast in the great hall", Harry would approach the Malfoys and lay Draco's wand in front of him, make eye contact, say a simple "thanks", and go on his way. Draco and Harry still loathe each other for personal reasons, but in the end Draco made the right choice - Harry's side over Voldemort's side - and even if he made it for purely selfish reasons, it's a damn sight better than the entire Malfoy clan being saved by Saint Harry's largesse. va32h From deepam at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:02:23 2007 From: deepam at yahoo.com (deepam) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:02:23 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173289 I think the frustration, waiting, sense of boredom are all realistic and make the books/series more appealing for that realism. Real life is not about a series of bang-bang actions. In all seven books, we see Harry dealing with day-to-day life, exams, boring detentions, boring history classes, frustration for lack of action etc. alongside the adventures. This happens in real life too. And too true that in war, 90% time is spent in preparing and waiting for the worst. Being an Army officer's daughter, I know first-hand what it means to have a family member on the front lines, and second-hand from his narratives, what it means to be on the front-lines. Many times, if you are just a rookie, you don't even plan. You just wait and execute what others have planned, keep nightly watches, execute defensive strategies, without really knowing if they are worth it. The reason HP resonates with so many of us (despite our likes, dislikes and opinions of it) is the healthy dose of realism we see in the lives of the characters. -Deepa From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:14:32 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:14:32 -0000 Subject: Timeline of Snape's 'return', account of the prophecy, wand allegiance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173290 ciraarana wrote: > Q: Snape wasn't yet teaching at Hogwarts when he approached Dumbledore > with the plea to keep Lily safe (otherwise they wouldn't have met at > the hilltop). So, when did that interview take place? And why did it > take Voldemort so long to find the Potters? They only went into hiding > a week before they were murdered. zgirnius: You are assuming that the Potters made no effort to hide using other means before resorting to the Fidelius Charm. On the other hand, Cornelius Fudge makes the statement that Dumbledore suspected a spy was passing on information to Voldemort about the Potters' movements, and Sirius Black accuses Peter of having been Voldemort's for a year. WE also know Hasrry';s christening was a hurried affair because the Potters were going into hiding. I have always put this all together in my brain as follows, and nothing I learned from DH contradicts it - rather, that Dumbledore was adversarial to Snape as a DE at the first meeting tends to support it, since as you say this clearly indicates he was not yet teaching. Snape warned Dumbledore, and the Potters went in to hiding, not too long after Harry's birth, certainly before his first birthday. This makes sense in tewrms of when christenings usually happen (earlier rather than later in a baby's life), and with Sirius's statement that Peter was a spy for a year. This hiding went badly because Peter was leaking information, but the Potters did manage to keep from getting killed. Eventually they realized simple hiding ewas not doing it, and decided to use the Fiidelius Charm, only they picked Peter as their SK. Oops. To me this also makes sense of Dumbledore's Pensieve testimony about Snape switching sides and spying at 'great personal risk'. I think that would require some length of time, as would a decision by Dumbledore to hire Snape. Snape seemed sincere anough about Lily in the first meeting, but I don't think Dumbledore trusted him much back then, he would have wanted to see Snape live up to his promise to do 'anything' before hiring him. > Q: Snape approached Voldemort with the plea to not kill Lily? And > Voldemort agreed? He agreed to not kill a "Mudblood"?? (And he did > agree, didn't he, because he gave Lily the choice to step away.) > Looking at Voldemort's policy ... Are we supposed to accept that? zgirnius: Sure, why not? If Snape was useful, granting such a request would make Snape beholden to Voldemort, and give Voldemort leverage over him as long as Lily remained alive, or at least until Snape lost interest. I figure Snape retained the sense not to bring phrases like 'true love' into that conversation... > Q: The prophesy business. What a mess. Dumbledore's and Trelawney's > accounts clashed ? if what Dumbledore said was true about the evening > of the Prophesy, there was no way Trelawney could have known the > eavesdropper was Snape. But she knew. And Snape still only reported > the first part. How does that all fit?? zgirnius: There were explanation of this onlist before DH, I assume we must now suppose that's how it works, since the alternative proposed, that Snape heard it all, is not supporetd by any new canon in DH. Here is what happened: 1) Snape started listeining. 2) Trelawney started the prophecy. 3) Aberforth saaw Snape and dragged him from the door. (this way, he only heard part of it). 4) A scuffle or discussion ensued between Snape and Aberforth, during which Trelawney completeed the prophecy. 5) Aberforth got the upper hand and dragged Snape in to be seen by Albus and Trelawney. (This is where Trelawney sees Snape, after her 'funny spell', she is not aware that was the moment she prophesied). 6) Snape was thrown form the building. Dumbledore does not mention 5). This does not mean it did not happen, he could have simply chosen not to memtion it, in order not to emphasize that he knew who the eavesdropper was. > Q: If Expelliarmus changes the wand's allegiance then nobody from > the DA is still using their own wand. No wizard or witch who has ever > been taught that spell at Hogwarts would be using their own wand > (although considering the DADA teacher problem ) But wouldn't Harry > have won Voldemort's wand in the graveyard scene in GoF? zgirnius: Harry did not disarm Voldemort. He cast his spell simultaneously with Voldemort's AK, and neither spell succeeded. Instead we got the Priori Incantatem effect because of the wand cores. As far as the point about defeating someone in a class or other setting, I assume that the victor allowing the vanquished to retrieve his or her wand must nullify that effect. So for example if Snape had refused to kill Dumbeldore and Dumbledore had somehow survived, if he had retrieved the Elder Wand, he would still be its master. Unless Draco got to the wand first and claimed it. But Dumbledore died, leaving the wand to consider Draco's action definitive despite Draco's failure to claim it, and Draco its master. From bowie_alicat at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:16:18 2007 From: bowie_alicat at yahoo.com (bowie_alicat) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:16:18 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173291 > va32h: > > > Now is that an interesting coincidence or utter brilliance on the > > part of JKR or neither? > > I think utter brilliance... we readers are getting listless > with "nothing" happening, frustrated the trio is cold and hungry, > annoyed with those things affecting Ron so readily, etc. etc. We are > really in the tent with them, imo. > > Veronica > ******************************************************** I felt the nomadic nature of their quest was perfectly captured by having to be on the move constantly, the psychological pressure that comes with being on the run, and not having any sort of plan. I could feel all the frustration for all the characters in that tent! Bottom line, it is JKR's story - I found nothing to be disappointed in. alison From carla.mcculley at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 17:10:13 2007 From: carla.mcculley at comcast.net (Carla (Ball) McCulley) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:10:13 -0000 Subject: DH most touching moments (contains SPOILERS) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173292 Though alot of this book disappointed me because because of the lack of details, there are a couple of moments I found really touching. The first is when Snape is dying and he asks Harry to look at him. He wanted to see Lily's eyes one last time. The second was when we find out that Harry had named his son Albus Severus. That really got me. And to all those who believed Snape was evil, a very strong I TOLD YOU SO!! :) DDM all the way. Carla From carla.mcculley at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 16:49:00 2007 From: carla.mcculley at comcast.net (Carla (Ball) McCulley) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:49:00 -0000 Subject: Should have waited, Was: Too quick and a sell out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173293 Earliler Carla wrote: > > I probably won't check any posts until I've finished the book, but I > only have 50 or 60 pages left and I really feel betrayed. I won't > include spoilers, but I feel cheated. This book should have been 2 > books with more detail. I don't understand why 7 is such a magical > number with authors, but I don't care how many books it takes....tell > the story. Don't sell out at the end because you have made your > fortune. > > Does anyone else feel this way? Empty deaths for shock and > effect....no back stories to explain the over simplified plot devices. The previous 6 books were brilliant. Did she grow so tired of Harry and those we love so much that she just did whatever to get away from it? I hear she cried. Well so did those dedicated fans who expected the same thoughtfulness, consideration, and love that the other books contained. There better be one hell of an epilogue to make up for the shabby treatment of the characters I've come to love and cherish so much. This book hurt my heart. It's like losing friends for no other cause but financial gain. Nothing noble there. And to me, these characters were noble. > > Carla now: Well, I have to say that the last 100 pages saved the book for me. I still felt like it should have been 2 books with more background information, but the ending made that bearable. Had the rest of the book had the rich details the last 100 or so pages did, it would have been the best read ever. From prep0strus at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:26:35 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:26:35 -0000 Subject: Snape V. Marauders Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173294 I wanted to attempt to encapsulate some of my thoughts on the characters, and why I find arguments for Snape being in some way 'morally superior' to the Marauders silly. I'll say, though, as I think it through... it seems that choice plays very little into how characters turn out. Or upbringing. It seems very much genetics. With the exception of Sirius, the family you're born into appears to decide whether you will be a good person, or a bad person (or, if you like... a good witch, or a bad witch ;) sorry.) The Marauders: James. James is a talented, arrogant boy who comes from a proud Griffindor family. He's all wizarding world, all the way, and had a great childhood. He's a little bit of a bully - to Snape - we don't see how he is to other students. He may be perfectly nice to students from all houses but Slytherin. He has nothing to do with dark magic. He grows up to become a member of the Order, marries Lily, who is described as having almost no bad qualities, and is extremely well thought of by all members of the good wizarding world that we know, barring Snape - Dumbledore, Hagrid, the rest of the order... sure, they sanitize for Harry, but I see no reason to believe they didn't truly like him. He loved his son, his friends, and he was part of the resistance against Voldemorte. He died trying to give his wife and son time to escape. Sirius. Sirius is another talented, arrogant boy. His background is a bit different than James' - but there are similarities. They both grew up immersed in the wizarding world, as privileged sons (Sirius more so) of respected families. Sirius bucked generations of tradition to become a Griffindor. He went against a family that had supported in word, and later in his brother's case, in deed, the ideals of Voldemorte. Though it had to be difficult adjusting prejudices imbued in him since birth, he was not anti-muggle, or anti-muggleborn. It appears he became good friends with Lily later in life, and was a member of the order fighting Voldemorte. As an adult, he was more reckless than James - but in the time we saw him predominantly, he had spent years and years in Azkaban for a crime he did not commit, having no joy, no friends, knowing everyone he loved was dead or thought he was evil. We see a lot of negatives in Sirius - how he treated house elves, how he treated Severus as a child. And surely he was impulsive, almost childish. But he did not go towards dark magic or towards Voldy. He was fiercely loyal to his friends, brave in the fight against evil, and he did it all against his upbringing. Lupin. We don't know too much about Lupin's upbringing. But he was a werewolf. Prejudiced against by a 'disease' he had no control over. Something that causes the majority of the wizarding world to hate and fear you. And something that turns many to dark magic and to voldemorte, since they've been pushed from the mainstream of the ww and want a place to fit in, to fight for rights, and perhaps to succomb to darker natures that everyone assumes they have. But Lupin is smart, and brave, and also loyal to his friends. We do see negative aspects of Lupin's nature, as do we all the characters, but mostly we see a brave man, tortured by demons most of the other characters cannot relate to. He too is loyal to his friends, to the Order. He fights to protect a society that will not even accept him, finds love that racks him with guilt, and while he struggles to do the right thing sometimes (and we cannot say we have not seen the same in Harry, or of course, Ron), he is good and true, despite his magical deformity. Peter. We know even less about Peter's childhood. What we do know of Peter is that he is weak. Why he was put into Griffindor, we'll never know, for he never seems to show that part of his nature. Perhaps he didn't have enough ambition for Slytherin, brains for Ravenclaw, or loyalty for Hufflepuff. Peter probably never would have turned to the dark without external pressure, but it shows he wasn't brave. He, even more than any other DE, is ruled by fear rather than ambition. Severus Snape. Oh, Snape. Loved by so many on this board. Hated by as many. He's a decent character, I suppose, and in the end, one fighting on the side of good. But how so many can defend him and raise him up higher than our three good Marauders, I'll never understand. Snape had a crappy childhood (I'll compare to our other 3 orphans shortly), I'll grant him. But perhaps not the WORST. He did have Lily as a child, while Harry had no one. He did grow up in the WW, like the Marauders, with the knowledge and prejudices this brings. But he was also half muggle. Rather than give him sympathy, it made him need to prove even more what a 'good' slytherin he was. He was raised to believe the brains were in slytherin (what's ravenclaw? choped liver?), and a lot has been made of how horrible james and sirius were upon first meeting Severus - was severus better? they all came in with their prejudices... james and sirius had made friends, and were bigger than severus, but all of them were arrogant and snippy. simply because the griffindors become the heroes of the school, i see no reason to believe that had snape been bigger, more charismatic, more powerful, he wouldn't've treated the others the same way. And he turned towards the dark. Something james, lupin, and sirius did not. Lupin and Sirius arguably had even better reasons to, and they did not. And what's more, they grew up. (well, James did...) Severus didn't grow up. First, he became evil. He was interested in dark magic, even in school, and became a death eater. Eventually he saw how voldy would kill even someone he loved, and he turned away. Perhaps he turned even more than most of us thought, and by the end was fighting a little bit for the 'cause' and not just for the memory of Lily. but, regardless, he was a jerk. A big nasty jerk who treated small children terribly. Not just Harry, who reminded him of James, and a promise he had to keep. But to Hermione, his best student. To Neville, a weak little orphan having a difficult time. Really, to most of the children, he was still a jerk. He died on the side of right, but I don't see how he becomes morally superior to any of the other Order members. Perhaps more interesting - turncoats and double agents always are. But he was a mean little child - with prejudices the others didn't have, that I don't believe he ever truly grew out of, despite his feelings for Lily. And he was a nasty adult, who has done evil, is drawn to evil, and stays away from it because of the one good person he had in his life. Look at Harry, who had no one. Or Sirius who had all people who wanted him to be dark. They rose above it with much more aplomb than Severus. Other Orphans: We have 4 prominent orphans. The one with the arguably best childhood would be Neville, with a loving family. He's weak in magic, but apparently grows in strength and confidence as he gets older. Most importantly is his strength of spirit. He could be another Peter - but without friends who were as tightly loyal to him. Neville was a loner for the first few years of school. The weakest member of the class, and yet, he stood against his classmates to do what was right, and by the end is a brave shining example of a good wizard. He follows his parents footsteps. I think it almost would have been a better story for him to remain weak in magic- not able to do a patronus, or barely duel. Good with plants, and willing to stand up for what is right, to show that strength of character means something. But he turns out strong as well, and we can be proud of him. Voldemorte had a bad childhood - but worse genetics. I feel like he could have perhaps had a better time of it than Harry, whose only family was rabidly against him, but for Voldy's innate evil. But he goes to school, and has a very different experience than the other 3 orphans. He is the king, the ruler, perhaps more popular than James. He's what Severus would be with charisma - except, perhaps, that Severus had a small capacity to love Lily, while Voldy could only love himself. And, of course, Harry. A terrible childhood, and a most mixed time at school. He had loyal close friends, which is more than can be said for Neville and Snape, but he also had a lot of opposition and mistrust in periods over the school. Sometimes to them he was a hero, sometimes a villain, and sometimes a joke. But he was steadfast in trying to do what he believed was right. Final comparisons: Ron & Hermione. I wanted to say, to everyone who dislikes Sirius and James... they are Ron. More successful, more talented, more popular, but... Ron. Ron, raised in the wizarding world, with the same prejudices. He comes to school ready to hate slytherins. He has no respect for house elves. He's got his own issues of desperation, neediness, desiring acclaim. But no one can deny that he is good and brave and loyal. But he wouldn't've treated Severus any better. Or house elves. he came to school with prejudices that he keeps, but he is good. He is strong, and he also tries to do what is right. Hermione is much more like Lily. A muggleborn, she comes to school much more openminded than those raised by wizards. She can see prejudice against elves where wizards, raised with the status quo, can't see it. I think that we need to look at the Marauders through those lenses, and remember that Sirius bucked his family and became much more accepting. And Severus didn't. Lastly... the negatives we see in James... think of the time period as well. Was it entirely unreasonable to come in with a prejudice against slytherins? Shoot, half the posts are us discussing that issue, and most of us seem to come down on the side of, nope, jkr didn't make them redeeming at all. There were lines drawn when James et al were in school. Snape and his little slytherin friends were wanting to join up with voldy. for a young wizard growing up in the ww... they knew what was out there. and they knew where they came from. slytherin. to go in with that prejudice... i'm not saying they were nice, or couldn't have risen above it. It's hard to look at a popular jock who hangs a skinny boy upside down and say, oh, yeah, he's right. But in the world, there was evil, and slytherin represented that evil. And Severus would've done the same if he had the power to the others. And what's more, James grew up. To fight for good, to love his family, be loyal to his friends. Sirius, imprisoned unfairly, continues to be loving to his godson and fight for right. Lupin, prejudiced against to his death, was also a teacher like Snape - but was kind to the children, taught them well, and was good and loyal to all people, even those afraid of him who treated him badly. And Snape... snape was a mean little boy, and a mean little man. He loved and lost a woman, and it changed him so that he stopped pursing evil, and tried to fight on the side of good. But he was still a mean little man. ~Adam (Prep0strus), who apologizes for the unexpected length of this post. From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Fri Jul 27 16:57:13 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:57:13 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173295 To be honest I was less than enthusiastic about the the Snape loves Lily motivation myself, but I'm adjusting to it ;) I must say I don't see anything particularly ignoble about dedicating one's life to the cause of the woman one loved and making sure her death was not in vain. In fact I may be mistaken but I get the distinct impression that JKR herself regards such a personal motivation as superior to an abstract dedication to 'the greater good' which as she, and we, know all to well can be easily abused. Young Death Eater Snape discovers that he has inadvertantly betrayed and put in danger the only friend he's ever had. He is not satisfied with Voldy's promise to spare her but appeals to Dumbledore promising to do 'anything' in return not only for Lily's safety but for her husband and son's as well, (an important inclusion IMO). Even more significantly Snape continues to serve DD even after he fails to protect Lily, thus vitiating their original agreement, and at great risk to his, Snape's, life. He wins Dumbledore's respect and unconditional trust and proves himself more then worthy of both. As for DD himself, note that Harry has no reproaches when they meet in King's Cross Station. He, like DD and Snape, has accepted that defeating Voldemort is worth his life. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" wrote: > The other point is that he doesn't give Harry just the memory with > Snape and Dumbledore discussing 'Harry needs to die by LV's hand'. > He gives Harry the whole truth, as Snape knows it. 'This is who I > am, this is why I was protecting you, this is why Dumbledore was > protecting you. And neither of us were doing it for Harry Potter, > the person. We were doing it for other reasons.' > > And by giving these memories, he treats Harry as an adult. He > doesn't tell Harry what to do; he gives him the truth, effectively > tells him he doesn't owe his mentors anything, and then leaves it to > Harry to make up his own mind. That is a very good point. Snape *IS* treating Harry like an adult, giving him the facts and leaving him free to choose. However in all fairness DD did much the same thing. He told Snape bluntly and frankly that Harry had to die knowing Snape would feel betrayed and used - but believing he will pass the information on nonetheless. 'I trust Severus Snape.' DD says over and over again and he proves it, just as Snape proves his ultimate trust - and respect for Harry. rowena_grunnionffitch From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 17:34:31 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:34:31 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173296 Maeg: > Lupin is another example of the twisted thinking behind > dehumanization. If you're unfortunate enough to have a father with > an affliction that makes him less than human, it's better for you > if he's dead. And better still if your mother, who made such a > terrible mistake in loving him and conceiving a child by him, is > dead, too. That way you can be raised by a "proper" wizarding family > so we can conveniently forget your tainted past and therefore you'll > be happy. Assuming you're turn out to be a wizard, not a werewolf.... > > The only heroic role for Lupin is death? That's just a big bowl of > wrong. SSSusan: Sorry, but why does *that* have to be the 'message' that one takes from situation? How about a much plainer but still true one: 'War sucks' Bad things happen in real life which have no 'message' attached to them. To assume that because this is a work of fiction that every single character's outcome has a message about what the author feels or believes about that person seems a stretch to me. Siriusly Snapey Susan From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Jul 27 17:35:49 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:35:49 -0000 Subject: Houses / Sorting "too soon" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173297 --- "colebiancardi" wrote: > What the heck was DD's comment to Snape about "sorting too > soon" because Snape was brave? Are we to believe that > Dumbledore, a champion *against* the whole sorting of the > Houses, is stating that anyone *not* in Gryffindor is *not > brave*? I think that to understand the comment in a way that is consistent with Dumbledore's worldview you need to consider the context of the conversation. On the surface, he clearly means to imply that the then Snape might have been sorted differently than the 11-year-old Snape. And in doing so, I would suggest that he is focusing not only on the aspect that has grown in Snape's character (bravery), but also on the aspects that have waned (ambition; out-for-himself-ness), that now tie him less to Slytherin. That suggestion does not require Dumbledore to assume that the characteristic traits of the houses are unique to those in the houses -- on the contrary, since he is explicitly recognizing that people's character changes over time, the comment reinforces his position that there are no strict dividing lines. To recognize that the grown-up Snape fits the Gryffindor more than the Slytherin stereotypes hardly implies that Gryffindors have a monopoly on bravery (or Slytherins on egocentrism). I read Snape's double-take not as an indication that he eschews house stereotypes (or expects Dumbledore to), but that he still has not shaken those stereotypes. After all these years, he still sees James and Sirius as the characteristic Gryffindors -- foolhardy, arrogant, risk-takers. He fails to see his own actions in the same light, somewhat ironically, given that he has (paraphrasing his own words) put himself in a position where he needs to continually hoodwink the greatest legilimens to ever hold a wand. Finally, I think that Snape's double-take was exactly what Dumbledore wanted to provoke. Rather than an acknowledgement of the house stereotypes, the comment was a continuation of Dumbeldore's effort to explode them, in this case by pointing out to Snape how much he was like James, Sirius et al. in his own positive actions. I agree with elmntrymdr (in #172789) that the comment was also tinged with regret about how Snape's particular environment helped to shape him, and the pain that that caused, but I think that Dumbledore blames Voldemort much more than the house system for creating and exploiting divisions. (Indeed, it would be a bit strange to look at Snape, the Slytherin in love with a Gryffindor, and conclude that it was the house system driving students apart.) -- Matt From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:35:52 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:35:52 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173298 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > Leslie41: > Well, there I would have to disagree. Names are incredibly > important, most especially the names we give ourselves. They are > often a profound statement of not only our interests, but what we > admire, and with whom we identify. Lupinlore has and continues to > make a statement with his name, and any perusal of his posts will > show that his choice is apt in terms of what he admires. For > example: If I name myself ""nsynclover" and then visit a > discussion board on music and attack the Beatles, well would a > Beatles fan be untoward in criticizing me on the basis of my name, > even if I'd never brought up nsync? Not in that context, no. But you do have to admit the absolutely hilarious irony here--you're going after Lupinlore's comments based on his name, an aspect of the author and given the nature of this board and pennames, perhaps an aspect of intention...who I thought was not supposed to matter in the interpretation of comments, for we can all read discussions and arguments in much the same vein as novels, given the fluidity of text. Seriously, though; I'm not functioning in an official capacity, but it is close to the line. > To admire Remus Lupin and excoriate and loathe Severus Snape seems > to me to reveal a basic refusal to come to terms with the characters > of both men, and anyone guilty of that to me demonstrates that their > opinions on Severus Snape are suspect. It's the leap into the assumption that because a name is used that the character is necessarily admired, especially after the revelations of a book. I've never assumed anything about Siriusly Snapey Susan based on her name; if Lupinlore were to change his name, would you change your views on his arguments? It's still a tu quoque. -Nora also hopes that we are beyond the level of fannish music boards, here From prep0strus at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:32:51 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:32:51 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173299 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > I've seen many complaints about the Worst Camping Trip Ever! (on this > and other forums) and while I can't disagree that those parts were > boring, I wonder if there was a reason for them to be boring? > va32h > Prep0strus: Meh. I agree with a lot of the thoughts as to how our boredom mimics their boredom, but... no. It's a book. I'm sure it was meant to be engaging the whole time. We should be engaged in their boredom. And I wasn't. I think it went on too long, not enough happened (though I did enjoy some of the dialogue in that part), and mostly, I hated the Ron storyline. We've seen it enough through the books, how Ron gets frustrated, how Ron is the weak one. I like Ron, and yet I'm constantly disappointed by how he is written. I thought, in this book, maybe they would have grown up. The put-outer was cool, but really random for Dumbledore to predict something that specific. I feel if that storyline were removed, the whole book would've been tighter and less frustrating. And for them to not know what Harry was getting them into, and to be mad at him for it... blah. And, the one thing he WANTED to do that he thought would be productive (go to the burrow), they wouldn't do... but then did when Ron was gone. It all felt stretched. If she WANTED us to be bored and frustrated because the trio was, she succeeded, but I don't think that's a writing technique many should emulate. ~Adam (Prep0strus) From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:41:01 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:41:01 -0000 Subject: The Pig to be Slaughtered (wrong! -- or is it?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173300 >Chuck Han: > However, if Voldemort were thinking clearly, he > would have realized that the Elder Wand could be passed without > killing the previous owner. If he thinks that the progression is > Gregorovich/Grindlewald/Dumbledore/Snape, then he should have realized > this fact since Gregorovich and Grindlewald were still alive. zgirnius: I agree that this must have been Dumbledore's reasoning. Otherwise his plan for *Harry* had a gaping hole. The idea that Dumbledore set Snape up to be murdered, and ALSO made Snape the sole posessor of vital information Harry needed to get before the end, is illogical. What if Voldemort had killed Snape before it was time for Snape to deliver the message to Harry? As it was, this pitfall was avoided by a matter of seconds. There is no way Dumbledore could have predicted which would happen first. I therefore think Dumbledore reasoned as you suggest. He expected Voldemort to think the wand was his by right of his seizure of it, just as he knows Grindelwald stole it from Grigorovitch, and Dumbledore seized it from Grindelwald. From chaomath at hitthenail.com Fri Jul 27 17:42:39 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:42:39 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: <005a01c7cf77$9237b250$4101a8c0@Altair> References: <005a01c7cf77$9237b250$4101a8c0@Altair> Message-ID: <7E43EBE9-FC7B-4E44-8849-8D8765ABA8FA@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173301 Rahel wrote: > Well, dear, people are different. Take it from another parent of a > 1 year old (and of a 3 years old). Under the conditions life > presented to the Lupins, I would have not hesitated but acted just > like Tonks did. I would have left my child under the best care I > know it would get, and went off to protect the loved one who was in > imminent danger - my husband. Thanks for the different point of view. I never would have believed a parent would do this (and I'm not saying this to denigrate your parenting skills, I really do mean that it never would have occurred to me that parents would trust the saftey of their infant to another under these circumstances). I suppose for me it comes down to the fact that by choosing to have a child, the duty to protect him/her that rises above everything else. Love has something to do with it, but there is something inalienable about the need to protect those who cannot protect themselves. Biologic imperative, and all that. Now, if you could argue that Tonks believed her son would be better protected if she left him with someone else, then I think she did the right thing in leaving him. Tonks is shown as somewhat incompetent, despite being an Auror. She's continually clumsy and has done nothing in all her years to try to correct that (at least, nothing in canon); this can't be good in battle. She's also emotionally immature (lots of wailing at her own faults in the early books, her inability to keep it together when Lupin rejects her, her total blindness to Lupin's descending gloom after marriage). On the other hand, she is an Auror and a member of the Order. She's got to have something more than just her metamorphmagus status. Here's the kicker for me: Tonks knows she's being hunted. It's explicitly stated in DH that her family is a target. And the reasons behind it would definitely be passed down to her son; not only is he the son of a werewolf (a dangerous half-breed), but he's the grandson of a blood-traitor! If Tonks doesn't see that that's painted a huge bullseye on his back, she's a idiot. (Unless I'm remembering wrong? If so, please correct me.) If she wasn't confident of her abilities, she could have left her son with someone who was better able to protect him. (Of course, she could have stayed with him, too, and there would have been even more protection for him.) Maybe that's what she was doing? But then why did she think her poor abilities would save Lupin? That doesn't wash. She simply was selfish enough to want to be with him. This is totally in character with her earlier lovesickness. And a major reason why I despise what the character became after OotP. And perhaps it's kind of a practical thing: if the existing kid dies but my husband still lives, that's OK because I can have another child with him. Utterly practical, but icky. And not very Gryffindor- ish, either. Regardless, it kinda disgusted me that JKR praised the orphaning of another child. But with two parents like that (both too self-absorbed to be good parents), he's probably better off without them. On that cynical note, I end. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From G3_Princess at MailCity.com Fri Jul 27 16:48:14 2007 From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:48:14 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173302 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: > That is entirely the point, that he was damaged goods before and > after. > His love for Lily, his desire to redeem something of worth from his > actions gave him what little value as a human that he had. I don't think Snape had only a little value. Those of us that wanted him to be more than that, wanted him to be a > truly worthy character, a Sydney Carton, we were, I was, taken aback > that his arc could be dealt with in such a pragmatic and almost flat > way. Snape loved Lily. Snape betrayed Lily and James. Snape lived the > rest of his life trying to make up for that. With great dedication and at great risk. I don't quite see why that is a problem. After all isn't DD himself motivated by his grief and guilt over his little sister's death? rowena_grunnionffitch ELFY NOTE: Rowena, could you please contact the list elves at the owner address? The owner address is HPforGrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com (minus the space). Thanks! Zaney Elf. From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Fri Jul 27 17:49:48 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:49:48 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173303 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "anne_t_squires" > Anne Squires: > > I am sorry; but, I have to disagree with your reading of Colin > Creevey's presence during the battle. Right before the first attack > Neville says that he had used the spelled galleons to contact the > Order and the DA. Then, to use his words, "it snowballed from there." > The ROR was full of people arriving to fight. I think that's when > Colin arrived. He had been in the DA. Later the underage wizards > were told to leave; but people obviously came back into the castle > (Draco et al). > > In DH all muggleborns are being hunted down. Only half bloods and > purebloods were allowed to attend Hogwarts. There weren't any > muggleborns there. That doesn'r mean that students didn't need > protecting from the Carrows; but those students who were tortured by > the Carrrows weren't muggleborns. > > On another note: I would like to see the cannon that Diggle's house > blew up. I never saw that. In the Potterwatch broadcast they say a > Muggle family of five was found dead in their home. The Muggle > authorities were reporting that it was from a gas leak. Potterwatch > says they were victims of the Killing Curse. Nothing was blown up. > If two of the dead were Diggle and Hestia Jones, it seems to me this > would have been reported by the MoM as a warning to people who were > helping Potter and the Order. > > Anne Squires > You're correct about Muggle-borns not being able to attend Hogwarts. But Muggle-borns were, how shall we say, "relieved" of their wands as witnessed by the begging adult Muggle-borns in Diagon Alley. So if Muggle-borns had their wands confiscated, and if the Floo network was being monitor and the portkeys were similarly monitored, how did Colin get into Hogsmeade/Hogwarts? Dean Thomas arrived with Luna, so we can assume he side-by-side apparated with Luna. But who picked up Colin and the other Muggle- born DAs? I don't think members of the OP or the graduated DA would pick up Colin--based on Molly's reaction to Ginny being there. Milz From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:51:38 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:51:38 -0000 Subject: Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173304 Carol earlier: > > We're given no alternate version, so Severus's idea that James saved him because he got cold feet must be right, and the worst memory has to be, as the LOLLIPOPS people have always argued, because he slipped and called her a Mudblood and she refused to forgive him even when he slept outside the Gryffindor common room and abjectly begged her to do so. That, and not the worst memory, must have been the turning point. His despair caused him to join his "friends" because he felt he had not other choice. Lily is prejudging him, assuming that because *they* have become Death Eaters, he has done so, too, but I think she's mistaken. Not only does he still love her but she's the one who says, "You've chosen your way. I've chosen mine." (DH Am. ed. 676). There's no evidence that he's done anything worse than turning a blind eye to his friends' Death Eater ambitions. Clearly, he's not like them, nor is there any evidence that he routinely uses the word "Mudblood" or she would not have been shocked by it. > Jen responded: There are a couple of important points missing from the interpretation above. For one thing, Lily doesn't seemed shocked by Snape calling her a Mudblood because she's already aware he uses that term for all Muggleborn witches and wizards save her: > In addition, Lily expresses that she's "made excuses for you for years," and says "I can't pretend anymore." Perhaps she isn't operating with every bit of information about Snape's life in that moment, but it doesn't sound like Lily has made a snap judgement based on one incident, either. She's apparently seen enough evidence 'over the years' for her to have reached the conclusion that she can't pretend Snape is other than a person who has grown to have *something* in common with those sympathetic to Voldemort. > > But my main objection to the above interpretation is the idea that Lily holds even an iota of responsibility for Snape's choice to join the DEs. Even if her decision to turn her back on him was premature and made without the whole story (and as I said above, there's evidence this was not the case), Snape and Snape alone made the decision to follow Voldemort. > > In fact, my understanding was Lily was the only thing tethering Snape to a different path, and her awareness of that fact was one reason she made a point of talking to him about his friends and defending him to others. Lily's comment about reaching a parting of the ways with Snape came across as a defeat to me rather than a rash act: After many years of seeing good in Severus and wanting to be friends with him despite the objections of others, Snape had finally acted in a way that opened Lily's eyes to realize she couldn't *make* him change the path he was on. Carol responds: Of course Lily isn't responsible for his choices or his mistakes. But IMO he hadn't made his choice until that point. As you say, she was the only thing keeping him from joining his fellow Slytherins, the people he thought were his friends whose evil deeds he has been excusing because he doesn't want to see them as evil. He's in denial, as far as I can see, and certainly, if it hadn't been for Lily, he would have joined them earlier. they are his house, and he never loses his affection for Slytherin and Lucius Malfoy and the people who made him feel that Hogwarts was his home, at the same time indoctrinating him with their pure-blood prejudices (which he clearly did not yet have on the Hogwarts Express or he would not have been friends with Lily and wanted her to join him in Slytherin: Slytherin = brains; Gryffindor = brawn in his early view). He's clearly torn. He has to choose between Slytherin and Lily and he can't do it until her rejection leaves him, in his mind, nowhere to go but to his friends. He has not yet acquired the courage to do the right thing regardless of consequences. Without Lily's friendship and support, there's nothing to hold him back from his ambition to become a DE. (He must not have done so until he left school, however, or Black and Lupin would have known.) Through no fault of her own, Lily's refusal to forgive him pushes him over the edge. (But, of course, had he not joined the DEs, we'd have no story.) I also concede that he must have said "Mudblood" in relation to other people despite her objections, and that's why she *thinks* he's already made his choice, that and his continued association with people like Avery and Mulciber and his refusal to see them for what they are. I misread her shock in SWM as shock that he would use the word rather than shock that he would apply it to her and, I confess, applied that preconception to my reading of DH. But it seems to me that Severus, unlike his "little Death Eater friends" who openly express their ambition to become DEs, is torn between Lily and the DEs. IMO, He's teetering on the edge like Draco in HBP trying to choose between killing and not killing DD and. like Draco, is unable to choose. Yes, *she* says that he has made his choice, but that's her interpretation based on his friends and his use of the word "Mudblood." (as we see later from Blaise Zabini, blood prejudice alone does not make a Slytherin a Death Eater.) Notice that when she says that he's chosen, he says, "No. Listen. I didn't mean--" and when she refuses to forgive him, he's wordless. He can't find the words to say because he still has not yet made his choice. Love for her, a deep desire for their continued friendship and her approval, is still holding him back. But surely, this is the defining moment. If she'd forgiven him, given him the second chance that DD later gives him, perhaps he'd have found the courage not to join the DEs. (Evidently he never does so openly, or Sirius Black and Lupin would have known.) That does not make his decision her responsibility. Of course, it's his decision, his mistake, which he would never have regretted had Voldemort's interpretation of the Prophecy not endangered her. But nevertheless, it's the SWM--his use of the word "Mudblood" and Lily's reaction--that triggers his choice to join the DEs. A word of explanation. I had always thought that the life debt to James was the reason he went to Dumbledore, and I believed that he also regretted that Voldemort had targeted Potter's innocent wife and child. It turns out to be only Lily (but his loyalty to Dumbledore and his determination to protect Lily's son for her sake grows into something more, a desire to bring down Voldemort and to do "anything"--to spy, to lie, to risk his life--to serve Dumbledore's cause. yes, it's because of Lily, but Lily helps him to do what's right rather than what's easy. (As for seeing that Voldemort is evil, even Draco sees that but is too weak to fight against him.) I also thought that the so-called Prank came after the worst memory, that it was both the incident that pushed Severus to join the DEs and the moment that James became something other than an arrogant, bullying toerag. Wrong on both counts. Severus's decision to join the DEs seems to be the result of the SWM, the worst memory not only because it severed him from Lily but because it was his incentive to join the DEs, which led, ultimately, to her death. And James? We still don't know what turned him around. It must have been Lily (who still, apparently, didn't want him to hex Severus, who had once been her friend). And James, of course, would have had to stop running with a werewolf and get serious about his responsibilities once he married and fathered a child. (Contrast Lupin near the beginning of DH.) So since James really was the "toerag" that Lily thinks he is at the time of the so-called Prank (as we see in SWM) and we get no alternate version of the "Prank" (Lily doesn't know what happened, and Severus, it seems, has been sworn to secrecy by Dumbledore and can't tell her that Lupin really is a werewolf), the "cold feet" version is as likely as James's finding about it belatedly and stopping Severus (who wasn't an Animagus and didn't know how the other boys survived their encounter with the werewolf). Either way, James is protecting Sirius (and himself?) from expulsion and Remus from much worse. He doesn't care about Severus. And in SWM, Severus has done nothing to merit being attacked unawares tow on one. He's only studying his DADA exam, which still matters to him--as it would not if he had already made up his mind to be a DE. (Cf. Draco in HBP saying that the Dark Lord doesn't care whether he's a fully qualified wizard.) As for the point made elsewhere in this thread about the so-called Prank being Severus's fault, yes, he suspected that Lupin was a werewolf. Yes, he wanted to know what the Marauders were up to and thought it was dangerous, but he was trying to show *Lily* (not Dumbledore) that they weren't the wonderful boys everyone thought they were, and even though he clearly can't tell her that Lupin is a werewolf, he walks away from his talk with her with "a spring in his step," not even hearing what she says about Avery and Mulciber because she has acknowledged that James is "an arrogant toerag" rather than a hero (DH Am. ed. 675). She has said that they're still best friends and that she dislikes James Potter, and that's all that matters. It's only after he publicly calls her a Mudblood that she stops seeing the good in him, the part of him that doesn't deny and excuse Avery's and Mulciber's evil behavior, the part that reflects his secret doubts about his own Muggle blood. (Imagine being a Half-Blood in a House that uses passwords like "Pureblood." Not excusing him; just trying to imagine how it felt to be the brilliant but neglected Severus Snape, who reminded Harry of a plant left in the dark. How different would he have been if, like James, he had come from a family that loved him and encouraged his prodigious talents? His friends in Slytherin seem to have recognized those talents and admitted him into their gang despite his being a Half-Blood. The choice between them and Lily must have been painful, and it's easy to see why he turned a blind eye to what they really were, just as Remus Lupin ignored his friends' bullying despite his qualms of conscience.) Also note that Lily tells James and Sirius that Severus has done nothing to them. She doesn't blame him for the so-called Prank. Until he calls her a "Mudblood," indeed, even after he's done so, she says that James is as bad as Severus (OoP Am. ed. 648). Clearly, he hasn't gone around using Dark Curses like Avery and Mulciber even if he defends them as supposedly humorous. Nor is any hex in the HBP's book at all dark until he invents Sectumsempra. (That's a question I'd like to ask JKR: When and why did Severus invent Sectumsempra?) Sorry. I'm straying from my point. Yes, he wants to go down there, but for Sirius to show him how to do it, knowing that he isn't an Animagus and has no defense against the full-grown werewolf he'll meet there is indefensible. It's like offering a drink to an alcoholic knowing that the alcoholic can't refuse, only in this case, the drink could kill the alcoholic. In any case, we never see the adult Snape using the word "Mudblood." That word ruined his life. He knows the pain it causes and even if he uses it in the company of DEs, he never judges people by their blood status (Muggles excepted) AFAWK. By HBP, he is tired of watching people die for their blood status or their views on Muggles or Muggleborns. "Lately, only those that I could not save" says it all. And by DH, Hermione, that insufferable know-it-all, is to be called Miss Granger. Carol, who thanks Lily for being Severus's saving grace, giving him the means and motive for redemption, and hopes that her soul has forgiven his From chaomath at hitthenail.com Fri Jul 27 17:55:53 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:55:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1DA4D591-4139-4B05-9996-2938340B0944@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173305 On Jul 27, 2007, at 11:43 AM, va32h wrote: > I also think that all the camping scenes allow us to really feel the > frustration that the trio are experiencing. They don't know where > they are going or what they are doing - we don't know where JKR is > going with her narrative. Hermione and Ron are disappointed in Harry, > they thought he knew what he was doing. I confess I was disappointed > with JKR - I thought this book had been planned for 17 years, why all > the filler? The trio are frustrated and bored, the readers are > frustrated and bored. In short - the camping trip is a metaphor for > our experience of reading DH. > > Now is that an interesting coincidence or utter brilliance on the > part of JKR or neither? There's a difference between showing how your characters go through a boring and frustrating period and actually boring and frustrating your readers. Given the simplicity of JKR's writing, I have a very hard time ascribing this to brilliance. I call it bad writing. I was bored. I began to not care what happened to the characters. Brilliance in war writing is Catch-22 or All Quiet on the Western Front. But thanks for making me re-think my position. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 17:56:26 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:56:26 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: <7E43EBE9-FC7B-4E44-8849-8D8765ABA8FA@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173306 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maeg wrote: Thanks for the different point of view. I never would have believed a parent would do this (and I'm not saying this to denigrate your > parenting skills, I really do mean that it never would have occurred to me that parents would trust the saftey of their infant to another under these circumstances). > I suppose for me it comes down to the fact that by choosing to have a child, the duty to protect him/her that rises above everything else. > Love has something to do with it, but there is something inalienable about the need to protect those who cannot protect themselves. Biologic imperative, and all that. va32h here: Oh I wholeheartedly agree. I find Tonks' behavior both disgusting and deplorable. I am a mother, and no I would never choose my husband over my children, would not risk leaving them parentless to go in search of him. And moreover - my husband would never expect me to do so, and would be horrified and furious if I did such a thing (and vice versa). Tonks did NOT come to Hogwarts to fight for the cause, she came looking for Lupin. She asked only after Lupin's safety, and she completely abandoned 16 year old Ginny in mid-fight, to go scurrying off after Lupin. Just as in HBP, she left her post guarding Hogwarts to go find Dumbledore and ask about Lupin. Tonks' loyalty is to Lupin first and Lupin only - quite honestly, her son is better off without her, as I doubt Tonks would ever love him as much as she loved her dead husband's memory. va32h From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 17:58:32 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:58:32 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173307 > va32h: > Call me presumptuous - but I think a much better, meaningful ending > to the the final Harry/Voldemort showdown would be for Harry to have > never had his wand broken in the first place, and to have never taken > Draco's wand. When Harry tells Voldemort that Draco is the true > master, all eyes in the Great Hall turn to Draco...Voldemort says > fine, he'll just kill Draco first, and turns to do so, and in that > split second, Draco throws his own wand to Harry declaring "I > surrender to you Harry Potter" and just misses the killing curse. > Harry meanwhile catches Draco's wand and drops his own, Voldemort > turns in a howl of rage at being thwarted yet again, and tries to > curse Harry, and then the rest of it plays out as it did in the > actual version. > > Later, during the whole "victory feast in the great hall", Harry > would approach the Malfoys and lay Draco's wand in front of him, make > eye contact, say a simple "thanks", and go on his way. Draco and > Harry still loathe each other for personal reasons, but in the end > Draco made the right choice - Harry's side over Voldemort's side - > and even if he made it for purely selfish reasons, it's a damn sight > better than the entire Malfoy clan being saved by Saint Harry's > largesse. Magpie: You know, this gets into a very dodgy area, I know, but that is exactly what I felt. This is the author's story for me to make sense of--it's not up to me to tell her to write the story I would want. If I can say "this should happen in the Draco storyline!" why shouldn't somebody else make her write Snape as being motivated purely by ethics or Harry get together with Hermione? So I realize that I can't just demand what I want. But in this instance, it really felt like more than just my Draco fangirl wanting something good for my boy--after all, it's not like that ending in any way makes Draco more courageous or OOC. It actually plays on exactly the qualities he showed throughout, where he realized he actually didn't like being evil or having Voldemort back (and was punished by having to commit the kinds of torture he'd grown up claiming was cool, while Crabbe turned out to enjoy it as a true sadist) but didn't have the courage to actually do anything to oppose it. The trouble was that the way it happened felt actually *more* artificial for me, like I could see the author's hand guiding everything around the points she wanted to make. That's why I think I feel so strongly about the way Slytherin ends up--as you say, saved by largesse without making the right choice. It seems like JKR was absolutely making a point about these characters, and that meant, for instance, showing that the assassin storyline in HBP did *not* have the thematic importance I thought it did--it was just an extended punishment and way to start "Who's got the Elder Wand?" Draco was meant to go from a child who thought evil was cool to a man who had lost that idea--but that's not much, and it wasn't all that transformative. It wasn't a real development or change. Dumbledore really wasn't about second chances the way I thought he was--he was just really smart about what made people tick and how to make that work for you. So the moment Harry says Draco was the master of the elder wand, he brings it right back to himself-- luckily I swiped his wand back in chapter 23 so he's totally irrelevent. This isn't even totally about Draco, btw. This would have been a good development in Harry as well, especially if he had to encourage Draco's choice via what he saw on the Tower. That, I think, would have said something that I personally would find very true about courage, and very hopefully for a future healing of the split--all without turning Draco into a hero or stealing any of Harry's thunder. If I were her editor--and I am an editor--I think I absolutely would have grilled her on that: why have you chosen to end Harry's dealings with his antagonists (I'm including Snape here, though he's got a totally different story) the way you have? I suspect she might have had a real point that she was making about "people like that," but it's just not a point that resonates with me or seems particularly realistic or insightful. I don't think that's an unreasonable criticism to make. I think it's part of why some people found the end of the series just sort of...repulsive. Not uplifting. And I know that many have pointed out that maybe everything doesn't have to have a great lesson, but I think with 7 volume series like this it usually helps and might make the difference in the way it's ultimately regarded. There obviously are values being put forth as correct and good throughout the book, and the ending is going to be the thing that people use to unlock exactly what the values are and whether they agree with them. I realize I'm as subjective as anyone else, but this really felt like one of those places where it was a story opportunity artificially missed. Maybe because it went against the author's idea about character--but then that leads me to wonder if her ideas about character didn't just turn out to be a limitation in this case. I do think that's a valid criticism, even if not everyone agrees with it. -m From Schlobin at aol.com Fri Jul 27 17:56:01 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:56:01 -0000 Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173308 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ciraarana" wrote: > > Kia ora! > > > > Q: Who is the one who, according to Rowling, performs magic quite late in life? ****I don't think there has been any conclusive answer to this. Merope is shown doing magic in her shack (her father tells her to mend a plate).....Ted Tonks was "muggle born", not a muggle....maybe JKR forgot about that or it was in an earlier version? > > Q: Did the Sorting Hat burn completely? What or who is Sorting now? I think it survived...certainly it was after it burst into flames that Neville pulled the Sword of Gryffindor out of it...remember that Voldemort's spells weren't working too well.... > > Q: Why didn't Snape know about the Horcurxes? He's a Dark wizard. > Voldemort is boasting about his near immortality. Snape is a clever > man. Why didn't he know?? That information/knowledge is suppressed. DD had the books hidden in his study. My guess, however, is that he put a spell on them so that only Hermione would be able to get them. Then he tells Harry to tell Ron and Hermione about the horcruxes... > > Q: Where is Snape's portrait?? He was Headmaster of Hogwarts. We saw > how their portraits pop up after their death. And I'm sure Harry would > have noticed Snape's portrait. So, where is it?? My theory is that it's there. Remember the first time after Dumbledore's death that Harry went into the Headmaster's office? DD was asleep in his portrait. I theorize that it takes a while for the portraits to awaken after death... > > Q: How could Dumbledore have known Draco's mission before Draco did? > I think that's a good question. I assumed that DD (who was a great keeper of secrets, trained to do so in his childhood) had another spy among the Death Eaters, but that's not too plausible....I wondered that as well. > > Q: Snape approached Voldemort with the plea to not kill Lily? And > Voldemort agreed? He agreed to not kill a "Mudblood"?? (And he did > agree, didn't he, because he gave Lily the choice to step away.) > Looking at Voldemort's policy ... Are we supposed to accept that? I think this one is totally understandable. People who choose evil in their lives love to exert power and humiliate others. Rape is not about sex or love, it's about power over someone and humiliation of someone....Snape would have been smart enough to tell Voldemort that he wanted to possess Lily to gain vengeance against James Potter (who he vocally hated) and against Sirius Black. This would have made sense to Voldemort, who loved to humiliate and punish people. Why else make Pettigrew wait for his new hand? Why the "slow torture" of the Malfoys by recruiting Draco to kill Dumbledore? Why not just kill Lucius..... Also evil people like to demonstrate their power and omnipotence, making their followers/victims more afraid to thwart them...Voldemort would have loved the idea of handing Lily over to Snape. > > Q: The Polyjuice Potion. It only lasts for an hour. That was important > in GoF. And in this book it's never even once mentioned! And some of > the adventures took longer than an hour. Is this a new version of > Polyjuice? Why aren't we told so? Good question. Either they found a stronger PP, they took it every hour but she doesn't mention it, or it's a flaw... > Q: Harry peering in on Voldemort. Excuse me, but Voldemort is the one > who is in control of the connection. During HBP, he kept it shut. And > now, suddenly, Harry can creep in again? Without Voldemort noticing? > (Okay, perhaps Harry didn't always notice when Voldemort came to peek > into his mind in OotP, and perhaps now Voldemort doesn't know Harry's > there.) And Voldemort didn't even once use the connection to try > something like he did with Sirius? He never used it to look in on > Harry and see where the boy was? You know, to better catch him, and > all that. I half-expected it for the first several hundred pages. It > never happened. And I can't understand why not. I'm wondering if it had something to do with Voldemort's possessing Harry and finding it intolerable. Doesn't DD say something about it being like unbearable......? But more likely, Harry explains it....Snape WAS trying to teach him occlumency, but could only teach Harry to do it the way HE knew how to do it...for Harry, the emotions of love/grief etc. was the way to keep Voldemort out of himself....doesn't Harry say he finally learned how to do it? > > Q: The Trace. Rubbish. Excuse me, but it is. I mean, in CoS Harry is > accused of having used the Hover Charm. The Ministry didn't know it > wasn't him. Somewhere, I think at the end of HBP, Dumbledore even told > Harry that the Ministry can only detect that magic is performed, but > not by whom. And now we are introduced to the Trace, which allows the > Ministry to tell exactly who performed which spell?? No. Doesn't make > sense. Or is it a new ministry policy and I simply missed that bit? > Not sure. And why didn't the MOM put a trace on people who called Voldemort the "Dark Lord"? (When they were still relatively uninfiltrated.....) > Q: If Expelliarmus changes the wand's allegiance then nobody from > the DA is still using their own wand. No wizard or witch who has ever > been taught that spell at Hogwarts would be using their own wand > (although considering the DADA teacher problem ) But wouldn't Harry > have won Voldemort's wand in the graveyard scene in GoF? > > I think this charm only works with the Elder Wand. Susan McGee (If you're over 40, and interested in a low volume list, email me about Harry Potter for Grownups Over 40 at SusanGSMcGee at aol.com) From melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 17:55:34 2007 From: melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com (melrosedarjeeling) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:55:34 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "verosomm" wrote: > > va32h: > > I confess I was disappointed > > with JKR - I thought this book had been planned for 17 years, why all > > the filler? The trio are frustrated and bored, the readers are > > frustrated and bored. In short - the camping trip is a metaphor for > > our experience of reading DH. > > > > Now is that an interesting coincidence or utter brilliance on the > > part of JKR or neither? > > > > > > I think utter brilliance... we readers are getting listless > with "nothing" happening, frustrated the trio is cold and hungry, > annoyed with those things affecting Ron so readily, etc. etc. We are > really in the tent with them, imo. > > Veronica > Now MelroseDarjeeling: In the first creative writing class I ever took, we were given an assignment to write about a character who was excruciatingly bored. The catch was, you had to write about it in a way that was interesting for the reader. This was a real challenge, trying to come up with creative ways to inhabit that boredom, to make it feel real but not dull. But as our teacher explained, there is never an excuse for an author to bore her readers. So to me, this is a flaw in the book. I think it's there as part of Harry's spiritual journey, but it's up to the author to make it meaningful for the reader. I'm trying to think of some great works of literature that are all about being bored... maybe Tales of the South Pacific, Mansfield Park, Heart of Darkness? Yes, how's this, from Heart of Darkness, just by way of comparison?: "Going up that river was like travelling back to the earliest beginnings of the world, when vegetation rioted on the earth and the big trees were kings. An empty stream, a great silence, an impenetrable forest. The air was warm, thick, heavy, sluggish. There was no joy in the brilliance of the sunshine. The long stretches of the waterway ran on, deserted, into the gloom of over-shadowed distances...you lost your way on that river as you would in a desert, and butted all day long against shoals, trying to find the channel, till you thought yourself bewitched and cut off for ever from everything you had known once - somewhere - far away - in another existence perhaps." (p.55-56) -MelroseDarjeeling From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 18:05:10 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:05:10 -0000 Subject: JKR's story vs. JKR as a person (Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173310 > lizzyben: > Of course not. I'm sorry if my post wasn't clear; I was trying to > get a handle on some concepts that I'm not really expressing very > well. I'm saying that all authors put some of their self into their > characters - as JKR has acknowledged about Hermione or Lupin. And I > think Snape & the Slytherins represent a part of JKR too, a part that she would rather condemn & judge instead of integrating or > understanding. I'm talking about things from a psychological > perspective, *not* a social perspective. Jen: I agree with many of Jung's theories and get your line of thinking here; what surprises me is the idea that because JKR created a fictional work, that work defines her as a person to the extent that we can perform analysis on her deeper motives and impulses. Guessing at her intentions and motives for the story and her characters is par for the course around here, but it seems a bit of a stretch to say her work means we know her personally. To me that also aserts she didn't take into account her world or her characters and how she honestly believes they would act in any given situation. lizzyben: > And there's something about the total condemnation of a house > of "emotion", combined w/Harry's statements that he likes that > Ginny doesn't ever cry, JKR's refusal to ever allow Harry to cry - > it's like she's saying that emotion, itself, is bad? Jen: I understood this to be consistent character development for Harry myself (more on Slytherin house in a moment). As she said in an interview in 2000: "Harry is vulnerable. He's suffered. He's damaged in some ways." She elaborated more on this recently by saying something to the effect of if Harry were a real person he would be more damaged by what's occurred in his life (sorry, searched and couldn't find that interview). In his fictional world, he's not an utter mess but there are aspects to his character that reflect how much he's suffered. Considering emotion somehow shameful or distasteful at times seems consistent with his early life at the Dursleys to me (speaking as a social worker here in RL and attempting to say something consistent with my professional experience - you can take it with a grain of salt of course!). lizzyben: > I'm just at a loss to understand the way JKR resolved the House > system. Were fans really begging JKR to make Slytherin *more* evil > & unredeemable? IMO, it seems like fans were begging for a good > Slytherin, a redemption for the House. JKR never gave it - and her > total condemnation of anything resembling Slytherin-ness is just, > odd, to me. I don't get it. I don't get why she did it. Jen: My only answer is that apparantly in JKR's mind, this wasn't how the WW would act - like Harry, the WW is damaged. There aren't psychologists; magical people don't spend much time comforting each other or processing through emotions - Harry is left almost alone to deal with his grief save for an occasional intervention by a friend. Would I want to live in this world? Not anymore, though I did want to after reading book 1. However, I don't believe this world is anything but fictional or that it's a mirror for JKR's psyche even though I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment that the WW cuts off their emotional side. I suspect it's due in part to living in such a dangerous place where survival seems primary. I honestly think right now, until I hear otherwise, that JKR considered unity of the houses to be an impossibilty in the WW we've watched evolved over seven years. Not that it couldn't ever happen, but in the blip of a centuries old world, that's the point to which the world had evolved. And even nineteen years later it's not appreciably different in my eyes, although my own personal hope is many who acted to oppose Voldemort do want a better world and are working toward that end. It's hard to tell from the epilogue. lizzyben: > The problem is that JKR never managed to integrate the "shadow" > House, the shadow figure into the overall narrative. And IMO the > novel suffered for it. Jen: I haven't made any final decisions yet, need to re-read and hear more from JKR, as well as read analysis on this list. It wasn't exactly the book I expected and it's taking me time to make any final judgements. I definitely understand why others express what you have, lizzyben, and understand people who are done with the series; it's not a world with a consistent moral compass for me at the moment even though I'm open to having my views grow and change as I understand more. Or perhaps accept the flaws of the WW in the end and make peace with 'her story' - that's my hoped for outcome for me personally. lizzyben: > And the overall message of the novels *is* scary to me, > because it seems to say that we can just instantly judge people as > less worthy, almost less human, based on a label. While JKR condemns > that mindset in the text for Muggles, she supports exactly that type > of thinking when it comes to Slytherins. All of them, 25% of the > population, are totally immoral & evil? Jen: Not to change your mind (in fact, it might make it worse for you - I hope not) but as a way to offer at least one personal thought that JKR has expressed about her own thinking, here's an interview comment from her from 1999, Assoc. Press: "I see children as innately good unless they've been very damaged. That's where I'm coming from." That comment came after what I believe underlies the ending of the series: "I wasn't going to pretend that an evil presence is a cardboard cutout and nobody gets hurt," J.K. Rowling said Thursday in an interview on NBC television's "Today" program. "If you're writing about evil you genuinely have a responsibility to show what that means and that's why I'm writing them the way I'm writing them." ********************************** Jen: At the moment, my belief is JKR sees the children in Slytherin house as those who have been most damaged by the evil that is Voldemort (and the evil that has come before due to the serious flaws in the WW) and is saying that the prejudice and hatred running through the lines of certain families over generations has caused severe damage to these kids, more damage than the children in other houses. Should they be hated for being damaged? Absolutely NOT. But they have been and it's caused the breeding ground for dark lords to continue until real unity is a goal of the majority of magical people. Very sadly, that didn't happen in the scope of her 26-year journey through the WW. Jen, who may very well be in denial about JKR and her story but still wants to hold onto something she's invested 7 years of her own life in before reaching a final decision. From mookilie2003_1 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 16:38:59 2007 From: mookilie2003_1 at hotmail.com (mookilie2003_1) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:38:59 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173311 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > They both occur in the chapter where Harry leaves Privet Drive: > > '"This is different, pretending to be me-" > "Well, none of us really fancy it Harry," said Fred earnestly. > "Imagine if something went wrong and we were stuck as specky, > scrawny gits forever." > Harry did not smile.' > (DH "The Seven Potters" p.46 UK edition) > > I did! > > '"You can't do it if I don't cooperate, you need me to give you > some hair" > 'Well, that's the plan scuppered," said George. "Obviously, there's > no chznce at all of us gettign a bit of your hair unless you > cooperate." > "Yeah, thirteen of us against one bloke who's not allowed to > use magic; we've got no chance," said Fred. > "Funny," said Harry. "Really amusing."' > (ibid. p.47) > > 'Fred and George turned to each other and said together, "Wow > - we're identical!" > "I dunno, though, I think I'm still better-looking," said Fred, > examining his reflection in the kettle.' > (ibid. p.49) > > I do so love the twins' deadpan humour. :-) > mookilie2003_1: I thought the funniest line by far came from Molly Weasley: "NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!"--(USA, p736) After Bellatrix shot the Avada Kedavra curse at Ginny and right before Molly returned the favor. Well done Molly! From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 18:11:20 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:11:20 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173312 > > > Milz wrote: > You're correct about Muggle-borns not being able to attend Hogwarts. > But Muggle-borns were, how shall we say, "relieved" of their wands as > witnessed by the begging adult Muggle-borns in Diagon Alley. > > So if Muggle-borns had their wands confiscated, and if the Floo > network was being monitor and the portkeys were similarly monitored, > how did Colin get into Hogsmeade/Hogwarts? > > Dean Thomas arrived with Luna, so we can assume he side-by-side > apparated with Luna. But who picked up Colin and the other Muggle- > born DAs? I don't think members of the OP or the graduated DA would > pick up Colin--based on Molly's reaction to Ginny being there. > > Milz > Anne Squires now: Dean's wand was "relieved" by the Snatchers. I am, of course, purely speculating here; but, I think Colin (and Dennis) were on the run much like Dean was. Or hiding out somewhere a la Anne Frank. I think Colin had his wand with him when he came to Hogwarts to fight. OTOH, it's also possible that when one of the defenders fell, he picked up their wand before a DE could grab hold of it. In the chaos of battle it seems anything could happen. However, I feel that Colin was fighting with his own wand. In any event, it makes absolutely no sense that he was unarmed. All of this is just conjecture on my part, obviously. Anne Squires From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 18:11:05 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:11:05 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173313 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > In fact, I'd go so far as to say that what occurs in DH > > is not only not very Christian, it's actually in opposition to > > everything Christ taught and demonstrated. > > Of course this is my opinion and I'm sure (very sure! ) > > others will differ. > > > >>KATIE: > > I agree that there are parallels that *can* be made to the > Christian story. Betsy Hp: I agree, though only in the loosest of ways. So loose as to be practically negligible, IMO. > >>KATIE: > However, I do not believe that these are "Christian" books, at > least in the sense of a Narnia. > Betsy Hp: Goodness, no. Frankly, I don't even see where a "Christian" moral comes in. > >>KATIE: > ...incidentally, I wonder why it is that Christians often > claim that *any* redemptive or moral tale is Christian? Is > redemption copyrighted by Christianity? Betsy Hp: Not so far as I've been told. But I think, because redemption is such a big part of the Christian philosophy, whenever a story contains redemption as a theme, it's possible to see a parallel there. Not that it's the only or even the best parallel available, just that it's one of the choices > >>KATIE: > Why can't HP be books about personal truth, love, and redemption > without being Christianized? > Betsy Hp: I guess all that I'm saying is because I don't see that these books are about truth, love or redemption, they cannot be Christian. They can also not be other things of course. But since the Christian context was raised (ie, is this really a "Christain" story?), that's what I was responding to (ie, no). > >>Chancie: > While you are of course intitled to your opinion Betsy Hp, I wonder > if perhaps you have over looked quite a few points. > > In the garden, when Jesus prayed, he was discussing his impending > crusifiction with GOD, Who is definatly alive, and in a way so are > Lily, James, Sirius, and Lupin. Betsy Hp: Lily, James, Sirius and Lupin are all ghosts. They're certainly not (IMO) a stand in for God. > >>Chancie: > > Harry is NOT surounded by death, but Life and Love...Still see an > inconsistincy there? Betsy Hp: He's surrounded by dead people telling him to kill himself. So yeah, it's hard for me to equate that either with Jesus's prayer in the garden, or with his going with the Roman soldiers. > >>Chancie: > > I don't believe Harry "suicided", I think he definatly sacrificed! > He went in knowing that he would die, but that in his death many > would be saved because Evil could FINALLY be defeated! Betsy Hp: *IF* Neville killed Nagini, and *if* Voldemort didn't become true master of the Elder Wand. So Harry actually left the battle before it was close to done. Again, very different from what I see Jesus doing. Much closer to escaping, IMO, and therefore a suicide. > >>Chancie: > > As far as the "redemption limited to few" there are PLENTY of > instances in the Bible where people COULD have chose to follow God, > and decided not to. > Betsy Hp: The interesting thing to me is that in the Bible those folks were generally quite complacent in believing themselves morally good. They were sure they were chosen, IOWs. But there were also plenty who were considered the dregs and the unclean of their society who *did* get the Christ message and were redeemed. In DH, unfortunately, we didn't get a single example of someone designated "bad" becoming fully and truly good. There was no redemption unless you'd already been chosen. Which does fall in with what I believe are rather old-fashioned (and I think out of fashion?) Christian beliefs, but it doesn't fit with my own understanding of what Christianity is. > >>Monica: > > I will agree that he [Harry] is certainly not divine, and has good > and bad within himself, making his sacrifice quite different than > that of Jesus. Nevertheless, his sacrifice was to eliminate the > personification of evil, i.e. Voldemort. Betsy Hp: But Voldemort wasn't really the "personification of evil" was he? Otherwise his destruction would have brought about bigger (or quite frankly, any) changes to the WW. Instead, as we see in the Epilogue, the WW and Hogwarts returns to business as usual. It's pretty much a carbon copy of the world Harry entered in PS/SS. Which means Harry's struggle was the equivalent to bringing down Hitler (though frankly, Voldemort didn't even come close to matching Hitler's evil). Which okay, good job young man. But hardly an earth shattering occurrence. > >>Monica: > As far as the house system, I likewise think the ending could have > wrapped things up a little better by unifying Hogwarts instead of > allowing it to remain divided. Or perhaps a group of Slytherins > fighting the death eaters. But Malfoy, the quintessential Slytherin > of Harry's day, was redeemable, in his readmittance to wizarding > society. Perhaps that says something? Betsy Hp: Draco is returned to the spot he began in as well: a member of the unclean, the non-elect, the scapegoat house (clearly marked by their green and silver ties). So again, nothing has changed. And certainly no redemption occurs. Harry's actions were a blip on the radar. A footnote in "Hogwarts: A History". Hardly equivalent to Christ. Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 18:37:21 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:37:21 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173314 fitzchivalryhk wrote: > > One of the most unsatisfying point in Deathly Hallows for many HPfGUers is the continual/approval of the Sorting system after the Voldemort war. In DH, by showing that none of the current Slytherin students was good enough to join the other Houses to fight against Voldemort, and discounting other Slytherins as "Griffindor at heart" (i.e. Snape), the book seems to send a message to people that as long as you are categorized as one type of people (namely, Slytherin) at the age of 11, you are a coward or villain for life. > > I find this type of message disturbing, and am surprised that, even though the Sorting Hat's song in previous years seem to disapprove this type of segregation, the epilogue shows that the system is allowed to remain unchanged at least for the next 19 years. > > For those who share the point of view that the Sorting and House System of Hogwarts is not beneficial for the wizarding society and its children, what do you think can be done to change it? > Abolishing the House system all together? > Eliminate the Slytherin House? > Abolish Sorting by the Sorting Hat and put the students randomly into each house? > Change the ideological implication that permeates the house system? > Put a pro-equality teacher as the Head of Slytherin to change the pro-pure-blood atmosphere of the House? > Other suggestions? :) Carol responds: I think the epilogue shows a gradual eradication of prejudice in the making. Draco and Harry are not at each other's throats like Lucius Malfoy and Mr. Weasley. Draco has probably not indoctrinated his son with the pure-blood superiority ethic that caused so much grief in DH and it's unlikely that the Sorting Hat, which has always advocated unity and its own abolition, will sort by that criterion. Nor does it seem a good idea for the Sorting Hat to talk about Power-hungry Slytherin or otherwise insult the Founder of the House as he sorts the students. True, they should be taught undistorted history, but perhaps Slytherin's reasons for fearing and distrusting Muggles, and by extension, their children, could be taught along with his building of the CoS (rather like teaching American children that, for all their opposition to King George III, some of the Founding Founders owned slaves). At any rate, a more neutral criterion such as ambition would be a good start. Maybe it's already happened, which is why Harry tells his son that it's okay to be Sorted into Slytherin. Delayed Sorting based on choice would also help, but only if Slytherin is associated with some virtue or at least some neutral quality (again, I think ambition comes closest--Percy would have fit well there if the House bore no stigma). Or Slytherin as the House of emotion, the water House, where it's okay to wear your heart on your sleeve? The House for students who believe that love is more important than brains or courage? But, then, we already have Hufflepuff represent loyalty (not the catch all House for those who don't fit anywhere else, please). Some distinguishing trait that isn'e reprehensible, that doesn't mark eleven-year-olds as tainted and evil. (Children Sorted into Slytherin should not be booed.) If Muggleborns are allowed in Slytherin (assuming that they want to be there), that ethic will die out. Obviously, too, would-be Slytherins will not be Death Eaters in the making. Voldemort is long gone. On a side note, Hermione is (according to the "Today Show" interview) revolutionizing the Department of Magical Law). We don't know what reforms she's instituted, but we can be sure that werewolves are allowed to attend Hogwarts and provisions are made for them to take Wolfsbane Potion and be safely secluded once a month. Teddy Lupin, the werewolf's son, is well-adjusted and happy. To return to eradicating enmity between the Houses and replacing it with a friendly rivalry (cf. McGonagall wanting the Quidditch Cup in her office instead of Snape's), students should be encouraged to spend more time together. Classes should not be segregated by House, as most of Harry's classes were (two with the Slytherins, one with Hufflepuff, none with Ravenclaw). Students should be encouraged to mingle at meals with friends from other Houses instead of being segregated by House. Voldemort's idea of requiring all students to take Muggle Studies is actually a good one if the teacher is a Charity Burbage and not an Alecto Carrow. IOW, instead of teaching students that Muggles are animals and their children not true wizards and witches, the class should teach that blood doesn't matter and Muggles are people not very different from wizard's (the view for which Charity died). Another possibility is random sorting so that students who share a particular trait (intelligence, loyalty, courage, ambition) aren't thrown together. that might not work, though, because Slytherin would still be named after the least reputable of the Founders. Another thought: The names of the Houses could be changed to Dumbledore, Snape, and a Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff headmaster or headmistress, the most illustrious members of each House rather than the Founders. (though I admit that "I want to be in Dumbledore!" doesn't have quite the same ring as "I want to be in Gryffindor!" Another tiny point: If Hogwarts destroys the Sorting Hat, how can a needy and valiant Gryffindor pull the Sword out of it? Evil hasn't ended; that never happens. It's just on hold until the next outbreak. (Maybe Cormac McLaggen will turn Dark Sorry and the next Dark wizard will be a Gryffindor. Bad joke.) One more thought. It might be a good idea if the DADA teacher actually taught students what the Dark Arts are and why they're evil. Advanced students could be taught what Snape knew--how to recognize and stop a Dark Curse, even for a start, how to heal an ordinary cut. And the Unforgiveable Curses should either be renamed or really made Unforgiveable. Somehow, the lifetime sentence to Azkaban didn't serve as a deterrent to Harry, much less the Death Eaters. And any student studying Advanced DADA, with access to the Restricted Section, should be carefully watched and monitored to make sure that he or she wasn't lured into practicing rather than fighting the Dark Arts. Carol, who has exhausted her ideas on the subject but doesn't think the problem is insurmountable even if JKR in her concentration on Harry doesnt seem to have given it sufficient though From katrinawitch at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 18:40:34 2007 From: katrinawitch at yahoo.com (katrinawitch) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:40:34 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: <01e701c7ce6e$0f0bbb60$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173315 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly" wrote: > > Maybe it's too early for a "funny lines" thread but I just wanted to say that I loved Ron in this book. He said two things that just had me in tears laughing. > (snip) Ron can always bring the funny! The line that made me howl out loud with laughter was, "I hate to break it to you, mate, but I think they may have noticed that we broke into Gringott's". The fact that the Trio were themselves rolling around on the ground, helpless with laughter, made it that much better! From dougsamu at golden.net Fri Jul 27 18:47:59 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:47:59 -0400 Subject: Funny lines Message-ID: <45812A95-9921-4C43-B3F0-F657C4DB180F@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173316 The funniest line that wasn't said: Lupin on the birth of his son; "He's not fuzzy!" ___ __ From Schlobin at aol.com Fri Jul 27 18:48:17 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:48:17 -0000 Subject: That Whole Christian Thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173317 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmgarciaiii" wrote: > > I'm of the opinion that JKR included some parallels/allusions to > Christianty. This is different than saying these books are allegories > for the Crucifixion of Christ, etc. > Of course, JKR included at least two biblical quotes that I'm aware of...at the two tombstones at Godric's Hollow....but of course she also includes a quotation from Aeschylus. We do know that JKR is a Christian so it's possible that there's a crucifixion parallel here. However, Harry did NOT die...whereas the death of Jesus is a major part of Christian theology. I'll wait for JKR to tell us whether the parallel exists. Supporting that theory would be the fact that she names as one of her favorite series the Narnia Chronicles, and C.S. Lewis does not bother to hide his Christian parallels. I can easily make the case that it's a pagan analogy (royal sacrifice), but that speaks to me because I AM a pagan...I suggest that Harry's experiences resonate with Christian beliefs if you're a Christian, and that belief system is important to you. There are a bunch of religions and myths that include a dying god/sacrifice for others/resurrection, many of them predating Christianity. I do feel terribly sorry for the children who are forbidden HP because of their parents' beliefs (particularly as so many of them have not read the books). I have a hard time understanding why parents would not love books that teach the value of love, friendship, doing the right thing, making good choices, making mistakes, but trying again to make better choices, etc. I read an excellent critique of the books which suggested that the problem with the books from a Christian perspective is not the use of magic or "witchcraft" but the total lack of religion in the book. The holidays are Christian (although since Christmas borrows almost all of its symbolism from pagans one could argue that it's really a pagan celebration...lol).....but no one goes to church, trusts in God, mentions God, prays, etc. (Of course, no one mentions God or goes to church in the Lord of the Rings either, but perhaps Professor Tolkien's Christianity has been more publicized - and there are more Christian parallels - the Valar, Gandalf as an angel, etc.) Also, in answer to that commentary about how Harry doesn't struggle or his character doesn't change, etc. First, I don't agree, I think going to one's death willingly is an incredible struggle, but second, so what if the book is really about Snape and not Harry? Second, who really believes that this is "just" children's literature? Susan McGee From juli17 at aol.com Fri Jul 27 19:04:41 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:04:41 -0400 Subject: Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) In-Reply-To: <1185543564.2051.51366.m47@yahoogroups.com> References: <1185543564.2051.51366.m47@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C99E981F031731-91C-5E62@MBLK-M42.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173318 Sssusan: IMO, these scenes from Snape's memories were included by JKR to provide **just that evidence** that Snape HAD been drifting towards his 'little Death Eater friends.' I cannot fathom where it has been shown that he was doing no such thing, nor that he hadn't yet done anything beyond turning a blind eye! Rather, it appears to me that what Jen has stated is the case -- Lily appears to be all that's tethering Snape to a different path. It appears to me that Snape simply didn't have the courage (or interest?) to choose that different path! Even with how much he 'loved' her. Julie: Exactly. I said this earlier too, that Snape either didn't have the courage or the desire to choose Lily over his Slytherin loyalties. I do think this would have taken tremendous courage on Snape's part; he has two more years to go and he would be ostracized and tormented by his Housemates, probably would receive little or no support for sticking with Lily from anyone else at Hogwarts (would the Marauders really be able to change their minds about Snivellus after years of mutual enmity), and he would have to make great strides within himself to change beliefs set in place throughout his miserable childhood and 5 years among fellow Slytherins at Hogwarts. Like I say, this would be take tremendous fortitude and courage from anyone, let alone from someone with as little self-esteem as Snape. So it's no surprise at all that he can't conceive of giving up what amounts to everything else to remain her friend--and only her friend, as he hasn't had the courage to tell her how he feels which would mean taking the chance of finding out that she does not feel the same way (as believe to be the case). Snape only has to look in the mirror I'm sure to believe he'll never be worthy of her! s Sssusan: No, the memories show that the point had arrived when it was no longer any good pretending that at the CORE there wasn't something very, very wrong with what Severus was doing, in Lily's view. It wasn't a suspicion of things to come; it was a being fed up with what had already come. Julie: And as I recall (don't have the book with me), Lily had already been let Snape know that she didn't approve of his friends. So they had reached the endpoint, where it was her or his DE friends. Sssusan: One final remark. As to Snape loving Lily, and not in a 'silly crush' kind of way, as had been the case with Harry concerning Cho... I will agree with you that Snape loved Lily, but I don't think it was something to glorify. It sounds as if Harry is being insulted with that remark, that he only had this 'puppy love' kind of thing, whereas Snape had 'REAL Love' about Lily. But it just wasn't healthy! It was an *obsessive* love, not what I would term 'real love.' Julie: I do think Snape loved Lily, as much as he could love someone. To me the love became truly obsessive after she died, because Snape couldn't forgive himself for his role in her death. I wonder if, say, Neville Longbottom had been the Prophecy boy and thus Lily hadn't been killed because of Snape's revelation to Voldemort, where would that have left Snape? He loved Lily from afar essentially, he never tried to take her from James, so would he slowly have lost interest in her, and both would have gone on to live their individual lives? Or if Lily had died later fighting against Voldemort's tyranny, would Snape have been as distraught as he was by being personally involved in her death? Or would he have mourned silently that she'd picked the "wrong" side in the war, and if only she hadn't be so stupid to marry James Potter she might have lived? It seems he might have gotten over her or rationalized away her death and meaning to him eventually *if* he hadn't had a direct hand in her death. It was her death that basically froze Snape in position, the position of being unable to let go of his love because he couldn't let go of his guilt. Julie, who isn't minimizing the fact that Snape *did* love Lily, or that it led to his redemption and perhaps even a true change in his principles, but that it all had as much to do with guilt as with love. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From doliesl at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 19:06:01 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:06:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) Message-ID: <863991.96940.qm@web82207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173319 I had a really hard time struggling through the first 500 pages. The endless camping trip dawned on me how really lacking and not-interesting-enough Trio as characters on their own. It made me realize what made this series extraordinary fun to read were trio's reaction and interaction with the school and other endearing/more interesting supporting characters. Yeah I know it's nature of the story and plot requirement or realism of waiting-in-war of whatever, still doesn't make all those camping trips and trio-alone not boring. Maybe JKR as a mediocre fantasy/adventure stories writer contribute much of it feeling lackluster. When the story got back to Hogwarts and Neville fill them in what happened in the school, I was thinking "geez I wished the camera was with Neville all these times instead." D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lmkos at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 19:26:04 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:26:04 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173320 who? > > The only reason I can think of is because, like DD and Harry >himself, defeating Voldemort has become Snape's prime objective. > ><<>> Lenore: Thank you. I agree! Adam: >I think >that if defeating VM was the primary objective, Snape would not have >acted the way he did toward McGonagall(sp?) in the hall. He knew >Harry was there (that's what I took, anyway) and I assume he knew >what Harry's presence meant. He had to know the gig was up...he >could have told Harry then, but he didn't. That would have been his >hero turn. Lenore: Snape was in a very tough, touchy situation. He needed to get his memories to Harry, but the timing had to be absolutely impeccable too. First, Snape also had to get up there fast to intervene with the DE siblings who might have taken Harry. Second, I think Snape was always looking for a chance to get the message to Harry, to give him the memory vial and instruct him when to look at it. When we look at the instructions DD gave Snape for how to manage all this, well, wow, Snape is on a very tight schedule with a huge, crucial responsibility. So Snape jumped at this opportunity but McGonagall got in the way. Very sad, because they were both trying to help Harry. Maybe Snape should have used Polyjuice so he could give Harry the vial. Tell him its from Dumbledore or something. Adam: >However, he was still playing the role of VM servant, a >role he played to protect Harry, a protection he only gave to help >save Lily. Yes, it was brave of him to get those memories to Harry, >but it was also incredibly lucky Harry was even there to get them >(and, for that matter, that Hermione was there to conjucture a cup). Lenore: That seems like poor writing to me, but I suppose it heightened the dramatic effect to have Harry get them as Snape dies. But Snape was so smart I can't imagine that he would have EVER left something so critically important to a mere chance that Harry would show up in time to collect them! In my mind's scenario, Snape could have left them in the office and sent an urgent message to Harry through one of his friends; or, Snape could have given a vial directly someone reliable enough to make sure Harry got it. Or some other way. But he would have gotten the job done. Adam: >Had he not done that, then his protection of Harry, and thereby his >penance for Lily's death, would have been for nothing. Lenore: Utterly failing to carry out this mission would have been totally out character for Snape, imo. But it was also out of character for him to be in a position where he was dependent upon the miraculous arrival of Harry at the precise moment when he was needed. Snape would not have left it to such a slender hope, imo. (snip) >Adam, who, despite all of this, still admires Snape way more than I >admire James or Sirius Lenore: Me too, no contest. From leahstill at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 19:25:27 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:25:27 -0000 Subject: Houses / Sorting "too soon" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: (snip) > I agree with elmntrymdr (in #172789) that the comment was also tinged > with regret about how Snape's particular environment helped to shape > him, and the pain that that caused, but I think that Dumbledore blames > Voldemort much more than the house system for creating and exploiting > divisions. (Indeed, it would be a bit strange to look at Snape, the > Slytherin in love with a Gryffindor, and conclude that it was the > house system driving students apart.) > > -- Matt > But Snape was love with Lily long before the Sorting Hat got to work. It was in part the malign influence of his house companions that led to their separation. From the moment they sit at different tables Snape and Lily are severed. Leah From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 19:29:19 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:29:19 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Too predictable? In-Reply-To: References: <1185426203.3195.1202105837@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707271229q859ffc6i2f8914cc57d8b0f1@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173322 Adessa: Really? I found it to be surprising most of the way through. Yes, RAB was obvious...but Umbridge having the locket was a shock. And yes, Harry being a horcrux has been discussed ad nauseum, but I never really bought it, and Harry's handling of it made up for its lack of originality. Lynda: Yes, some things were obvious, but certainly not the entire book! RAB I figured out (along with most others) and the whole Harry as Horcrux thing many had as well, but that had a nice twist on it. You know, there are a lot of books out there that are much less original than DH was. Believe me. I've discarded many of them in the last several years. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Fri Jul 27 19:38:31 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:38:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Funny lines Message-ID: <46921.1185565111848.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173323 From: Geoff Bannister: >'"This is different, pretending to be me-" >"Well, none of us really fancy it Harry," said Fred earnestly. >"Imagine if something went wrong and we were stuck as specky, >scrawny gits forever." >Harry did not smile.' >(DH "The Seven Potters" p.46 UK edition) > >I did! Bart: This is really what makes Fred & George so special. Out of the Harry Potter Rat Pack, they're Dean Martin. They are the only ones who treat Harry exactly like they treat everybody else (at least those they like). They're not afraid to take him down a peg when he needs it. If Harry needs a completely honest answer to a question, he knows that he can get it from Fred & George; they alone will not spare his feelings, nor will they hurt him unnecessarily. I suspect that, if they were still around at end of OOP, they would have talked Harry out of going to the Ministry. I hope with Fred gone, George is still willing and able to keep that relationship with Harry. Bart From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 19:41:20 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:41:20 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Classical & Biblical Quotations In-Reply-To: References: <46A80160.3040603@sprynet.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707271241p66be3ee7l2c90c618313f2d1a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173324 Ken: My first thought was that Harry must not have gotten any religious instruction while he was at the Dursley's if he was unfamiliar with those quotes and meanings. The first is quite famous, the second less so but still one that you would have met if you spent much time in a church or Sunday school. Lynda: Yes. I certainly did. Still do, in fact when I go to Sunday School (I'm more of a midweek Bible Study or study on my own person--five years at a Christian University with a minor in Bible helps--no I didn't take Hebrew or Greek). I just changed churches and I think SS may become part of my life at the new church. Of course it comes up in church, too, so now I'll get back on topic which leads my to type...I never saw the Dursleys as being a church-going family. Certainly not after Harry arrived. He would have been an embarrassment to them, unless they wanted to pray the magic out of him, which, had they been religious might have been a possibility. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chaomath at hitthenail.com Fri Jul 27 19:41:43 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:41:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173325 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote about my interpretation of Lupin's death: > Sorry, but why does *that* have to be the 'message' that one takes > from > situation? > > How about a much plainer but still true one: 'War sucks' Yours is another interpretation, and equally valid. I see Dobby's death, for example, in this light. Mine was inspired from canon -- Lupin himself says of his child ".... it will be better off, a hudred times so, without a father of whom it must always be ashamed!" (DH, US ed., p. 213) Given that there is nothing in canon to suggest that werewolves are treated more humanely after the events in book 7, it seems like this is exactly JKR's point. The best Lupin can do is die. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From prep0strus at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 19:45:27 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:45:27 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173326 > >Adam, who, despite all of this, still admires Snape way more than I > >admire James or Sirius > > Lenore: > Me too, no contest. > Prep0strus: I just don't understand. I'm just baffled, even if you could like the character of Snape, even if you see more good in him that I can imagine - taking him in the best of terms, a tortured child, full of love, who risks life and limb for his love, his love's child, for the fight against evil... why would you admire him more than James or Sirius? What did they do to make them worse than him? They couldn't play double agent... they never were evil so that they could turn good. they fought only on the side of good. And Sirius went against his family to do it! James put himself in harm's way for his family. Sirius, coming from a background of muggleborn haters, fought on their behalf. Yes, they hated slytherins and acted like bullies as children, but snape hated griffendors and acted like a bully as an adult.. I went on for a long time in my post entitled "Snape V. Marauders' if you feel like seeing more arguments, but I need to hear more of someone else's. how can there be 'no contest' in admiring snape more than james or sirius? to admire someone is to respect them, believe them worthy of emulation. why would you choose a nasty little boy who grew up into a nasty little man - an EVIL man, who managed to become good, but remain nasty... over two men who always chose good. sometimes they were petty, sometimes they were small - no more than sirius, but they were always GOOD. and brave. shoot, there at least has to be a CONTEST. ~Adam (Prep0strus), who's amused at the Adam v. Adam fight over snape.l From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 19:54:28 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:54:28 -0500 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40707271254u19cc08ebode5cb71aa0c46aa1@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173327 montims: I don't have my books with me just now, but I am just about to take off for a long weekend, and wanted to reply while the threads are still fresh - I am totally perplexed as to people's reactions to the sorting system. I know what the Hat said, and what DD said, but people here seem to be against the system for its own sake, and I don't understand that. There are always houses and house rivalries at schools. I didn't go to a boarding school, but we had a house system. We weren't sorted according to innate personal characteristics, per se, but we were sorted according to the results of our 11-plus exams, and our likes and hobbies. So the sporty ones were in a totally different house from me. Ditto the very brainy ones. This makes sense, because I never mixed with, or even spoke to, anyone from another year, and very rarely anyone from another house. Similar people stick together. The brainy ones did extra study which ensured they were good university material, etc. The Hogwarts Hat has a privileged insight into the characters of the students. Even if DD said "we sort too soon", we have seen that it is right in its judgement most of the time. Being a Slytherin does not make someone bad. A Slytherin student is the kind of person who will be happiest in the company of similar students - pureblood, whatever. I was going to make comparisons with the various colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, and who chooses which and why, but that might not resonate in the same way with US readers. If I pose the question - the "aristocrats" of the American world (the Kennedys, Bushes, Mayflower descendants, rich kids, etc etc) - what colleges do they attend? Idaho University or Yale/Harvard and the like? Why do they apply there and why are they accepted? They are not necessarily that smart, but daddy and grandad went to that college and endowed a few buildings, and their fellow students are the kind that they are comfortable mixing with. Yet Yale and Harvard also accept "nobodies", and some rich kids choose to go to different universities, for different reasons. Being smart in the WW and being sorted into one house does not make you better or worse than being brave and sorted into another. It means that you will be more comfortable with your head of house and fellow house mates. I believe that a person's essential character is formed quite young. Life experiences will test that character, and the character will affect how one faces those life experiences. But putting a Slytherin type among a group of Gryffindor types would not be a happy experience for any of them, particularly when they first leave their families to board, and especially considering how closely they live, and the amount of studying they have to do - they don't need the extra stress. IMHO of course... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Mhochberg at aol.com Fri Jul 27 19:58:43 2007 From: Mhochberg at aol.com (Mhochberg at aol.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:58:43 EDT Subject: Reference to Easter foreshadowing? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173328 cjmatt66 wrote: > Did anyone else notice the references to Hogwarts' "Easter break" in > Book 7? I know they had Christmas break in Harry's world, celebrated > in a purely secular way (until the Muggles' Christmas Eve at church > also new in 7) - but this was the first time I noticed anything about > Easter. Mary writes: The Easter break is mentioned in several of the books, most notably in GOF when Hermione receives an Easter egg noticeably smaller than the ones that Mrs. Weasley sent to Ron and Harry. In the books, the break is shorter than the Christmas one and is often mentioned only as a preparation/panic time regarding end of the year exams. One exception is in OotP when the twins mention that they have been quiet lately as there was no point in causing trouble for Umbridge if there was no one around to see it. ---Mary ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bamf505 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 20:00:57 2007 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:00:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry and Voldy Related - Techincalities. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <151176.12431.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173329 --- Steve wrote: > --- "sdeepthi" wrote: > > > > myspacetraveller: > > > > > I know JKR said that Harry and Voldy were not > > > related, but as it turns out they are in fact > > > related. Both are descendants of the 3rd > Peverell > > > brother since he was the only one who had > children. > > > ... > > bboyminn: > > I'm inclined to agree with Deepthi. Logically the > Ring > traveled down one line, the Cloak down another, and > the Wand pasted from /winner/ to /winner/. > > > Further, at least I don't recall, that could have > been many many many generations ago. We don't know > the age of the Peverall brother who passed the > Cloak down to the Potter line. We don't know how > wide the family tree spreads. By the time we get > down to the level of the youngest Gaunt and Harry, > they could be many many branches apart. > > Note if the tale of 'Three Brothers' has been made > into a children's fairytale, we can assume the > brothers > live a long time ago. > > Yes, by some technical stretch, Harry and Voldemort > were related, but it is like a big and distant > stretch. > So, distant as to be meaningless. > > Just one man's opinion. > > Steve/bboyminn > > bamf: I would have to agree with Steve/bboyminn. DH states that the stories of the wand can be found through out history - "Yes, it is perfectly possible to trace the wand's course through history. There are gaps, of course, and long ones where it vanishes from view..." (DH, US ed, pg 497) For Olivander to say long gaps, would indicate that the Hallows have been around for a goodly amount of time, probably centuries or more. To compare, the Brothers Grimm first published a collection of Children's and Household Tales in 1815. Today, there are so many of those stories that children grow up on (and Disney steals for movies...) The Brothers Grimm published a book of 'fairy tales' in 1814 that most of us grew up reading or knowing about (Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, etc.) we have a basis for comparison for the Wizarding World. If you take into account that the BG spent a good 5-10 years collecting stories, which had passed down from generation to generation, we easily can be looking at events that inspired the stories to have happened 300+ years ago. Back to the point, for Harry and Moldy Wart to be considered related, would be tenuous at best. Yes, they share A common ancestor, but you are looking at the common ancestor to be about 13-14 generation back, if we use 300 years (and the average for a generation, which is 22 years.) bamf There is no snooze button on a cat who wants breakfast. ***** Me t wyrd gewf ____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 27 19:24:31 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:24:31 -0000 Subject: Locket and Umbridge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173330 > --- "Jenni Merrifield" wrote: > > a. The fact that Umbridge was the ministry worker who > > took the locket from Mundungus felt a little bit too > > tidy and contrived. Matt wrote: > I had the opposite reaction on that one, because I took Umbridge's > possession of the locket as a potential explanation for a mysterious > loose end from book 6. > The implication I took, knowing that she ended up with the locket, was > that she might have acquired it early in book 6, so that by the time > of the detention scene it had begun to possess her, in the subtle way > that it does with the trio in book 7. While I thought it was a little contrived, I also thought it was a clever way to combine seeking the locket and getting a glimpse of the (scary!) Ministry... until Umbridge mentioned that the locket belonged to her ancesters. At that point, I loved that she had the locket, becayse I want to believe that Umbridge was trying to cover up some amount of muggle blood. (Her blood, not spilt blood, heh.) I love the idea that the locket was possessing her, though. It makes a lot of sense, although it also gives us a mild reason to pardon her behavior (which I really don't want to do). Joan of Anarchy From solar_saramax at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 19:53:38 2007 From: solar_saramax at yahoo.com (Sara) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:53:38 -0000 Subject: JKR Cut Ron & Hermione Like a Movie Edit ...UNbelievable! ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173331 "Sara" wrote: > How could Hermione or Ron possibly > strip themselves away from Harry at > this ultimate crisis point? Eggplant replied: It's easy to get separated from your companions in the chaos of war, especially if you just found out your brother was killed. *** Sara: They already knew Fred was dead. (pg.637-639) The fighting had stopped. (page 659-660) JKR writes: "Lord Voldemort is merciful. I command my forces to retreat immediately. You have one hour. Dispose of your dead..." (Then Voldemort gives his ultimatum to Harry.) JKR continues: "Both Ron and Hermione shook their heads frantically, looking at Harry. Don't listen to him, said Ron. It'll be alright, said Hermione wildly. Let's -- let's get back to the castle, if he's gone to the forest we'll need to think of a new plan --" Then, it is Hermione that leads the way, then Ron, and Harry follows them to the castle. JKR emphasizes that Ron & Hermione are "ringing in their heads" Voldemort's one hour deadline. They are leading the way for Harry without any interest to do what Voldemort suggests: "Dispose of your dead... Treat your injured." Give me Harry or else. So how is it possible that JKR then irrationally flips the storyline opposite "Voldemort's" way?... Then, upon arriving at the castle Great Hall, JKR says Ron & Hermione just walk away without a word to Harry! (To do what Voldemort suggests! Note what Ron and Hermione just said above.) I don't buy it! I don't believe it! It was an easy way, a lazy way, for JKR to ditch Ron & Hermione to transition like a "movie edit" the narrative out of their context to make-way for the storyline switch to Harry. Precisely here, at this point, is what's unbelievable. There were vastly more intelligent ways to transition the story for Harry and Ron and Hermione for the reasons I posted. This was perhaps the most important separation point of the entire seven book series, and I can't grasp how or why JKR could do it this way that's justifiable. Kathy K wrote: "Or perhaps knowing the history Snape had with Harry they sensed that those memories were for Harry alone, he certainly didn't invite them to watch them with him." Sara: See what Ron and Hermione said above. Keep the context in mind with Voldemort too. What he says to do. Kathy K wrote: Harry is a very private person, he always has been, he doesn't share all his thoughts with his friends. And after Harry had viewed those memories he took pains not to meet his two best friends again because he knew they would use force if necessary to stop him from doing what had to be done. No weepy goodbye scene for Harry, he's just not the type. I'm sorry but I'm quite certain that it was *Harry* who slipped off and "abandoned" Ron and Hermione (if you want to look at things that way). And Harry going it alone is not at all out of character, IMO. Sara: Agreed, but this is after "the facts" of what Ron & Hermione were already doing by leading Harry with them as a team. JKR had to transition this differently if following my points & JKR's narrative hold true... "Both Ron and Hermione shook their heads frantically, looking at Harry. Don't listen to him, said Ron. It'll be alright, said Hermione wildly. Let's -- let's get back to the castle, if he's gone to the forest we'll need to think of a new plan --" Kathy K: There was not much conversation between the three of them as they returned to the castle from the Shrieking Shack. Harry shared no plan to immediately find Dumbledore's portrait or the Pensieve . Instead, the three all went to the Great Hall, where everyone else was gathering and met with their loved ones mourning some more loved ones. Understandably, IMO, Ron and Hermione joined the Weasley family. Sara: That's what Voldemort basically said to do! Honor the dead and injured. It's not what JKR was already having Ron and Hermione doing. ("Both Ron and Hermione shook their heads frantically, looking at Harry. Don't listen to him, said Ron. It'll be alright, said Hermione wildly. Let's -- let's get back to the castle, if he's gone to the forest we'll need to think of a new plan --") Kathy K: Harry, who "could not bear to join the Weasleys, could not look into their eyes, when if he had given himself up in the first place, Fred might never have died," was the one who left Ron and Hermione and the Great Hall behind without a word as to where he would go or what he would do.* At that point, he just wanted to escape from those whose suffering he felt responsible for. Harry wanted to be alone, away from even his own thoughts. He went to the Headmaster's office and plunged into Snape's memories. Once Harry learned what he had to do, allow Lord Voldemort to kill him, he was certain this was something he had to do alone. He made no attempt whatsoever to find Ron or Hermione. In fact, he was determined not to see them or discuss this with them, using the Invisibility Cloak to move through the castle unseen. Harry made the choice to go it alone. Even if Ron and Hermione *did* want to find him (which we would not see, anyhow), they would not be able to. Sara: I totally agree except for the one crucial point I'm making. Ron & Hermione would not do what Voldemort just suggested. JKR simplistically and flippantly got Harry away to transition the storyline, which was "now" out of "their context" of Ron & Hermione letting Harry out of their sight even for an instant! It certainly had already crossed their mind Harry might make a run for it straight to Voldemort to save everyone! JKR just strips Harry away from Ron & Hermione, when they knew Harry might try to get away. Kathy K: Sara says above, "...storyline where Ron & Hermione were forced to allow Harry to go on alone without any other choice or option they could have taken." I believe that is exactly what JKR accomplished by keeping Harry, Hermione and Ron completely in character. Harry decided for Hermione and Ron that they could no longer accompany him on this journey. Sara: I agree except that Ron & Hermione could never be distracted to let Harry get away at this point. It's "not in context" to allow Harry to go on alone the way she wrote it. Kathy K: Sara, I'm curious what you mean by a "fully reasoned approach" to this flaw you perceive? I am having difficulty thinking of another way Harry going it alone could have been handled. Because this bit as JKR wrote it really works for me. Sara: As I wrote: My criticism is that JKR should have placed some believable storyline where Ron & Hermione were forced to allow Harry to go on alone without any other choice or option they could have taken. Even a physical barrier or blocking mechanism would have sufficed... For instance, Ron & Hermione looked back to see Harry leave or note his disappearance and now can't follow for any number of reasons. Perhaps the stairs Harry uses cave-in, and the castle is too destroyed to follow another way. Just that simple act "of blocking" allows for believability that Ron & Hermione could be separated from Harry again. Or, it's noted how they try to follow but just can't find him. As I also wrote: ...though a fully reasoned approach would have enhanced the story wonderfully for many interpretive standpoints of why Harry had to go on alone without them. (Then Ron and Hermione could still have remained behind with good reason to mourn the dead and comfort the living.) Well, this is where one can speculate a better way to write this. I'm sure I could think of many creative ways to enhance & transition this, and still allow for Harry to go it alone exactly as JKR wrote that part... just after a proper separation from Ron & Hermione... For instance, Dumbledore or Snape or Voldemort could have set a trap to only allow Harry to go forward at some point. It would have been cool to see a "memory spell cast" or some instruction given, while Harry was inside the pensieve "memory hole" that Snape or Dumbledore somehow planted to unfold. It could have been Snape's last unspoken words to Harry at his point of death now coming from the memory hole. (More healing & understanding for all.) Heck, even the funny Hermione trick that she used on Neville would have worked with Harry doing it to Ron & Hermione. JKR stated how it showed such great character in Neville to stand-up to his friends; to do what's right. Harry could have stopped them in a similar but obvious way of preventing them. Even some humorous method would have lightened the story with all the warfare. (Great for stressed out kids & parents!) This just had to be documented in some way. It was not the place for a passive solution! I just can't accept how JKR chose to let Ron and Hermione turn away from Harry the way she did it. It's an impossible sell and just too unbelievable for me, & it's a great loss of meaning (what could have been) especially considering Ron's hero return and Hermione never leaving Harry's side. The three were one. I certainly do appreciate your ideas and comments. Thank you Kathy K. and Eggplant! Luna sends her love... Maybe I'm a bit "out there" on this one with Luna too. ;-) From cairnlady12027 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 19:44:34 2007 From: cairnlady12027 at yahoo.com (Hammel) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:44:34 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173332 I have to say that I was not bored by the endless camping. I knew as did the trio that something was going to happen just around the corner. I was in suspense and several things happened on the camping trips to either explain past threads or to help to move the story along. I had guess that Snape would be a good guy in the end. I also knew that if Rowling followed the classical style that Harry would have to die. Thankfully he had a choice and I was glad that he was able to "talk" to Dumbledore before making his choice to return. I have found the HP series to be an enjoyable escape. I look forward to the movies! Lynda Hammel From shirley2allie at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 20:08:27 2007 From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:08:27 -0000 Subject: Funny lines In-Reply-To: <01e701c7ce6e$0f0bbb60$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173333 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly" wrote: > > Maybe it's too early for a "funny lines" thread but I just wanted to say that I loved Ron in this book. He said two things that just had me in tears laughing. > > Just before the wedding when Mrs. Weasley is making him clean his room... > He says something to the affect, "And are they getting married in my bedroom ? No !"..... "Why in the name of Merlin's saggy left- " I don't know why but I just thought that was the funniest thing...! Shirley: I just LOVED that line! Kimberly > (whose daughter talked her into eating Bertie's Beans... ewwwww !) Shirley: More Ron funny-ness, the night before the wedding: "A brutal triple murder by the bridegroom's mother might put a bit of a damper on the wedding." Classic. And Viktor came through, too: "Vot is the point of being an international Quidditch player if all the good-looking girls are taken?" As well as Harry, after Crucio-ing Amycus Carrow: "I see what Bellatrix meant - you need to really mean it." (Which probably wasn't meant to be funny, actually, but it made me chuckle.) Shirley, thrilled to death that her formerly non-reader daughter has finished this book, "the longest one I've ever read, Mom" (she's listened to the first 6 on tape, you see) From mosu22 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 19:24:40 2007 From: mosu22 at yahoo.com (Monica) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:24:40 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173334 > > Monica: > > I will agree that he [Harry] is certainly not divine, and has > > good and bad within himself, making his sacrifice quite different > > than that of Jesus. Nevertheless, his sacrifice was to eliminate > > the personification of evil, i.e. Voldemort. > Betsy Hp: > But Voldemort wasn't really the "personification of evil" was he? > Otherwise his destruction would have brought about bigger (or quite > frankly, any) changes to the WW. Instead, as we see in the > Epilogue, the WW and Hogwarts returns to business as usual. It's > pretty much a carbon copy of the world Harry entered in PS/SS. > Which means Harry's struggle was the equivalent to bringing down > Hitler (though frankly, Voldemort didn't even come close to > matching Hitler's evil). Which okay, good job young man. But > hardly an earth shattering occurrence. Monica again: I definitely saw some parallels to Nazi Germany, of course, or any other megalomaniacal world leader in recent years. I am more than willing to accept this as the parallel rather than making it necessarily a reflection of Jesus' cross (incidentally, I'm sure the meaning of "King's Cross" has been discussed ad nauseam so I won't bother going into it here). As far as Voldemort as personification of evil, I would say he was definitely not the only example an evil wizard, nor is he the embodiment of all evil in the wizarding world such that when he was destroyed, the world would be all happy and nice and good. I mean, as we all know, Harry had his own dark side, which manifested itself more than once as the series continued. The reason that I see him as personification of evil is because given his last chance to show even the remotest redeeming quality, he chose evil. That having been said, within the Christian religion, did Jesus come and eliminate all the evil in the world? He changed the status quo for sure, but evil still exists in this world (provided this is your belief, if not then at least as an understanding of Christian belief this would have occured). Radical change occurs primarily within people themselves, rather than on an outward level. Perhaps this is what happened in the case of Harry. Not to mention, if Voldemort had not been destroyed, the consequences > >Monica: > > As far as the house system, I likewise think the ending could have > > wrapped things up a little better by unifying Hogwarts instead of > > allowing it to remain divided. Or perhaps a group of Slytherins > > fighting the death eaters. But Malfoy, the quintessential Slytherin > > of Harry's day, was redeemable, in his readmittance to wizarding > > society. Perhaps that says something? > > Betsy Hp: > Draco is returned to the spot he began in as well: a member of the > unclean, the non-elect, the scapegoat house (clearly marked by > their green and silver ties). So again, nothing has changed. And > certainly no redemption occurs. Harry's actions were a blip on the > radar. A footnote in "Hogwarts: A History". Hardly equivalent to > Christ. Monica: A blip on the radar, but possibly prevented the destruction of all that is good in the world. A subset of the wizarding world would undoubtedly have continued to fight but with Voldemort at full power would have been crushed eventually. (Parallel to Jesus overcoming the effects of original sin; at least this makes redemption possible whereas if he had not sacrificed himself in that way, there would have been no hope for humanity). Not having the book on me at the moment, I would say what is momentous about Draco's appearance at the end of the book is that he is alive, has children, and has been redeemed. Maybe he is on the fringes of society, which I do still see as a problem, but I would have seen it as quite unrealistic for him to come up to Harry and be old buddies. Monica - who incidentally is not a shining beacon of religiosity but is nevertheless enjoying the argument. And is terribly sorry if this post is lengthy and not particularly well-written but needs to attend to her work instead of play all the time. From Meghanhopkins at bellsouth.net Fri Jul 27 19:33:45 2007 From: Meghanhopkins at bellsouth.net (meg_lsu) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:33:45 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: <863991.96940.qm@web82207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173335 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doliesl at ..." wrote: > > I had a really hard time struggling through the first 500 pages. > The endless camping trip dawned on me how really lacking and not- > interesting-enough Trio as characters on their own. It made me > realize what made this series extraordinary fun to read were trio's > reaction and interaction with the school and other endearing/more > interesting supporting characters. Yeah I know it's nature of the > story and plot requirement or realism of waiting-in-war of whatever, > still doesn't make all those camping trips and trio-alone not > boring. Maybe JKR as a mediocre fantasy/adventure stories writer > contribute much of it feeling lackluster. When the story got back > to Hogwarts and Neville fill them in what happened in the school, I > was thinking "geez I wished the camera was with Neville all these > times instead." meg_lsu: I kind of felt this part of the book was a bit too "Lord of the Rings". Them walking through the woods like Frodo and Sam on the never ending walk to Mordor. The Order of Phoenix saying they'd know if Harry were alive or not like the Fellowship sensing Frodo was still alive. The locket when around their necks making them feel anger like when the ring starts pulling Frodo. When Sam leaves Frodo and returns the hero (film version of LOTR anyway) like Ron leaving and coming coming back helping to get the sword. I just kept thinking LOTR when I was reading this part. I was ready for them to get back to school to see what was happening!! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 20:16:13 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:16:13 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173336 Jack-A-Roe wrote: > - He agrees not to run away like Karkaroff. Carol responds: Not agrees. Chooses. It's not DD's suggestion. It's his own free choice: "Then Flee. Flee--I will make your excuses. I, however, am remaining at Hogwarts" he tells Karkaroff at the Yule Ball (GoF Am. ed. 426). And he says as much to Dumbledore: "Karkaroff's Mark is beoming darker too. He is panicking, he fears retribution . . . . Karkaroff intends to flee if the Dark Mark burns." DD asks if snape is tempted to join him and Snape says, "No. I am not such a coward." Dumbledore agrees. "you are a braver man by far than Igor Karkaroff," he says, and suggest that Snape was Sorted too early. Snape looks "stricken" (DH Am. ed. 680): his House, to which he is rather obstinately loyal, has been insulted--but Dumbledore is telling him that he has courage equal to any Gryffindor's. And JKR in her "Today show" interview, confirmed that view. He's "spiteful" and "a bully" (her view), but he's "immensely, immensely brave." True to his word, Snape not only doesn't flee with Karkaroff but stays away from the graveyard when LV summons the DEs, causing LV to believe (rightly) that Snape has left him forever. He returns only when DD orders him to do so (as they have apparently planned). Jack_A-Roe: > - He goes back to Voldemort as DD's spy. Carol: Another act of immense courage, after he has stayed away from the graveyard and caused LV to view him as "one I believe has left me forever". "You know what I must ask you to do," says DD. "If you are ready; if you are prepared." "I am," says Snape (GoF 713). They have obviously planned his return to LV. Snape has his lies and half truths prepared (we learn most of them in "Spinner's End"), and he has his means of "hoodwinking" the Dark Lord, his superb skills as an Occlumens. (We actually witness him doing so in the first chapte of DH, where he calmly allows Voldemort to look into his eyes and Voldemort is satisfied with what he sees there (4). Nevertheless, his pale face and glittering eyes show that he knows he's going into terrible danger, as does DD, as shown by the look of apprehension on his face (713). Knowing that he is sending Snape into the gravest peril, DD wishes him luck (as he does to none of the others he sends on less perilous errands) and stands silent and unmoving for a moment after Snape leaves (713). Yes, he fears for Snape's mission, which is crucial and which he alone can accomplish), but he also, surely, fears for the man himself. If he didn't, he would not have been moved to tears by Snape's doe Patronus in DH. (Just how he and Snape have been communicating if this is the first time he's seen it is unclear; he must simply be recognizing its significance. Lest we forget, DD's one desire is to see his dead sister in the Mirror of Erised. How could he not understand and empathize?) As he tells DD later, he has spied and lied and risked his life because DD wanted him to (DH 687). And note that he says he's doing it *for Dumbledore*, not just for Lily. Given a choice, surely, he would have taken an open stand against Voldemort like the other Order members. But he can't. DD needs him to infiltrate the Death Eaters, to, among other duties, tell the Order what LV is telling his Death Eaters. ("Yes, Potter. That is my job," he says with satisfaction in OoP as Harry finally gets a clue. Not enough of one, unfortunately.) And by HBP, he's asking Snape to kill him. No wonder Snape is looking mutinous. But when DD gives him the information about the soul bit (not about Horcruxes, which only HRH can know about), he agrees to the terrible mission of telling Harry Potter at the last possible moment that Harry must sacrifice himself. Jack_A-Roe: > - He provides info the Order, although we don't know exactly what. Carol: I'd say, given the timing of his return to Voldemort and the building plans that are part of his report, that he informed the Order of the plans to steal the Prophecy and its location in the Hall of Prophecy. Certainly, he also informed DD of the plot to have Draco kill him (or more likely be killed in the attempt). He also, obviously, tells him about the UV. Beyond that, his job seems to be as much supplying Voldemort with information but leaving out the key point as informing the Order or DD. And yet, DD seems to have known that the DEs would infiltrate the Ministry and take over Hogwarts. Where can that information have come from other than Snaape? Jack_A-Roe: > - He extends DD's life. Carol: Exactly. He has also saved Katie Bell and Draco Malfoy. (His teaching about bezoars indirectly saves Ron; his teaching of Expelliarmus indirectly saves Harry, not only in DH but in GoF and OoP.) And judging from what we see in DH, he would much rather have extended it again, if possible, after the poison potion than killed him. DD has placed a terrible burden on him, and it may only be his promise to protect the school or his vow to Draco's mother that nerves him to act on it. Or maybe it's Lily--saving Harry Potter's son at whatever cost to himself. (He knows, surely, that Harry is standing there in his Invisibility Cloak.) He must get the DEs off the tower and out of Hogwarts or it's all for nothing. Jack_A-Roe: > - He basically admits that his soul is not perfect and agrees to be the one to kill DD. Carol: I interpret this scene differently. He wouldn't be concerned for the state of his soul if he had murdered before. DD asks him how many people he has watched die, not how many he has killed. And Snape says, "Lately, only those whom I could not save" (687). That, for me, says everything. Jack_A-Roe: > - He would have failed to give his information to Harry if Voldemort had killed him outright or if Harry hadn't been right there. Carol: Sadly and ironically, that's true, but how it can be blamed on Snape escapes me. He's dying from a snake bite, and rather than die in vain (which is what he fears throughout this scene), he gives the memory to Harry (along with the memories that will allow Harry at last to understand him) before he makes his last request for Harry to look at him. Jack_A-Roe: > So we are left with a man who's obsessive love for a women, drove him to try to make up for the fact that he got her killed. > > Did he ever care about Harry? No, he tells us this by showing his doe patronus when DD asked him. Carol: I read that scene differently. He has made DD promise never to tell Harry that he's protecting him. He wants Harry at the last to look into his eyes, not only to see Lily but so that Harry could at last see him for what he was. he didn't have to provide those other memories, only the one about the soul bit. but he wanted Harry to know that it was his Patronus that had led him to the Sword of Gryffindor; that he had been Dumbledore's man since Dumbledore gave him that second chance, even when DD didn't fully appreciate him. By the time of his arrest as a DE, Dumbledore values him enought to say before the whole Wizengamot that "Severus Snape is now no more a Death Eater than I am" (GoF > Jack_A-Roe: > Did he end up helping the light side? Yes. Not because he saw the errors of his ways but because he was trying to make it up to Lilly. > > And since results do matter, I will say that he redeemed himself somewhat. But he was still a poor human being who only truly cared about himself and Lilly. > > And no I would not have named my child after him. Carol responds: JKR apparently sees it differently. The virtue she values most is courage, and there can be no question that Snape had that virtue in spades. And the whole book revolves around love. Why does Molly kill Bellatrix? Because she loves her children. Why does Narcissa betray Voldemort (less openly than Snape but still in the end betray him)? Love of her son. Why does Lily die? Love of her son. Why does Ron return to help Harry with the Horcrux quest and fight the final battle? Love for his friend the Chosen One and the Muggleborn girl he loves. Tonks fights for Lupin (and, I'd like to think Teddy and her dead father). Hagrid fights for Dumbledore (and maybe Grawp). Does anyone besides Dumbledore join the good side for any reason other than love of friends and family or the WW itself? What other reason is there to fight, really? Would it have been more admirable for Snape to lie and spy and risk his life and ultimately kill his own mentor at that mentor's request for some other motive than love? Would the life debt to Jaemse have been a better reason? I think not. You forgot his infiltration of the DEs and carrying out DD's orders in DH, not to mention the Sword of Gryffindor and protecting the students of Hogwarts from the Carrows as best he could without giving himself away. Detention with Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest? How terrible! Reinstituting Umbridge's decrees knowing that the students would rebel and disobey them? Reverse psychology and deep cover. Not going after the students in their hideaway, where they were protected by Hagrid? I wonder why not. And his last act, in the face of a terrible death, makes possible Harry's intended self-sacrifice and enables him to save the WW. Give the man a posthumous Order of Merlin. Carol, who would gladly have named her son Severus but is not so sure about Albus From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 20:21:13 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:21:13 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173337 ---In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maeg wrote: "Regardless, it kinda disgusted me that JKR praised the orphaning of another child. But with two parents like that (both too self-absorbed to be good parents), he's probably better off without them". va32h wrote: > Oh I wholeheartedly agree. I find Tonks' behavior both disgusting and > deplorable. ... > Tonks' loyalty is to Lupin first and Lupin only - quite honestly, her > son is better off without her, as I doubt Tonks would ever love him > as much as she loved her dead husband's memory. Ronnie: I completely and totally disagree! and also am quite offended by these sayings, as I really identify with the Lupins. Remus is probably my favorite character, and not everything Snape says is true: Lupin is not weak! As a matter of fact, he is one of the strongest, most honest and deep men in the books. (his only mistake is marrying Tonks instead of me... ;)). I don't know what background you have on wars, but being Israeli, unfortunately war is not at all foreign to me. And DH war obviously resembles a much more frightening war such as WW2 (in contrast to our "minor" but deathly middle east situations). In war, the very world in which you raise your child, the very world in which you live in, your everyday habits, your day to day life, is endangered. There is absolutely no way not to feel panicky about it. Whether you're an idealist or not, you can't help but wanting to give whatever it is you got to protect your world. Tonks defending "the cause" is not contrasted to defending her son. On the contrary: defending your cause is momentarily identical to defending your loved ones. It's a "fight of flight" situation, and for the sake of your children, as Remus says, you have to go out there and fight the enemy. Tonks goes out because her beloved husband is in danger, but also because she is a Lioness Auror, who is going out after the vultures inorder to defend her cub (unlike LV, I'm using this word with deep sympathy). Also, I really oppose the idea of having to choose loving your spouse or your child. First of all, these are different sorts of love. Moreover, a person who is capable of deep love, will love both. (Sometimes perferring strongly one family member over the other is sickly obsession disguised as love). I was shocked and devastated when JKR killed Remus (and Tonks). You can imagine the tears I shed over Remus' death. Just look and my nickname - Remus taught all of us the expectopatronum, which is probably the most important and deep spells of them all. I was also at first quite upset by the 'BTW fashion' she announced their death. However, while still mourning them, I'm a little bit more composed now, and I believe that reporting the Lupins death, JKR was piercingly accurate on what actually happens in wartime. Things like the Lupins death-report are happening all the time, and you don't get to have the satisfaction of knowing exactly what happened on every single death, meaningfull as it may be. I think that besides my likings to Remus, the Lupins death may have been the most emotionally arousing percisely because of the way it was reported to us. Also, I hate the "Remus is a self obsorbed coward" attitude, in some of the messages in this thread. Imagine having a terrible and dangerous illness, like bouts of insanity or schizophrenia (mind you, schizophrenics are usually less violent than the general population, and still they are feared and shunned). It is not only natural, but ethical and noble of him, to be unsure of whether he wants to live his life as fully as possible (i.e. marrying and having children) or not. It is a very brave decision IMO, under these werewolfish circumstances, to build a home and family, and not to contend in a partial non-satisfying life. Remus needed time and support (Harry's and Mrs. Weasley's, for example) inorder to make this brave decision, and I admire him for it. The last point I'd like to make on this subject, is that some of the writers in this thread used the dreadfull, judgemental and hatefull words, that the baby Teddy might be better off without one or both of his parents. This is a terrible statement IMO. I believe that children are better off with their parents in all but extreme cases.As Harry says to Lupin, parents should not leave their children for their children's sake. Even a parent with a monthly risk for an psychotic-like episode, must remain and care for his child. Most people are fit to be parents, even though all have their faults. The famous Psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott, states that 'a perfect mother is not good enough', meaning that a parent's fault is necessary and helpfull to the mental growth of her child. Being a fine mother and father, Dora and Remus need only be "good enough", but not perfect. Sometimes, the mother cannot attend her child, and at desperate times, sometimes a good enough mother, not being omnipotent and able to divide herself to all that is necessary, might decide that leaving her child with the caring grandmother is the best that could be done. Ronnie, Who besides all these points, just can't get over Remus and others deaths. good enough mother From allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jul 27 20:10:29 2007 From: allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk (allthecoolnamesgone) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:10:29 -0000 Subject: Snape V. Marauders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173338 > But he was still a mean little man. > > ~Adam (Prep0strus), who apologizes for the unexpected length of this post. > But a mean little man who spent year of his life going into danger with little thought for his own safety. I have no doubt he was a deeply damaged individual but dismissing him as a 'mean little man' is hurtful to those of us who perhaps identify with him in some aspects of our personalities. Have you never been mean and petty or behaved like a child when you should have been an adult. All of us are damaged goods in some ways unless you had a charmed childhood with perfect parents and went to an exceptional school. James and Sirius were themselves unlovely adolescents but were unlovely in ways that fellow students overlooked. Sirius dismissed Harry's concerns about his fathers treatment of Snape and considered house elves unworthy of any consideration. Sanpe was a social outcast who took the friends he could get who unfortunately were all on the way to be death eaters. Dumbledore himelf conceded that Snape sorted into another house might have been a different person. Snape was an exceptional potion maker and a skilled occlumens and Harry accorded him the title 'the bravest man I ever knew'. Dumbledore said he was lucky to have him and mourned him with his aside of 'poor Severus'. So I think your final epithet for him is unkind and uncharitable more in kin with Voldemort's casual killing of a man he thought to be a loyal servant. Contrast it with Dumbledore's compassionate acceptance of a flawed man who was nevertheless acting for the good. I'm sorry if this seems to have become a little personal, it was not meant as a personal attack merely a deeply felt disagreement with your expressed view of what I admit is my favourite character. allthecoolnamesgone From pair_0_docks at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 20:16:14 2007 From: pair_0_docks at yahoo.com (pair_0_docks) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:16:14 -0000 Subject: rec: Missing from 'Harry Potter' a real moral struggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173339 Feng Zengkun wrote: > > Harry has no inner struggle - the > > choices he has to make are easy because > > everything is so black and white for him. > > In this respective, there is no 'moral > > struggle' for Harry to grapple with: his > > options are to defeat Voldemort or not, > > and that choice is ridiculously easy to make. Eggplant wrote: > Ridiculously easy?! It's easy to march into the Forbidden Forest to > be murdered by a maniac? What Harry did was moral and as you read > his thoughts as he walked to his doom it sure seemed to be a > struggle to me. It takes no courage to know what the right thing to > do is, but it can be a struggle to actually do it. I read that > article yesterday and I still can't make heads or tails of it. Pair_0_docks wrote: I agree with both ideas here. Clearly, it is not easy to make difficult choices especially ones that require great sacrifice. However, I believe that the point of the article and comments that followed it are that for Snape making his choices out of his background/environment (poor home life, Slytherin house friends, nasty meanish sense of humor (which I still happen to like regardless), etc) could be "harder" to have been made than Harry's choices (yes bad situation with the Dursleys, but enormously strong friendships, and other Adult wizard support offered that is unknown as for Snape). We don't just choose in a vacuum. Yes I suppose many will argue that Snape is responsible for all his choices, but did he choose the family life that he was born into. And as for his sense of humor I rather enjoyed it (allow admittedly at times he did go too far.) Also, there is this idea (not sure how valid but) that the person who acts rightly will continue to do so. Do we ever really doubt that Harry will do the right thing? But we always wondered about Snape. That was because he appeared and did in fact CHANGE. I still don't understand why changing for love of lily makes his choices thereafter somehow less than what they are. That is the context that is provided for them by Rowling. I suppose because Rowling gives us knowledge beyond the scope of his character that had Harry not been the son of Lily he wouldn't have changed BUT how and why is that important? So what if he wouldn't have choosen that way if things were different, they weren't. pair_0_docks From homeboys at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 20:26:08 2007 From: homeboys at comcast.net (Adesa) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:26:08 -0000 Subject: JKR Cut Ron & Hermione Like a Movie Edit ...UNbelievable! ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173340 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > > Sara wrote: > > My criticism is that JKR should have placed some believable > > storyline where Ron & Hermione were forced to allow Harry to go on > > alone without any other choice or option they could have taken. > > Even a physical barrier or blocking mechanism would have sufficed, > > though a fully reasoned approach would have enhanced the story > > wonderfully for many interpretive standpoints of why Harry had to go > > on alone without them. >>SNIP<< > KathyK: > > I'm sorry but I'm quite certain that it was *Harry* who slipped off > and "abandoned" Ron and Hermione (if you want to look at things that > way). And Harry going it alone is not at all out of character, IMO. >>SNIP<< Adesa: And let's not forget our ever-practical witch friend. I find it totally in-character for Hermione to realize they needed those fangs, not see Harry around, and rush off to get them awhile without him. I'm sure she was thinking, "Well, what'll he do once he's got the Horcruxes and Voldemort in front of him?" Always planning ahead, she is, unlike our hero. From kimbroughr at verizon.net Fri Jul 27 20:24:20 2007 From: kimbroughr at verizon.net (Kimbrough) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:24:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Muggle borns at Hogwarts References: Message-ID: <003301c7d08c$1db098a0$2f01a8c0@kim> No: HPFGUIDX 173341 Anne Squires earlier: Dean's wand was "relieved" by the Snatchers. I am, of course, purely speculating here; but, I think Colin (and Dennis) were on the run much like Dean was. Or hiding out somewhere a la Anne Frank. (snip) Kimbrough: I'm using an audiobook so I can't give you an exact page number, however Colin Creevey was definitely at school before the first battle at Hogwarts. In Chapter 31 The Battle of Hogwarts, when McGonnagall is evacuating the school all the Slytherins leave, some of the older Ravenclaws stay, more Hufflepuffs stay and over half of the Gryffindors remain at their table. So, McGonnagall had to go to them to make the under aged kids leave. She said, "Absolutely not! Creevey Go! And you Peaks!" I suppose he could have shown up if the DA called him, but he is so under aged I can't really think of how he would have gotten to Hogsmeade in order to sneak into the castle. It seems more logical to me that he would have been there already. Kim From elync at eclectic-egg.com Fri Jul 27 20:30:52 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:30:52 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173342 Leah wrote: > > I am sorry, but I think it might matter. Draco Malfoy becomes > master of the Elder Wand by his 'expelliamus' of DD' s wand on the > Astronomy Tower. The Elder Wand is not taken by Draco but buried > with DD. Harry takes Draco's own wand from him. This according to > Harry, has made Harry master of the Elder Wand, because he has > removed a wand from Draco. Harry might not be right, he might win > over VM because this is what VM believes and that slows up his > reflexes, but we don't know that. Lyn: I'm sure this might have been addressed already, in fact it might have been a previous post or posts here that helped me figure this out in my own head... but I don't think the Elder Wand ever recognized the specific wizard called "Draco Malfoy" as its master. Draco never took physical possession of the wand, never touched it, so the Elder Wand never knew Draco as the wizard who had defeated its previous master. What it did know, was that its previous master (Dumbledore) had been Disarmed by a spell cast with the hawthorn wand that belonged to Draco. So the person it recognized as its master was not "Draco Malfoy" but "the holder of the hawthorn wand that disarmed Dumbledore." Had Draco disarmed Dumbledore and immediately taken physical possession of the wand, the wand would then have equated Draco himself with "the owner of the hawthorn wand" - but that never happened. So the Elder Wand only knew that its true master was the holder and presumed owner of the wand that had been used to win it, but did not yet associate that holder with any particular wizard. (I'm thinking there's something here to do with the same kind of "flesh memory" that came up with the Snitch that Dumbledore left Harry.) Harry then took Draco's hawthorn wand and proceeded to use it for the rest of the story - and when he met LV in the final duel, the Elder Wand recognized him as its master because he was using the same wand that had disarmed Dumbledore, which was the only way it could recognize its true master at that point. It recognized the wand first, and then gave its allegiance to the wizard using it. Harry succeeded in both disarming LV of the Elder Wand *and* taking physical possession of it, thus EW now recognizes the touch of one particular wizard, Harry Potter. That's what makes "Harry Potter" master of the Elder Wand, instead of its master being just "the holder of the wand that defeated Dumbledore." Well, it makes sense to me, anyway. :) Lyn From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 20:40:01 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:40:01 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: More puzzling DH questions from a Muggle In-Reply-To: References: <2155A7BA65BC4A9183B07839DC5D32A1@ShimonMoshesPC> Message-ID: <2795713f0707271340k11d0ff8due635f04cc0de510e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173343 Lynda says: 1) We never find out the theory or background behind the veil that Sirius falls through, and his body is never recovered. was JK ever planning to address that? Perhaps she will later. This doesn't bother me much. I think its rather incidental. 2) How did Gryffindor's sword find its way from Griphook to the Sorting Hat? Magic. I hypothesize that Godric Gryffindor realized that the goblins have a different reckoning of ownership than humans and would attempt to retake the sword that he gained lawfully from them and so he had an enchantment/series of enchantments out on the sword that will always return it to its rightful owner. Gryffindor House/The Sorting Hat. 3) We never revisit Grimmauld Place; how did Kreacher get to Hogwarts? did he realized his master wasnt coming back, and therefore went back to his old job? He probably/obviously apparated back to Hogwarts after realizing that the trio weren't retuning 4) Griphook was on the run because he was given an assignment that was demeaning to his race... what was that assignment? Don't know. Doesn't really matter, it just put Griphook into position to help the trio later on. 5) Why didn't Lord Voldemort feel that his horcruxes were being destroyed... you would've thought he would feel some pain, this is his soul we're talking about? He's too damaged, too arrogant and too detatched from reality to feel the loss of parts of his soul he gave up by choice long ago. 6) How did Tom Riddle's soul in the locket know all those mistruths about Ron's mother wanting a girl, hermione wanting Harry etc. - is this some form of dark eerie magic? Its a bunch of lies! Con artists always know the best way to get to someone. They prey on people's weaknesses. 7) How did draco, crabbe and goyle get into the room of requirement if it was taken by Dumbledore's army for the past 2 weeks? I thought the room of requirement can only be one thing at a time? Can it be several concurrent rooms? It was empty at that time, wasn't it? Just having been emptied when Ginny left? If not, then I don't know. 8) How did Voldemort manage to leave the Shrieking Shack without coming near Harry? Is there another way in besides for the Whomping Willow? Maybe so. Did even Harry know all of Hogwarts secrets? 9) Was Snape's body was ever recovered from teh Shrieking Shack and given a proper burial? I guess we'll just have to imagine that. My guess is that was taken care of by Harry and the Hogwarts Staff off the page. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 20:51:02 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:51:02 -0000 Subject: Slapstick Comedy - was Deathly Hallows Reaction In-Reply-To: <46A6B0C5.3000903@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173344 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Jones wrote: > Aberforth's eye in a piece of magic mirror that Sirius had. > Explain that if you dare! As Aberforth has the second (Sirius') part of the mirror (he bought it from Mundungus), who else's eye can Harry see there? Or do I misunderstand your question :-)? > Neville whipping another Godric's sword out of a burning hat as has > been mentioned by others. How many are there? It was the same sword, of course, Neville got it the same way as Harry did in CoS, by asking the Hat for help. JMO :-). zanooda From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Jul 27 20:53:04 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:53:04 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173345 There are three authors who, over the last fifty years, have given me continuing satisfaction and to whom I return time and time again. If you have been a member here for some time and have read my ramblings, you will not get any merit points for guessing that I refer to JRR Tolkien, CS Lewis and JK Rowling. :-) My back story is that I allowed certain members of my church to persuade me for some years that Harry Potter was bad: there was witchcraft, magic and so on. I accepted this view without investigating for myself. Then, by chance, I saw COS just after it hit the cinemas at the end of '02 and then saw PS on satellite the same week. This launched me into the Potterverse and I realised the dangers of jumping to conclusions. The outcome was I came to HPFGU (where I celebrated my "fourth birthday" yesterday). Long-time members may know also that I am an evangelical Christian belonging to a UK Baptist church and have posted fairly frequently on matters Christian. Getting to the point, I wanted to add my twopennyworth to the current discussion on DH. Of the three authors mentioned above, the only one I consider to have used allegory is CS Lewis. He made it very clear that "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" was intended to present the Christian faith to younger readers. There is quite definite allegory that Aslan equates to Christ in Narnia. He is a being beyond humanity and, in Narnian terms, is God. In "The Magician's Nephew" he is seen creating the world of Narnia and in "The Last Battle", ending it. The creatures of Narnia refer to him as the Son of the Great Emperor-over-sea. This corresponds to the Christian belief that Christ is God in human form; that he was involved in the creation of the world. I do not think that Tolkien or Jo Rowling have set out to write morality stories. Tolkien originally started the material which became "The Silmarillion" during the First World War because he wanted to create a vehicle in which he could use his created Elvish languages Quenya and Sindarin. JKR had said that Harry came to her fully-formed as a scrawny bespectacled boy who did not know he was a wizard. However, I believe that their own personal belief may then have coloured their writing unintentionally. I think that astrong, true faith will display itself in all manner of ways in a person's life and actions. Tolkien demonstrates this, although Middle-Earth is intended to be in a pre-Christian era. Although he said that he disliked allegory, perhaps he approached nearest to it at the beginning of "The Silmarillion" where his account of creation and his cosmology of Ainur and Maiar reveals his Catholic background fairly clearly. What about Harry? JKR has indicated that she is a Christian worshipping with the Church of Scotland who came from an Anglican background having been born and brought up near Bristol. She has said that after the last book, her views will be more obvious. I have staunchly maintained that I do not believe that Harry is a Christ figure; no human can be. To a Christian, Jesus is God in human form and is sinless. We can be Christ-like, which is what Christians are urged to be. In Philippians 2, Paul writes "Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus " but Harry is like us, an everyman making his way through life although not a Christian as far as we know. He is basically good, he wants to see good things happen to himself and can be altruistic towards others but he has flaws ? he can lash out in anger, he can rush into things rashly, he can carry hatred in his heart. So can we. For me, the thing that draws me to him is I see so much of myself at that age in him. Although, like JKR, I see the chapter "The Forest Again" as one of the best in the book, I do not see this as Harry being suicidal or even mirroring the crucifixion. It is another example of what Jesus said in John 15:13 "Greater love has no-one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." He sees his death as the only way to get rid of Voldemort once and for all. It is the altruism that leads people to risk their lives to rescue others in disasters or on the battlefield; the courage that led Captain Oates to walk out of Scott's tent in the Antarctic. Summing up, I believe that Harry's story has a Christian foundation because it was written by a Christian who incorporated her personal belief into it, maybe unknowingly. It is not meant to convert others to that faith although it may help seekers after faith but it was meant to be a great story ? which overall it is. Briefly digressing onto a different thread, I believe that "never tickle a sleeping dragon" may have occurred to JKR as a variant of a Tolkien comment rather than CS Lewis. In "The Hobbit", Bilbo confronts Smaug and after a conversation with him, makes a silly remark as he goes which makes the dragon breath fire after him and burn him. Tolkien writes: `"Never laugh at live dragons, Bilbo you fool!" he said to himself and it became a favourite saying of his later and passed into a proverb.' From Meghanhopkins at bellsouth.net Fri Jul 27 20:38:31 2007 From: Meghanhopkins at bellsouth.net (meg_lsu) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:38:31 -0000 Subject: similarities to LOTR Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173346 meg_lsu: I posted something about this elsewhere but wanted to see if others thought the same thing. I know Rowling has said she respected Tolkien a lot and got some of her ideas from his writing. But while reading the section in DH when they were camping I just kept thinking it was a bit too similar too "Lord of the Rings." Them walking through the woods like Frodo and Sam on the never ending walk to Mordor. The Order of Phoenix saying they'd know if Harry were alive or not like the Fellowship sensing Frodo was still alive. The locket when around their necks making them feel anger like when the ring starts pulling Frodo. When Sam leaves Frodo and returns the hero (film version of LOTR anyway) like Ron leaving and coming coming back helping to get the sword. I just kept thinking LOTR when I was reading this part. Hsving to destroy the horcruxes like having to destroy the one ring. I really loved this book, it's just this one part that I felt like it wasn't HP anymore. A lot of the magic of HP for me has been Hogwarts and while I understood why Harry couldn't go back for his 7th year I wanted to know what was going on there a bit more than the whole endless camping. meg_lsu From moosiemlo at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 20:55:26 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:55:26 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The unforgivable curse argument In-Reply-To: <46A8E661.7080301@yahoo.com> References: <46a8242e.05358c0a.3c5e.38c1@mx.google.com> <004d01c7cf96$b139d5b0$0202a8c0@Lana> <46A8E661.7080301@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707271355h11abc699u1677da2d657e6a9b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173347 Lynda: Maybe its becuase as former military I was taught that self defense or defense of others changes actions that are normally immoral or wrong such as say shooting a weapon to an acceptable course of action, but I don't have a problem with the "good guys" using the unforgivable curses. Say what you will. It was war. The enemy had no compunction about using those same curses. Its not as though Harry woke up one fine morning and decided to go torture someone for fun and games. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 19:37:32 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:37:32 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <12086145.1185395718161.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173348 > > From Erin Ridgeway: > > On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of > > Ariana as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted > > as possible? > > Bart: > A better question: did anybody NOT read it that way? > > As adults (note the name of the group), we are much more > knowledgeable about what sort of attack some adults are capable of > on children. And we know, from news accounts and otherwise, how > children react to certain kinds of attacks. Jack-A-Roe: No, I never thought she was raped. "When my sister was six years old, she was attacked, set upon by three Muggle boys. They'd seen her doing magic, spying through the back garden hedge: She was a kid, she couldn;t control it, no witch or wizard can at that age. What they saw scared them, I expect. They forced their way through the hedge, and when she couldn't show them the trick, they got a bit carried away trying to stop the little freak doing it." It sounds alot more like they beat her than they raped her. Why would someone who is afraid of a child decide to rape them? Beating is so much easier. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 20:58:50 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:58:50 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as champion of Muggle-borns Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173349 As far back as CoS, the Malfoys sneer at Dumbledore as the champion of "Mudbloods," but given what the Muggle boys did to his sister and his father's being sentenced to Azkaban for trying to punish them (the use of magic against Muggles was considered to be unjustified despite the provocation), it's quite remarkable that he did so. An aside first on what the Muggle boys did to Ariana. I for one don't think it was rape; there are enough horrors in this book without that and rape is not the only cause of lasting trauma. Children have many ways of torturing each other, especially a child who is different. IMO, it's much more likely that they hit her with rocks, perhaps reflecting "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"--and, yes, I know that the translation is flawed) and the ancient punishment of stoning to death. or they could have burned her with cigarette lighters, causing much more lasting damage than a Crucio. Assume what you like. What matters is that she was a defenseless six-year-old and she was tortured and that she never recovered from the emotional trauma. Dumbledore, of course, seems to have been more concerned with his own brilliant future than with Ariana, having an attack of remorse only after his mother, his sister, and his father were all dead and Grindelwald was exposed as the Dark wizard DD should always have known he was. (Shades of Severus Snape refusing to see Mulciber and Avery as much less powerful and dangerous Dark wizards.) I suppose learning that Grindelwald set up concentration camps for Muggles or Muggleborns (I need to reread that part of the story) caused his epiphany. He must have forgiven the Muggle boys for what he did to Ariana through fear that he himself had killed her (and yet it had to be GG unless there are more ways to kill a witch or wizard than a Killing Curse). But it seems like a most unpromising start on the road to being a "champion of Mudbloods" (to quote Draco), much less to protecting Muggles. Anyone care to shed light on this or point me to a thread where it has already been discussed? It's impossible to keep up with the flood of posts, and I've been focusing on Snape. Carol, who doesn't like the DD of this book and has been almost afraid to look at him From psych12 at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 20:52:59 2007 From: psych12 at gmail.com (leggrachel) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:52:59 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173350 > >>Ronnie: >> >> Tonks defending "the cause" is not contrasted to defending her son. On the contrary: defending your cause is momentarily identical to defending your loved ones. It's a "fight of flight" situation, and for the sake of your children, as Remus says, you have to go out there and fight the enemy. Tonks goes out because her beloved husband is in danger, but also because she is a Lioness Auror, who is going out after the vultures inorder to defend her cub (unlike LV, I'm using this word with deep sympathy). << Rachel writes: I agree with Ronnie! You have to look at the situation from their perspective. Remus and Tonks weren't running out for each other, they were fighting for everything about their world that they believe in. You have to understand, under Voldemort's rule, their child likely wouldn't have lived long. The DE's made it clear that children of 'undesirables' were equally undesirable. The final battle was all or nothing, and I think that Remus and Tonks knew that when they chose to fight. As a side note, JKR once said that she molded Voldemort after Hitler, so you can easily imagine that this was truly an extreme case. Any parent would probably choose to die so that their child can live, including Lily and James, and Remus and Tonks. From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 21:01:09 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW Message-ID: <766770.98521.qm@web80507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173351 ----- Original Message ---- From: prep0strus To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 12:45:27 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW > >Adam, who, despite all of this, still admires Snape way more than I > >admire James or Sirius > > Lenore: > Me too, no contest. > Prep0strus: I just don't understand. I'm just baffled, even if you could like the character of Snape, even if you see more good in him that I can imagine - taking him in the best of terms, a tortured child, full of love, who risks life and limb for his love, his love's child, for the fight against evil... why would you admire him more than James or Sirius? What did they do to make them worse than him? me: well for me it's not about what James/Sirius did or did not do. A character who goes through a much more difficult moral journey and end up on the good side is always much more admirable than a character who start out "good/well adjust/happy" and has much less inner moral struggle and thus straightforwardly and easily end up good good good good... I just generally have more admiration for characters like Snape who came from much less/worst (i.e. under-previledge, damaged personality due to poor upbringing, bad environement and people he unfortunately fell into because of a supposed "choice" that he chose when he's only 11 years old and did not have problem with "muggle-born" before going to Hogwarts), and then come around and end up fighting for the good side. Even if the initial motivation was a selfish though positive (pure love for someone), it doesn't matter. It just takes a lot more courage and struggle for him to choose redemption and do the right thing. And from then on he put his life in high risk while leading a lonely and painful life for the good side, with no regards for rewards/recognitions/love, nothing... so yeah Snape a far more admirable character, not to mention a much more compelling characters that makes me care more. Jo From ida3 at planet.nl Fri Jul 27 21:00:48 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:00:48 -0000 Subject: Reflection on DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173352 Now that I have calmed down a bit after the initial major feeling of disappointment that had struck me like a bolt of lighting, I think I'm able to give some direction to why I had such a negative response to the book. My initial reason to want to read book 7 was not specifically because I am a fan of the series (ya, who guest, after debating so much on this list), I simply love PoA and it is today actually still the only book that I really love as a whole, even if I like parts of other books. Although I like GoF, to an extend, it does not do much for me as a whole and pretty much fell out of love with the series completely after OotP. That is not to say that the story had not grabbed hold of me without letting go or that it did not leave me with an obsessive urge for more information. Wanting to know more, needing to know more but not particularly loving the story as a whole. Yes, and as we all know obsessions aren't pretty and almost never turn out satisfactory so neither did this one. Although I shall not bore everyone with my obsession for one particular character, me falling out of love with the series after OotP says enough, I will try to address my problem with the book(s). When in OotP Sirius falls through the veil, it is not so much that he died (well it is but that is another point entirely ;o) but the way the aftermath of his death was handled. To me it was for one not totally clear from reading the text that yes he died (No explanation about the veil or even that falling through is indeed deathly) and secondly I found DD's aftermath speech tasteless. Besides being in total denial that I actually had just red a major character die (which of course now after DH can no longer be done), I do not understand how it can be acceptable to talk about who is to blame after someone just died. If someone comes to your door to tell you that your loved one has just died in a car accident, do you really want to hear that it was his own fault because he was looking for something in the glove compartment and never saw the truck coming? I do not think so. Although I clang onto my denial as if my life depended up on it, I do have to admit that I was immediately frustrated, after finishing OotP, with the author for not making it absolutely clear that she killed the character off, with no intent to ever retrieve him from the dead. The death scene is absolutely ambiguous with the colour of the second yet not being mentioned and neither is the purpose of the veil or that you indeed die by falling through it. I had discussions with people about the conversations with DD or Nearly Headless Nick but these too have to some extend some ambiguity to them. Sure in the aftermath of DH there is no doubt left but finishing OotP left many unanswered questions that I feel I should not have needed to have, after finishing the book, if the death in this book had been addressed properly and with slightly more taste. Fast forward to DH, well of course this book gave me a reality check in regards to my denial and obsession which surely was the biggest major blow I had to deal with after finishing. Now that I have calmed down a bit from this initial shock and disappointment, I realised what my real problem is with OotP and ultimately this book. It is lack of reflection on the dead, lack of closure on the reader's end of the spectrum for the characters that we have attached ourselves to. Death is a tricky subject and when dealt with in a good way, it can be satisfying even if emotional but I have to admit I feel that the Harry Potter series is lacking this aspect. To be honest I feel a little cheated in this department because the author clearly is capable of writing closure, reflection and a fictional funeral to say her goodbyes to the character(s) most important to her. Although it is absolutely her story to tell, I do think that any author publishing a book should understand that different characters have different meaning to different people. So even though I am not delusional about why the author invented specific characters and their purposes in the story or even that the author will not keep a character alive on my behalf, I do feel that it would not have been a waist of time to actually think about the effects a character's death has on the readers of the books you are writing. And with this I do not mean the shockwave of the death itself, although I have to admit that the amount of deaths in DH seem slightly overkill to me and some of them are absolutely tastelessly done in my opinion. Remus and Tonks deserved more then just one line to show us they are death. If you have blinked while reading you would have missed it. It is actually not the deaths in themselves that I'm complaining about but a major issue for me is the lack of closure and reflection on the dead. Death in war might be senseless but they are never meaningless and people in the aftermath do reflect on their dead. Instead of showing through Harry kid's names that he respected the dead, I would rather have had some type of memorial service in honour of those that had lost their lives to give him and others a chance to build their lives in piece and happiness. That is what we do after war, the living remember the dead and cherish their memory and sacrifices, so we can live in a free world that they helped create. This would have given the readers a chance to say their goodbyes (even if fictional) through the main characters attending and would have given some closure and a more satisfying feeling about there beloved character being killed off. Seeing the characters being mourned gives the reader the feeling that they had meaning and therefore give their deaths in themselves meaning. In my personal case the lack of canon mourning over Sirius's death left me with a really unsatisfying feeling after OotP and it was not picked up in HBP while DD's death was turned into a major event. I am not trying to say that JKR should have written it in the same manor as she did for DD but Cedric's death in GoF was reflected up on with an appropriate speech, Dobby in DH got his funeral with a small gathering and even mad-eyes magical eye had a ritual burial. And now, after DH where many major characters were killed off, I seriously ask myself the question was it to much to ask of JKR, even if it is her story to tell, to imagine for a second that readers would have wanted a fictional reflection on the characters they had invested so much of themselves in and had grown to love. My answer is no. It would have given the entire story more debt and more emotion and above all would have given it more meaning. For me this has seriously crimpled the potential for me to love and respect the series as a whole because I do not ever want to read DH or OotP again as a book even if I am still capable of looking at parts of these books. I will never read them again from front to end. Dealing with death is indeed difficult for many people myself included but that doesn't mean that it should be stepped over so easily in a book that is said to be specifically about this topic. Dana From lmkos at earthlink.net Fri Jul 27 21:06:14 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:06:14 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173353 > > >Adam, who, despite all of this, still admires Snape way more than I > > >admire James or Sirius > > > > Lenore: > > Me too, no contest. > >Prep0strus: >I just don't understand. I'm just baffled, even if you could like the >character of Snape, even if you see more good in him that I can >imagine - taking him in the best of terms, a tortured child, full of >love, who risks life and limb for his love, his love's child, for the >fight against evil... why would you admire him more than James or >Sirius? What did they do to make them worse than him? Lenore: First of all, we never learn much about James in the books. The best we know of him is that Lily loved him and married him. Well, we don't know why and how he changed, so that isn't enough to inspire me to admiration. Sirius was always a kind of disappointment to me. I did like book three best, and loved Sirius' escape story. But, he, too, as a character never developed fully. I never could sense any real inner strength in him; he was just kind of immature, always a little boy. Lenore: I'm not sure why we are debating perceptions, which are what we each see in a given character. However, since you asked, my perceptions of Snape aren't based on any of the things you've mentioned above. I don't care about superficial things, like personality pleasantness or unpleasantness, or external forms of things, like dress, fashion sense, status, etc. You are certainly right that Snape's personality doesn't do him any favors! But what I am always looking for in people (which currently includes JKR) comes down to what their deeper inner values are. In the "olden days" it was called character, or honor, or integrity, being true to oneself, which means being consistently honest with oneself. What do they value and how much do they value it? You can defend Sirius and James to me all you want and it won't make any difference, because we just don't know that much about them. They have never been revealed to the reader, really, in any deep sense, and so they leave me uninspired. [snipped] >how can there be 'no contest' in admiring snape more than james or >sirius? to admire someone is to respect them, believe them worthy of >emulation. why would you choose a nasty little boy who grew up into a >nasty little man - an EVIL man, who managed to become good, but remain >nasty... over two men who always chose good. sometimes they were >petty, sometimes they were small - no more than sirius, but they were >always GOOD. and brave. Lenore: IF I perceived him as you do, then no doubt I wouldn't admire him, or be able to see any admirable qualities in him. But I've always seen more in him. It was easy. Lenore From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 21:17:33 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:17:33 -0000 Subject: That Whole Christian Thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanmcgee48176" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmgarciaiii" > wrote: > > > > I'm of the opinion that JKR included some parallels/allusions to > > Christianty. This is different than saying these books are allegories > > for the Crucifixion of Christ, etc. > > Of course, JKR included at least two biblical quotes that I'm aware > of...at the two tombstones at Godric's Hollow....but of course she also > includes a quotation from Aeschylus. Me: Precisely my point. > We do know that JKR is a Christian so it's possible that there's a > crucifixion parallel here. However, Harry did NOT die...whereas the > death of Jesus is a major part of Christian theology. I'll wait for JKR > to tell us whether the parallel exists. Supporting that theory would be > the fact that she names as one of her favorite series the Narnia > Chronicles, and C.S. Lewis does not bother to hide his Christian > parallels. Me, still: Whether Harry "officially" died is something I'd like to have JKR stipulate. I'm not sure either way, frankly. > I can easily make the case that it's a pagan analogy (royal sacrifice), > but that speaks to me because I AM a pagan...I suggest that Harry's > experiences resonate with Christian beliefs if you're a Christian, and > that belief system is important to you. There are a bunch of religions > and myths that include a dying god/sacrifice for others/resurrection, > many of them predating Christianity. Although I am Catholic, it resonated with me more as a Classical Mythology thing (from reading THAT is where I came up with the idea Harry would "die" and see DD and Sirius...2 out of 3 ain't bad) > I do feel terribly sorry for the children who are forbidden HP because > of their parents' beliefs (particularly as so many of them have not > read the books). I have a hard time understanding why parents would not > love books that teach the value of love, friendship, doing the right > thing, making good choices, making mistakes, but trying again to make > better choices, etc. Me some more: I can't speak for other Christian belief systems, but the general consensus among my tribe is that these books are fine for children (at an age appropriate level) and that parents should keep an eye on the little tyke, lest he start sacrificing rats to Baal as a consequence of reading GOF too young or something. > I read an excellent critique of the books which suggested that the > problem with the books from a Christian perspective is not the use of > magic or "witchcraft" but the total lack of religion in the book. Me yet again: I'd heard those circumstances being used to bolster the very opposite conclusion. All institutions in these books are ridiculed to one degree or another, but religious insitutions are spared. -J. From rvink7 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 21:20:56 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:20:56 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173355 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lizzyben04" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lizzyben04" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lizzyben: > > > > > > I think JKR has a secret that she is desperately worried that readers > > > will figure out; so worried that she has to tear down Snape atevery > > > possible opportunity, loudly proclaim how *horrible* he is, how his > > > sacrifices & actions are never heroic, how he's unloveable, how he's > > > against everything she values & believes in. The secret is, JKR is > > > Snape. And she knows it. She's just worried we'll realize it too. > > > > Renee: > > > > I'm snipping the rest of the post, because I don't think it ought to > > be repeated on this list. But simply have to react to it. > > > > Lizzyben, was it your intention of accusing JKR of being a racist and > > a Nazi? If not I seriously advise you to rethink this post. Ad hominem > > arguments never contribute to a healthy discussion, and you're > > crossing the line here quite thoroughly. > > > > List Elves, sorry if I seem to step into your shoes, but I couldn't > > remain silent. > > > > Ren?e > > > > lizzyben: > > Of course not. I'm sorry if my post wasn't clear; I was trying to get > a handle on some concepts that I'm not really expressing very well. > I'm saying that all authors put some of their self into their > characters - as JKR has acknowledged about Hermione or Lupin. And I > think Snape & the Slytherins represent a part of JKR too, a part that > she would rather condemn & judge instead of integrating or > understanding. I'm talking about things from a psychological > perspective, *not* a social perspective. > Shadow figures are present for all of us, representing the things we > don't like about ourselves - the key is to integrate the shadow into > the rest of the personality; because if we do not, we'll end up > projecting that shadow instead & trying to destroy it. (this is vague > Jungian stuff) Renee: Thanks for the explanation; I see what you mean now. But could it be that JKR *does* want to condemn the Slytherinesque traits in herself and others? That she thinks of them in religious terms of sinfulness instead of Jungian terms, in terms of expiation rather than integration? Lizzyben: And there's something about the total condemnation of a > house of "emotion", combined w/Harry's statements that he likes that > Ginny doesn't ever cry, JKR's refusal to ever allow Harry to cry - > it's like she's saying that emotion, itself, is bad? Renee: I doubt she is, because in the process of writing the series she has frequently admitted having had bouts of crying. And several of her non-Slytherin characters cry as well, notably Hermione. It seems a stretch to me to suggest she is rejecting emotion as such. But its true that she does seem to set much store by Stiff-Upperlipness in some of her favourite characters. Lizzyben: I'm just at a > loss to understand the way JKR resolved the House system. Were fans > really begging JKR to make Slytherin *more* evil & unredeemable? IMO, > it seems like fans were begging for a good Slytherin, a redemption for > the House. JKR never gave it - and her total condemnation of anything > resembling Slytherin-ness is just, odd, to me. I don't get it. I don't > get why she did it. It seems to be an internal need to cut off & > destroy those qualities, instead of understanding them. So yeah, I > think parts of Snape come from JKR, as do all of her > characters. The problem is that JKR never managed to integrate the > "shadow" House, the shadow figure into the overall narrative. And IMO > the novel suffered for it. Renee: I don't see this need to destroy the qualities embodied by Slytherin House in the books. It's is an integral part of Hogwarts - and didn't JKR say in an interview it was a necessary part? In other words, the Shadow has been given a place, not just in her world, but also in the narrative; JKR doesn't deny its existence at all. But because it is the Shadow, it's influence can't be benign. The problem comes with the nature of the books: the story is steeped in symbolism, but the storytelling is very realistic. The Houses are based on the Four Elements which together constitute the world - but each house is full of boys and girls who apart from having magical qualities are ordinary human beings and behave as such. If there is a problem - and to be honest, there is - it is rather a clash between the genre of the story and the mode of its telling. I don't see it as psychological, as a failure on JKRs part to confront her own shadow. Lizzyben: > And the overall message of the novels *is* scary to me, > because it seems to say that we can just instantly judge people as > less worthy, almost less human, based on a label. While JKR condemns > that mindset in the text for Muggles, she supports exactly that type > of thinking when it comes to Slytherins. All of them, 25% of the > population, are totally immoral & evil? The way JKR's world is set up > right now, Harry & co could probably justify some Slytherin > registration commission - you've got to make sure those evil Slyths > don't attempt world domination again, right? And that's the paradox at > the heart of her novel, where the subtext seems to create a message > that runs against the surface message of the text. It preaches against > stereotypes & dehumanization, while actually *reinforcing* exactly > that in how Slytherins are portrayed. Renee: "Totally immoral and evil" are strong words. Draco and his parents are weak rather than evil, and we don't see any Slytherins of Harry's generation commit the kind of atrocities that is the trademark of people like Bellatrix. (Well, maybe Crabbe, but I think he was being utterly stupid rather than evil.) And don't forget that one of the vilest characters in the book is a Gryffindor. That alone should give Harry pause if he ever considers a Slytherin registration commission - which I don't think he ever will, given his words about Slytherin in the Epilogue. I admit the message could have been clearer. Actually, this element in the books is also the one that bugs me most. But as I said, I'm just not inclined to ascribe it to an unwillingness on JKR's part to face her demons. I prefer to see it as an artistic failure. Ren?e From va32h at comcast.net Fri Jul 27 21:23:06 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:23:06 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173356 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leggrachel" > I agree with Ronnie! You have to look at the situation from their > perspective. Remus and Tonks weren't running out for each other, they > were fighting for everything about their world that they believe in. > You have to understand, under Voldemort's rule, their child likely > wouldn't have lived long. The DE's made it clear that children of > 'undesirables' were equally undesirable. The final battle was all or > nothing, and I think that Remus and Tonks knew that when they chose to > fight. > > As a side note, JKR once said that she molded Voldemort after Hitler, > so you can easily imagine that this was truly an extreme case. Any > parent would probably choose to die so that their child can live, > including Lily and James, and Remus and Tonks. > va32h: Except that Tonks never, not once, not one single time, says a single word about "the cause". From the minute she arrives at Hogwarts, she asks one thing only "Where's Remus?" Lupin himself tells Harry, in the Forest, that he is happy to have tried to make the world a better place for his son, but Tonks NEVER verbally expressed interest in the safety of anyone but Remus Lupin. And speaking of James and Lily, when Voldemort came calling, what did James say? NOT - "chuck Harry out the window and come help me fight". He said "Take Harry and run." James wanted Lily to take the baby and run for it, he *didn't* want her to die fighting for the cause. When Lupin first arrives at Hogwarts he is without Tonks, suggesting that he didn't want her to fight either. Once my husband was missing for about a week - his convoy was attacked in Baghdad, and he and several others managed to flee to safety, but he was out of communication for several days. It was the most terrifying week of my life. But never once did I consider abandoning my children to go look for him. And if I had, I'm sure my husband would have been mortified that I had done such a foolish, selfish thing. And I am certainly not going to feel badly over thinking badly about a fictional character. It's not as if my saying that Tonks was an unfit mother is actually going to hurt the feelings of her fictional son. va32h From rvink7 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 21:37:12 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:37:12 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173357 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > lizzyben: > >> And that's just scary. Because this is the same kind > >> of mindset that leads to genocides or persecution of > >> minority groups in real life. JKR condemns this mindset > >> when it comes to Muggles, yet tacitly supports it for > >> Slyths. > > Renee: > > > Lizzyben, was it your intention of accusing JKR of > > being a racist and a Nazi? If not I seriously advise > > you to rethink this post. Ad hominem arguments never > > contribute to a healthy discussion, and you're crossing > > the line here quite thoroughly. > > houyhnhnm: > > I can't speak for lizzyben, but I don't think it even > crossed her mind to accuse Rowling of being a Nazi. It > is certainly not how I interpreted her message. Renee: Well, forgive me for having had doubts; to me, it looked like she did. I'm very glad she explained herself. houyhnhm: (And I > find the veiled threat of sicking the list elves onto > someone who posts an idea someone else finds threatening > very scary indeed.) Renee: Stealing the tea-cozy of a list-elf for a moment, however dubious, isn't the same as siccing them onto someone. As far as I know, the list elves are fully capable of deciding when to interfere without any siccing by third parties. Houynhm: > Here's where *I* think the Nazi bit comes in. For decades > after World War II, there was an argument advanced in > Anglo-American culture that Nazism arose in Germany > because of some inherent defect in the German people. > Germans were the Other. They were the Slytherins. > It Can't Happen Here because we're not like that. > We're Gryffindors. Renee: Like Peter Pettigrew? (BTW, it wasn't just an Anglo-American trait, but that isn't relevant here.) From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Fri Jul 27 21:44:37 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:44:37 -0000 Subject: Muggle borns at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <003301c7d08c$1db098a0$2f01a8c0@kim> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173358 wrote: > > Anne Squires earlier: > > Dean's wand was "relieved" by the Snatchers. I am, of course, purely > speculating here; but, I think Colin (and Dennis) were on the run much > like Dean was. Or hiding out somewhere a la Anne Frank. (snip) > > Kimbrough: > > I'm using an audiobook so I can't give you an exact page number, however Colin Creevey was definitely at school before the first battle at Hogwarts. In Chapter 31 The Battle of Hogwarts, when McGonnagall is evacuating the school all the Slytherins leave, some of the older Ravenclaws stay, more Hufflepuffs stay and over half of the Gryffindors remain at their table. So, McGonnagall had to go to them to make the under aged kids leave. She said, "Absolutely not! Creevey Go! And you Peaks!" I suppose he could have shown up if the DA called him, but he is so under aged I can't really think of how he would have gotten to Hogsmeade in order to sneak into the castle. It seems more logical to me that he would have been there already. > > Kim > Anne Squires: All quotes/pages from the US edition of DH. Okay, let's look at the chronology of what we know about who is at Hogwarts and when. On page 210 (Chapter 11, The Bribe) it says, "This way, Voldemort will have the whole Wizarding population under his eye from a young age. And it's also another way of weeding out Muggle-borns, because students must be given Blood Status --- meaning that they have proven to the Ministry that they are of Wizard descent --- before they are allowed to attend." Thus, Muggle-born are not allowed at Hogwarts. Therefore, I find it highly unlikely that Colin was attending Hogwarts during DH. Granted, Colin has always impressed me as being very brave and willing to go against the tide in his undying support of Harry; but I really don't think he's attending Hogwarts. In Chapter 29, The Lost Diadem, Neville shows HRH what's been going on in the Room of Requirement. It says members of all houses are present except Slytherin House. It says a crowd greats HRH when they enter the room. Not everyone is mentioned. However many students are listed as hiding out in the ROR for the past two weeks. Besides Neville there's Seamus Finnigan (page 577), the Patil twins, Terry Boot, Ernie Macmillan, Anthony Goldstein, and Michael Corner (page 578). Colin is never mentioned at this point and I think he would be mentioned if he'd been there. Skip forward fifteen pages---- On page 603 (Chapter 30, The Sacking of Severus Snape) it says that, "As the room came into view, Harry slipped down a few stairs in shock. It was packed, far more crowded than when he had last been there." A paragraph later it says, "We sent messages to the rest of Dumbledore's Army, " Fred explained. "You couldn't expect everyone to miss the fun, Harry, and the DA let the Order know, and it kind of snowballed." It goes on to say that everyone's going to meet in the Great Hall. Next members of the Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore's Army, and Harry's old Quidditch Team run past with their wands drawn. (page 604) Colin is not mentioned specifically; but, I think this is when he arrives. On page 608 (Chapter 31, The Battle of Hogwarts) everyone is gathering in the Great Hall. Some students are wearing dressing gowns which indicates that they are attending the school. Others are described as wearing traveling cloaks which indicates that they have just arrived. Again, I maintain that Colin is one who has just arrived. Three pages later, page 611, McGonagall tells Colin, "Absolutely not, Creevey, go! And you, Peakes!" In conclusion, I strongly believe that Colin was not in attendance during the year and showed up when the DA was summoned. In the Great Hall McGonagall told him to leave. He would have been a sixth year if he had been at school and I think McGonagall believes he is sixteen. It's possible though that he had already had his seventeenth birthday. Anne Squires From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 21:45:01 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:45:01 -0000 Subject: my DH reactions minus Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173359 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" wrote: > The besting in a duel, I'm sorry to say, still baffles me Do you mean DD besting Grindelwald? I don't think that the Elder wand was really invincible, just very powerful. DD won because of his superior skill, IMO. I think DD was right when he suggested that the Hallows were man-made objects, just imbued with very powerful magic. This means for me that Harry was never immortal, even when he owned all three Hallows. > What truly transfers ownership of the elder wand, and why was Harry > able to take mastery from Draco, but Voldy didn't get it from Harry > when he blasted him? But Harry didn't die, right? We can't even say that he was defeated, because he didn't fight, he "died" willingly, undefeated. It was his own decision to die, and it was more like suicide then anything else. zanooda From jnferr at gmail.com Fri Jul 27 21:55:31 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:55:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40707271455s175a44a4u20469f78ecb1144a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173360 > > va32h: Except that Tonks never, not once, not one single time, says a single word about "the cause". From the minute she arrives at Hogwarts, she asks one thing only "Where's Remus?" Lupin himself tells Harry, in the Forest, that he is happy to have tried to make the world a better place for his son, but Tonks NEVER verbally expressed interest in the safety of anyone but Remus Lupin. And speaking of James and Lily, when Voldemort came calling, what did > James say? NOT - "chuck Harry out the window and come help me fight". > He said "Take Harry and run." James wanted Lily to take the baby and > run for it, he *didn't* want her to die fighting for the cause. When > Lupin first arrives at Hogwarts he is without Tonks, suggesting that he > didn't want her to fight either. montims: my father died when I was 4, and my mother never stopped telling me she wished I had died instead of him - he was her chosen companion - she had loved and lived with him much longer than she had known me - if he had lived, they could have made another child - she had to go to work to earn the money to pay for both of us, at great sacrifice, rather than staying at home looking after his home... this is a reality, not like all of the letters I have read implying that motherhood is kind of a sacred profession where women automatically become saintly and selfless. It works for some, not for others. I adore my husband. If he was in danger, and I thought I could do the slightest thing to help, I would try. I hope I would sacrifice myself for him. JKR is a very loving mother. Given the choice between her children and her husband, I am sure she would try to protect her children. Lily did, and that was a Good Thing. Merope did not and that was a Bad Thing. But please, people, don't just take it as a given that mothers are perfect... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snapes_witch at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 22:07:30 2007 From: snapes_witch at yahoo.com (Elizabeth Snape) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:07:30 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173361 "ysuhistorygrad" wrote: > > It is a fine line between love and obsession. I beleve from reading > all the varied opinions out there is that those that find Snape > altogther creepy think his feelings for Lily part of a sick obsession. > Those that like or feel sorry for Snape seem to find his unrequited > love heart-warming. Perhaps when Lily ended their friendship, she saw > not only his dark side but his obssesive side. > > I would like to add my thanks to JKR for the adventure, we might not > all agree with how the story went but we all stayed on the ride! Thank > you for an ending that I and many other couldn't put done. Thanks for > allowing us to have Harry back from death! > > wolf Considering that Harry saw exactly the same scenes we've read and didn't think Severus was either a stalker or obsessed, I'll just accept his opinion of Severus Snape. Snape's Witch Always! > From pinkfoxranger at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 21:56:42 2007 From: pinkfoxranger at yahoo.com (Eva) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:56:42 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173362 leggrachel: "You have to look at the situation from their perspective. Remus and Tonks weren't running out for each other, they were fighting for everything about their world that they believe in. You have to understand, under Voldemort's rule, their child likely wouldn't have lived long. The DE's made it clear that children of 'undesirables' were equally undesirable. The final battle was all or nothing, and I think that Remus and Tonks knew that when they chose to fight." Hi, I am coming out of lurkdom for a bit since I really like Lupin and Tonks. I am totally agreeing with leggrachel here. This was an all or nothing battle. Both Remus and Tonks were fighting here for a beter world, a beter world for their son. va32h: "Except that Tonks never, not once, not one single time, says a single word about "the cause". From the minute she arrives at Hogwarts, she asks one thing only "Where's Remus?" Lupin himself tells Harry, in the Forest, that he is happy to have tried to make the world a better place for his son, but Tonks NEVER verbally expressed interest in the safety of anyone but Remus Lupin." I don't want to sound melodramatic here, but we have seen in the books how emotional Tonks can be, even though she is an Auror. I have seen this before in books, that when a situation becomes so overwhelming, people focus on one smaller thing. If Tonks was so overwhelmed by everything (although that seems a bit OC if you think she is an Auror), that she kept order by focussing on the well-being of her husband. And I am not just talking about the final battle, but all the other stuff that happened. And about Lupins reaction and wanting to go with Harry and Co... Wouldn't it be possible that Lupin, after finding someone to love, a marriage enz, was somewhat floating around on pink cloud and looking at the world trough pink glasses, but came crashing back to Earth and suddenly oversaw all the consequences? He got scared and ran... I thought Harry a bit ruff, but he did manage to give Lupin a kick on the back of his pants and set him on the right pad. This episode doesn't detract from Lupins braveness or any good qualities he has. He is a good person, but but was overwhelmed with all that was happening and the consequences of that. Eva From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 22:15:29 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:15:29 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173363 > >>Betsy Hp: > > But Voldemort wasn't really the "personification of evil" was he? > > Otherwise his destruction would have brought about bigger (or > > quite frankly, any) changes to the WW. Instead, as we see in the > > Epilogue, the WW and Hogwarts returns to business as usual. > > > >>Monica: > > As far as Voldemort as personification of evil, I would say he was > definitely not the only example an evil wizard, nor is he the > embodiment of all evil in the wizarding world such that when he was > destroyed, the world would be all happy and nice and good. > Betsy Hp: Hmm, but I think I have a problem in that the WW didn't even become that much happier or nicer. It was the end of what I think amounted to an almost school-boy king-of-the-hill (heh, or keeper of the wand) type of squabble. There just wasn't much *epic* to it. > >>Monica: > That having been said, within the Christian religion, did Jesus > come and eliminate all the evil in the world? He changed the status > quo for sure, but evil still exists in this world (provided this is > your belief, if not then at least as an understanding of Christian > belief this would have occured). Betsy Hp: Well, it certainly depends on your own personal belief system, but I think it can safely be said that the life, death and resurrection of Christ made an impact. So much so that our calender system does a before and after. > >>Monica: > Radical change occurs primarily within people themselves, rather > than on an outward level. Perhaps this is what happened in the case > of Harry. > Betsy Hp: If it did it all happened off-page. Which means (since this is the end of the series) that it didn't happen. Harry doesn't change after his fight with Voldemort. He's pretty much the same boy as ever. Which, again, reflects the lack of epic, IMO. And makes it hard to link with the Christ story. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Harry's actions were a blip on the radar. A footnote > > in "Hogwarts: A History". Hardly equivalent to Christ. > >>Monica: > A blip on the radar, but possibly prevented the destruction of > all that is good in the world. A subset of the wizarding world would > undoubtedly have continued to fight but with Voldemort at full power > would have been crushed eventually. (Parallel to Jesus overcoming > the effects of original sin; at least this makes redemption possible > whereas if he had not sacrificed himself in that way, there would > have been no hope for humanity). Betsy Hp: Except, the lack of good in the WW is exactly what gave rise to Voldemort. And Harry doesn't change that. Harry attacks the symptom but gives no thought to the cause. Again, another difference between the Christ story where Jesus actually digs into what was wrong with the world and gave the world the tools to fight it, IMO. Before Jesus there was a very small elect who had a relationship with God, afterwards, that relationship was open to anyone interested, IMO. But with Harry, there's still just a small elect. And there is still the unclean (something Jesus worked pretty strongly against, IMO). > >>Monica: > Not having the book on me at the moment, I would say what is > momentous about Draco's appearance at the end of the book is that > he is alive, has children, and has been redeemed. > Betsy Hp: He cannot possibly be considered redeemed if he is still a member of the unclean class. And since he is a Slytherin, and since the Slytherins are still the bad house, Draco is, as he was, a non- redeemable lesser-than. Which is exactly why I cannot consider these books either moral or Christian. > >>Monica - who incidentally is not a shining beacon of religiosity > but is nevertheless enjoying the argument. And is terribly sorry if > this post is lengthy and not particularly well-written but needs to > attend to her work instead of play all the time. Betsy Hp: I'm totally enjoying the ::ahem:: *discussion*, too. And work is totally over-rated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173317 > >>Susan McGee: > > I do feel terribly sorry for the children who are forbidden HP > because of their parents' beliefs (particularly as so many of them > have not read the books). I have a hard time understanding why > parents would not love books that teach the value of love, > friendship, doing the right thing, making good choices, making > mistakes, but trying again to make better choices, etc. > Betsy Hp: Personally, I think these are incredibly immoral books that promote bigotry and hatred, and possibly even suicide. Plus, there's the whole might makes right and the blessed can do no wrong thing. Oh, and the total lack of respect for any sort of guiding law. > >>Susan McGee: > Also, in answer to that commentary about how Harry doesn't struggle > or his character doesn't change, etc. First, I don't agree, I think > going to one's death willingly is an incredible struggle... Betsy Hp: Actually, I think if so many people close to you have died, and your one constant mentor has told you it's a good idea, and the dead are telling you to jump in the water's great, suicide is easy. Times like those, living is the hard part. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173345 > >>Geoff Bannister: > > He [Harry] sees his death as the only way to get rid of Voldemort > once and for all. It is the altruism that leads people to risk > their lives to rescue others in disasters or on the battlefield; > the courage that led Captain Oates to walk out of Scott's tent in > the Antarctic. > Betsy Hp: I think the reason I have such a hard time buying this is that Harry left before his part was done. Nagini was still alive. I know Harry told Neville to kill the snake, but it struck me as passing the buck. Also, I didn't like it that it was all Dumbledore's idea, rather than Harry's own. Even to the extent that Dumbledore arranged for Harry's dead to tell him how cool death was when the time came. It was like Harry was just a puppet on Dumbledore's strings. Rather than looking noble, Harry just looked very scarily obedient and malleable to me. Betsy Hp From pinkfoxranger at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 22:10:15 2007 From: pinkfoxranger at yahoo.com (Eva) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:10:15 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black and James Potter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173364 Hello everyone, In several parts in the books Sirius and James are shown in their time at Hogwarts. In that time, they are shown to have been very immature, rash and sometimes (sorry for the rough language) very arrogant little pricks. I have to compliment JKR on a very accurate portrayal of some boys of that age. I have been an assistent-leader to a scouting group with boys that age and James and Sirius could have been two of my boys. Luckily enough most of them grew up and matured. That is what seems the most likely path that James took. Otherwise, he wouldn't have made Head Boy and I don't think Lily would have fallen for him. Sirius is somewhat different. He reminds me of one of my fellow students at university. He is about nineteen/twenty and he has still a lot of maturing to do. A somewhat latebloomer on that aspect. That is how I envision Sirius. The only point with Sirius is that he didn't have the chance to do that fully, since he ended up in Azkaban and before that he had the war. And after he escaped Azkaban he also didn't get the chance to do this. First he was on the run, then totally couped up in Grimmauld Place. Just my vision on Sirius Black and James Potter. Eva From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Fri Jul 27 22:15:09 2007 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:15:09 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape V. Marauders In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AA6E6D.1020605@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173365 prep0strus wrote: > The Marauders: > > James. James is a talented, arrogant boy who comes from a proud > Griffindor family. He's all wizarding world, all the way, and had a > great childhood. He's a little bit of a bully - to Snape - we don't > see how he is to other students. Tiny little correction - actually, we do. In book 5, Lily tells him off for hexing other students in corridors "for fun". You may well be right in that he only hexed Slytherins. In JKR's universe it does not count against him being a wonderful person, apparently. Oh, and please don't say that James and Sirius are Ron. I really like Ron after book 7, that's insulting to him. James and Sirius were spoiled rich kids, Ron is nothing like them. Irene From severussnape at shaw.ca Fri Jul 27 22:27:58 2007 From: severussnape at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:27:58 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173366 va32h wrote: > I've seen many complaints about the Worst Camping Trip Ever! (on this and other forums) and while I can't disagree that those parts were boring, I wonder if there was a reason for them to be boring? dan: Complaints about the camping trip remind me of the offhand comments about "exposition" in OotP. My response to that book was absolute joy - at last, descriptive passages galore, the whole witchwizard world coming alive, being given shape and texture and context. All the while, the plot moves forward. OotP was a great read, because of the exposition, not in spite of it. > I confess I was disappointed with JKR - I thought this book had been planned for 17 years, why all the filler? But just as Harry complains that learning about Tom's background is irrelevant (and it most definitely is not), so I think those who complain about the camping trip are missing the true nature of what went on. The horcrux among them, undestroyed, showed them at their lowest point, very near hopeless. Here, jealousy, envy, fear are real tests, not filler at all. Un this series, I was never truly in love with the trio until this camping trip. It was us getting to know three young people who have given up everything for what they believe in, and Rowling letting us enjoy the working out of their true relationship, which absolutely MUST be worked out before the end. So, the camping trip is actually the most important part of the book. dan From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 22:46:08 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:46:08 -0000 Subject: Importance of Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173367 Allie wrote: > We don't know for sure that Voldemort was using Occlumency against Harry, only DD's presumption that he was. HBP 59: "Lord Voldemort has finally realized the dangerous access to his thoughts and feelings you have been enjoying. It appears that he is now employing Occlumency against you." > > How is it that he "FINALLY" realized, when he used the connection purposely several weeks before to lure Harry somewhere? Does "it appears" mean "Severus Snape has told me"? I suppose that's possible, in which case it would be more than speculation, BUT - > > I like Harry's logic better. Voldemort could not possess/project to him when he was grieving for Sirius; Harry realizes this when he grieves for Dobby. And Harry has finally learned to CONTROL the connection, which really worked out better for him than the Occlumency ever did. Carol responds: Or he finally figured out how to do Occlumency in a different way, using his emotions rather than blocking them, in contrast to Snape, who has to prevent the Dark Lord from detecting a suppressed thought or emotion at close range, a different matter altogether from the long-range scar connection. In OoP, Snape tells Harry, "I am going to attempt to break into your mind. We are going to see how well you resist. I have been told that you have already shown aptitude at resisting the Imperius Curse. You will find that similar powers are needed for this" (Am. ed. 534). What Snape is saying resembles what Harry ends up doing in DH, but in OoP, Snape is trying to get him to keep the Dark Lord from deliberately entering his head while Harry, not realizing that the dream is planted, keeps resisting him. It's different from GoF, when Voldemort is unaware of the (one-way) connection. In DH, Voldemort again seems unaware of the connection. He is no longer attempting to plant visions in Harry's mind, and he may well be using Occlumency (needlessly) to block against deliberate intrusions. Either he's stopped doing so, realizing that Harry isn't making any such attempts, or LV's Occlumency doesn't work against the strengthening scar connection. Harry's soul bit is getting stronger, perhaps trying to connect with the master soul, just as it connects (horribly) with the soul bit in Nagini in the Bathilda chapter. Near the end of HBP, Snape shouts, "Blocked again and again and again until you learn to keep your mouth shut and your mind closed!" (603). Harry, it turns out, will never need to battle a Death Eater with anything resembling Snape's duelling prowess, at least not until he becomes an Auror in later life, and consequently doesn't really need to learn nonverbal spells (yet); in the end, it isn't his power or magical skill or power that matters. But Snape's advice on Occlumency, intended to help Harry in blocking deliberate intrusions into his mind, turns out to be applicable in a different way. Harry does learn to do what Snape has been trying to get him to do from the first Occlumency lesson: control the scar connection by closing his mind. But it isn't the deliberate intrusions of Voldemort into his own mind, it's the mental connection, the shared soul, that he teaches himself to protect against. "Similar powers are needed for this," Snape said in OoP, and he was right. The mental that allowed Harry to resist an Imperius Curse in GoF surface at last in DH as Harry learns to control the connection. Or that's how I read it.) Carol, wondering if Harry ever remembered Snape's advice after normalcy was restored and whether he rethought his perception of those events From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Jul 27 22:47:01 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:47:01 -0000 Subject: Houses / Sorting "too soon" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173368 I wrote: > > I think that Dumbledore blames Voldemort much more > > than the house system for creating and exploiting > > divisions. (Indeed, it would be a bit strange to look > > at Snape, the Slytherin in love with a Gryffindor, and > > conclude that it was the house system driving students > > apart.) ---"littleleahstill" replied: > But Snape was love with Lily long before the Sorting Hat > got to work. It was in part the malign influence of his > house companions that led to their separation. From the > moment they sit at different tables Snape and Lily are > severed. I disagree on the last point. At least based on Snape's recollections, they remained close for almost five years after that, until the post-O.W.L. incident in which Snape called her a "mudblood." And Snape didn't pick up that anti-Muggle prejudice at Hogwarts -- he was just as quick to dismiss Petunia as worthless for her lack of magical talent in the memories we see from when they were little kids. He fell in with the proto-DE group not just because of where the Sorting Hat placed him but because that was where his political views fit most naturally. -- Matt From ida3 at planet.nl Fri Jul 27 22:50:47 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:50:47 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173369 Snape's Witch: > Considering that Harry saw exactly the same scenes we've read and > didn't think Severus was either a stalker or obsessed, I'll just > accept his opinion of Severus Snape. Dana: Sorry could not resist but why believe Harry now? Before DH Harry's point of view on Snape has always been a major point of debate but now suddenly he is right? If he is not a good judge of character when he witnessed and experienced Snape's behavior towards him then why is he now? Snape truly hated Harry and his dad that character assesment is also still very much part of canon!Snape. Is the Harry filter suddenly a reliable witness while before these revelations it wasn't? I'm just saying. Dana From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Fri Jul 27 23:21:27 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:21:27 -0000 Subject: Harry lives... OK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173370 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: >> > I am left breathless by the book but we must remember the words of the Duke of Wellington > about Waterloo that it was "a damned close-run" thing. We lost a lot of good people... I > wonder whose loss affected you most? > ronnie: My favorite characters in the series are Remus Lupin, Severus Snape and Hermione Granger. With the anxious anticipation for the DH, I was certain that Snape is not going to last, whichever theory about him will turn out to be right. Even though I was expecting this, I was terribly upset when it at last happened (I never expectes a reconsiliation scene between him and Harry, and thought (or "knew" :))that the Harry's insight into Snape's motives would be post mortem. For Lupin's sake, however, I was earnestly praying for month, and boy did I cry when his death was anounced. 2 out of my 3 favorites killed... It really was bloodbath, and as I was reading the book, my husband (and other's I've met) kept enduring my kreacher-like mumbling about JKR: "Murderer... [censor]... [censor]... insane woman... aggressive bitch [oops.. censor didn't make it here]... how dare you kill X... I know where you live and I will evenge (unfortunatly, I don't)... you should get therapy..." And let me quote my husband, who doesn't share my HP mania, but still read the first three books: "How on earth did this septology, which began with a naive children's book, become a mass slaughtering". Well, even so, I'm glad of it. From muellem at bc.edu Fri Jul 27 23:22:16 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:22:16 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173371 > Dana: > Sorry could not resist but why believe Harry now? Before DH Harry's > point of view on Snape has always been a major point of debate but now > suddenly he is right? If he is not a good judge of character when he > witnessed and experienced Snape's behavior towards him then why is he > now? Snape truly hated Harry and his dad that character assesment is > also still very much part of canon!Snape. Is the Harry filter suddenly > a reliable witness while before these revelations it wasn't? > colebiancardi: Well, it could be because of two important things: The first being that Harry saw Snape, objectively, through the Pensive. Those memories, good & bad, are not biased towards Snape and shows Harry Young!Snape, Teen!Snape, DE!Snape and DDM!Snape (or LILY!Snape). Harry gets privy to Snape's motivations and what Snape did. Harry also gets DD's assentment of Snape - that Snape is not a coward and brave, and that Snape, in *his own way*, loved Lily for years. Those Pensive moments are not candy-coated. The second being Dumbledore's conversation in King's Cross. Dumbledore states "Poor Severus" and Harry retorts "That bit didn't work out". Then Harry & DD sit without talking - for the longest time yet. I think Harry, by viewing the Pensive scenes and talking to DD, came to that conclusion. Harry's filter has been lifted. Don't forget that Harry's filter has been lifted before - in another one of Snape's memories, back in OotP. Harry, up to that time, thought his father was the best, greatest, wonderful, could-never-be-a-git; yet after he saw those memories, he was torn, conflicted; felt empathy with Teen!Snape. He even asked Lupin and Sirius about it and questioned why did his mother even marry James. They confirmed that James was a bit of a-hole. So, Harry is well aware that the Pensive memories aren't *fake* or *false* (unless you are Slughorn and even then, it is pretty clear they've been tampered with) Harry's judgement of Snape's character in the past *was* wrong. But that was because Snape never let anyone get close to him, break down those barriers, let them inside. That was his job - to be a spy and he could not have Harry romping around in his past with the chance it could get leaked out to LV. Also, for what Snape did, regardless of his initial motivations, he was *brave* - very much so. He could have just rolled up and off'd himself after Lily was killed, but he didn't. He continued to do the dirty and dangerous work of a spy and he was, after DD died, alone. He had no living being to confide in. Only portraits. And that is extremely sad, IMO. To be left like that, hanging on a string, with no one to save you if you got caught. And the rest of the WW thinking you were an evil DE bastard who murdered DD. It wasn't until Snape died, that they knew the real truth. colebiancardi From prep0strus at yahoo.com Fri Jul 27 23:25:39 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:25:39 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Snape_V._Marauders/=09Re:_Victory_for_TEWWW_EWWW_?= In-Reply-To: <46AA6E6D.1020605@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173372 Hey. Responding to a few comments together here. Thanks for all the responses. ~Adam Prep0strus > Irene: > Oh, and please don't say that James and Sirius are Ron. I really like > Ron after book 7, that's insulting to him. James and Sirius were spoiled > rich kids, Ron is nothing like them. > > Irene > Prep0strus: But my point is that they are the same, in spirit. I love Ron (though I hate JKR's continued obsession with his jealousy and temperamental loyalty). He's funny, usually loyal, and brave. One of my favorite characters (along with Lupin and Lee Jordan, if anyone is counting).But can't you see him 'hexing other students for fun' if he could get away with it? Draco, other Slytherins? If he could get away with it, he would. No one showed Kreacher less respect other than Sirius. And Ron came into school with the same anti-Slytherin tendencies. Sure, Sirius and James were rich (though I maintain we don't really know how rich the Potters were), but I don't think they would be nasty to poor kids. In fact, they took into their little clique a werewolf and a much weaker wizard. And maybe they appreciated Peter's sycophantism, but they did wind up using him as the secret keeper, showing trust. And they surely respected Lupin. James married a muggleborn. And Sirius, for all his faults, overcame being born into a family like the Malfoys to become a character I would compare very closely to Ron. He may be a bit rasher, but I attribute that to his greater talent and his years in prison. Sirius was fiercely loyal to his friends and dismissive of those he deemed not worthy. A flawed, but good person. Like most of our characters. ~Adam(Prep0strus) Allthecoolnamesgone: I have no doubt he was a deeply damaged individual but dismissing him as a 'mean little man' is hurtful to those of us who perhaps identify with him in some aspects of our personalities. Have you never been mean and petty or behaved like a child when you should have been an adult. All of us are damaged goods in some ways unless you had a charmed childhood with perfect parents and went to an exceptional school. Allthecoolnamesgone ~Prep0strus: I do apologize for the 'mean little man' comment - I forget how it may be taken as insulting to other people. But I want to assure you, it's not that I don't identify with flaws - and I think every character (except the almost saintly-portrayed Lily) has exhibited them. Mean, petty, behaving like a child - this is what the detractors of the Marauders accuse them of. Which they are, at times. We have now seen major flaws in Dumbledore, in Harry's father, his godfather, his favorite teacher. In Ron, Hermione, and Harry himself. Hagrid. None of these characters are perfect - they are flawed, and not always in 'cute' ways like endangering the entire school with their pet giant spider. But Snape... Snape is almost all flaws. He has redeeming qualities, unlike Voldemorte, but I find it easier to identify with Sirius, the loyal friend, erroneously accused, who can also be mean, spiteful, and childish, rather than Snape. And certainly James, who grew out of much of his childhood bullying. Or Lupin, overcoming fear and prejudice to be a great teacher and fighter against evil. Again, we see his flaws in this book, but a flawed hero I find more admirable than ... how do I reverse that for Snape. He is an antihero, perhaps. A turned villain. ~Adam (Prep0strus) Lenore: I don't care about superficial things, like personality pleasantness or unpleasantness, or external forms of things, like dress, fashion sense, status, etc. You are certainly right that Snape's personality doesn't do him any favors! But what I am always looking for in people (which currently includes JKR) comes down to what their deeper inner values are. In the "olden days" it was called character, or honor, or integrity, being true to oneself, which means being consistently honest with oneself. What do they value and how much do they value it? Lenore Prep0strus: Here we disagree in a fairly major way, because I don't consider 'personality pleasantness', as you put it, a superficial thing. I agree about dress, fashion - I don't care about Snape's hair one whit. But kindness is something else. First, I don't think you mean it this way, but if you honor being true to oneself and how much they value what they value... voldy is the most admirable in the story. He values one thing: him. He values it above all other things, and he sticks through it through thick and thin. No one is truer to himself. But I think I get your point. But Snape... yes, when he became good, he did many brave things. But I don't find him admirable. I think being a 'nice' person is almost as important. It's not everything - trying to come up with an example - perhaps Umbridge or Lockhart could be considered nice... but I think Slughorn is best. He's usually 'nice'. I was so hopeful for him, finally, the Slytherin we could respect and admire. But no, he wound up being one of my least favorite, because while not evil, and not even mean, he still was rather loathsome. But, remember, in the end, he returned to the fight, showing bravery and fortitude, so maybe he is redeemed. But for Snape... bravery doesn't seem enough. He didn't even have great choices. Run away, and be slaughtered, like Karakoff. Stay with a maniacal leader, knowing voldy might kill him at any point, finally seeing he meant nothing when his love was killed. Or be a double agent for the side of good. There was no safe option for him. Now, he did make the right choice. And I'm sure it was hard, and he was brave. But in society... I think being kind to one another is more than personality pleasantness. Being cruel to children (and it's a harsh word, but viewing how he treated Neville, I think warranted) just doesn't work in the personality of a person who is admirable. He's complex, and interesting, but... I dunno. I don't understand the fire people have to defend him. Yes, we didn't see as much of Sirius and James, but from what we're told I don't see them as any less true to themselves, or to their beliefs. they were steadfast from the beginning. ~Adam (Prep0strus) well for me it's not about what James/Sirius did or did not do. A character who goes through a much more difficult moral journey and end up on the good side is always much more admirable than a character who start out "good/well adjust/happy" and has much less inner moral struggle and thus straightforwardly and easily end up good good good good... Jo: I just generally have more admiration for characters like Snape who came from much less/worst (i.e. under-previledge, damaged personality due to poor upbringing, bad environement and people he unfortunately fell into because of a supposed "choice" that he chose when he's only 11 years old and did not have problem with "muggle-born" before going to Hogwarts), and then come around and end up fighting for the good side. Even if the initial motivation was a selfish though positive (pure love for someone), it doesn't matter. It just takes a lot more courage and struggle for him to choose redemption and do the right thing. And from then on he put his life in high risk while leading a lonely and painful life for the good side, with no regards for rewards/recognitions/love, nothing... so yeah Snape a far more admirable character, not to mention a much more compelling characters that makes me care more. Jo Prep0strus: Compelling character I will give you. And the moral struggle of redemption also - in fact, I wish we had somehow seen more of that struggle, even in his memories. He's a dark, interesting man. But remember who came from as little as he did - Harry Potter, with a horrid first 11 years, no Lily even to guide him. And Sirius, who, while privileged, was also indoctrinated, his whole family a bunch of muggle-hating, dark arts loving, primed for evil rich jerks, like Malfoy. He was brave and good and flawed. And didn't have to treat children terribly to do so. And Lupin, so easily contrastable, as societal outcast who has to live on the fringes, and yet still treats children well and fights for what is right. I know Snape is a major character. Perhaps he has the greatest character arc in the books. Harry was always a hero, the flaws of dumbledore are all shoved together at the end. Lupin and Sirius don't have quite as much page time. But Severus was a cruel person, a nasty person who made the lives of every child we cared about worse on a daily basis. And while I believe his 'soul' is redeemed.. I can't admire him. I would never emulate him. I appreciate the story of redemption. But perhaps true redemption would have allowed him to take not just the side of those he formerly opposed, but their ideals. To try to treat everyone equally, and not favor Slytherins so heavily, even as they call Hermione mudblood, even as he sees her talent and denigrates her for it, and sees nevile's flaws and makes his life harder. And people love identifying w/ the antihero, with evil, especially when it's complex (and Snape is certainly more complex than voldy). But I don't understand why to do so means we take the much smaller flaws of the marauders and blow them out of proportion as if they must be inferior. Because they never chose evil, they can't be morally superior by recanting it? Because were petty as children, that overshadows Snape's adult pettiness? Because their loyalty was never in question, that makes them disposable? Not to me. And though I know I'll never change minds about Snape... if we all had the chance to be in a DADA class taught by Lupin, or taught by Snape... which would we choose? ~Adam (Prep0strus) PS. it's not really related, but on the Lupin/Tonks/Baby issue.. this one is getting heated, but I don't like to look at it in a 'what if book' scenario: 'if your husband were about to be eaten by a tiger, and your baby by a crocodile, which would you choose?'. Teddy was temporarily safe. her husband was in mortal danger. Tonks was an auror. This was what she did - more than Lupin even. I don't think sitting home and waiting it all out is in her nature. Everyone with children doesn't choose not to fight. I think harry's tirade towards Lupin was more about his reasoning than his conclusions - Lupin was running away from his wife and child, afraid of himself and the situation. At the end, he ran towards the defense of his friends, his child, his world. And I think Tonks did the same, and to his defense, and did her job. Ever since OoP, I had hoped to get to know Tonks a little better, and I'm sad we didn't in this book. but I don't think leaving her child with her mother so she could help her husband and friends makes her a bad mother. Wotcher. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Jul 27 23:29:45 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:29:45 -0000 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal / Unforgiveables In-Reply-To: <46A66FC9.7060701@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173373 Lee Kaiwen wrote about the "moral inconsistency" of characters portrayed as "good" using the unforgiveable curses, beginning with Snape (and Harry's attempt) at the end of HBP, and continuing through DH. I've reproduced a lengthy excerpt from Lee's post at the end of this message, and I'll respond to individual points after these general comments: 1) That a morality is not absolutist does not make it inconsistent. I can say that "killing is wrong except in self-defense"; the exception is part of the normative rule, not an inconsistency. 2) The morality of an adult, operating in the adult world, is frequently more nuanced than the moral rules that are typically (or appropriately) taught to children. Sometimes this is because moral principles come into conflict; sometimes it is because, even in the most absolutist normative systems, the morality of particular actions may depends on the surrounding circumstances. How do those points bear on the use of unforgivables in the last two books? I would assert that what is disconcerting about the morality expressed in DH (and to a greater or lesser extent since OP) is that the characters are faced with more difficult moral choices. It is much easier to disagree on the nuances of morality exposed by those choices than with basic principles expressed in the early books of the series. And in many cases, even where the morality is relatively clear, we see characters making choices that we are intended to question. These books (HBP and DH) are telling a war story, not a more innocent tale about the adventures of eleven-year-olds. On to Lee's examples -- A) Snape and Harry in HBP: Lee Kaiwen writes: > Then came the end of HP6, when Snape uses the Avadra > Kedavra to kill Dumbledore, and Harry attempts to use > the same on Snape. At the time, I explained to my son > that Harry, caught up in his grief and his anger, made > a mistake, as even good people sometimes do. But for > Snape no redemption was possible. Cold, calculated, > premeditated, his use of the Curse had put him beyond > all possibility of salvation. That is, if > "unforgivable" had any meaning at all. This is a case where the complexities of a situation expose nuances of morality. The morality Lee is expressing excuses mistakes of passion, even if the mistake is attempted murder. The morality Rowling expresses excuses classic euthanasia (with the twist of also saving Draco from the murder / be murdered dilemma). Neither is inconsistent with the concept of murder being unforgivable. It is fair to be disappointed if Rowling's morality does not coincide with one's own, but it is not fair to charge her with inconsistency. Incidentally, I am not so sure that Rowling intends us to read Harry's actions at the end of HBP as without fault -- I think here, as in his scene with Bellatrix at the end of OP, we are intended to see and understand his flaws: when Harry gets really angry, he is a loose cannon. B) Imperius curses at Gringotts: Lee Kaiwen writes: > That the good guys started "liberally" throwing around > the Unforgivables is bad enough. But JKR compounds the > moral issue here in the way in which they do so ? without > reluctance or hesitation, without so much as a hint of > moral compunction. When Harry Imperiuses the goblins ? at > Hermione's almost casual suggestion, no less -- he might > have been casting a Hot Air Charm for all the reticence > he exhibited. A couple of factual points here. First, Harry uses the curse not only on the goblin Bogrod, but also on the wizard, Travers. Legally, only the second is proscribed, although I think Rowling would certainly intend that the same moral strictures apply to the use of the unforgiveable curses against all intelligent species. Second, and more relevant to the message Rowling is conveying, it is *not* the principled Hermione who urges Harry to use the curse, but rather Griphook, who is portrayed as having, at best, a non-human moral compass (personally, I read him as an egocentric utilitarian). Hermione does not even know what is going on at first. Third, Harry is anything but casual about the situation. He is in the middle of a bank robbery, with an armed Death Eater at his side and an imp (if you'll excuse the metaphor) literally hanging around his neck, whispering into his ear. He is portrayed as acting (as he often does) without thinking, but not as unconscious of the enormity of what he is doing. Is what Harry does right? I think most people would agree that bank robbery is not right to begin with, unless some form of "this is war" or "the end justifies the means" applies. And even if those excuses justified violating the security of an institution that is itself unconnected with the war and with Voldemort, what of the planned deception of Griphook, the trio's putative ally? I think Harry's actions through this entire sequence are morally questionable, and I don't think we as readers are intended to give him a pass. Rather, it's part of a buildup which made me wonder if Harry would ultimately attempt the killing curse on Voldemort. C) Cruciatus and Imperius curses in the Ravenclaw common room: Lee did not directly discuss this scene, which I found the most disturbing morally. Here, both Harry and McGonagall employ unforgivable curses in a situation in which they are not only unnecessary but hardly even provoked. All that Harry or McGonagall needs to do is to disable Amycus. But Harry is so infuriated by Carrow's show of disrespect that he blasts off a Cruciatus curse, while McGonagall follows up with the Imperius just to, what, get the Carrows close enough to tie up together? What is it supposed to tell us when Professor McGonagall, the adult paragon of upstanding, rule-following morality, resorts to the unforgivable and *unnecessary*? Is it a show of solidarity with Harry? Is it an affirmation that this is war and anything goes? And what has happened to Harry to make him "really mean it," to want to hurt Amycus so badly that his curse sends the grown man flying through the air? The only explanation I can see is that Rowling needs to show us what the horrors of war can do to good people. Having seen friends maimed, tortured and killed, having been on the run for nine months, driven to larceny and robbery, haunted by dreams of yet more terrible things, Harry is simply a different, more brutal person than he was in book 5. We are intended to understand, perhaps, but not to think that this is okay. D) Molly and Bellatrix: Does it matter whether the curse that kills is a killing curse? I didn't think Molly had cast one, although Lee believes so. Here is how the text reads: "Molly's curse soared beneath Bellatrix's outstreched arm and hit her squarely in the chest, directly over her heart. Bellatrix's gloating smile froze, her eyes seemd to bulge: For the tiniest space of time she knew what had happened, and then she toppled, and the watching crowd roared, and Voldemort screamed." Ordinarily with Avada Kedavra we see a flash of green light and the victim has no opportunity to react, no knowledge of what has happened. I had therefore assumed that, while they were both "fighting to kill," the curse that finished Bellatrix was some other one. I'm not quite sure, however, why it should matter. Is murder more acceptable when accomplished by poison than by a gun? Are soldiers in hand combat judged by what weapon they use? This is clearly a case of situational morality, but from my own perspective, I found the right and wrong of this scene quite easy to judge, without reference to the particular curse. Bellatrix was attempting to kill Molly's underage daughter, had already killed her cousin (Tonks), was gloating over the death of her older son and throwing lethal curses around like a madwoman, all this in the middle of an epic battle between good and evil. How could Molly possibly be criticized for joining that battle under those circumstances and aiming to kill? -- Matt The full discourse: Lee Kaiwen writes: > Moral Inconsistency > ----- ------------- > > "But I thought they were bad?" > > My 11-year-old actually asked me this as we read HP7 > together, and I had no answer except to say I thought > JKR was wrong. > > He was referring to the Unforgivable Curses. > > [snip] > > Then came the end of HP6, when Snape uses the Avadra > Kedavra to kill Dumbledore, and Harry attempts to use > the same on Snape. At the time, I explained to my son > that Harry, caught up in his grief and his anger, made > a mistake, as even good people sometimes do. But for > Snape no redemption was possible. Cold, calculated, > premeditated, his use of the Curse had put him beyond > all possibility of salvation. That is, if > "unforgivable" had any meaning at all. > > [snip] > > That the good guys started "liberally" throwing around > the Unforgivables is bad enough. But JKR compounds the > moral issue here in the way in which they do so ? without > reluctance or hesitation, without so much as a hint of > moral compunction. When Harry Imperiuses the goblins ? at > Hermione's almost casual suggestion, no less -- he might > have been casting a Hot Air Charm for all the reticence > he exhibited. > > For all intents and purposes, in HP7 JKR just seems to > ignore the moral component of at least two of the > Unforgivables, and, both in Mrs. Weasley's dispatching > of Bellatrix, and the way she attempts to extract Snape > from his moral predicament, apparently the Avadra Kedavra > as well. > > As you can guess, I do NOT think the fact that Dumbledore > arranged the whole thing excuses what remains, to my mind, > an act of murder. > From rkdas at charter.net Fri Jul 27 23:47:58 2007 From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:47:58 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173374 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rowena_grunnionffitch" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" > wrote: > > > That is entirely the point, that he was damaged goods before and > > after. > > His love for Lily, his desire to redeem something of worth from his > > actions gave him what little value as a human that he had. > > > I don't think Snape had only a little value. > > Those of us that wanted him to be more than that, wanted him to be a > > truly worthy character, a Sydney Carton, we were, I was, taken aback > > that his arc could be dealt with in such a pragmatic and almost flat > > way. Snape loved Lily. Snape betrayed Lily and James. Snape lived the > > rest of his life trying to make up for that. > > > With great dedication and at great risk. I don't quite see why that > is a problem. After all isn't DD himself motivated by his grief and > guilt over his little sister's death? > > rowena_grunnionffitch Hi Rowena, Your post escaped me until just now. I don't think you and I disagree in essentials. Yes, Snape did show great dedication and demonstrated he was willing to take amazing and frightening risks to honor his memory of Lily. I think what saddened me, left me bereft (and I was not seriously Snapey, ever) was with what little fanfare his story was put to bed. I, quite mistakenly it seems, considered his redemption to be of prime importance to the whole story. It was, indeed, essential, foundational, but received somewhat less attention than I expected. So many people's sacrifices were necessary to achieve this victory that Snape didn't stand out. He simply did his part and was disposed of. Yes, yes, Harry recognized in the end what Snape had done, the true nature of his role, but I guess I wanted more. A chance for Harry to have to tell Severus he understood and had been wrong. That's asking a lot, now that I think about it. But it seemed Severus was somewhere far in the back of things, hardly seen, dealt with quickly and *poof* gone. Jen D. (not sure how one mourns a brave but flawed character...) From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Jul 27 23:54:29 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:54:29 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: <00c501c7cfe0$46090a50$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173375 colebiancardi wrote: >> So, the House System, which is still in play 19 years >> later, helped formed and cement any biases and *badness* >> that those unfortunate enough to get placed in Slytherin. >> No redemption. You cannot atone. >> >> What type of message is that? >> >> [snip] >> >> Their was ONLY one person that started out nasty with >> horrible biases, which he picked up from his parents, >> whom we see change & mature. And he didn't even DIE >> at the end. And that person was a Muggle - Dudley. --- Shelley replied: > > If we knew more information, we might have a second- > Draco Malfoy. Clearly his mum changed her mind and helped > out Harry by not giving away that he was still alive .... I've already commented on the house system and accompanying stereotypes, but on the subject of the possibility or impossibility of redemption -- 1) I would put Shelley's point a bit more strongly. Draco has clearly changed. Or Dumbledore was right and he was never a killer. He was ready to back out on killing Dumbledore, and every time we saw him in DH he was trying to subvert others in their efforts to capture Harry. 2) What about Regulus? Strongest family prejudice we have seen, but he turned coat once he saw what Voldemort was really about and -- like Harry -- was willing to die in order to make Voldemort defeatable. 3) What about those who we know bucked the family prejudices -- Sirius and Andromeda? 4) What about Kreacher, who completely shifts his allegiance and worldview once the situation with Regulus is explained and the trio start treating him like a person? -- Matt From ida3 at planet.nl Fri Jul 27 23:56:45 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:56:45 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173376 colebiancardi: > Don't forget that Harry's filter has been lifted before - in another > one of Snape's memories, back in OotP. Harry, up to that time, > thought his father was the best, greatest, wonderful, > could-never-be-a-git; yet after he saw those memories, he was torn, > conflicted; felt empathy with Teen!Snape. He even asked Lupin and > Sirius about it and questioned why did his mother even marry James. > They confirmed that James was a bit of a-hole. Dana: Well I wasn't really arguing I just could not resist the urge. The problem is actually that we know that even though the pensieve memories are objective in their own right. The conclusions Harry extracts from them are not by definition so. In OotP we see that Harry concludes by his mother's reaction that she really hated his father but if you played close attention then you saw that Lily was observing James as much as he was Lily. James had not played with the snitch before as Sirius asks him where he got it and then Lily makes a comment about it later. Harry did not pick up on it and just can't fathom his mother ever loving his dad. So essentially yes Harry did get that Snape loved his mother for pretty much his entire life but he actually never comments about what he thought about the love in itself. Just that it had motivated Snape to work against LV by serving DD. So to say that Snape's love was not of the obsessive kind because Harry did not mention it as such is not really supporting evidence. The objectivity in view of the memory does not change the concept of how Harry understood the complexity of the love Snape had for his mother. The only thing that mattered to Harry is that Snape was loyal to his mother and therefore had helped him in his fight against LV. JMHO Dana From carodave92 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 00:14:48 2007 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 00:14:48 -0000 Subject: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo... In-Reply-To: <512774.20205.qm@web30011.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173377 > Yes, I have seen that theory and I think it's really cute, I > completely agree. But it does not explain Rose. What other favorite > author of Hermione could be blamed for Rose? Any guesses? > > While i like this theory, I still think there is another reason behind > those particular choices of names.> > > Carodave: I also love this theory - it made me laugh out loud. I thought Rose was a great extension of the flower themed names that appeared throughout - Lily, Petunia, Pansy,etc. > --------------------------------- > Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. > Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > From kjones at telus.net Sat Jul 28 00:15:57 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:15:57 -0700 Subject: Slapstick Comedy Message-ID: <46AA8ABD.8010204@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173378 Zanooda writes: As Aberforth has the second (Sirius') part of the mirror (he bought it from Mundungus), who else's eye can Harry see there? Or do I misunderstand your question :-)? KJ writes: It's not so much a misunderstanding as filling in the details that JKR should have filled in. We can all come up with theories on why something happened the way it did, but that does not make it canon. The fact is there are glaringly large holes in much of this book that require some explanation, and cause massive groans from many readers. I find it pretty darn hard to believe that Aberforth bought everything from Mundungus. He didn't get the locket after all. Snape and Harry finding the letter from Lily in a place that it should not reasonably have been, Pettigrew strangling himself, I found hugely amusing. Having Harry and Voldemort related through the same family line, no matter how distant, muddies the waters, and the whole trip about wand allegiance makes my head ache. Dumbledore, who was an utter skunk just as single-minded as Snape, is a good guy but Snape is still a bad guy. Voldemort is trading wands and so is Harry. The whole brother wand thing didn't mean squat except to explain the hunt for the Elder Wand, which didn't need to be there at all. Because of the blood connection and the soul piece connection, Voldie could have apparated into the school while Harry and Snape were sorting out their differences. Voldemort would have immediately zapped Harry, which we know knocked him on his arse. While Harry and Voldemort were recovering, Snape could have cut off Voldemort's head, leaving Harry alive. Harry and Snape could still have agreed to hate each other. I just think that there is going to be no way to make a final movie that makes any reasonable sense out of this book. I am willing to bet that that the whole Deathly waste of Time Hallows get left out and they just cut to the chase. But I've come to enjoy crow. KJ From skippy at ezy.net Sat Jul 28 00:18:16 2007 From: skippy at ezy.net (skippy at ezy.net) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:18:16 -0400 Subject: Neville Longbottom Message-ID: <1185581896.46aa8b48dde7f@imp_skippy> No: HPFGUIDX 173379 Did anyone see in DH, any explanation for Neville's history of being "forgetful", or why Trevor his frog tried continuously to escape? I thought it was wonderful to see a new and "take charge" Neville when the "three" returned to Hogwarts. And that "gran" finally appreciated her grandson. I was disappointed though in not finding out particularly in the epilogue, what happened to everyone else? What happens to Luna? The rest of the Weasley family? and other favorite characters that gave the series such richness and depth. kat From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 00:29:05 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:29:05 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why was Mad-Eye able to see through the invisibility cloack? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948bbb470707271729n160c9a6fn8ca243cb159fa6db@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173380 Jeremiah (replies) I think the point of the cloak isn't that Moody's Eye CAN see through it... it's that Death can't. So, if anyone other than Death comes up with a magical "whatchamacallit-thigger-ma-gigger" then they might see through the cloak... unless you're Death... and then you can. Ever... Makes sense to me. On 7/24/07, Aida Costa wrote: > > I suspect it's Moody's magical eye. That eye was never explained, but > it's pretty darn powerful magic. > > Aida > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Sat Jul 28 00:45:14 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:45:14 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] goat charming? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AA919A.9020509@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173381 redwooddawn wrote: > I am rereading the book and am still not sure what is insinuated by > goat charming, since it seems to have a slightly ridiculed > connotation. Bart: I've said before, and I'll say again, that I think it's an homage to the late Marion Zimmer Bradley. In her collection of stories about her magician/swordsman/woman Lythande the Star Browed, she had Lythande confront her arch rival in a town where a common insult was calling someone a "despoiler of young goats." In Lythande's order, a magician would lose his powers to another magician of the order if he discovered his secret (as a woman who managed to sneak into the order, Lythande has the most challenging secret of all to keep; the fact that she is a woman). Well, at one point, Lythande gets so annoyed at her rival that she calls him a "despoiler of young goats." Upon seeing the look of horror in his eyes, she realizes that she has uncovered his secret. I've gotten into the habit, myself, of whenever I want to give something as an example of an insult, but want to ensure that NOBODY will take it seriously, I use the term "despoiler of young goats". As a result, if you do a lookup of the phrase, my name will often be associated with it (I would be flattered if Rowling got it from me, but as Bradley got a LOT of women into the fantasy writing business, I'm putting my money on MZB). Bart From kitnkids at comcast.net Sat Jul 28 00:24:15 2007 From: kitnkids at comcast.net (faery_wisdom) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 00:24:15 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707271254u19cc08ebode5cb71aa0c46aa1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173382 prep0strus: > But overall... the houses are a childish delineation, which can only > be viewed through a child's eyes of good vs bad. Complexity doesn't > play a part. Harry tells little Albus that good people can be > Slytherin. Kit jumps in: are they really, or is this how they've grown to be viewed over the years and through Harry's eyes? Isn't the childish everything's black and white view of things part of what we witness Harry, Snape and other characters evolve from. Everyone views / perceives things differently yes, but there is aculturation that gives us a bias or filter - and that filter or stereotype hat grew from the sorting led to many of the problems that created the possibility of a Voldy. But is it the hat that is flawed, and the sorting that occurs, or is the stereotypes that humans ascribe to as part of culture the real root of the problem? Veronica: >The four houses should be used to teach the kids that hard work and >loyalty (Hufflepuff), intelligence (Ravenclaw), bravery and chivalry >(Gryffindor), and ambition (Slytherin) are all qualities that can hold >positive and negative tendencies in their possessors, which is why >uniting these elements, which every human has to some extent, ends up >with the possessor being a well-rounded, well-adjusted individual. Kit here: similar to my commnents above, I think we have grown to believe what we've heard and learned through Harry's perception of things - that Gryffindor is obviously the end all be of the houses, which simply isn't true. Starting with GOF we begin to learn more of the differences between the houses. Hufflepuff produced the house champion for Hogwarts, not Gryffindor. The songs the hat sings proclaim both unity AND the attributes of each of the houses, AND the need to recognize those in one another. I loved the riddle answer method of entry into Ravenclaw, but even more, I loved Harry's astonished response to it - something along the lines of Isn't there just a password? My biggest complaint about DH is that everything felt so rushed and wasn't fleshed out as much as I've grown to expect from JKR - she just had so many story lines to tie up, and not enough time I think. Still, it's there although subtly. The sorting may be too early, but the stereotypes attributed are not a product of the sorting but the student's and family's perceptions of what the houses stand for. It's hard to catch in the pell mell madness of the battle, but some Slytherins do return with reinforcements, Narcissa does spare HP and gives up on LV in order to rescue her son. At battles end, the Malfoys are sitting with everyone in the Great Hall, not sure if it's okay to stay, yet no one tells them to leave. Malfoy and Harry don't become good buds and chat it up at the train station (that would be too trite), but they acknowledge each other - politely... Carol responds: >I think the epilogue shows a gradual eradication of prejudice in the >making. Draco and Harry are not at each other's throats like Lucius >Malfoy and Mr. Weasley. Draco has probably not indoctrinated his son >with the pure-blood superiority ethic that caused so much grief in DH >and it's unlikely that the Sorting Hat, which has always advocated >unity and its own abolition, will sort by that criterion. Kit replies: I agree with you about the epilogue. The nod between Harry and Malfoy is plenty. More would cheapen it given the loathing and hatred that defined their childhood relationship. But this would never have happened if attitudes hadn't changed. They would have stoically ignored each other's presence at the very least, and more likely Malfoy would have been hard pressed not to stroll by and make some comment about blood traitors and mud-bloods. It seems that his ungrateful life being saved twice, and watching Crabbe die by fiend fire may have wrought a change upon his perception of things? So much more I could say about this, but I've taken enough bandwidth as it is. I am surprised at the resentment and feelings towards the sorting system. No, it isn't perfect, but it's real - there is so much in life that this serves as an analogy for. Our to true measure of maturation is realizing how we define and manipulate the divisions we experience in life to either serve our better good or harm us, color our views of others, etc. What I wouldn't give for an hour of JKR's time over a cup of tea to just listen to her feelings on this subject. Cuz, of course this is all just IMO and I'd love to hear the stand point she's written it from!! From wildrosegirl76 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 00:35:48 2007 From: wildrosegirl76 at yahoo.com (Gerri) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:35:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <488408.85080.qm@web30415.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173383 "ciraarana" wrote: > Q: The Trace. Rubbish. Excuse me, but it is. I mean, in CoS Harry is > accused of having used the Hover Charm. The Ministry didn't know it > wasn't him. Somewhere, I think at the end of HBP, Dumbledore even told > Harry that the Ministry can only detect that magic is performed, but > not by whom. And now we are introduced to the Trace, which allows the > Ministry to tell exactly who performed which spell?? No. Doesn't make > sense. Or is it a new ministry policy and I simply missed that bit? Gerri replies: It made perfect sense to me. The Trace doesn't have to be telling the Ministry who said the name. There are very few in the wizarding world who are willing to refer to Voldemort by name. Dumbledore did. Harry does. But who else? So the odds are in the DEs favour that an utterance of Voldemort's name is coming from Harry. And even if there are a handful of other witches and wizards who aren't afraid to say Voldemort's name, it's unlikely that there are enough to make it a problem for the DEs to check out any use of the name to see if it came from Harry and/or his friends. It's not as if they'll be spending their time now popping all over Britain in search of who set off the Trace. From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 00:57:49 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:57:49 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] my incoherent rambles on DH - MAJOR SPOILERS Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173384 In a message dated 7/24/2007 7:37:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Schlobin at aol.com writes: Are we to assume Emmeline Vance, Amelia Bones and Florean Fortescue ARE really dead? (I would have liked the epilogue expanded). I don't think that there is assumption to be made in the cases of either Emmeline Vance or Amelia Bones. Chapter 1 of HPB (The Other Minister) makes their fates pretty clear:Both were murdered by D.E.'s and in Madam Bone's case most probably by LV himself. Unfortunately Florean Fortesque's fate in unknown but I'd like to think that he survived. .the world always needs more ice cream ;-). Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherriola at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 01:12:31 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:12:31 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46aa9804.26f8720a.53f6.ffff8ea0@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173385 lizzyben "And the implications of JKR's world-view are pretty bleak. She really was interested in creating stereotypes, not overcoming them; in dehumanizing the "other", not accepting it. And when I think of how many horrible things have come from dehumanizing the other, it makes this series seem almost malicious." Sherry now: Call me crazy or not insightful, but what I took out of the ending was that JKR was showing us how much the world does not really change after war. People still hang on to their prejudices and preconceived notions. I thought it was very realistic, though disappointing. I'm a fan of the main character, so didn't like some of the Slytherin "baddies", but I actually did hope for house unity and wanted to see the four houses band together to defend Hogwarts. I was disappointed it didn't happen. and yet, after thinking about it, I thought, this ending is probably far more realistic, with not much really changing overnight. Maybe, if we were to see the world in 30, 40, 50 years, things might have begun to change, but for now, it felt like something pretty typical after a war. Sherry From taykimson at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 00:58:40 2007 From: taykimson at yahoo.com (taykimson) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 00:58:40 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and the Endless Camping Trip (a new perspective) In-Reply-To: <863991.96940.qm@web82207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173386 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doliesl at ..." wrote: > When the story got back to Hogwarts and Neville fill them in what happened in the school, I was thinking "geez I wished the camera was with Neville all these times instead." > > D. > Sonya: Yes - exactly! Earlier I posted about this very thing. There was no "B" storyline. We didn't get to switch to other events in the wizarding world. I think it would have helped tremendously if these events were interspersed into the camping story. It may have even increased the tension if we read how terrible things were for everyone else and then we flip back to Harry & Co. who are struggling to make progress - if it were written that way, I would have joined Ron and Hermione as they talked about Harry behind his back about not having a plan! From elync at eclectic-egg.com Sat Jul 28 01:03:44 2007 From: elync at eclectic-egg.com (elync64) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 01:03:44 -0000 Subject: 12GP & Secret-Keeper Snape (was Questions for JKR) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173387 Like many others here and elsewhere, I'm also wondering about the whole issue of the "safety" of 12GP in book 7. It seems clear that the entire Order believes Snape is now ESE. It also seems clear that, based on their understanding of the Fidelius Charm placed on the house, once DD died, everyone he'd let in on that particular secret also became a Secret Keeper. That meant Snape could (if he'd actually been ESE) revealed its location to LV and the DEs. What strikes me is odd is that the protections put in place to protect Snape from doing so, only seem designed to work if and when Snape actually enters the house. IIRC, the tongue-tying curse only takes effect when someone enters the front hall, then the image of Dead!Dumbledore appears and some code phrase along the lines of "I did not kill you" deactivates all of that. But, based on book 5, all that's needed to "reveal" 12GP to anybody is for a/the Secret Keeper to tell them it's there and is OotP HQ. He doesn't need to physically take them there, he doesn't need to get them on the doorstep or in the door. When DD was the only Secret Keeper, all he did was write it down on a piece of paper and somebody else gave it to Harry to read and suddenly the place revealed itself for Harry to see and enter. He didn't have to take Harry to GP and tell him #12 existed and was the OotP headquarters, he didn't have to speak its location to Harry, he didn't even have to be physically present. So I don't see how a tongue-tying curse could have kept Snape from writing down the same thing Dumbledore did on a piece of paper and handing it around to anybody he pleased, even if it somehow worked on him no matter where he was and not just if he walked in the front door again. And some of the Order had to know this, because they were *there* when the same thing via DD worked to reveal the place to Harry when they first took him there. Now, maybe Snape could have done that, if he'd really been ESE, and the other protections inside the house could've taken care of anyone who came into the house afterwards and didn't know how to counter them. But I don't see how the Order could've believed that the protections we see working in DH could've prevented Snape from communicating the location and therefore revealing the house to LV and the DEs. I guess they have to assume he didn't/couldn't do this, because it seems like even though the DEs know where it should be, because they're staking it out while HRH are there, they still can't see it or gain access to it until one of them is accidently Apparated with the trio right onto the doorstep. So were there other protections in place, that would keep Snape from revealing the place even by writing it down like DD did? It seems like the Order must have thought so, and assumed those protections were working. Another thing - if Yaxley's Apparating onto the doorstep with the trio counts as revealing the secret, this means that just accidently being taken to a place reveals it, even if the the Secret Keeper who takes someone there doesn't actively communicate that information, which seems to be how such secrets had to be revealed before this point. Which seems to indicate that, say, if Peter Pettigrew (supposing he'd not been a, well, rat) had just paid a visit to the Potters in Godric Hollow, and they'd opened the door and he'd said, "Why, hello there, James and Lily Potter," upon seeing them, anyone who'd followed him there without his knowledge and saw and overheard this would now know exactly where the Potters were. Which raises some doubt in my mind as to the effectiveness of the Fidelius Charm, if a Secret Keeper can reveal the secret involved without intending to or even knowing he's done it. But maybe what happened with Yaxley didn't really reveal anything, and Hermione only assumed it did. Even if it did, presumably only Yaxley would then be able to see and enter 12GP, because even if the Trio had accidentally revealed it to him, that still didn't make *him* a Secret Keeper for 12GP and he couldn't reveal it to anyone else, or else what's the point of the charm and having a Secret Keeper in the first place? Just being told the secret doesn't make one a Secret Keeper, able to reveal it to others in turn. The other thing all this makes me wonder about, is whether or not Mad- Eye - who supposedly put all the protections on 12GP once DD was dead and Snape was presumed ESE - actually knew better, if DD had told him more about the overall plan and Snape's part in it than he told anyone else. We don't see his reaction to Snape's apparent murder of Dumbledore and flight from Hogwarts afterward, because he's not there. He attends DD's funeral, but there's nothing said about that except that Harry sees him there. The next time we hear from him, he's at Privet Drive in DH, in charge of the process of getting Harry out of there and to a safe location. Later, it's Mr. Weasley who tells Harry that Mad-Eye put protections on 12GP; Mad-Eye never says a word about it "onscreen" or, as far as I can tell, says anything about Snape and his supposed betrayal of DD and the Order. I don't know, it's a big stretch, but it just seems like the protections we actually see are so inadequate, and we know Snape *does* in fact get in and back out, although whether or not this was before any protections were in place is a good question. But the protections we see are not adequate to keep Snape from revealing the location of 12GP to somebody else, so it seems like there must be more protections they know about (or at least think exist) or else they'd be wondering why DEs weren't beating down the door trying to get to HRH instead of just standing across the street hoping they'll catch a break and catch them on the outside. I'm also wondering if LV and the DEs had any real understanding of how the Fidelius Charm works, or if Snape perhaps made a show of trying to give them the information and pretended he was unable to because of some hex that really wasn't there (if the protections we saw were the only ones involved) and got away with it the way he got away with everything else, his superb Occlumency skills. My guess is, he told them that he'd managed to get into 12GP one last time, but that he couldn't find anything of use to them since the Order had already vacated... or else he brought back something insignificant (or even misleading) and told them that was all he found. And used Occlumency to put that over on LV, and then either pretended he still couldn't reveal it to them, or actually couldn't because of some protective spell we were never told about. Just some random thoughts... Lyn From sherriola at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 01:53:15 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:53:15 -0700 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46aaa192.28d6720a.1cab.ffff9396@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173388 Eva This episode doesn't detract from Lupins braveness or any good qualities he has. He is a good person, but but was overwhelmed with all that was happening and the consequences of that. sherry now: I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. I am a disabled person, and Lupin is a metaphor for disabled people. My parents would have been ashamed of me, if I'd come off with such a self-pitying attitude as Lupin in that moment. My siblings and true friends would give me a figurative kick in the rear if I tried it today. Lupin had love, a baby, respect of people he respected. He was doing something, fighting Voldemort. Yes, I know what it's like to be unemployed because of a disability. I know how I've had to prove I'm ten times better at a job than a sighted person, in order to get and keep a job. Yet, I've been steadily employed for 20 years, due to my determination never to give up, never to give in to what the world thinks. I'm stubborn and was taught that the only thing that could stop me was me. I was taught to believe in me, a lesson Lupin apparently never learned. Either that, or he just got too comfortable with everyone enabling him in his self-pity and whining, used to people saying things such as, come on, moony, it's gonna be ok. We all like you. or whatever they said. I cheered when Harry told him off, because it was about time someone did! I liked Lupin in every previous book, but I wanted to shake him in DH, and no other supposedly good character came off looking so disgusting to me. Until the scene at shell Cottage, where he had obviously perhaps grown up a little and was finally doing the right thing. We didn't see his death, and I'm confident he died bravely, but I did not like him in the beginning of the book. Sherry From bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 02:06:34 2007 From: bookworm857158367 at yahoo.com (bookworm857158367) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 02:06:34 -0000 Subject: DH thoughts: Sirius, the pace of the book, Rose and Hugo... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173389 I wonder if Wendell and Monica are Hermione's parents' real first names and she just added a fake last name? As for Rose and Hugo, I suspect they were chosen mainly because Hermione and Ron liked them. Each child shares an initial with one parent. They're both names that are fashionable right now in Great Britain, too, and the "o" ending sounds like a lot of the other names that are popular in the wizarding world, without being too outrageous. Hermione may also like the idea of giving her daughter a simple, down to earth flower name rather than one that no one can pronounce and that even her creator thinks is pretentious. Bookworm857158367 From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 02:09:29 2007 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 02:09:29 -0000 Subject: Magic Late In Life... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173390 Hey, I'm a long time lurker and first time poster. I'm not sure if this has been discussed at length yet. I confess that I've had a bit of trouble keeping up with all the posts! Firstly off, loved the book even though there were parts that I would have liked to be a little different I'm still very happy with where the book went and ended up. Anyway, I was wondering about the person that was going to perform magic late in life and then something occurred to me... Perhaps we all took too literally what JKR said... I believe that the person who preformed late in life was Molly Weasley... Now before people start yelling here is the justification for it... I'm not trying to suggest that she wasn't magical because we all know that's not true, she however, has not displayed great amounts of power. In the first books all we really saw her doing were simple spells around the house and later on in the OOTP we see her overcome by a boggart. Yet in this book we see her come up against Bella and what a show!! Molly manages to take down an extremely powerful witch, who has numerous murders/torture under her belt. So maybe it was Molly who really came in to her powers late in life... Ok so now I'm going to go back into lurkdom! Space Cadet From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 02:06:13 2007 From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 02:06:13 -0000 Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions In-Reply-To: <488408.85080.qm@web30415.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173391 "ciraarana" wrote: > And now we are introduced to the Trace, which allows the > Ministry to tell exactly who performed which spell?? No. Doesn't > make sense. Or is it a new ministry policy and I simply missed > that bit? Gerri replied: > It made perfect sense to me. > > The Trace doesn't have to be telling the Ministry who said the > name. There are very few in the wizarding world who are willing > to refer to Voldemort by name. Dumbledore did. Harry does. But > who else? So the odds are in the DEs favour that an utterance > of Voldemort's name is coming from Harry. Petra nitpicks: Hmm...I'm not sure the two of you are speaking of the same thing and perhaps both of you are conflating two different spells. The Trace refers to "the charm that detects magical activity around under-seventeens, the way the Ministry finds out about underage magic" (pg. 47, US HB). So ciraarana, the Trace really doesn't identify the spell performer exactly, whereas the Taboo might defeat spells preventing the exact tracking of a person. Gerri/wildrosegirl76 seems to me to be referring to the Taboo on Voldemort's name instead of the Trace. The Taboo is the jinx that allows those who say Voldemort's name to be trackable because it breaks protective enchantments through magical disturbance. (pg. 389, US HB) This is probably something that happened in the first Voldemort War, explaining why people still were afraid to use LV's real name even back in PS/SS. So Gerri/wildrosegirl76, since uttering "Voldemort" is not a "magical activity" (even a muggle could utter the name, no?) this then has little to do with the Trace. It's really thanks to the Taboo that tracking an utterance of Voldemort's name can lead to Harry. Hope that helps? Petra, still re-reading a n :) From jimjefferis at frontiernet.net Sat Jul 28 01:55:17 2007 From: jimjefferis at frontiernet.net (jimjefferis) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 01:55:17 -0000 Subject: snape and lily BEFORE DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173392 I was completely surprised when I read about the long friendship between Snape and Lily in Book 7, but many friends (and, it seems, many people on this list) were not particularly surprised. The only scene I can remember before DH that hints at this relationship is Snape's "worst memory" in HBP. Are there other hints of the snape/lily friendship in the first 6 books? Jim From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sat Jul 28 02:24:33 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 02:24:33 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory/Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173393 > > >>Susan McGee: > > Also, in answer to that commentary about how Harry doesn't struggle > > or his character doesn't change, etc. First, I don't agree, I think > > going to one's death willingly is an incredible struggle... > > Betsy Hp: > Actually, I think if so many people close to you have died, and your > one constant mentor has told you it's a good idea, and the dead are > telling you to jump in the water's great, suicide is easy. Times > like those, living is the hard part. Magpie: My feeling about this issue--which is maybe an even more direct answer to, I think, Eggplant--is that the reason Harry's willingness to die is not a big change or development is because it isn't a big change or development for Harry at all. It's brave. It's not something he wants to do. I'm hardly one to dismiss it as if it's not a big sacrifice. But it doesn't hit Harry in any of his blind spots about himself. It's not a humbling experience, it's not something that makes him come to different idea about his place in things--which I think is usually an important part of something like this--it's not anything new or surprising. If Voldemort were our hero, this would be a bigger deal, simply because Voldemort is all about fear of death and an arrogant immortality. For Harry, he's not suicidal, but he's been willing to die over and over again (it's kind of a Gryffindor thing, actually). He's always been far more afraid of others dying for him than he has been of dying for others, which is one reason he can be counted on to rush to the MoM when he thinks Sirius is being held captive (though he doesn't ever fully process it that way). But even beyond that, how many times has Harry met death willingly in the series? He thinks he's dying with Quirrel in PS/SS. He starts to die from the basilisk poison in CoS and accepts it (I believe that's one of his first "not so bad" realizations). The TWT seems to consider the risk of death a plus--in that book Harry isn't dying, but he does take control of what he thinks is his impending death in the graveyard. In OotP again he's on the brink of death and begins to see it as attractive--he could stop the pain and be with Sirius. I don't think this means Harry's suicidal, but he's been on the edge of death more than once and accepted it. He's had a lot of practice accepting his own death. It isn't a change for him to rather die himself than have others die for him, it's one of the basic parts of his character--not a development. Lizzyben: I'm just at a > loss to understand the way JKR resolved the House system. Were fans > really begging JKR to make Slytherin *more* evil & unredeemable? IMO, > it seems like fans were begging for a good Slytherin, a redemption for > the House. JKR never gave it - and her total condemnation of anything > resembling Slytherin-ness is just, odd, to me. I don't get it. I don't > get why she did it. It seems to be an internal need to cut off & > destroy those qualities, instead of understanding them. So yeah, I > think parts of Snape come from JKR, as do all of her > characters. The problem is that JKR never managed to integrate the > "shadow" House, the shadow figure into the overall narrative. And IMO > the novel suffered for it. Renee: I don't see this need to destroy the qualities embodied by Slytherin House in the books. It's is an integral part of Hogwarts - and didn't JKR say in an interview it was a necessary part? In other words, the Shadow has been given a place, not just in her world, but also in the narrative; JKR doesn't deny its existence at all. But because it is the Shadow, it's influence can't be benign. Magpie: I don't know...it doesn't seem like the kind of acknowledgement it gets is the healthy kind--which is I think why you could ask earlier if maybe this wasn't more about Christian sin than Jungian Shadow. It felt to me much more like Calvin than Jung to me, reading it. (Though God knows I'm not expert on either!) As you say here, "because it's the Shadow, its influence can't be benign." That's not true of the Shadow in Jung, afaik. The Shadow becomes bad when it's repressed and denied--which is much more the impression I get from DH in the way the house is viewed. The Shadow not only can be benign, it can be a source of strength and encapsulte good qualities. And confronting the Shadow truly is going to be difficult for the person--I don't think it can just be taken care of with the idea that they gradually lost their bad feelings about it. I wouldn't, btw, quite say that all the qualities of Slytherin house are up for destruction either. The good ones seem to be praised in the good guys--in HBP it seemed like Dumbledore was encouraging Harry to be a bit Slytherin, and when he describes the Slytherin qualities Harry has in CoS they sound pretty sexy (and common to Gryffindors)...which is perhaps why the cooler qualities one might imagine went along with being a Slytherin almost never appear in actual Slytherins. They're left with the Shadow qualities of their own house. Sherry: Call me crazy or not insightful, but what I took out of the ending was that JKR was showing us how much the world does not really change after war. People still hang on to their prejudices and preconceived notions. I thought it was very realistic, though disappointing. I'm a fan of the main character, so didn't like some of the lytherin "baddies", but I actually did hope for house unity and wanted to see the four houses band together to defend Hogwarts. I was disappointed it didn't happen. and yet, after thinking about it, I thought, this ending is probably far more realistic, with not much really changing overnight. Maybe, if we were to see the world in 30, 40, 50 years, things might have begun to change, but for now, it felt like something pretty typical after a war. Magpie: You know, I can see this view? But I don't really feel it's written in in the way you seem to be describing it. First, because this isn't the story of a realistic war--it's magic and there's plenty of this kind of--what's the word?--romanticism when it comes to the good guys. But also, because it's just not part of the story--as I said above, if we were talking about the Shadow, I don't think it's something that people just naturally get over without having to do that. It just seems like bringing in something new into the whole mix, like after the fact saying that the next day they started solving all the problems that weren't part of the ending. Yeah, they could, but...they could do anything. It has no attachment to the story to me. Harry and Draco's brief, distant encounter (in which Draco nodded to Harry, Harry did not nod to Draco and neither did anyone else afawk) does not seem to come out of any new feeling, but right out of the interaction between the two that happened in the story we saw. They might have never seen each other since that day and it would have played the same. -m From entangledhere at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 03:05:05 2007 From: entangledhere at yahoo.com (Sunny) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:05:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions Message-ID: <504268.3990.qm@web51401.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173394 Gerri, ciraarana was referring to the trace on Harry that tracked his use of magic until he was 17, not the "Voldemort's name" tracker. And in this case, ciraarana, you're right! But there are LOADS of inconsistencies in this book! Jo told us Hermione's middle name was Jane, and now it's Jean. She told us the Fidelius charm dies with the Secret Keeper, but then she changed that too. It's a huge mess, all around. I'm waiting on her to write it. SIGH. *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 redwooddawn at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 02:50:46 2007 From: redwooddawn at hotmail.com (redwooddawn) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 02:50:46 -0000 Subject: goat charming? In-Reply-To: <46AA919A.9020509@sprynet.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173395 > Bart: > I've said before, and I'll say again, that I think it's an homage to > the late Marion Zimmer Bradley. In her collection of stories about her > magician/swordsman/woman Lythande the Star Browed, she had Lythande > confront her arch rival in a town where a common insult was calling > someone a "despoiler of young goats." I redwood: That sounds like a brilliant enough answer for me. I just really hope it was all mere name-calling, and not a true habit of Aberforth's. From muellem at bc.edu Sat Jul 28 03:23:27 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:23:27 -0000 Subject: snape and lily BEFORE DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173396 >Jim wrote: > The only scene I can remember before DH that hints at this > relationship is Snape's "worst memory" in HBP. Are there other hints > of the snape/lily friendship in the first 6 books? colebiancardi: well, as long-standing member against LOLLIPOPS ("Love Of Lily Left Ire Polluting Our Poor Severus" which can be read at http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#lollipops), I was dismayed (and that is stating it mildly) that it became canon. However, as many asute list members pointed out to me in the past, there were several things that pointed in this direction: 1. Snape was always quick to insult Harry's father, James. Always told him he was *just like his father* and then proceeded with the insults. However, never a bad word was uttered from Snape's thin lips about Harry's mum, Lily 2. Just about everyone who knew Lily, with the exception of Snape, remarked how Harry looked like James, but he had Lily's eyes. We are also told by JKR that we will learn more about the remarkable Lily eyes and that they are important. 3. Lupin stated that Lily was nice to everyone and people liked her back. Never a bad word about *sainted* Lily. 4. Then the OotP "Snape's Worst Memory" popped up. Lily sticks up for Snape and then *blinks* at Snape when he calls her a mud-blood - some posters predicted correctly that this was the first time that Snape called her that and she was taken aback by said comment. 5. HBP - we learned that Lily, like Snape, had a gift for potions. Slughorn even mentions it at the Christmas party in front of Harry & Snape. those are our clues until DH's canon shattering chapter, "The Prince's Tale", which confirmed LOLLIPOPS, which was predicted ages ago. As well as "Too EWW to be TREWW" theory (read more at http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#eww) colebiancardi (I am in the 12 step program to get the EWW out of my hair. It is taking some time, but no one *can* ever say I don't have clean & shiny hair!!! My fellow listies are helping me see past the EWW - so, I will take a moment now & thank you all) From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Jul 28 03:25:14 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:25:14 -0000 Subject: FILK: Undesirable Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173397 Undesirable To the tune of Extra-Ordinary from Stephen Schwarz's Pippin You-tube performance here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au1TPizvwHo Note: The title word is pronounced UN-DEE-ZIE-ER-ABLE (last two syllables rhyme with table) THE SCENE: HARRY, in DH extremis . HARRY: The Chosen One, the Boy Who Lived Is now on the lam as a fugitive When you're Undesirable You gotta do Undesirable things This is a time dark and intense For I must spend ev'ry night in tents When you're Undesirable You're made to do Undesirable things There's an answer I cannot see How best I should respond To oppose DEs and the Ministry With just a broken wand. And although this is major Although this is vast I'll have to wager that we finish last Voldy's launched a cabal That wants to put the label "Undesirable" on me. And if Ron keeps on swearing And Hermione's despairing And our Gryffindor prospects seem bleak If we're fleeing from Greyback And we can't find our way back Well, this isn't the worst day I've had this week . I've come to be downright depressed Wearing this locket upon my chest When you're Undesirable You have to do Undesirable things Our next course of action's not easy to judge And whoever would dream that we'd miss Cornelius Fudge? I'm Undesirable I need to do Undesirable things I'm on a mission to finish the man Who gave to me my scar. So I'll design a Horcrux plan If someone would just tell where the hell they are! So keep us all safe, don't let me be framed And stop me from blurting out Voldemort's name For I must disable That old miserable Undesirable LV! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Sat Jul 28 03:31:44 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:31:44 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173398 > > Magpie: > I think I'm just looking realistically at what the book said to me. > If you start off with this house of antagonists, and consistently > show them being a certain way, and in the end make that sort of a > side issue, I just don't see why there's any reason I should write > in an ending where integrating Slytherin into the school is the > outcome. It's like just assuming that everybody likes werewolves or > that Goblins can now carry wands just because that would be good. > > The epilogue takes place 19 years after the events of the book, and > the most we've got to show for it is a platitude Harry gives in > response to his son being worried he'll wind up in Slytherin, having > iirc been teased by his brother that he would do so. That > establishes something about Slytherin there. Harry does not respond > with his new ideas about how good Slytherin is--nor should he, > because there aren't any. He says, "If you're in Slytherin, that > would be Slytherin's gain. And you're named after a Slytherin who > was very brave--the quality of the house the rest of your family is > Sorted for. Oh, but if it really matters, I've never told anyone, > but I also worried about being Slytherin as a boy but the hat lets > you choose against it." > Ken: What you see in the book is of course 100% true for you. This is true of all readers and all books and I am sure it drives all authors absolutely nuts. Isaac Asimov claimed that an English professor who was teaching his novels in a class once told him not to presume that just because he wrote the books that he understood what they meant. I can see both sides of that argument. But maybe if you listen to the books again they will tell you something different. I have to say that in my opinion the problems with Slytherin house were real and not a matter of stereotyping or prejudice by the other houses. Otherwise I could see a more rapid resolution to the split. Harry at one time had nothing good to say about Slytherin. In the epilogue he seems to still recognize a rivalry but to me there does not seem to be any force behind this. Yes, James is teasing Albus but James knows that he and his father are both Princeton men, not Yale men. I'm not sure there is anything to it beyond that. Harry isn't reacting the way Mrs Black did when Sirius became a Gryffindor and at one time I think he would have. I see this as a big change. And Ron teases Rose not about marrying a Slytherin or even a Malfoy, but a pureblood. In other words Slytherin is ok, even the Malfoys are tolerable, it is the thing that Voldemort tried to pervert to justify his overlordship, blood purity, that has a bad name in the post Voldemort WW. And even then it is a joke. I do wish that when Harry noticed the Malfoy's standing in the great hall looking like they weren't sure they belonged that he had gone to them and made sure they felt like they belonged. While she wasn't the only one Narcissa truly saved the day. I think that an explicit gesture of appreciation by Harry at that point would have been a good touch and perhaps that is something like what you were hoping to see. The thing is that in the epilogue we tend to see Harry as he always was, the snot nosed kid from Gryffindor. That is no longer true. I doubt there is a more admired, more famous, or more influential wizard alive than the 37 year old father of three we see standing on a train platform with his high school sweetheart. Because of that the changes we see in his attitudes towards old rivals that you feel are too mild to imply the resolution you hoped for are of much larger import than you give them credit. I think it is pretty much true that as Harry goes, so goes the WW. Ken From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 04:02:20 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 04:02:20 -0000 Subject: Harry as Auror, WAS: Rowling tells all In-Reply-To: <06D40C99-7D8F-401F-9489-335809325F80@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173399 Najwa: I'm a mother and I've done the lot as well. I apologize for not saying things clearer, but what I had meant by it would be a waste was not that it would be a waste for her to be a stay at home mom, but that the wizarding world would be at a loss. I do apologize for it coming out offensively, but then again I had just accidentally offended my own self that way. I did not mean to offend anyone. Lisa: Thanks, Najwa, for the apology. I find it too common that people often blame the offended: "SHEESH, sorry YOU took it that way, but it wasn't MEANT that way, so if YOU took it that way, that's YOUR problem!" A sincere apology is always accepted and appreciated. ;0) I also want to point out that Hermione (and any other intelligent woman!) can make a meaningful imprint upon their chosen career and their loving family - one does not exclude the possibility of the other! From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sat Jul 28 04:03:49 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 04:03:49 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173400 > Ken: > I have to say that in my opinion the problems with Slytherin house were > real and not a matter of stereotyping or prejudice by the other houses. > Otherwise I could see a more rapid resolution to the split. Magpie: I totally agree with this. But as I said I wasn't looking for a *rapid* resolution to the split. That seems a bit of a straw man, as if it's either a rapid resolution with a big tea party at the end with the Slytherins or else this epilogue must indeed represent giant steps forward. I don't think either is the case. What I would need would be a step that indicated a move towards resolution, and that's what I didn't get. I completely understand the way you're reading the last scene, but to me it's just that--a reading of one scene set years in the future, not a moment in the story where the difficult Problem of Slytherin is addressed. I've got no problem believing that everybody isn't going around wanting to get rid of Slytherins--I'm not claiming that's what they're doing. I just don't see the underlying problems addressed seriously, and it doesn't seem like something that can get fixed by just assuming it cleared up on its own. Ken: Harry isn't reacting the way Mrs Black did > when Sirius became a Gryffindor and at one time I think he would have. > I see this as a big change. And Ron teases Rose not about marrying > a Slytherin or even a Malfoy, but a pureblood. In other words Slytherin > is ok, even the Malfoys are tolerable, it is the thing that Voldemort > tried to pervert to justify his overlordship, blood purity, that has a bad > name in the post Voldemort WW. And even then it is a joke. Magpie: I actually couldn't imagine either the Harry or Ron know in previous canon, if they grew up and became fathers, reacting any other way nineteen years earlier no matter what happened with Voldemort. Harry wasn't ever Mrs. Black, and Weasleys never blasted people off their family trees for marrying the wrong person (and have always been the Purebloods who thought blood heritage was stupid). Again, I'm not claiming that underneath Ron and Harry really want to kill the Malfoys or anything, I'm just saying this isn't a problem I can assume just got fixed because the epilogue isn't virulently anti- Slytherin. Ken: > I do wish that when Harry noticed the Malfoy's standing in the great hall > looking like they weren't sure they belonged that he had gone to them > and made sure they felt like they belonged. While she wasn't the only > one Narcissa truly saved the day. I think that an explicit gesture of > appreciation by Harry at that point would have been a good touch and > perhaps that is something like what you were hoping to see. Magpie: It could have been--but as it was I thought JKR was making a point of leaving it out. I read that line and thought part of the point was that the Malfoys didn't have a place there like everyone else did, but that they weren't enough to bother about. Iow, I didn't think it was just an oversight that Harry didn't go over to them, I thought it summed up their position accurately. Ken: > > The thing is that in the epilogue we tend to see Harry as he always was, > the snot nosed kid from Gryffindor. That is no longer true. I doubt there > is a more admired, more famous, or more influential wizard alive than > the 37 year old father of three we see standing on a train platform with > his high school sweetheart. Because of that the changes we see in his > attitudes towards old rivals that you feel are too mild to imply the > resolution you hoped for are of much larger import than you give them > credit. I think it is pretty much true that as Harry goes, so goes the WW. Magpie: As I said somewhere else, I think Harry's reaction to Draco in the epilogue and Draco's return reaction is explicitly earned in the preceding chapters. The two of them could never have seen each other since that day and it would make sense. Harry was never calling for Slytherin to be kicked out of school. His enemies might have been mostly Slytherin, but Slytherin wasn't his enemy. Now that Tom Riddle is gone I think Slytherin has lost a lot of its scaryiness and I think Harry's reaction to his son is perfectly fitting for that new world. But like I said, I just don't think this kind of division just goes away. It can get better, and not be so hostile, but it still seems like the same division JKR described in that interview. Even the big step that took 20 years in this scene has Malfoy stared at from a distance. The exchange, like the Malfoys in the Great Hall, seems to accurately reflect the story that happened in the previous chapter that took place 19 years earlier. Ken: I think it is pretty much true that as Harry goes, so goes the WW. Magpie: Which way do you mean this? That people are watching Harry and when they see him staring at Malfoy some ways away and not attacking him they change their thinking on Slytherin? Or just that Harry as our pov character is showing us the trend of the WW? Harry's own views have often been at odds with the WW. Though for me, that's not even the point. You create a big division and a problem like Slytherin, and then you avoid solving it, it's not solved. As a reader of the story, if you didn't show me somethng this central, you can't tell it to me as an afterthought--or hint it at me, since that's basically what we're talking about. I have excepted the changes in Harry and Ron's attitude that I did see in the main story, and those changes seem accurately reflected 19 years later on the platform. That seemed as far as the author was going. -m From graynavarre at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 03:34:06 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:34:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: snape and lily BEFORE DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <541805.49561.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173401 > >Jim wrote: > > The only scene I can remember before DH that hints > at this > > relationship is Snape's "worst memory" in HBP. > Are there other hints > > of the snape/lily friendship in the first 6 books? > > > colebiancardi: > became canon. . > > 4. Then the OotP "Snape's Worst Memory" popped up. > Lily sticks up > for Snape and then *blinks* at Snape when he calls > her a mud-blood - > some posters predicted correctly that this was the > first time that > Snape called her that and she was taken aback by > said comment. And then she says " And I'd wash my pants if I were you, Snivellus". That is not exactly a sweet, saintly thing to say. Yet he forgave her while she didn't forgive him. Barbara From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 04:06:00 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 04:06:00 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173402 Dana: First of all Sirius intent is never revealed and can therefore not be judged. Lisa: Sure it can -- there could be no other outcome other than for Snape to be killed or turned into a werewolf, and no one else to actually perform the killing or the bite except Lupin. Therefore, Sirius' intent was clear in the canon facts. But let me ask this question? How could Sirius possibly set Snape up to be killed by a werewolf if Snape already knew what Lupin was? My answer you can't trick someone into facing a werewolf unknowingly if the person actually knows he is going to face a werewolf by entering a tunnel, he had seen Lupin being escorted to by Madame Pomprey, on a full moon night? So it actually wasn't Sirius who played the trick but Snape himself who wanted to trick the marauders by finding out what they where up to and trying to expose their secret. Lisa: By finding out what they were up to? But you're arguing that he already knew. His goal was to expose the rest of the Marauders, not Lupin's "hairy little secret," as Snape had already seen that Madame Pomfrey was privy to said secret; therefore, Dumbledore already knew that, obviously. What Dumbledore did not know was that the Marauders were sneaking out of their dorm, was that the Marauders were unregistered animaguses (animagi?), was that the Marauders were placing themselves in mortal peril by consorting with a werewolf while he was transformed. Snape was not going there to confront the werewolf Lupin, but to expose the Marauders. We have no hint that Snape knew he'd be getting into a situation that would inevitably end up with getting himself killed -- after all, if the Marauders could survive hanging with a werewolf, why couldn't he? Dana: What we know from the scene in Snape's memory is that 1) He knows about Lupin and his disappearances on full moon nights. 2) He knows James, Sirius and Peter sneak out at night. 3) He knows that he can find the answer to his obsessive questions behind the willow. Lisa: Exactly! Dana: Although this final theory will never be canon I'd say Sirius wanted to scare the living daylights out of Snape because he was aware of Snape's interests in Lupin. Tells Snape all he has to do is prod the knot and he can find out for himself. Lisa: And Sirius was going to ... what? Save Snape before Lupin bit or killed him? James didn't think so. Dana: Snape already knows but is actually not interested in Lupin but in what James and Sirius are up to (as he wants to proof to Lily that they are not as perfect as everybody think they are). So Snape goes to the willow to find what the marauders are up to with werewolf Lupin as there must be something more to it as you can't just play with a werewolf on a full moon night. James finds out drags Snape out without Snape ever learning the truth about them being animagi. Lisa: We agree on that, too ... Dana: Snape is humiliated by being saved by the boy that is interested in his best friend and plays it for all it is worth by running to DD with the story that they tricked him in order to kill him. Snape is not yet a good occlumens at age 16 and thus DD detects he is lying. Snape spills the beans and DD uses that to keep Snape from telling anyone about Lupin's furry little problem. Lisa: And lets the Marauders get away with breaking school rules by sneaking out of their dorm; breaking Ministry Rules by being unregistered animaguses (animagi?); and allowing themselves to continue placing themselves in mortal peril every month? Gee, their parents must be comforted. Dana: Snape does not want Lily to think James did something heroic because he still believes that he did it to hide a secret from being exposed. Lisa: We really don't know why James did it, actually. Dana: Snape's body relaxing when Lily calls James an arrogant toerag is an indication to me that he was not as upset about the whole ordeal as we get to see of him in PoA. The joke was supposed to be on Sirius but it backfired on Snape when he failed to get the marauders into trouble because of it. Lisa: I don't think it was ever meant to be a joke on either behalf. I think Snape was completely serious about getting the Marauders expelled, and I think Sirius was dead-set on harming Snape, to "teach him a lesson." Dana: And as soon as JKR comes out and openly state that Sirius indeed send Snape to the willow in an attempt to murder him, it was never so and the trick never materialized because Snape already knew. And James saved Snape from his own stupidity instead. JMHO Lisa: Precisely - that IS your opinion. And I have mine. Dana: Last post on the subject because I can't convince someone that does not want to be convinced anyway. Interpretation is very personal and we will just have to respectfuly agree to disagree on the subject. Lisa: LOL -- you're the one who doesn't want to be convinced. I have held theories on several things and kept my mind open enough to have it changed -- most notably, after reading HBP, I thought Harry was a horcrux. However, there were too many good solid arguments to the contrary, and I was convinced to change my positions. I've learned from that mistake to trust my instincts! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 04:06:42 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 04:06:42 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? / Step aside silly girl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173403 > Ken: > I have to say that in my opinion the problems with Slytherin house were > real and not a matter of stereotyping or prejudice by the other houses. > Otherwise I could see a more rapid resolution to the split. Alla: That is an absolute key for me Ken as well, that is why I am perfectly Okay with the things as they played out and probably yeah, tiny change started slowly? I only see tiny, but I want to hope. Loved your post. Now on completely different **not me too** note and topic. I am rereading the book now and was actually sort of shocked to realise that Voldemort is asking Lily to step aside three times. Not once, but three times. Don't we only hear it once in PoA, when Harry relives the scene? Wow, I guess Voldemort **really** intended to make true on his bargain with Snape, lol. He even gave Lily last warning. I wonder did Snape really think for a second that Lily would give him time of the day even as friend after her husband and baby are dead? Alla. From penhaligon at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 04:04:15 2007 From: penhaligon at gmail.com (Jane "Panhandle" Penhaligon) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:04:15 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The perfect ending of my favorite book In-Reply-To: <007e01c7ce3b$664b6d40$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> References: <007e01c7ce3b$664b6d40$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173404 Anders asks: > On Behalf Of Ricky & LeAnn > What were James and Lily's occupations? I don't understand the widespread interest in James and Lily's occupations. Based on the amount of gold left to Harry, it would seem that they didn't have to work and instead devoted their energies to the Order of the Phoenix and fighting Voldemort. Panhandle -- Jane Penhaligon penhaligon at gmail.com From penhaligon at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 04:12:29 2007 From: penhaligon at gmail.com (Jane "Panhandle" Penhaligon) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:12:29 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The return to normalcy (Was: The (Hated) Epilogue) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43F3CF8032AE48FBA9EDF90C52DFCE3E@Home> No: HPFGUIDX 173405 JustCarol says: > Primarily, though, the epilogue makes it clear that Harry can now live > rather than survive, he can be "just Harry," as he's wanted to be from > the moment he found he was famous. I think that's such an important point. In the Half-Blood Prince, as the kids are going back to Hogwarts after Christmas break at the Burrow, Mrs. Weasley says to Harry: "Promise me you'll look after yourself ... Stay out of trouble ..." and then Harry replies: ' "I always do, Mrs. Weasley," said Harry. "I like a quiet life, you know me."' Most people seemed to think of that as a joke, but I always believed it was Harry's deepest, most sincere, and most secret wish: a nice quiet life, with a loving wife and family. It makes me so happy that he has that. Panhandle -- Jane Penhaligon penhaligon at gmail.com From angellima at xtra.co.nz Sat Jul 28 04:22:28 2007 From: angellima at xtra.co.nz (Angel Lima) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:22:28 +1200 Subject: HPforgrownups - Christianity and Aeschylus Message-ID: <000001c7d0ce$e889bdd0$9964a8c0@ezybuycar.local> No: HPFGUIDX 173406 MelroseDarjeeling wrote: Everyone might not agree that *all* of these are intended as Christian allegory, but I suspect most would agree that the central point of the book, and indeed the whole series, is Harry sacrificing his life for others in a dead-on parallel to Christ's crucifixion. Curious to know what others think. If this was her goal, was she successful? Angel Lima: I couldn't access that link Melrose, could you please send me the writing whatever it is directly? Pretty please? Being Christian though admittedly a lousy one - i.e. I don't believe you need to read the whole bible to be a Christian etc, it was still hard to miss the allegorical elements of Christianity throughout the whole piece and despite the arguments to the contrary, I do believe that was Rowling's goal. I honestly didn't think Rowling would go down the sacrificial route (Harry giving up his life yet resurrected somehow) but she did. She did it very well, better than I thought she would manage it, but still a tad preposterous, again my opinion. In DH: Dumbledore played the Father figure. Omniscient. Harry rescued [souls] from the Dementors in the [MoM] specifically Mary Cattermole. He saved his friends from the Malfoy Manor. He [saved] [nemeses] Draco and Goyle from the Fiend[fyre] in the Room of Requirement. Discovering what he must do, he did it. He accepted the [goblet] and proceeded to the place of the [skull] (where the Death Eaters and Voldemort congregated) where he laid his life down for everyone. He even went to see his fatherfigure Dumbledore in the Wachowski's version of Limbo. In Jesus' last hours - the snake tempted Him and Jesus crushed it. In DH Nagini ended Severus' life and it didn't seem likely at all to me that Harry was tempted to save Snape. It was only after Harry's sacrifice that Neville smote Nagini. Of course Jesus was nailed to the Cross also but Narcissa only ran her nails across Harry's chest upon reawakening. Harry kept wanting to sleep, he was tired and fatigued but everyone bustled about him, either to help him - Neville, remind him of what to do - Minerva and even journeyed with him - the duo. When Jesus was in the garden praying, he returned to find his friends asleep. Obviously Harry Potter has better friends than Jesus did When Severus cut off George's ear no one could mend it but Jesus was able to reattach the soldier's ear that Peter had cut off, one thing is for certain though, I would aptly agree that Severus was Harry's right hand man. Ron, Harry's canon right hand man, denied Harry as Peter denied Jesus thrice before the cock crew. Harry did what he did because: 1. He knew it was the right thing to do. 2. He was tired of seeing people he loved getting killed because of him. 3. To make Voldemort vulnerable. Jesus died because: 1. He loved everyone, the poor, the lame, the ugly, the cowardly, the beautiful, the heroic. Even Snape, Jesus would have loved Snape. He died to save all those He loved. 2. His death would end the devil's power on those He loved. 3. It was the right thing to do. Jesus forgave "they know not what they do" Harry only forgave Snape after delving into Snape's thoughts after knowing whom had Snape's allegiance. "The stone rolled away" I'm pretty sure that was the exact phrasing. Harry dropped the stone and it rolled away... So basically, all the elements are there that are hard to put down to anything other than Christian symbolism but the reasons and messages are very different. There is no change for the Slytherins who are delegated still to their dungeons with the stigma of grown and dead wizards' sins. Once Jesus' time to die was upon Him, no one else died except for Judas who betrayed Him. Maybe Rowling's message is that Harry can go through all that Jesus went through and still not be Jesus, in which case I didn't need to spend 7 Hogwarts years to find out. Apologies for posting really long posts (I think altogether now this is my fourth post in over four years ) Was anyone else struck with those two powerful opening passages? My tongue cleaved to my palate in anticipation of such a powerful introduction. Across from it was a statement - J.K Rowling asserts her morals (or sthing) Was anyone else disturbed she chose [that] passage? Befitting the noble house of Black and the Chorus could easily interchange with the elves maybe, but a prayer preceding matricide???? It was powerful, heart-wrenching but utterly frightening after I was finished with the book...where Harry feasted on his mother's features and named his middle child after her stalker. So in answer to your question Melrose - was she successful? My goodness no! :) Angel Lima From mommy2maddyrose at aol.com Sat Jul 28 04:39:59 2007 From: mommy2maddyrose at aol.com (Hollie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 04:39:59 -0000 Subject: Lily's Letter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173407 I apologize in advance if this has been mentioned before. I searched but didn't see it. In the letter that Harry finds in Sirius's bedroom, Lily mentioned that Harry had "smashed a horrible vase Petunia sent me for Christmas..." (DH, page 180, US edition) Haven't we been led to believe (unless I'm mistaken) that Petunia more or less disowned her sister? I don't send gifts to people I don't like. I know in the first book (don't have page number) that Vernon says they usually pretend Petunia doesn't have a sister. But this can't be true for Petunia if she's been sending Christmas gifts less than a year before. Any ideas? Hollie From angellima at xtra.co.nz Sat Jul 28 04:23:21 2007 From: angellima at xtra.co.nz (Angel Lima) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:23:21 +1200 Subject: Hpforgrownups - unforgivables and epilogue Message-ID: <000101c7d0cf$08470bf0$9964a8c0@ezybuycar.local> No: HPFGUIDX 173408 elfundeb wrote: > Too many Unforgivables were cast by Harry and co. Eggplant: I profoundly disagree, I think it shows JKR at her full brilliance. For the first time in his life Harry was able to cast a full power nononsense over the top Cruciatus Curse. Why? Because he enjoyed it. Does this mean Harry has become a bit corrupted? Yes, but no human being, not anything made of flesh and blood could go through what Harry has and not become a bit corrupted. Harry is still a VERY good person, but he's no longer a innocent eleven year old boy getting on the Hogwarts Express for the first time, he's a slightly cynical battle scared veteran who's seen things no man should ever see. Angel: I think the words of Sirius and Minerva can shed light on this dilemma and why readers such as myself are so perturbed by Harry's use of the Unforgiveables. It is not just that these are curses, or Death Eater curses. These curses are named the Unforgivables for a reason, all intrinsically linked in my opinion to the kinds of people who would use them. A certain "mindset" after all had to be utilised to carry them out successfully. When Sirius spoke of Moody (GOF) he said he was an Auror, one of the best. Forgive me am paraphrasing because I do not have any of the books at hand, but the allusion was made to Moody being a good "good guy", because he avoided the Unforgiveables if he could. It was a measure of the kind of man he was and why his body was so torn up - he suffered to avoid the UNNECCESSARY suffering of others. Though his death was expected it was callously done especially for a man holding true to such honourable values even in the time of war - WWVW1 (Wizarding World Voldemort War 1) And Minerva's reply to Harry in DF was, 'chivalric but .' Minerva was not in any harm. Harry's own immediate reaction was to quote Bellatrix "you had to mean it," jest-like. He enjoyed the result. Why Minerva Imperioed Alecta was befuddling also. Voldemort was on his way already, all she had to do was tie them up which she could have done without resorting to use of Imperio. It was Rowling's way of showing war was at hand in my opinion but unnecessarily so. Epilogue I won't quote anyone here as there are so many varied views and increasing animosity towards those who are refuting the trite offering. Austenesque? Maybe. I honestly thought JKR let her daughter write the epilogue. That isn't me being nasty (I do not and cannot write fanfic) - it was an honest thought assuming her daughter is in her early teens and I thought she wanted to share the profundity of it with her. Yes it was saccharine but it felt wrong. It didn't feel like anything had been accomplished other than Voldemort was gone and I couldn't shake the feeling that a pall hung over the scene...or maybe the darkness that saturated the previous pages seeped through. Whilst I understand the argument that she portrayed real life after the fall of Hitler, not so entirely. Sure we continue to battle evil as evil continues to arise but the implements that allowed for a dictator such as Hitler to rise and conquer have been crushed, whatever new evil arises does so through loopholes or other means unforeseen or plain human weakness. Not so in the wizarding world. Cold dungeons and perceptions continue to await the Slytherins and we are left without hope of them rising above the stigma. The children's names were also bizarre. Rowling has irreparably damaged Severus for me and I have loved him since first laying eyes on Rickman through the cheery disposition of Columbus. Throughout everything, I stuck by Severus and wondered just how much more Rowling could make him "look" evil. Then the Prince's secret was outed and I felt sorry that I had ever hoped for "good" in anyone other than her heroes. I defy anyone to prove that what Snape felt for Lily was love. From stalking, lusting to betrayal. I had deluded myself to believe there was a reason for his mistreatment of Harry. There was even hope dangling there - he appeared to rupture a spleen when told by Dumbledore Harry had to die yet when asked if he had begun to care for the boy, his reply was incredulity! "For him?" He asks and casts the doe to refute any good he has ever done was for any reason other than "for Lily" under Dumbledore's orders. Lily, whose husband and child he happily led Voldemort to. Yes we read the same words, understand them differently and take from them lesson or folly. I had hoped so much for Severus and tried my very best to disbelieve he had loved Lily fearing sweetness unbearable . In hindsight I would take that sweetness gladly instead of the twisted man Snape was. But I digress, my point about the names was - to have both his parents given precedence in their children's names felt awkward - not only selfish of Harry but docile of Ginny whose character transformations, was already discombobulating to keep up with prior to the epilogue. Then to have Severus in the middle, middle. I guess Harry like Dumbledore thought he was sorted "too soon" which was completely barf-able much like naming my child after my mother's lusting stalker and my father's indirect murderer. Beleaguered. The way Rowling wrote Severus was not one of a man seeking and finding redemption but a man arriving to honourable ends by despicable means. Much like any morsel of goodness portrayed by a Slytherin was later resoundingly rescinded i.e. Draco refusing to confirm it was the trio in his house only to later reaffirm his allegiance to a Death Eater, smack in the middle of fighting and the after being rescued from the fiendfyre by the honourable heroic trio. The Deathly Hallows If I may be presumptuous enough to ask, what on earth was the point of this unnecessary mishandled contrivance? An invisibility cloak that truly renders the wearer invisible? How daft was I to miss Barty Crouch Jnr in the top box at the Quidditch World Cup with Harry's wand then! How were we to have distinguished the difference between Harry's and the others in GoF and OotP? I was under the impression Harry's IC was impenetrable unlike others, why then did Nagini see them outside Harry's parents place in GH? Apparently Dumbledore's majesty was not all of his own ability too with the Elder wand but his portrait still ran the school as Snape ran his errands! Then to suggest that Voldemort would not have been interested much in the Hallows had he even known? A guy who would split his soul into destructible sevenths turn down the one indestructible means of conquering Death? Well, as he proved in the end, intelligence was not his strong point was it? Four failed Avada Kedavras and he couldn't suffer another means of killing Harry! Sadly after much deliberation on my part, I have come to the conclusion misguided, wrong or utterly ridiculous it may be, that Rowling was inspired! This boy struck her as she has said. She then wrote his story which was rejected time and time again. Once it had been published she was struck with an epiphany more endearing, more powerful than her original premise. The story took a life of its own, then in the end she pulled on the reins and injected her original ending. The writer she was then is not a tenth of the writer she is now. Quite the reverse. The earlier books told stories enthralling though Rowling's storytelling amateur, all the more fresh and exciting. Deathly Hallows was brilliantly told but the story itself was rather disturbing. All in all, I have read Deathly Hallows maybe four times. After the first I forced myself to reread it in hope of gauging some overlooked message of hope, forgiveness. Nada. After that it was the sheer memory and fondness of the previous years and how much I as a fan had invested in Harry's journey that made me kept picking up my book, but as time continues to pass, Deathly Hallows rears uglier than at first reading, so much so that if Deathly Hallows with its pulsating rush, sloppy sleuthing and unforgiving flaws was the first book of Rowling's I had ever picked up - I do not think I would have read a second. Angel From ciraarana at yahoo.de Sat Jul 28 05:19:41 2007 From: ciraarana at yahoo.de (Cira Arana) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 07:19:41 +0200 (CEST) Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions Message-ID: <800823.31877.qm@web25910.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173409 DuffyPoo: I think what ciraarana meant was that Fake Crouch had to remember to take the potion every hour: "But I think, in the excitement of tonight, our fake Moody might have forgotten to take it as frequently as he should have done ... on the hour ... every hour ... we shall see." GoF Can Ed pg 592. CA: Yepp, that's what I meant. You have to drink some every 59 minutes or so to stay the other person. And in DH, they don't and still don't transform back. Although, perhaps, it's because they took a "large dose". Perhaps the more you drink the longer it lasts. But if that's the explanation, I would have liked to be told so. From aida_costa at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 05:45:08 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 05:45:08 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173410 Adam: >However, he was still playing the role of VM servant, a role he played to protect Harry, a protection he only gave to help save Lily. Yes, it was brave of him to get those memories to Harry, but it was also incredibly lucky Harry was even there to get them (and, for that matter, that Hermione was there to conjucture a cup). Lenore: > That seems like poor writing to me, but I suppose it heightened the dramatic effect to have Harry get them as Snape dies. But Snape was so smart I can't imagine that he would have EVER left something so critically important to a mere chance that Harry would show up in time to collect them! In my mind's scenario, Snape could have left them in the office and sent an urgent message to Harry through one of his friends; or, Snape could have given a vial directly someone reliable enough to make sure Harry got it. Or some other way. Aida: I totally agree - poor writing. I thought so as soon as I read the scene. How very fortuitous that Harry happened to be there *roll my eyes*. Why not have Snape leave the memories where Harry will find them and send his patronus?? It worked for the sword, Harry would have trusted that patronus again. I realize that having Harry (and by default, the reader) witness Snape's death is important. But what *REALLY* bothered me about the way the scene was written was that Harry felt no swell of hatred and rage at the man who killed Dumbledore when he first realized Snape was in the Shrieking Shack. What happened to 'Harry versus Snape is now as personal as Harry versus Voldemort?' (paraphrasing JKR) And when Snape was killed, Harry didn't feel anything - no satisfaction at his death, nothing. Very sloppy writing. Aida, who feels this book was rushed into publication and needed many more months of drafting and editing. From Schlobin at aol.com Sat Jul 28 05:46:10 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 05:46:10 -0000 Subject: Was Ariana the one who performed charms on the goat? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173411 Having now re-read the book a couple of times...... Did Albus' comment about Aberforth -- that he wasn't sure Aberforth could read strike you as mean-spirited? Given what we know now about their history? Also, we find out that Dumbledore's father would not reveal why he had attacked the Muggles for fear of exposing Ariana. Is it possible that it was Ariana who performed inappropriate charms on the goat....and Aberforth covered up for her -- taking the rap? Would that be why his Patronus is a goat? Susan McGee (If you're over 40, and looking for a low volume group, contact me at SusanGSMcGee at aol.com about Harry Potter for Grownups Over 40) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 05:52:01 2007 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 05:52:01 -0000 Subject: HPforgrownups - Christianity and Aeschylus In-Reply-To: <000001c7d0ce$e889bdd0$9964a8c0@ezybuycar.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173412 I have seen the Christian symbols in the HP series from the first book. I knew that there was going to be some sort of reserection scene in DH somehow. I thought at least it would be a near death experince for Harry. And since book 2 I knew that it would be Harry and Ginny, because they are representing Adam and Eve. When George's ear was cut off, I was sure than Harry or someone would put it back on. I expected DD or at least Fawlks to come back, but that didn't happen... except that Harry talked to him in that 'room' between life and death. Harry made a cross on the tree when he buried the eye, for those who say there is no Religion in the series. The main thing for me, other than the sacrifice and near death experience, was Christmas eve. The Muggles and maybe a Wizard or Witch or two were in the church singing and Harry looked up and saw the image of the Holy Family... his father, mother and himself as the baby in her arms. There is such deep symbolism in these books and in so many ways. It just speaks to some collective subconscience thing in each of us. Don't you just feel it tugging at you when you see the stone for Dobby 'here lies Dobby, a free elf". That last part just sort of pulls at something within me.. and in many of us.. something in a deep layer of our minds... Tonks_op From GAP5685 at AOL.com Sat Jul 28 05:54:49 2007 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 05:54:49 -0000 Subject: Neville Longbottom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173413 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cheryl Dimof" wrote: > > > Hello, > > This may have been discussed before, but I couldn't find the posts. In GoF, > Dumbledore tells Harry about the torture, and subsequent insanity, of > Neville's parents. Does anybody have any thoughts as to who might have been > their torturer >> I know others have mentioned the Lestranges, but since I'm re-reading parts of OOTP, I have the cannon handy for you: OOTP, end of chapter 23 'Christmas on the Closed Ward' "I did," he [Harry]said glumly. "Dumbledore told me but I promised I wouldn't mention it... that's what Bellatrix Lestrange got sent to Azkaban for, using the Cruciatus Curse on Neville's parents until they lost their minds." Gwen From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 06:02:36 2007 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:02:36 -0000 Subject: Was Ariana the one who performed charms on the goat? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173414 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanmcgee48176" wrote: > > Is it possible that it was Ariana who performed inappropriate charms on > the goat....and Aberforth covered up for her -- taking the rap? Would > that be why his Patronus is a goat? Tonks_op I don't think so. I think the charms on a goat thing was when he was an adult and long past the time of Ariana. I agree with those that think that he was just trying to get a bezore without killing the animal or something. I have no idea why his patronus is a goat. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 06:19:40 2007 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:19:40 -0000 Subject: UN answered Questions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 In-Reply-To: <368438.80887.qm@web55704.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173415 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Chancie wrote: > > Ok, all those things that were "supposed" to be so important that JKR couldn't answer yet turned out to be NOTHING to do with the story??? Is anyone else annoyed??? > Tonks: Yes. I expected to see a number of things that were going to jump out at us and we would say .. ah, ha!! There it is!! But no. I too was disappointed in the Epilogue and a bit about the book as a whole. I think it has to do with the fact that she wrote part of it years ago. Didn't she say that? It seems to me that she told us that she had to rewrite it a bit. Well there are part of DH that just don't seem like they fit in with the flow of the books up to that point. And I wonder if it is because she is a better writer now and she was going back and trying to tweek something that she wrote long ago and it just didn't fit anymore. There are parts of DH that seem a bit disjointed and I think that this is why. Tonks_op From pinkfoxranger at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 06:15:23 2007 From: pinkfoxranger at yahoo.com (Eva) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: a Lupin Rant Message-ID: <644663.69022.qm@web50205.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173416 Eva This episode doesn't detract from Lupins braveness or any good qualities he has. He is a good person, but but was overwhelmed with all that was happening and the consequences of that. sherry now: I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. I am a disabled person, and Lupin is a metaphor for disabled people. My parents would have been ashamed of me, if I'd come off with such a self-pitying attitude as Lupin in that moment. My siblings and true friends would give me a figurative kick in the rear if I tried it today. Lupin had love, a baby, respect of people he respected. He was doing something, fighting Voldemort. Yes, I know what it's like to be unemployed because of a disability. I know how I've had to prove I'm ten times better at a job than a sighted person, in order to get and keep a job. Yet, I've been steadily employed for 20 years, due to my determination never to give up, never to give in to what the world thinks. I'm stubborn and was taught that the only thing that could stop me was me. I was taught to believe in me, a lesson Lupin apparently never learned. Either that, or he just got too comfortable with everyone enabling him in his self-pity and whining, used to people saying things such as, come on, moony, it's gonna be ok. We all like you. or whatever they said. I cheered when Harry told him off, because it was about time someone did! I liked Lupin in every previous book, but I wanted to shake him in DH, and no other supposedly good character came off looking so disgusting to me. Until the scene at shell Cottage, where he had obviously perhaps grown up a little and was finally doing the right thing. We didn't see his death, and I'm confident he died bravely, but I did not like him in the beginning of the book. Eva again: Yes, Lupin had a very long moment of weakness. But that's human. In the rest of the books he is a brave, determined person. I have been trough a couple of episodes myself, where I was honestly a self-pitying jerk. But then I often caugth a kick in the backside of my pants and I was forced to straighten out. Perhaps that is why I can sympathize with Lupin. Yes, he had one long very weak moment. But in the end he managed to get himself straightend out (with some help) and did the right thing. Isn't that what matters in the end? Eva --------------------------------- Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 06:28:10 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:28:10 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: <46aa9804.26f8720a.53f6.ffff8ea0@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173417 > Sherry now: > > Call me crazy or not insightful, but what I took out of the ending was that > JKR was showing us how much the world does not really change after war. > People still hang on to their prejudices and preconceived notions. I > thought it was very realistic, though disappointing. I'm a fan of the main > character, so didn't like some of the Slytherin "baddies", but I actually > did hope for house unity and wanted to see the four houses band together to > defend Hogwarts. I was disappointed it didn't happen. and yet, after > thinking about it, I thought, this ending is probably far more realistic, > with not much really changing overnight. Maybe, if we were to see the world > in 30, 40, 50 years, things might have begun to change, but for now, it felt > like something pretty typical after a war. > > Sherry > lizzyben: So what was the point of it all? Gryfindors & Slytherins still hate each other, Slytherin still equals evil, and there'll be another Dark Lord in ten years, tops. Voldemort was the symptom, not the disease. And he was a symptom of a profoundly broken, corrupt, fragmented, oppressive society - as long as that society does not change, it'll keep on churning out Dark Lords on a regular basis. The only thing that would bring real peace is reforms & changes in that society - for example, integrating Slytherin into Hogwarts, lessening rivalries & hatreds, etc. But there's no indication that any of that happened; meaning there's not a whole lot of hope here for the fate of the Wizarding World. And it would have been *so easy* to go a different route. Why not show Slyths working w/other students to save their lives? Why not have Harry & Draco work together in some small way? Or Snape working with the Order? Some acknowledgment in the epilogue that little Albus Severus & Scorpius (lol) have become friends? It would have been dramatically satisfying & show that Harry's fight against LV resulted in real, long-lasting change. Why was JKR so insistent on *not* giving us that type of ending? Seems like most readers wanted it. Indeed, it seems like the whole structure of the series was leading to it - but we didn't get it. That's the fundamental *weirdness* of this ending to me. Other novels about rivalries or feuds end w/some sense of reconciliation between the feuding parties, of lessons learned & wisdom gained. Not this one. In Romeo & Juliet, the tragic deaths lead the feuding families to reconcile & seek peace. But here, it's like the Capulets realized that the Montagues are totally evil & worthless, & it really was all the Montagues' fault anyway. Uh, yay? lizzyben, who couldn't even be happy about Evil!Dumbledore. From ciraarana at yahoo.de Sat Jul 28 06:16:32 2007 From: ciraarana at yahoo.de (Cira Arana) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:16:32 +0200 (CEST) Subject: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions Message-ID: <419460.72156.qm@web25907.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173418 Q: Why didn't Snape know about the Horcurxes? He's a Dark wizard. > Voldemort is boasting about his near immortality. Snape is a clever > man. Why didn't he know?? Susan McGee That information/ knowledge is suppressed. DD had the books hidden in his study. My guess, however, is that he put a spell on them so that only Hermione would be able to get them. Then he tells Harry to tell Ron and Hermione about the horcruxes... CiraArana Yes, the knowledge was suppressed - at Hogwarts. But I would have expected that a boy who, when he came to Hogwarts, knew more hexes than the seventh-years wouldn't have restricted his reading to only the library at Hogwarts. And knowledge about the Horcruxes may be suppressed, but it isn't illegal (otherwise DD wouldn't have had to hide the books; they would probably have been destroyed). And who would stop Snape straying into a bookshop in Knockturn Alley to find out what Voldemort did to make himself immortal? That's what he does, isn't it: finding out other people's secrets. Q: Where is Snape's portrait?? He was Headmaster of Hogwarts. We saw > how their portraits pop up after their death. And I'm sure Harry would have noticed Snape's portrait. So, where is it?? Susan My theory is that it's there. Remember the first time after Dumbledore's death that Harry went into the Headmaster's office? DD was asleep in his portrait. I theorize that it takes a while for the portraits to awaken after death... Cira Yes, DD was asleep, but his portrait was there. And between Snape's death and Harry's final visit to the headmaster's office more than one hour has passed. I'm sure that's time enough for the portrait to pop up. And I'd like to think that Harry would even have noticed a portrait of a sleeping Snape. Q: Snape approached Voldemort with the plea to not kill Lily? And > Voldemort agreed? He agreed to not kill a "Mudblood"?? (And he did > agree, didn't he, because he gave Lily the choice to step away.) > Looking at Voldemort's policy ... Are we supposed to accept that? Susan Snape would have been smart enough to tell Voldemort that he wanted to possess Lily to gain vengeance against James Potter (who he vocally hated) and against Sirius Black. Cira I hadn't thought of that. Makes sense. Thank you. ^-^ Q: And Voldemort didn't even once use the connection to try > something like he did with Sirius? He never used it to look in on > Harry and see where the boy was? You know, to better catch him, and > all that. I half-expected it for the first several hundred pages. It > never happened. And I can't understand why not. Susan I'm wondering if it had something to do with Voldemort's possessing Harry and finding it intolerable. Doesn't DD say something about it being like unbearable.. ....? Cira I can't quite believe that. After all, Voldemort had no problems whatsoever to walk into Harry's mind throughout OotP. It was only the actual possessing that he found unbearable. At least, that's how I understood it. Susan But more likely, Harry explains it....Snape WAS trying to teach him occlumency, but could only teach Harry to do it the way HE knew how to do it...for Harry, the emotions of love/grief etc. was the way to keep Voldemort out of himself....doesn' t Harry say he finally learned how to do it? Cira Yes, but he only learned that when he buried Dobby. And at that time, Voldemort was concentrating on something else and had no desire to find Harry. But what of the time before? Harry escaped Voldemort at the end of July, and escaped again after Bill and Fleur's wedding. And Voldemort makes no effort to see where the boy is? He wants him dead. I'd have thought he would at least try it. *shrugs* Q: The Trace. And now we are introduced to the Trace, which allows the Ministry to tell exactly who performed which spell?? No. Doesn't make sense. Or is it a new ministry policy and I simply missed that bit? Susan Not sure. And why didn't the MOM put a trace on people who called Voldemort the "Dark Lord"? (When they were still relatively uninfiltrated. ....) Cira But the Trace has nothing to do with saying Voldemort's name. HRH only thought so because they didn't know the name had been Taboo'd (which, I suppose, works similarly to the Trace). But the Trace, as Moody explains in chapter 5, I think, is about monitoring under-aged witches and wizards. Anyway, I found my mistake. I thought it would tell the Ministry exactly who performed magic, but it only monitors the general area. But then I wonder why Harry thought he'd be called to another hearing for performing magic in the DE attack. There were about 40 grown-up wizards and witches throwing hexes and curses around ... and surely the ministry can't think that was all done by one person alone. It would be impossible to tell who did what. Plus, in OotP I think Hermione says that in an event of danger even underaged wizards are allowed to perform magic ... Argh. Perhaps I should simply stop listening to Harry. Q: If Expelliarmus changes the wand's allegiance then nobody from > the DA is still using their own wand. No wizard or witch who has ever been taught that spell at Hogwarts would be using their own wand > (although considering the DADA teacher problem ) But wouldn't Harry > have won Voldemort's wand in the graveyard scene in GoF? > Susan I think this charm only works with the Elder Wand. Cira It can't only work on the Elder Wand, because Harry won Draco's wand, the hawthorn wand, with an Expelliarmus. And the wand worked for him. Ollivander said that was because Harry had won the wand by overpowering Draco. And to me that means everytime one wizard/witch overpowers another, the allegiance of the wand changes. Or perhaps it only changes in a real duel and not in practice. But then I'd like to have been told so. (And Harry would still have won Voldemort's wand on GoF.) But thank you, Susan, for answering my questions. ^-^ CiraArana --------------------------------- Jetzt Mails schnell in einem Vorschaufenster ?berfliegen. Dies und viel mehr bietet das neue Yahoo! Mail. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 06:35:55 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:35:55 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AAE3CB.1090400@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173419 Charles Walker Jr blessed us with this gem On 27/07/2007 05:47: CWJ> So we're to believe that the ministry got it right here? In a word, yes. Why is that such a problem for you? In your comments you have mashed together a number of issues which clearly need to be disambiguated. But rather than addressing them point for point, I think it really boils down to one question: Is there any act, or category of acts, so barbarous that it cannot, under ANY circumstances, be justified? If, as I would hope any clear-thinking person would, your answer is yes, then really this whole discussion boils down to whether the UCs belong to such a category. It is clear to me that, in the Potter universe, the UCs were, for most of six books, clearly consigned to such a category. You may disagree with that consignment, but the main problem is JKR's inconsistency on this point. Up until the end of HBP, the UCs were, well, Unforgivable. But then at the end of book six we have Harry attempting to cast an AK though you might argue he was confused by anger and grief and suddenly in book 7 the good guys begin throwing them around so casually they may as well have been conjuring up ice cream cones for their friends. Even my ten-year-old picked up on the shifting moralities. As to Harry's use of the Cruciatus against Carrow, the question is neither what crimes Carrow committed in the past nor what acts he might commit in the future. Even wars have rules (just read the Geneva Conventions), and the only relevant question is whether Carrow presented a clear and present danger at the moment Harry ambushed him. Clearly he did not. Even if, for the sake of argument, you DID manage to successfully prosecute the clear and present danger test, you still have to demonstrate that Harry's responsive was not excessive. With so many less drastic but equally effective options available to Harry well, I can only say good luck. CJ From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 06:45:30 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 02:45:30 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Muggle borns at Hogwarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173420 In a message dated 7/27/2007 11:34:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time, verosomm at yahoo.com writes: Veronica: Hi, I'm the one who thought the Dursleys died, but someone told me privately (because he'd already posted 5 times that day) that the book specifically stated that the Dursleys went WITH Dedalus (and Hestia) but not to his house. I was very happy to be refuted as I didn't want them dead either. So I'm sorry about my misinterpretation. Bill. . .I think its Bill . . . says 'Of Course he (Dedalus) wasn't there. I took that to mean that while they may have been there initially, The Dursleys were moved somewhere else. I think that if they had been killed JKR would have told us that quite clearly. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lwalsh at acsalaska.net Sat Jul 28 06:51:15 2007 From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:51:15 -0800 Subject: Hagrid Flying In-Reply-To: <9723.52023.qm@web82909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <9723.52023.qm@web82909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <19BFB9BA-C440-49BB-85E1-3954D58CF728@acsalaska.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173421 Since I am now finished with the last book, I decided to go back and re-read everything. And now I have a question. In the first book, when Hagrid shows up at Privet Drive, DD is surprised that he comes on Sirius' motorbike. And 10 years later, when Harry asks him how he got to the Hut on the Rock, he says he flew. If he is too big to ride on broomsticks or thestrals (acc. to DH p. 53 US ed.), how did Dumbledore expect him to get Harry to Privet Drive? The only choice I can think of is hippogriff, unless Hagrid, too, can fly without means of support. Other ideas? Laura -- Laura Lynn Walsh lwalsh at acsalaska.net http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 07:28:01 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:28:01 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] The perfect ending of my favorite book Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173422 In a message dated 7/27/2007 11:10:00 P.M. Central Daylight Time, penhaligon at gmail.com writes: I don't understand the widespread interest in James and Lily's occupations. Based on the amount of gold left to Harry, it would seem that they didn't have to work and instead devoted their energies to the Order of the Phoenix and fighting Voldemort. I seem to recall Mr Lovegood mentioning (regarding the invisibility cloak) "None of you have ever seen such a thing. The possessor would be immeasurably rich, would he not?" That's intriguing. If we judge by the amount of gold that was in Harry's vault, he was very wealthy indeed but I'm curious as to why Mr Lovegood would think so. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 07:40:25 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:40:25 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James's age Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173423 In a message dated 7/27/2007 11:07:30 A.M. Central Daylight Time, gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk writes: Just to be picky, his parents were 21 when they were killed. However, at that point, he didn't know how old they were and hadn't got any photos - until Hagrid got some for him at the end of PS so either his imagination or the Mirror supplied a suitable image. One would think that on a subconscious level at least Harry would have remembered what his parents looked like and that memory could have been what the Mirror was pulling to the front. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Sat Jul 28 08:24:56 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:24:56 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System / Sorting "too soon" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173424 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "verosomm" wrote: Veronica says: keep the four houses... as part of the History of Magic curriculum (and please, get someone INTERESTING to teach it!). The four houses should be used to teach the kids that hard work and loyalty (Hufflepuff), intelligence (Ravenclaw), bravery and chivalry (Gryffindor), and ambition (Slytherin) are all qualities that can hold positive and negative tendencies in their possessors, which is why uniting these elements, which every human has to some extent, ends up with the possessor being a well-rounded, well-adjusted individual (because please let's not make it a goal for Hogwarts to turn out another Voldy). Marika agrees and adds some of her thoughts (some of them have already been expressed by others): I see a little boy who is excited about having a friend, a muggleborn friend who he wants to stay friends with - best friends. He's hoping for them to end up in the same House, not aware that Slytherin is not for her. To him Slytherin represents a place for the brainy, and nothing in canon tells us that he wants to be grouped with people who'll despise his best friend. His choice is not based upon cruelty or prejudice. The Sorting Hat sees that the boy - who most likely is both ambitious and cunning- could do well in Slytherin, and accomplishes his wish. I see another little boy, who doesn't know much about the world he's about to enter, or which House he wants to be placed in. By coincidence he meets a dislikable boy who is to be sorted into Sltyerin. Based upon this he asks the hat to pick another house for himself. The hat believes the boy could do well in Slytherin, but places him somewhere else, because of the boys request. What if the first boy had pictured Slytherin House a a threat to his best friend, and instead pictured Ravenclaw as a place for the brainy??? Would he have made a different choice? Would he have made friends with other muggleborns as well? Had his friendship with his best friend lasted? Had he not been a target to bullies? Had he grown up to become a likable person? What if the second boy had heard good things about Slytherin, or nothing at all? What if he never had asked the hat to be placed in another House? Is it possible that the hat had placed him there??? Maybe not, but who knows? These two boys stories are already written, but what about the next generation? What about the next child who chooses Slytherin for another reason than prejudice? What if this child is also capable of cruel acts, but initially not interested in developing this side, but will now be pushed in this direction by the pressure from his surrounding and because the child at this point in life not strong enought to stand up against it? Without the sorting system this child would not have to be exposed to only one kind of people, and would not have to be judged upon his/her wishes, qualities and experience at the age of 11. From guzuguzu at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 08:31:35 2007 From: guzuguzu at yahoo.com (guzuguzu) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:31:35 -0000 Subject: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173425 Peter Pettigrew: Wasted potential for a character: Among my disappointments in DH, one of my top ones was Peter Pettigrew. Here I thought Rowling had created an interesting and unusual character with incredible potential for a good storyline. Here's the set-up we have from the pre-DH books: -Peter was a friend of Harry's parents and former Order member (so presumably has a lot of important knowledge for Harry) - He joined Voldemort, though seemingly out of fear, not because he particularly agreed with the political cause - He outsmarted everyone (for years) with his betrayal and faked-death - Harry saved his life, so he owes him a life-debt - He practically saved Voldemort's life and was rewarded a silver hand (possibly important since we had werewolves, good and bad, running around) - Despite that, he did not seem too well-respected amongst the other Death Eaters and didn't seem to be too happy - He spent time living with (and presumably spying on) Snape in his childhood home Given all that, I was fairly sure Rowling was going to give a big finish to this character. I won't comment on what I thought she should have done, but there were so many ways she could have gone (full redemption by switching back over, double-crossing both sides, giving Voldemort some damaging info on Snape, etc.) but instead we got him choking himself in the closet in a two-line scene without one second of suspense. The life-debt (which seemed to be fairly important in book 3) may as well have not existed. What was the point of any of it? Overall reaction to DH: I can explain my overall disappointed reaction to DH like this: I feel like a friend came up to me and said, "Hey, I'm taking you on a trip-- while we're on the plane, read these to prepare yourself," and then handed me six books on India: all about the history, the culture, the people. And I read them all and as I did, I got really excited and ready to burst off that plane and experience India, my head filled with all the things I expected to see. But when the door opened, we weren't in India: we were in France. Now France is beautiful, and there is a lot to appreciate there, but I really can't appreciate it, because this entire time I'd been reading these books thinking we were going to India-- I thought that was the reason I was reading them. Reading DH to me was like having that plane door open in the wrong country. Now, I really don't care about things like what the Potters' jobs were (they died when they were 21-- probably nothing exciting) or who came late to magic. But I wondered why I had spent so much time in previous books reading about things which were ultimately irrelevant. I thought I would see the reason that Snape spent his one and only year as DADA teacher making the students proficient in wordless magic. I thought I would see the reason that I read 100+ pages in OoTP about the Department of Mysteries and all the rooms and the veil that killed Sirius. I thought I would see the reason that the Sorting Hat itself said more than once that the houses should unite. I thought I would see the reason for Peter's silver hand. I thought I would see the reason that I read umpteen times that Neville was unusually forgetful. If there were reasons, they apparently had lower priority to the series finale than things like Elder Wands, Grindenwald and Luna's father, which is what I ended up reading about. When I read that the Ravenclaw horcrux was a tiara, I *thought* I saw the reason that there had been at least three pointed mentions of Aunt Muriel's tiara, but apparently it was just some other tiara. Oh, oops. So, I don't mean to offend people who are enjoying France (DH) but I am too disappointed in not seeing India right now. Obviously, this is just my opinion-- maybe I will come to like DH one day. guzu From aida_costa at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 09:07:43 2007 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (Aida Costa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:07:43 -0000 Subject: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173426 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "guzuguzu" wrote: > Peter Pettigrew: Wasted potential for a character: I'm very disappointed with JKR over Pettigrew. She once said in an interview (I can't find the original source, I apologize) that the Sorting Hat is never wrong. How does she explain Pettigrew, then? He never once in the series showed an ounce of courage, the attribute that Gryffindors are prized for. I expected he'd show some kind of emotion other than fear and cowardice in DH. > He spent time living with (and presumably spying on) Snape in his > childhood home After reading DH, I believe he was placed in Snape's home for Snape to spy on Pettigrew. Snape proved himself - he killed Dumbledore. Voldemort never did trust Pettigrew. > I can explain my overall disappointed reaction to DH like this: I > feel like a friend came up to me and said, "Hey, I'm taking you on a >trip-- while we're on the plane, read these to prepare yourself," and >then handed me six books on India: all about the history, the >culture, the people. And I read them all and as I did, I got really >excited and ready to burst off that plane and experience India, my >head filled with all the things I expected to see. But when the door >opened, we weren't in India: we were in France. Now France is >beautiful, and there is a lot to appreciate there, but I really can't >appreciate it, because this entire time I'd been reading these books >thinking we were going to India. You hit the nail on the head regarding how I feel about both HBP and DH. All this rich detail for what? Two final books with mediocre detail and poorly structured story lines. I was on a brilliant roller-coaster ride, right at the top of the crest at the end of OOTP, and I expected an exhilarating ride to the finish - but then it abruptly slowed down and wandered off the track. >But I wondered why I had spent so much time in previous books reading >about things which were ultimately irrelevant. I thought I would see >the reason that Snape spent his one and only year as DADA teacher >making the students proficient in wordless magic. Yes - that detail in HBP seemed incredibly important. Even as Snape was fleeing with the DE's at the end of HBP and he was deflecting Harry's spells he tells him that he'll never learn to defeat him unless he keeps his mind and mouth shut (I'm paraphrasing of course). I also agree with all the other details you mention - they all seemed incredibly relevant. And what of Neville in OOTP mistakingly calling the Philosopher's Stone the Philological Stone? All of her brilliant word play flew out the window and became irrelevant in both HBP and DH. Aida, who thinks France is delightful, but expected Shangri-la From sydpad at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 09:16:26 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:16:26 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173427 > Lizzyben: >It seems to be an internal need to cut off & > > destroy those qualities, instead of understanding them.... The problem is that JKR never managed to integrate the > > "shadow" House, the shadow figure into the overall narrative. And IMO > > the novel suffered for it. > > Renee: > I don't see this need to destroy the qualities embodied by Slytherin > House in the books. It's is an integral part of Hogwarts - and didn't > JKR say in an interview it was a necessary part? In other words, the > Shadow has been given a place, not just in her world, but also in the > narrative; JKR doesn't deny its existence at all. But because it is > the Shadow, it's influence can't be benign. > > Magpie: > I don't know...it doesn't seem like the kind of acknowledgement it > gets is the healthy kind--which is I think why you could ask earlier > if maybe this wasn't more about Christian sin than Jungian Shadow. It > felt to me much more like Calvin than Jung to me, reading it. Sydney: I agree with Magpie (shock!). I think I was reading Slytherin as obviously the Shadow House and looking for Jungian integration, whereas the concerns of the HP series were much more about spiritual purification, something I suppose that comes from the Alchemy thing. >From what little I know, this features burning away and separating the impure elements. Hence the ritual 'exclusion' scene for the Slytherins at the end of every book, which (in my parallel universe of HP) were set up to be reversed with an inclusionary scene in the final book; but in fact were just recapitulated. I suppose there's a certain kind of Christianity that shares these concerns about purity and the separation of the saved from the unsaved, but right up until the last chapters of HP I would never have associated it with Rowling. For one thing I was putting a huge amount of weight on her favorite children's book being "Little White Horse", a transparantely Jungian allegory that DOES end in integration. What it really breaks the story for me and turns into something that makes me a bit ill, is that whatever your philosophy of life might be, she's projecting this allegory of purification onto a bunch of kids. Rowling's extraordinary gift for creating rounded human characters for me resulted in a story about an actual society of human people being being divided into the pure and impure. When she started to bring in all the Nazi imagery it created some extremely weird resonances in my head. *takes a deep breath* Okay, here's the part where I get an inbox full of flaming emails, but I just have to get this out. What is she giving us in Slytherin House? I'm not trying to be provocative, I'm just laying out what it is we're looking at here. This book has given us a population characterized by 'ambition' and 'cunning', they are often described as having 'greedy' expressions. They always seem to be in positions of power and have more money than seems right. They're not admitted into certain clubs and quite right too. They can't be trusted-- their loyalties are not those of the rest of society. In a war they will probably run or switch sides or try to profit from the suffering of others. They manipulate the government from behind the scenes to their own purposes, using money and mesmeric powers. They keep themselves to themselves and never fit in; who they are seems to be partly by birth-- established by nasty inbreeding--, partly by belief, and partly by some invisible taint. They killed Harry Potter and refused to accept his Salvation. What does a House like this sound like to you? A House associated with reptiles and ghettoes like Nocturn Alley? A House whose Founder has a 'monkey-like' face and a name that's suspiciously foreign? A House with sinister ties to Eastern Europe? Whose Head-- redeemed only by a passion, presented as kind of creepy and wrong, for a woman on the 'pure' side-- has greasy black hair and a freakin' *hooked nose*??! What was she *thinking*? JK Rowling, I appeal to you, *what were you thinking*? I'm not, please believe me, I'm NOT accusing Rowling of anti-Semitism here (I will guarantee 90% of replies to this post will say "OMG you're saying JKR is an anti-Semite!!!"). I wholeheartedly believe all this stuff is entirely unconscious-- it is inconceivable that she could have written that kind of symbolism otherwise. But believe me, there are large parts of the world where this unconscious message, will be recognized as a validation for something that I'm sure she would be utterly horrified at. Part of the reason I was so certain we would get a reversal of Salazar's story, a proper reconciliation with the Slytherin kids, and the destruction of the Hat, is that I didn't think that someone who was gratuitously leaning on Nazi analogies left and right could *possibly* not have realized what sort of imagery she was using to construct Slytherin House. Not to mention the Goblins.. yikes! JKR tells us that she hates bigotry. When 11-year-old Harry looks over at the 11-year-olds at the Slytherin table, after being told all about 'what they're like', and thinks to himself that they do look rather nasty, this to me was obviously about how bigotry works. When an entire society has built itself on labels and tribalism, that's how bigotry works. When what our tribe does is justified or at least mitigated by our purer feelings, and what their tribe does has selfish ulterior motives and is obviously wrong, when you can say, 'oh, he's a Slytherin and Slytherins always do this or that', that's what bigotry looks like. So, she's not advocating taking the kids sorted into Slytherin aside and shooting them. She's just totally fine with the idea that there is *something different about them*, but our Heroes should be kind and magnanimous like they are to House Elves (and don't even get me started on the House Elves). Oh, JKR wrote a book about bigotry all right. I could handwave and read between the lines and try to find a way that this ends on a message of hope, but the bottom line is, Voldemort tried to destroy the Hat, and Harry saved it. *sighs heavily* I really hate feeling like this. I wasn't being facetious when I said this might be my favorite book. There was a lot of beautiful stuff in it and Rowling is a storyteller of immense, almost frightening power. I never heard a bad thing about her personally in my life. But.. yeah, the total and utter validation of labelling people, labelling them at such a young age, and then having the people with good labels and people with bad ones.. it just goes so deeply against me it makes me feel sick. Maybe I'm just bitter because my vainglorious predictions were so totally wrong! And obviously I have strong preference for reconciliation and reversal stories. "The Little White Horse" is one of my favorite books. Bizarrely, it's also one of Rowling's. I can't get my head around it. -- Sydney, heavy-hearted From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 09:23:33 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:23:33 -0000 Subject: Greatest creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173428 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rowena_grunnionffitch" wrote: > Could her point have been that if Snape hadn't loved Lily he would > have stayed a Death Eater? > > rowena_grunnioffitch > expectopatronnie: I believe that JK's point is NOTthat Snape is good becuase he love LILY POTTER, but that someone still capable of love, cannot be ESE. Snape has loved Lily ever since he was a small child, even though he had terrible parantage, not at all supporting and loving (as Lennon puts it: "How can I find love when love is something that I have never had?"). Snape is exceptional, because he could! And even though his love is obsessional, limited to only one person at the beginning, and although strong - his love is very immature, adolecsentic and narrow-scoped, he still IS able to love (unlike LV). I stated in an earlier post, how ambivalent I think he must feel towards Harry: How do you think Ron would have felt towards a potential child or Harry and Hermione? Or worse: How would Harry feel towards Draco and Ginny's son (with his white blond hair and his knack to snigger, behind those honey-brown eyes)? The capacity to love and be empathic, is what makes a healthy (good?) person as opposed to an antisocial personality. Snape is neither here nor there: He is a complex character, able to deal with a small range of feelings to others, but not to all. I totally agree that his ability to love has evolved during the 16 years since Lily was murdered, and while his compassion was limited to Lily only at the age of 21, at his deathbed it is much more developed (I give DD the full credit for creating a surrounding where this was possible). Still, the scars of his youth, including the terrible fate of being the rejected, ridiculed teenager, still show to the very end. BTW, I think it is pretty obvious now why James chose to lead the torment of Sev, Lily's best freind and a possible competition for her love.Someone wrote she found the nickname "Sev" hard to digest, but at least, she wrote, it was not "Sevie". Well, it was Sev and not Sevie, exactly because Lily potter's feelings to Snape were very friendly, but not Romantic. ronnie, who is growing fonder and fonder of Snake-killed-Snape by the moment, as limited and complex as he may be. From rvink7 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 09:40:09 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:40:09 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: <46aaa192.28d6720a.1cab.ffff9396@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173429 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Gomes wrote: > > > > sherry: > I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. I am a > disabled person, and Lupin is a metaphor for disabled people. My parents > would have been ashamed of me, if I'd come off with such a self-pitying > attitude as Lupin in that moment. My siblings and true friends would give > me a figurative kick in the rear if I tried it today. Lupin had love, a > baby, respect of people he respected. He was doing something, fighting > Voldemort. Yes, I know what it's like to be unemployed because of a > disability. I know how I've had to prove I'm ten times better at a job than > a sighted person, in order to get and keep a job. Yet, I've been steadily > employed for 20 years, due to my determination never to give up, never to > give in to what the world thinks. I'm stubborn and was taught that the only > thing that could stop me was me. I was taught to believe in me, a lesson > Lupin apparently never learned. Either that, or he just got too comfortable > with everyone enabling him in his self-pity and whining, used to people > saying things such as, come on, moony, it's gonna be ok. We all like you. > or whatever they said. I cheered when Harry told him off, because it was > about time someone did! I liked Lupin in every previous book, but I wanted > to shake him in DH, and no other supposedly good character came off looking > so disgusting to me. Until the scene at shell Cottage, where he had > obviously perhaps grown up a little and was finally doing the right thing. > We didn't see his death, and I'm confident he died bravely, but I did not > like him in the beginning of the book. > Renee: But one of Lupin's arguments is that he is a social outcast, even more than in any of the previous books. He already had to get away from the authorities (Scrimgeour) in one of the earlier chapters of DH, and that was *before* Voldemort took over the Ministry. His problems run deeper than being disabled at this stage. That doesn't mean he isn't wrong in turning his back to his pregnant wife. That *is* the cowardly way out, and Harry was correct in saying so, though the way he did it showed little understanding, because of his own sore spot. But actually I was more shocked by the hex, which showed that Lupin didn't understand where Harry came from. Renee From minorsocialite at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 10:01:14 2007 From: minorsocialite at yahoo.com (Stephanie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:01:14 -0000 Subject: The Malfoys Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173430 Hey all, I'm really hoping that JKR will come out with more information on the future of the Malfoys. The family really began to interest me in HBP when Narcissa took her life in her hands, and threw pride to the winds in the interest of preserving her son's safety. Here, I thought, is an interesting character. My interest in the Malfoy family was only further peaked in DH when I saw the Lucius, Narcissa, and Draco's obvious love for one another. Draco's character seemed so on the verge of really blossoming in a fascinating way but then the series ended! FINITO! Drop curtain!! AIYEEE! It just struck me that Draco truly WAS a product of his upbringing, and this showed itself quite plainly when, about to perish by accursed fire and having been dragged out of the path of destruction by Potter, his first words spoke his concern for the welfare of his friend. "C-Crabbe" chocked Malfoy as soon as he could speak, C-Crabbe..." Nor do I forget that while being chased by this same cursed fire, Malfoy willingly slowed his own flight to drag a stunned Goyle along with him and, with Harry's help, to ultimate safety. The origins of this sort of reaction were explained when Narcissa and Lucius, at the height of the fighting weren't even remotely interested in the battle, the dark lord, or any of the rest of it. Their whole focus was on their son and his safety. While Draco may have been a brat, and a little terror, raised with an overwhelming sense of racial---pure blood---superiority, he also seems to have imbibed, at his mother's knee, a strong "people first" ethos. This just seemed to open up so much possibility for Draco's future character. It all depends upon which people he puts first, but the chap's basic instincts of loyalty under extreme duress, seemed worthy of a Hufflepuff!! I was struck by how Rowling always seemed to take upbringing into account in the development of her characters...maybe it's just something that a mother would notice. Stephanie (my 1st post) From red84irish at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 09:58:59 2007 From: red84irish at gmail.com (Sean) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:58:59 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: <46AAE3CB.1090400@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173431 >From my interpretations of DH it seemed that the Unforgivable Curses were not thrown around by the good guys, but rather they stuck to curses that stunned, or disarmed. I cant think of many instances where UC were used Sean From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 10:41:43 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:41:43 -0000 Subject: First Comments on HP:DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173432 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "seanmulligan2000" wrote: > It seemed that Rowlings > was confirming stereotypes of Slytherins as the Death Eater House, > although I don't remember if she said that none of the Slytherins > fought for Hogwarts. Some of them might have fought for the light > and were but they were just not mentioned. > ronnie: Slughorn and Snape are mentioned. She also mentions that all slytherin students have chose to evacuate and not fight. However, we later see that Draco, Crabbe and Goyle went back to fight. Maybe some others did the same, only fight for the right side. I didn't get Draco's behaviour at all, and would be happy to have someone explain: Draco lies to Bellatrix and the Manor, and says he's not sure whether he recognizes Hermione and Ron (come on...). But then at the Battle of Hogwarts, he's acting as a DE again: Why is that??? I realy couldn't understand what exactly Draco (whom I expected to be much more compliant to Harry's cause in DH)is playing at, except being very confused. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Jul 28 10:42:43 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:42:43 -0000 Subject: snape and lily BEFORE DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173433 "jimjefferis" wrote: > > I was completely surprised when I read about the long friendship > between Snape and Lily in Book 7, but many friends (and, it seems, > many people on this list) were not particularly surprised. > > The only scene I can remember before DH that hints at this > relationship is Snape's "worst memory" in HBP. Are there other hints > of the snape/lily friendship in the first 6 books? Potioncat: This is my one prediction, out of several stupid ones, that came true. It's also the one I never posted. Based on Petunia's comment about 'that horrible' boy --which Harry took to be James-- tied to Snape growing up in a Muggle neighborhood, tied to Petunia's constant cleaning, Snape's grey pants and the great smoke stack I worked it out that they grew up in the same neighborhood. I went on to presume a little more, which pretty much becomes fan fiction (if only) Knowing only the traditions of the Mill Vilages in Southern US, I presumed that the Evans father either owned the mill, or was in upper management, while Tobias most likely held a very lowly position. But at either rate, it would explain how Severus and Lily lived in the same neighborhood, yet seem to be of a different class from one another. (pre DH) From darksworld at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 11:38:45 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:38:45 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: <46AAE3CB.1090400@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173434 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lee Kaiwen wrote: > > Charles Walker Jr blessed us with this gem On 27/07/2007 05:47: > > CWJ> So we're to believe that the ministry got it right here? > > In a word, yes. Why is that such a problem for you? > Charles: Are you kidding? The Ministry got pretty much everything wrong throughout the entire series, and I am supposed to accept that they got this right? These are the folks who think that murder is a normal crime as long as you don't use this one curse, that making someone do something is fine as long as you don't use the imperius, and that torture is a great way to make schoolkids serve detention. And you wonder what my damn problem with trusting the Ministry's judgement is? Where the hell have you been for the last three books? > In your comments you have mashed together a number of issues which > clearly need to be disambiguated. But rather than addressing them point > for point, I think it really boils down to one question: > > Is there any act, or category of acts, so barbarous that it cannot, > under ANY circumstances, be justified? > Charles: I can only think of one, and it does not get dealt with in the books- that act being rape. > If, as I would hope any clear-thinking person would, your answer is yes, > then really this whole discussion boils down to whether the UCs belong > to such a category. > > It is clear to me that, in the Potter universe, the UCs were, for most > of six books, clearly consigned to such a category. You may disagree > with that consignment, but the main problem is JKR's inconsistency on > this point. Up until the end of HBP, the UCs were, well, Unforgivable. > But then at the end of book six we have Harry attempting to cast an AK ? > though you might argue he was confused by anger and grief ? and suddenly > in book 7 the "good guys" begin throwing them around so casually they > may as well have been conjuring up ice cream cones for their friends. > Even my ten-year-old picked up on the shifting moralities. > Charles: The UC's were "unforgivable" because of ministry proscription. Whether that stemmed from morality or not is not actually explored in the books. The UC's were named UC's because the use of them on a human earned a life sentence in Azkaban. I suspect your ten-year-old, learning from you, is also incapable of distinguishing legality and morality. > As to Harry's use of the Cruciatus against Carrow, the question is > neither what crimes Carrow committed in the past nor what acts he might > commit in the future. Even wars have rules (just read the Geneva > Conventions), and the only relevant question is whether Carrow presented > a clear and present danger at the moment Harry ambushed him. Clearly he > did not. > > Even if, for the sake of argument, you DID manage to successfully > prosecute the clear and present danger test, you still have to > demonstrate that Harry's responsive was not excessive. With so many less > drastic but equally effective options available to Harry ? well, I can > only say good luck. > Charles: And now you are trying to insert real world legality into the discussions of morals in a fictional universe. It doesn't fit. This is part and parcel of what I keep asserting and you keep skirting. We're talking about morality not legality. I think I'm done with this subject. I've made my points, and they keep getting ignored. Charles, still proud of Harry. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jul 28 11:44:33 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:44:33 -0000 Subject: James's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173435 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at ... wrote: > > > In a message dated 7/27/2007 11:07:30 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > gbannister10 at ... writes: > > Just to be picky, his parents were 21 when they were killed. > > However, at that point, he didn't know how old they were and hadn't > got any photos - until Hagrid got some for him at the end of PS so > either his imagination or the Mirror supplied a suitable image. Melissa > One would think that on a subconscious level at least Harry would have > remembered what his parents looked like and that memory could have been what the > Mirror was pulling to the front. Geoff: Which begs the question, how clear would Harry's visual memory be of parents whom he had lost as an infant of 15 months - even subconsciously? Speaking personally, I can remember my parents when I was about five but I can't consciously go back further than that. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Jul 28 12:22:41 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:22:41 -0000 Subject: "Today " interview Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173436 Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? There's a quote in my newspaper from it. JKR says she couldn't answer every question in the books, " because I'm dealing with a level of obsession in some of my fans that will not rest until they know the middle names of Harry's great-great-grandparents." Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with derision? I took umbrage with it (we were discussing jewelry at the time). After all, she's the one who created the Black family tree and leaked complex background stories for incredibly unimportant characters. It reminds me of her reaction to H/H shippers or to the idea that Snape was a vampire---as if there was nothing that might suggest either idea. Disillusioned is the word that best describes how I feel after DH. The only thing that sustains me is my long held belief that Snape is really a Gary Stu. Dark Mirror, indeed! From clio44a at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 12:43:59 2007 From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:43:59 -0000 Subject: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173437 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "guzuguzu" wrote: > > Peter Pettigrew: Wasted potential for a character: > > Reading DH to me was like having that plane door open in the wrong > country. Now, I really don't care about things like what the Potters' > jobs were (they died when they were 21-- probably nothing exciting) or > who came late to magic. But I wondered why I had spent so much time in > previous books reading about things which were ultimately irrelevant. >SNIP< Thank you, guzu, you put my thoughts in writing, better than I could ever have done. I totally agree with your view on Pettigrew and DH in general. Although I'm dissappointed with how many stories and detours we saw during the previous books turned out to be irrelevant, I think the problem may lie in our, or at least my 'wrong' perception of the story. Let me explain. I think for JKR it was very important to make a point about how the future is in the hands of children. The trio and their friends are the ones that save the world. The focus of the epilogue is on the newest generation of the wizarding world. And isn't the poem at the beginning of the books also about children? (Have lend my book to a friend, so I can'tlook it up) I also think all whole generation of the marauders is killed on purpose as the books progress. They depicted as a generation lost. At least I think JKR intended it this way. That's why Lupin has to die at his climax of happiness. Although she gives us a lot of backstory, JKR isn't interested in the fate of that generation and that's why none of them is shown to overcome their limitations and torments. Sirius never get's to enjoy his freedom, Lupin can't live in acceptance of him being a werewolf. The even more conflicted characters Wormtail and Snape are not used to their full narrative potential and die unrecognized and in a rather dissappointing way. The most people here on this list are adults. So am I. I can only speak for myself, but I naturally took interest in the adult characters in the books. After all they were closer to me agewise than Harry and his friends. It intrigued me to learn more and more about their backstories and to speculate about their past and future on this list. Probably *because* I am no child, the little scraps of backstories for me were equally if not more important as the love life of Ginny and the quidditch games. For me the marauders' generation was never a completly lost cause, but very intersting characters with potential. The point is, to me it looks like I have taken the wrong perspectives on the books. The marauder generation was never ment to be of key importance. That realization makes me feel hollow and dissappointed. Maybe it explains also why JKR seemed always so surprised about the level of speculating her stories rised among adult readers. She maybe never saw the informations given as terribly important. Nice extras coming alive with the power of her storytelling, but not important for the point she was going to make. So, yeah, I too see a lot of potential wasted in DH, but I fear JKR never shared our perspective on the importance of the adult characters. So for her it is not a waste at all. At the end I would like to add to your list of unused previous plot elements two points. What was the point of Harry being the Chosen One and all this talk about the power-the-Dark-Lord-knows-not and Harry not using Unforgivables, if in the end it was all about being by mere chance to Master of the Death stick? What about all the moral talking (Quote Sirius: The world isn't divided in good people and Death Eaters. Quote Ddore(?): You will have to chose between what is right and what is easy), when in the end there were no real surprises in peoples loaylties (Snape being a questinable exception). The good guys were good - no traitors in the order or the Weasley family, the bad guys were bad -no Slyterin student fighting alongside HRH, Draco being a jerk to the end. And Snape and the reinforcemnt of his story through the Bloody Baron's background teaches us what? Don't trust a Slytherin, even if he is in love with you. They are all obsessive, sick stalkers, who will kill you? Clio, who excuses if not making sense in her argumentation. English is not her native language. From CariadMel at aol.com Sat Jul 28 12:45:33 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:45:33 -0000 Subject: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173438 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? There's a quote in my > newspaper from it. JKR says she couldn't answer every question in the > books, " because I'm dealing with a level of obsession in some of my > fans that will not rest until they know the middle names of Harry's > great-great-grandparents." > > Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with > derision? I took umbrage with it (we were discussing jewelry at the > time). After all, she's the one who created the Black family tree and > leaked complex background stories for incredibly unimportant > characters. It reminds me of her reaction to H/H shippers or to the > idea that Snape was a vampire---as if there was nothing that might > suggest either idea. > > Disillusioned is the word that best describes how I feel after DH. The > only thing that sustains me is my long held belief that Snape is really > a Gary Stu. Dark Mirror, indeed! ************** cariad now: Rest assured potion cat JKR has a deep affection for the more 'obsessed fans' as the interview, which I viewed via a link on Leaky Cauldron, explained. During her pre-DH interviews she was understandably cautious when answering Qs re Potterworld in order not to give the end game away. I can't see now why she doesn't tell all and give the fandom the answers they want, but hey, there's been over 1200 messages and queries on HPFGU and it's just a week since the release of DH. I reckon she could spend the rest of her life locked away in an ivory tower answering all Qs that we have for her, but she has to move on now. Besides, it's a fantasy story. Lets keep it that way. Let our imaginations roll. Whatever is said in canon, in interviews is just by the by. As a wise man once said " Just because it's in your head doesn't mean it's not real". > From chaomath at hitthenail.com Sat Jul 28 13:18:41 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:18:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <67D86EA0-26CB-4795-8AA4-F9B025987C05@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173439 lizzyben wrote: > So what was the point of it all? Gryfindors & Slytherins still hate > each other, Slytherin still equals evil, and there'll be another Dark > Lord in ten years, tops. Voldemort was the symptom, not the disease. > And he was a symptom of a profoundly broken, corrupt, fragmented, > oppressive society - as long as that society does not change, it'll > keep on churning out Dark Lords on a regular basis. I just finished re-reading book one of Susan Cooper's The Dark Is Rising series (I'm trying to get a little perspective on why I really hated DH). In this series, it is very clear that the battle between good and evil is repeatedly fought but never won. It's the struggle that is important -- and keeping balance between the opposing forces. The Dark is important, if only to throw the Light into relief. This tricky concept has been used successfully a construct for sophisticated narrative fiction. However, it totally doesn't work in JKR's world. From the beginning she's never espoused anything like this. It's always been clear that Harry will triumph over Voldemort and the world will be a better place for it. The prophecy, a key plot point, clearly shows that in this world, Good or Evil will vanquish the other. Not permanently (the early hint of Grindewald suggests that evil is always with us), but significantly. In the Potterverse, the struggle isn't as important as the end result. Again, not a new concept, but one that also has been successfully used in narrative fiction (indeed, I'd venture that it's a much more popular theme). And therein lies my problem with DH. JKR gave us an ending where the root cause is still spinning madly, supplying the next good-vs-evil battle. But she promised us a series where that would not be the case. It's this disconnect that is so jarring -- and it's another piece of the betrayal of the reader. > That's the fundamental *weirdness* of this ending to me. Other > novels about rivalries or feuds end w/some sense of reconciliation > between the feuding parties, of lessons learned & wisdom gained. Not > this one. In Romeo & Juliet, the tragic deaths lead the feuding > families to reconcile & seek peace. But here, it's like the Capulets > realized that the Montagues are totally evil & worthless, & it really > was all the Montagues' fault anyway. Uh, yay? Yes, weirdness is a good way to describe it. It just seems so wrong in tone, and so totally evil. > lizzyben, who couldn't even be happy about Evil!Dumbledore. Ach, me too! I love dark, compex characters (which I why I was fascinated by Snape and why I got bored with puppet Harry). I should have loved seeing this side of Dumbledore. I should be frantically rereading the earlier books for hints and different interpretations. Instead, I can't bring myself to even look at the bookshelf. I feel tricked and lied to (in the meanest sort of way), and have lost interest. Given that, you may wonder why I'm here. I guess I'm hoping that someone will be able to change my point of view. I still want to believe, but my eyes have been opened. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From jimjefferis at frontiernet.net Sat Jul 28 12:44:47 2007 From: jimjefferis at frontiernet.net (Jim Jefferis) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:44:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070728124508.2F07CB51A5@relay01.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173440 potioncat: Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? There's a quote in my newspaper from it. JKR says she couldn't answer every question in the books, ".because I'm dealing with a level of obsession in some of my fans that will not rest until they know the middle names of Harry's great-great-grandparents." Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with derision? Jim: I saw the interview and I would definitely say that she said it with affection. In fact, I believe she followed that comment directly with something like "I don't mind that, I LOVE it!" Jim [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gingermc at cox.net Sat Jul 28 12:02:26 2007 From: gingermc at cox.net (Ginger McElwee) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 07:02:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: <46aaa192.28d6720a.1cab.ffff9396@mx.google.com> References: <46aaa192.28d6720a.1cab.ffff9396@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <00c901c7d10f$2b23a760$816af620$@net> No: HPFGUIDX 173441 >Eva wrote: >This episode doesn't detract from Lupins braveness or any good qualities he >has. He is a good person, but but was overwhelmed with all that was >happening and the consequences of that. >sherry replied: >I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. . . . I liked Lupin in every previous book, but I wanted >to shake him in DH, and no other supposedly good character came off looking >so disgusting to me. Authors have to show some inner conflict in characters or the characters will look flat and uninteresting. Lupin has a serious problem. If Rowling never showed that he doubted himself and agonized over the proper and responsible way to behave, critics would (rightly) accuse Rowling of writing a cardboard book with flat, uninteresting and predictable characters. However, every time she makes one of the main characters have flaws or doubts, even when those doubts are resolved well, many fans become unset. Lupin has doubts and has to resolve them. That doesn't make him disgusting; it makes him responsible. If he didn't consider the possible negative consequences to his wife and child, he would show an amazing lack of insight into the difficulties he and his family are likely to face. Ginger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leahstill at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 13:21:48 2007 From: leahstill at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:21:48 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173442 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Charles Walker Jr" wrote: >. (snipped) >> > >> And now you are trying to insert real world legality into the > discussions of morals in a fictional universe. It doesn't fit. This is > part and parcel of what I keep asserting and you keep skirting. We're > talking about morality not legality. I think I'm done with this > subject. I've made my points, and they keep getting ignored. > > Charles, still proud of Harry. Leah Unfortunately for your argument, Rowling makes it clear in GOF that the WW there not only is there a legal prohibition on use of the Unforgivables, but that they are morally suspect as well. "Well, times like that (ie the first rise of Voldemort) bring out the best in some people and the worst in others. Crouch's principles might've been good in the beginning...he started ordering very harsh measures against Voldemort's supporters. ...Crouch fought violence with violence, and authorised the use of the Unforgiveable Curses against suspects. I would say he became as ruthless and cruel as many on the Dark Side" Sirius in 'Padfoot Returns', GOF (UK) 457. The view expressed by Sirius, which given the events of GOF, appears to be the authorial view is that use of the Unforgiveables, even when legalised by Crouch Senior, is immoral and brings those using them to the level of the 'Dark Side'. Hence the shock of seeing Harry use Crucio in circumstances where another curse would have served as well if not better. What is the authorial voice saying now? When did things changed? No wonder a ten year old is confused, I'm five times as old and I'm wondering. Leah From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 28 12:52:59 2007 From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:52:59 -0000 Subject: Lily's Letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173443 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hollie" wrote: > > I apologize in advance if this has been mentioned before. I searched but didn't see it. In the letter that Harry finds in Sirius's bedroom, Lily mentioned that Harry had "smashed a horrible vase Petunia sent me for Christmas..." (DH, page 180, US edition) Haven't we been led to believe (unless I'm mistaken) that Petunia more or less disowned her sister? I don't send gifts to people I don't like. I know in the first book (don't have page number) that Vernon says they usually pretend Petunia doesn't have a sister. But this can't be true for Petunia if she's been sending Christmas gifts less than a year before. Any ideas? Lesley: Hi, He says it on the very first page (PS UK edition). I wondered about this as well but I've just quickly re-read it and although it says they've not met in several years I think they must have kept in touch as they knew about Harry's existence. Perhaps it was just a birthday and Christmas thing, I think if the Potters sent them cards or presents they would feel obligated to send something back. What do you think? Lesley From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 28 13:09:48 2007 From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:09:48 -0000 Subject: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173444 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? There's a quote in > my newspaper from it. JKR says she couldn't answer every question in > the books, " because I'm dealing with a level of obsession in some > of my fans that will not rest until they know the middle names of > Harry's great-great-grandparents." > > Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with > derision? Lesley: I also think it was said with affection but as an obsessive I think another few pages at the end to explain the fates of these characters we have all come to love would have been nice. But there is also an old saying about always leave them wanting more. From elfundeb at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 13:23:56 2007 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:23:56 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] over analysing? In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707260833k7362dff6n91a55b246b81ce69@mail.gmail.com> References: <8ee758b40707260833k7362dff6n91a55b246b81ce69@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a0707280623nad5f399t5282c56972d4d33a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173445 Reply written 3 days ago but somehow not posted -- montims: I know that we all need to discuss the book(s), and I am very grateful that there is this great group, with such excellent ideas, but while we are teasing out every last strand, I really feel that we should appreciate that in JKR's eyes: DD is the epitome of goodness Snape is brave and noble the Marauders were lovable pranksters (though not as lovable as Lily...) Harry and Ginny love each other with a deep and abiding love, as do Ron and Hermione everything turns out for the best etc etc etc Debbie: I do hear what JKR says, but I am not compelled to agree with her. I can only interpret the events in the books in the light of my own life experience, which necessarily differ from hers, JKR cannot make me see James and Sirius (or the Twins, for whom that moniker fits much better) as loveable pranksters no matter how much she tells us so. In any event, James and Sirius were not lovable -- ask Lily, who will tell you they were arrogant toerags. What is missing from the narrative is any basis for understanding how James ceased to be an arrogant toerag and captured Lily's affections. Our only testimony comes from Sirius, who has not proven to be reliable. This is a storytelling gap that prevents me from appreciating James' good qualities. I must take it on faith. As for Dumbledore, aren't we better off knowing that Dumbledore really *isn't* the epitome of goodness? Dumbledore was a flawed human being (as we all are) who was much better than most at concealing his errors and his pain, not to mention his agenda. As a longstanding and fervent member of PACMAN,* I prefer this Dumbledore. He was a good leader who succeeded in the concealment of his own flaws and weaknesses behind a facade of strength, compassion and moral goodness. He was uniquely qualified to lead the Order through a period of wartime, because he could make tough choices for the greater good. As Headmaster, his experience enabled him to set a tone that fostered self-discernment. In other words, he allowed others the opportunity to learn from their mistakes, as he had learned from his own mistakes. But perhaps Dumbledore's greatest achievement was to recognize Harry's moral superiority to himself. montims: We, who analyse every detail, can and will reach other conclusions, and conclude that something is creepy, someone is sinister or a childabuser or whatever, but I really feel that that is due to JKR not having written more specifics, or hammered home her beliefs. I think she thinks that having a character say "everybody loved her", for example, is enough for us to believe it. Debbie: I think she does believe this. However, it's the job of a good novelist to *show* us how loveable a character is rather than to tell us. I often suspect that JKR believes she has given many more clues to a character's nature than she actually has, because she fills in the details. JKR has lived with her characters and her story for so long that she doesn't seem to appreciate that the lack of information often results in other visions of her characters. Overanalysing? I have not yet begun to analyse . . . and when I'm done I expect my opinions of the characters will differ from JKR's. Debbie off on a week's holiday which will include a careful reread of DH *PACMAN: Perfectly Angelic Characters Make Bad Novels [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 28 13:30:00 2007 From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:30:00 -0000 Subject: Harry's grandparent's Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173446 Hi, This is a question I've been puzzling over from book 1: what happened to Harry's grandparents? Sirius mentioned that he ran away from home at 16 and stayed with the Potters then (OOTP pg103 UK edition) but within 5 years they must have been dead as James was only 21 when he died and Petunia was Harry's only living relative. It has never been mentioned how they were killed and all four (including Lily's parents) must have been between the ages of 40-65, and as wizards generally live naturally to ripe old ages (Dumbledore, Muriel), what happened? Any ideas? Lesley From ida3 at planet.nl Sat Jul 28 13:49:52 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:49:52 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173447 Lisa: > Sure it can -- there could be no other outcome other than for Snape > to be killed or turned into a werewolf, and no one else to actually > perform the killing or the bite except Lupin. Therefore, Sirius' > intent was clear in the canon facts. Dana: No, you can't because you can't just make assumptions about a person's intention by looking at the severity of the possible outcome. It is like saying that a kid, who accidentally shot his kid brother, even though he was forbidden to play with the gun that he had the intention of shooting his brother by playing with it anyway, on the basis that playing with a gun can have dangerous consequences. That is making assumptions about Sirius truly understanding or even considering that only these two options where a likely outcome and that is not a canon fact. The subtext actually hints at the contrary that Sirius did not see Lupin or his fury problem as something really dangerous or that he, by becoming an animagus, had not forgotten that not everyone was as well protected as he was. Also one has to wonder if Sirius understood that being a werewolf was something really terrible for the one affected by it. James and his friends did not condemn Lupin for it. He never was anything other then their friend and their nightly adventures was something Sirius, just like the rest of them, looked forward to. I think Sirius never got what it meant for Lupin or that he even considered it as something negative. Also the many near misses that they encountered on their nightly excursions actually prove that Sirius had forgotten or never really thought about the dangers Lupin really could pose. If they had truly realized what could have happened if Lupin had gotten away from them, I do not think that they would have continued doing it. Many kids do things when they are young that are utterly stupid and they never think about the consequences that are so obvious to adults. Most of the time it never goes wrong and because of it they keep doing it until one day, one kid is not so lucky and the consequences of their dangerous behavior suddenly becomes an undeniable reality. Even Harry forgets the danger of Lupin being a werewolf or fails to even consider that werewolves can be deathly at times because of his association with Lupin. To Harry Lupin is just as normal as anybody else. Was Sirius irresponsible? He absolutely was but that doesn't automatically mean that his ultimate goal was killing Snape or having Snape turn into a werewolf himself. Lisa: > What Dumbledore did not know was that the Marauders > were sneaking out of their dorm, was that the Marauders were > unregistered animaguses (animagi?), was that the Marauders were > placing themselves in mortal peril by consorting with a werewolf > while he was transformed. Snape was not going there to confront > the werewolf Lupin, but to expose the Marauders. We have no hint > that Snape knew he'd be getting into a situation that would > inevitably end up with getting himself killed -- after all, if the > Marauders could survive hanging with a werewolf, why couldn't he? Dana: Tell me why this has anything to do with Sirius intentions? I am not sure if you want to imply that Snape had anything noble on his mind when he wanted to expose them because he surely didn't. I'm not suggesting that Snape could really fathom the dangers of his actions but it is not something you can blame Sirius for. You can't say oh now I have done something really stupid but it is not my fault because he done it too. In my view the problem is that people still connect Sirius playing a trick on Snape and the possibility of Snape ending up death but as canon stands now these two things are no longer connected because Snape was not in the tunnel because he was tricked by Sirius. Snape went into the tunnel because he wanted to expose the marauders, making it an isolated event that had nothing to do with Sirius or his trick. One could argue that if Sirius hadn't told Snape how to get in that Snape would never had been there and to some extent I agree (although I think Snape was sneaky enough to eventually discover how to get in on his own) but that doesn't make Sirius responsible for Snape choosing to go and now that we actually see that Snape had motivations of his own to go, I think it is only fair to say that he himself was responsible for the choices he made, regardless if Snape understood what type of consequences his action could have had or not. Snape was not in the tunnel as a direct result of a trick played on him by Sirius. Snape was in the tunnel because he used the information that Sirius gave him in the hope he could expose the marauders and make Lily see that James was not something to be admired. Sirius's intentions no longer had anything to do with why Snape was in the tunnel. It was Snape's own intention that could have resulted in his death or him turning into a werewolf. You can't blame Sirius for Snape's own stupidity even if Sirius acted irresponsible by given Snape information that he shouldn't have. It is not an automatic declaration that Sirius without a shadow of a doubt had murder on his mind when he told Snape how to get to Lupin. Lisa: > And Sirius was going to ... what? Save Snape before Lupin bit or > killed him? James didn't think so. Dana: This doesn't seem really logical to me to assume that Sirius actual envisioned Snape needed saving because James thought otherwise. Snape himself did not envision he needed saving even while he knew what he was going to find. Lisa: > And lets the Marauders get away with breaking school rules by > sneaking out of their dorm; breaking Ministry Rules by being > unregistered animaguses (animagi?); and allowing themselves to > continue placing themselves in mortal peril every month? Gee, > their parents must be comforted. Dana: I think you are applying a slight shortsightedness here for the simple fact that Snape was breaking school rules too. He would not have been able to know the marauders sneaked out of their dorms at night if he himself had followed the rules strictly and neither would he have gone to the willow if he was such an innocent rule obliging student as the willow was forbidden to go near. The marauders breaking the Ministry Rules had nothing to do with Snape nor was it up to him to reveal any wrong doing on their part. And in retrospect Snape thought it funny that is own friends applied dark magic on innocent school girls. Saw nothing wrong with it and was not shy to use it himself on other people. The marauders were arrogant ignorant school boys but I think it goes too far to say that they did what they did because they wanted to put people in danger. Lisa: > We really don't know why James did it, actually. Dana: Does that really change anything about why Snape thought he did it? Lisa: > I don't think it was ever meant to be a joke on either behalf. I > think Snape was completely serious about getting the Marauders > expelled, and I think Sirius was dead-set on harming Snape, > to "teach him a lesson." Dana: Well trying to proof to Lily that Sirius and James were not as wonderful as everyone thought they were does seem to me that Snape was the one wanting to inflict the most damage. If Sirius had been dead-set on harming Snape then I think he would have made sure that Snape indeed went to the tunnel and not leave it to chance that Snape might be to cowardly to go. He surely would not have told anyone that could possibly interfere with his plan. Again canon does not give any type of factual information about why Sirius told Snape how to get passed the willow or how it transpired. Teaching someone not to sneak around after them by scaring the living daylight out of him seems to me an equally valid assumption. On the other hand we do have valid information to conclude that Snape did not go to the tunnel because he was played a trick on. So Snape's reasons for being in the tunnel had nothing to do with anything Sirius did or said to him but Snape did use, him being played a trick on, to clarify his presence in the tunnel and tried to use this to get the marauders expelled. So Sirius so-called trick was used against him. It is like someone wanting to play a practical joke on you and you finding out before hand and turning it around so that the one playing the joke is now actually the one who is played. That is what happened. Snape wasn't tricked in going to the willow because he already found out what Sirius was playing at. Snape wanted to turn the trick around by exposing the marauders instead. Lisa: > Precisely - that IS your opinion. And I have mine. Dana: Sure and I respect your opinion I just disagree with the assessment about something being canon fact while it actually isn't factual at all. Just because Sirius wasn't sorry after nothing actually happened doesn't mean that he meant for Snape to be killed. It could be but it isn't an actual fact. So filling in the blanks is indeed just opinion but until it is proven without a shadow of a doubt that Sirius wanted Snape to be killed I'm very happy to assume it wasn't so. Lisa: > LOL -- you're the one who doesn't want to be convinced. I have > held theories on several things and kept my mind open enough to > have it changed -- most notably, after reading HBP, I thought Harry > was a horcrux. However, there were too many good solid arguments > to the contrary, and I was convinced to change my positions. I've > learned from that mistake to trust my instincts! Dana That might be so but the moment a theory becomes validated or disproven by canon then why should one still need to look at it from a different perspective? I could not for the live of me believe DD ordered Snape to kill him so I theorized about other reasons Snape could have had to kill DD but I was proven wrong and it is no longer open for debate. Only the unproven parts of the theory remain open for debate. Interpretation is not the same has having a theory and always remains open for debate because different people see different things. Interpretation can lead to theories and theories can lead to interpretation by trying to fit canon to the theory instead of letting the text speak for itself. Interpretation will never be fully validated by canon unless the text actually leaves no room for it to be interpreted in any other way and therefore it is actually a moot point to try to convince someone to see it differently if they do not want to. And you already made up your mind that Sirius is guilty of trying to kill Snape and me jumping to hoops will not convince you to change your mind. To me Sirius intentions are not validated in canon and are therefore open for debate. Snape's reason for going to the tunnel and him having enough information to know it could be potentially dangerous is validated in canon. This means Snape did not go to the tunnel because he was tricked regardless of what Sirius wanted to happen to him if he did. These two points become separate issues of debate. 1) Snape put himself in a situation that could have gotten him killed 2) Sirius's reasons for telling Snape how to get passed the willow. These two issues are no longer part of the same event. If Snape had gotten killed then it was not because Sirius tricked him but because Snape wanted to go there to find out what the marauders were up to. It is like saying Snape wanted to kill Harry when he revealed Harry's ability to speak parseltongue and thus giving Harry the tool to enter the Chamber of Secrets. Harry knew what he could face in the chamber but he went anyway. Snape had nothing to do with it. Harry to some level could have find out by other means that he could speak parceltongue but it was Snape who tricked him into revealing it. JHMO Dana From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 13:39:28 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:39:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <137166.67875.qm@web55012.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173448 Potioncat wrote: > Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? > Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with > derision? cariad wrote: > Rest assured potion cat JKR has a deep affection for the > more 'obsessed fans' as the interview, which I viewed via a link > on Leaky Cauldron, explained. I saw it and thought it was said with affection. I do believe JKR knows that we the fans have made her books the successes they are and is almost overwhelmed knowing that her story, characters, and themes mean as much to us as they do her. Dateline on Sunday (7 PM EDT) is devoted to that interview if you want to catch it. I suspect that what was aired on the Today Show are snippets of that interview and you'll be able to see what she said and how she said it yourself and in context within the entire interview on Dateline. Also, Mugglenet.com has links to both interviews aired on the Today show (one aired on Thursday, one on Friday). Christine/keywestdaze From guzuguzu at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 13:55:34 2007 From: guzuguzu at yahoo.com (guzuguzu) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:55:34 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: <00c901c7d10f$2b23a760$816af620$@net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173449 Sherry wrote: > >I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. . . . I > liked Lupin in every previous book, but I wanted > >to shake him in DH, and no other supposedly good character came off looking > >so disgusting to me. Then Ginger wrote: > Authors have to show some inner conflict in characters or the characters > will look flat and uninteresting. Lupin has a serious problem. If Rowling > never showed that he doubted himself and agonized over the proper and > responsible way to behave, critics would (rightly) accuse Rowling of writing > a cardboard book with flat, uninteresting and predictable characters. > However, every time she makes one of the main characters have flaws or > doubts, even when those doubts are resolved well, many fans become unset. > Lupin has doubts and has to resolve them. That doesn't make him disgusting; > it makes him responsible. If he didn't consider the possible negative > consequences to his wife and child, he would show an amazing lack of insight > into the difficulties he and his family are likely to face. Now guzu: I need to disagree with you here. Ditching your new wife and unborn child because you have doubts is not responsible; it is disgusting. Of course he had to consider all the negative consequences, and you are right, that made him a realistic character-- but that's what the entire somewhat-silly red-herring Tonks-Lupin subplot in HBP was. When Harry first came to the burrow in HBP, Tonks was there, upset, and refusing an invitation to a dinner that Lupin would be at, which means Lupin's doubts have been going on for over a year, and then we had the big confrontation in the hospital wing where his friends and even former Head of House told him to get over himself. Enough already-- he is supposed to be an adult and a teacher. And up to this point, he's seemed to have a healthy sense of humor about his "furry problem". And none of this explains his "deranged" look and him slamming a 17-year old into a wall. Speaking of lack of insight, I think Rowling could have made a wonderful point (in the epilogue perhaps) about the difficulties which he and his family were going to face in the world, however she chose to resolve the problem by simply killing both parents. So, it didn't even matter... he may as well have gone with Harry after all. In fact, if he had, Tonks probably would have lived to raise her son. From rkelley at blazingisp.net Sat Jul 28 13:53:45 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Ricky & LeAnn) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:53:45 -0500 Subject: That Whole Christian Thing (plus assorted others) Message-ID: <00d601c7d11e$be2be400$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> No: HPFGUIDX 173450 Joe wrote: >> "I'm of the opinion that JKR included some parallels/allusions to Christianty. This is different than saying these books are allegories for the Crucifixion of Christ, etc. And yet! She also included some elements that are clearly non-Christian." << Anders: I am one who strongly sees the Christ allegory in the last book since I'm a devout Christian. (Harry went to King's Cross to speak to DD, Pettigrew/Judas sold Harry out for silver and died by his own hand, Harry's "baptism" in the lake by Ron/John, in book five we had Seamus/Doubting Thomas, - I could go on and on about episodes in the books which seemed to me to parallel Christian examples.) However, the question is whether or not Jo did a C.S. Lewis and intentionally wrote the series with that purpose, or whether her own Christian background merely came through in the writing on occasion, or whether I'm reading something into them which doesn't exist at all. I believe the first, but I understand the opinions of others who believe one of the latter two. History tells us that many of our Christian celebrations - especially Christmas and Easter, - began as pagan festivals. When the church couldn't get people to stop the celebrations they interjected a new meaning into them and incorporated them as Christian holidays or "holy days". So, to a Pagan, a Christmas tree means something completely different than it does to a Christian. Therefore when I see Christmas trees in the Great Hall at Christmas, I think they're celebrating the day set aside to commemorate Christ's birth, while a Pagan might think they're celebrating an ancient pagan festival. Aren't we both correct in our own way? In that same vein I see the Christ story occasionally throughout the series, but especially in the book's ending. Anders From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 14:01:58 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 07:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The perfect ending of my favorite book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <817226.65673.qm@web55003.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173451 penhaligon at gmail.com wrote: >> I don't understand the widespread interest in James and Lily's >> occupations. Based on the amount of gold left to Harry, it would >> seem that they didn't have to work and instead devoted their >> energies to the Order of the Phoenix and fighting Voldemort. >> >> I seem to recall Mr Lovegood mentioning (regarding the invisibility >> cloak) "None of you have ever seen such a thing. The possessor >> would be immeasurably rich, would he not?" Melissa wrote: > That's intriguing. If we judge by the amount of gold that was in > Harry's vault he was very wealthy indeed, but I'm curious as to why > Mr Lovegood would think so. JKR has said in interviews in response to questions regarding some of her backstories of characters (and I'm sorry I can't point specfic interviews, but such things are collected at http://www.accio-quote.org) that James's parents were very wealthy; that James was born late in their lives after several unsuccessful attempts to conceive, so they tended to dote him (which could make one a bit arrogant -- makes me think of Dudley a bit); and that they died natural deaths. I don't recall anything she has said about Lily's parents though. Christine/keywestdaze From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 14:14:46 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:14:46 -0000 Subject: James's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173452 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pattiemgsybb" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > Did anyone besides me notice that James Potter is referred to > > in OoP as being fifteen, the same age as Harry, in SWM, but > > that all of the characters whose ages we know would actually > > have been sixteen in that scene? > > mac_tire: > That, or the fact that JKR is notoriously weak > at arithmetic. ronnie here: And speaking of JK's notoriously weak arithmetic skills, I've been wondering for some time now about a similar question, but thought it might be too picky and obsessional to put here: The Potters had a son when they were 20 years old - young, but acceptable. However, in OotP, Lupin says to Molly Weasley after the boggart scene: "... but we're much better off than we were last time. You weren't in the Order then. you don't understand". I always thought that meant she was younger than the Mauraders, and was underage, but how could thad be? She couldn't possibly have 5 successfull pregnancies before the age of 17! (Charlie, Bill, Percy, Fred & George, Ron. We know her brothers were at the order (the Prewetts) - so how come she wasn't?? From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 14:21:35 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 07:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:That Whole Christian Thing (plus assorted others) In-Reply-To: <00d601c7d11e$be2be400$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> Message-ID: <772816.50612.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173453 Ricky & LeAnn wrote: <<>> History tells us that many of our Christian celebrations - especially Christmas and Easter, - began as pagan festivals. When the church couldn't get people to stop the celebrations they interjected a new meaning into them and incorporated them as Christian holidays or "holy days". So, to a Pagan, a Christmas tree means something completely different than it does to a Christian. Therefore when I see Christmas trees in the Great Hall at Christmas, I think they're celebrating the day set aside to commemorate Christ's birth, while a Pagan might think they're celebrating an ancient pagan festival. Aren't we both correct in our own way? In that same vein I see the Christ story occasionally throughout the series, but especially in the book's ending. Anders ****KATIE:**** And yet, I do not. I think people see what they choose to see, or what they *expect* to see (thank you, Dumbledore). You expect to see Christianity in everything, because, as you said yourself, you are a *devout* Christian. I, as someone who believes in god, but not in religion, do NOT see Christianity in HP. I see the same themes that you do: redemption, love, sacrifice...but I do not interpret these as Christian. You do, because to you, and many others, these are primarily Christian themes. Maybe JKR did put some Biblical elements into the books, but she also put elements of Classical and Norse mythology, elements of British mythology (Arthur, specifically), and yes, elements of paganism. My mother often says that "Whatever is there, belongs to author." Meaning, I've always assumed, that whether the author attempts to or not, there are going to be many different levels of interpretation in a work. So, on that hand, I appreciate the different interpretations. On the other hand, however, I really think that boiling the whole complicated and rich story down to Christian allegory really takes a lot away from the books. First of all, that means that the story was already made up for her, that JKR just had to rewrite it, basically. Not very original. Secondly, it means that all the fun stuff about the books: the wands, the silly spells, the moving pictures...it's all made a lot more serious and a lot less fun if it's all about sending some religious message. I mean, personally, that idea just makes my skin crawl. If someone actually convinced me that these WERE Christian allegory - I would never read them again and I would feel like I had been tricked into reading them. And that would be really sad for me, because these books have been a great joy and comfort to me over the years. All that said, I am not responding to any more Christian threads, because I'm just making myself irritated. ; ) But, I did feel I needed to say all of that. Cheers, Katie --------------------------------- Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 28 14:57:55 2007 From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:57:55 -0000 Subject: James's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173454 > Geoff: > Just to be picky, his parents were 21 when they were killed. > > However, at that point, he didn't know how old they were and hadn't > got any photos - until Hagrid got some for him at the end of PS so > either his imagination or the Mirror supplied a suitable image. Lesley: Hi, In Ootp Harry could not have known his parents age as he had never been told when their birthday's were but because they were taking their OWL's i think he assumed they were both 15 as he was, not realising that their birthdays were earlier in the year and that they had already turned 16. Lesley From lmkos at earthlink.net Sat Jul 28 15:02:59 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:02:59 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James's age In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173455 >ronnie here: >And speaking of JK's notoriously weak arithmetic skills, I've been >wondering for some time now about a similar question, but thought it >might be too picky and obsessional to put here: > >The Potters had a son when they were 20 years old - young, but >acceptable. However, in OotP, Lupin says to Molly Weasley after the >boggart scene: "... but we're much better off than we were last time. >You weren't in the Order then. you don't understand". I always >thought that meant she was younger than the Mauraders, and was >underage, but how could thad be? She couldn't possibly have 5 >successfull pregnancies before the age of 17! (Charlie, Bill, Percy, >Fred & George, Ron. We know her brothers were at the order (the >Prewetts) - so how come she wasn't?? Lenore: I see what you mean. Molly was actually older than James-Lupin-Sirius by several years! She had to be 26 or 27 at the least, in order to already have six children, at the time LV was vaporized. Ron was 19 months old then, so she could have already had Ginny too by then. Somehow I think this could explain why she wasn't in the Order; she had quite enough to be getting on with. And, while she may not have been in the Order, she and Arthur were certainly very aware of the WW news, and they had shared in the atmosphere of tension and terror from childhood on. How could she 'not understand' when she had lost brothers during that time? I have found JKR's math skills to be slightly better than her calendar skills. Or, maybe it's just that WW lunation cycles are more wildly variable and erratic than our own. Lenore From muellem at bc.edu Sat Jul 28 15:18:05 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:18:05 -0000 Subject: Lily's Letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173456 > Hollie wrote: > In the letter that Harry finds in > Sirius's bedroom, Lily mentioned that Harry had "smashed a horrible > vase Petunia sent me for Christmas..." (DH, page 180, US edition) > Haven't we been led to believe (unless I'm mistaken) that Petunia > more or less disowned her sister? > > > Lesley: > > He says it on the very first page (PS UK edition). I wondered about > this as well but I've just quickly re-read it and although it says > they've not met in several years I think they must have kept in touch as they knew about Harry's existence. > > Perhaps it was just a birthday and Christmas thing, I think if the > Potters sent them cards or presents they would feel obligated to > send something back. What do you think? colebiancardi Don't forget that the Dursleys do send Harry *Christmas* presents - and I use those words lightly. The first year, he received a fifty-pence piece. The second year, they sent him a toothpick. I don't believe they sent him anything the 3rd year, as I do not see a mention in the book - maybe they did, but it got overlooked by the Firebolt The fourth year, they gave him a tissue. I guess for the fifth year, they couldn't get a present to #12 Grimmauult Place. Same for the 6th year, when Harry spent it with the Weasleys - however, Kreacher managed to send him a large package of maggots! You know what they say - it isn't the gift, but the thought that counts? Well, in these cases, those thoughts were nasty Petunia has always been a passive-aggressive character in my eyes. She sends *presents* but picks out the worst things in the world, or in Harry's case, as an afterthought - as if she was just happening to be cleaning out the *stuff* in her car and just stuffed one of those discarded items into a box and sent it off to Harry. Perhaps Petunia really took the meaning of re-gifting to heart. As in re-gifting using her trash. colebiancardi From rkelley at blazingisp.net Sat Jul 28 15:10:51 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Ricky & LeAnn) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:10:51 -0500 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory Message-ID: <00da01c7d129$7e4b8010$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> No: HPFGUIDX 173457 Sydney: "What does a House like this sound like to you? A House associated with reptiles and ghettoes like Nocturn Alley? A House whose Founder has a 'monkey-like' face and a name that's suspiciously foreign? A House with sinister ties to Eastern Europe? Whose Head-- redeemed only by a passion, presented as kind of creepy and wrong, for a woman on the 'pure' side-- has greasy black hair and a freakin' *hooked nose*??!" I didn't read as much negativity into Jo's Slytherin descriptions as you seemed to get from them. To me, she was showing us that there are all kinds of people in this world, and some of them aren't as nice as others, but there were also Slytherins who turned out good. Harry Potter wasn't killed by Slytherins, he was killed by the evil which possessed Tom Riddle, who was a descendant of Slytherin, and seemed to have been possessed by the same evil attitude. Slughorn didn't hate muggles although he was quite self-serving, and even Harry himself would likely have been a Slytherin had he not fought against it. It seemed to me that even Slytherin himself wasn't always a bad guy, since it said that at first all the houses got along. It was only after Slytherin developed his deep prejudice against muggles and mudbloods that problems erupted in the house system. He became obsessed with his own ideas, and his obsession was handed down through the generations of his family. I think Jo was also telling us that people who have a tendency toward cunning and self-serving can sometimes be steered into the wrong direction by people who play upon those tendencies. And she was telling us that sometimes we should question the things we've been told by our parents, such as, "Only purebloods are worthy." By the time Harry entered school, it seemed to me that Slytherin House had been corrupted by Salazar's ideas. It had nothing to do with who he was or what he looked like, although I must agree that I hadn't pictured him as monkey-like in my own mind, but rather as one who was very tall, handsome and haughty in manner who had developed a sneer over time. I thought Jo fought against the labeling idea when Sirius told Harry that the world isn't divided into Death Eaters and good guys. I thought the biggest example of that in the last book was her treatment of Snape. He had both good and bad tendencies, and he had been part of both worlds at various times. And finally, I thought by continuing with the sorting hat, I thought she was telling us that it's okay to be in a group with others of similar tastes and abilities as long as one group doesn't begin to think they are superior to others. I thought she was telling us that it wasn't the sorting which had caused the evil, but the bad ideas passed down from Slytherin's twisted mind which found fertile ground in some of those with qualities associated with Slytherin House. In book one we were also told that those same qualities could make a person great, and there were many Slytherins who had made good, as evidenced by Horace Slughorn's friends. Jo also showed us negative qualities in Sirius who was a Gryffindor, Ernie MacMillan who was Hufflepuff, and Cho, who was Ravenclaw. I didn't feel Jo was slurring all Asians when Cho turned out to be, IMO, shallow. How would you suggest she should have portrayed "the bad guys" to the readers? She had to make some type of distinction to move the story along. I didn't read her description of Bellatrix as a slur against any particular ethnic group, but rather as reptilian (hooded lids)to show that she was cold-blooded and without mercy, just as Voldemort was snakelike. I took the description of Bella's greasy black hair to show that she was so obsessed with Voldy and the dark arts that she didn't even take care of her own physical appearance. Jo described Narcissa Malfoy with an expression as having just smelled something unpleasant. I immediately pictured her in my mind as a complete, arrogant snob - do I think Jo was slurring all wealthy people? No. I never saw Knockturn Alley as a ghetto, but rather as a sinister, underworld street where people purchased items associated with the dark arts. It was the movie which made the people there look homeless, not the book. I also didn't see that Jo was slurring Eastern Europeans, but just chose Albania as a random place for Voldy to run to. It was also obviously a place where many wizards preferred to vacation. It is close to Romania which already has an association with vampires in literature, but we can't blame that on Jo. She also put in hints about Hitler and his attempts at genocide and creating a "pure race". I'm part German, but I didn't find any of those references offensive. In the end Jo showed us that anyone, regardless of their past, can be forgiven of evil if they want to change, but a price must be paid. Even the Malfoys who murdered, owned slaves, stole, were arrogant, - who did about everything "un-nice" Rowling could think of, - were still forgiven in the eleventh hour when they decided to turn against evil. Harry's act of saving Draco caused Narcissa to save Harry later on. I think Jo was telling us that no one is beyond redemption if they desire it. Anders From carodave92 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 15:28:45 2007 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:28:45 -0000 Subject: Lily's Letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173458 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "colebiancardi" wrote: > > > Hollie wrote: > > In the letter that Harry finds in > > Sirius's bedroom, Lily mentioned that Harry had "smashed a horrible > > vase Petunia sent me for Christmas..." (DH, page 180, US edition) > > Haven't we been led to believe (unless I'm mistaken) that Petunia > > more or less disowned her sister? > > > > > > Lesley: > > > > > He says it on the very first page (PS UK edition). I wondered about > > this as well but I've just quickly re-read it and although it says > > they've not met in several years I think they must have kept in > touch as they knew about Harry's existence. > > > > Perhaps it was just a birthday and Christmas thing, I think if the > > Potters sent them cards or presents they would feel obligated to > > send something back. What do you think? > > colebiancardi > > Don't forget that the Dursleys do send Harry *Christmas* presents - > and I use those words lightly. > > > Carodave: > A related question - how did they get the gifts to Harry (by owl???) and to Lily and James. I assume the muggle postman ddidn't deliver to GH and we know the muggle postman doesn't deliver to Hogwarts. Carodave From nightmasque at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 15:32:15 2007 From: nightmasque at yahoo.com (Feng Zengkun) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:32:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: rec: Missing from 'Harry Potter' a real moral struggle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <711567.60336.qm@web52603.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173459 Feng Zengkun (well, that's me) wrote: > > > > Harry has no inner struggle - the > > > choices he has to make are easy because > > > everything is so black and white for him. > > > In this respective, there is no 'moral > > > struggle' for Harry to grapple with: his > > > options are to defeat Voldemort or not, > > > and that choice is ridiculously easy to make. > Eggplant wrote: > > Ridiculously easy?! It's easy to march into the > Forbidden Forest to > > be murdered by a maniac? What Harry did was moral > and as you read > > his thoughts as he walked to his doom it sure > seemed to be a > > struggle to me. It takes no courage to know what > the right thing to > > do is, but it can be a struggle to actually do it. > I read that > > article yesterday and I still can't make heads or > tails of it. > > Feng again: No, no, I'm afraid you misunderstood me (and the article). I'm not saying that Harry has no morals or morality; I think we have two different definitions of the topic here. What I'm saying (and what I believe the article was saying) was that the choices are easy for Harry because they are black and white. There is no shade of gray here; defeating Voldemort is the right thing to do, no matter how hard it might be. It's easy for Harry because he knows that that is the 'right' thing to do, so to speak. Compare this to, say, Dumbledore's situation (before GoF, at any rate). If he wants Voldemort defeated, he has to sacrifice a young boy. This is a moral struggle: do you allow an evil wizard to live so that a boy you love can live as well, or do you sacrifice the latter to defeat the former? I'm sure you can appreciate that this is a vastly more difficult choice to make, because there is no 'right' answer here. The same with LotR: do you allow magic to continue existing and risk its abuse, or do you take magic out of equation completely and not give people a choice? These are the 'moral struggles' I was talking about: Dumbledore and Frodo and all the other classic series comprise some really difficult choices, because there is no real 'right' answer, and this creates the 'moral struggle'. Whereas for Harry the answer has been straightforward all along, and the choices easy to make. He has to kill himself, yes, but that's not the same as, say, if he had to kill Ron and Hermoine in order to defeat Voldemort - /that/ would have a 'moral struggle'. I hope that clarifies things. From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 15:59:20 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:59:20 -0000 Subject: The perfect ending of my favorite book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173460 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at ... wrote: > > In a message dated 7/27/2007 11:10:00 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > penhaligon at ... writes: > > I don't understand the widespread interest in James and Lily's occupations. > Based on the amount of gold left to Harry, it would seem that they didn't > have to work and instead devoted their energies to the Order of the Phoenix > and fighting Voldemort. > I seem to recall Mr Lovegood mentioning (regarding the invisibility cloak) > "None of you have ever seen such a thing. The possessor would be immeasurably > rich, would he not?" > > That's intriguing. If we judge by the amount of gold that was in Harry's > vault, he was very wealthy indeed but I'm curious as to why Mr Lovegood would > think so. Lisa: Well, that was one of the many reasons I didn't like Mr. Lovegood AT ALL. It implied to me that Mr. Lovegood thought that if one were invisible, they could use that invisibility to steal from others. I got a bad vibe from him the whole time the trio was at that house, and not just because he was contacting the Ministry about Harry being in his house. He wouldn't shake Harry's hand upon meeting him. He only reluctantly let them in the house. Sure, that can be explained by fear -- for himself and for Luna. Who sold him the Erumpent horn? He calls himself a "Quester," as one being on the Hallows Quest -- so he's interested in the power of the Hallows, as well. Interesting. I'm not sure where that leads me ... but it's interesting. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Jul 28 16:06:57 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:06:57 -0400 Subject: Molly's age was Re: James's age Message-ID: <002701c7d131$534c9900$4d62d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173461 Ronnie said: ". I always thought that meant she was younger than the Mauraders, and was underage, but how could thad be? She couldn't possibly have 5 successfull pregnancies before the age of 17! (Charlie, Bill, Percy, Fred & George, Ron. We know her brothers were at the order (the Prewetts) - so how come she wasn't??" You need to go back and re-read GoF. She and Arthur are older than the Potters and Sirius. They were at Hogwarts before Hagrid became the gameskeeper. "Mrs Weasley was intrigued by the Whomping Willow, which had been planted after she left school, and reminisced at length about the gamekeeper before Hagrid, a man called Ogg." Quite possibly Fabian and Gideon were in the order because a: they were male, or b: they were unmarried. Arthur and Molly eloped, IIRC, during the uncertainty of the previous Voldywar, and started a family. According to the HP Lexicon, Bill was born Nov 29, 1970 and they came in pretty quick succession after than. CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 15:37:04 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:37:04 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173462 I have been reprimanded about the way I post. Guess I am doing it wrong but I have re-read the rules and hoping this posting will be correct. I post to a number of various subjected boards like this and this by far is the hardest board to post to for me. Today's posting is about the 7th book so I think I am ok to post here. I am sure you will let me know if I still have it wrong, lol. As I have pondered the seventh book I think I would like an alternate ending book. Think about it, so much death and for what? Rowling said she really thinks about the characters she kills but it doesn't read like that in this 7th book to me. It seems like she killed for the shock value and not all that concerned about the story line. Rowling claims differently of course. This 7th book leaves me in a constant state of unfinished business. There is no satisfaction to it. It leaves me hallow. I am sorry I got involved. It makes me want to throw out the books and movies Because it has hurt my re-reading of the previous books now when it comes to Fred, Hedwig, Snape and others. The movies too. It basically has ruined all my affection for the Harry Potter series. Why kill Hedwig? Why Dobby? There isn't an 8th book so there isn't a plot line to protect. I mean if you look at all the characters Rowling killed in the 7th book do you see any benefit to the story line as to why? Why kill Lupin and Tonks, because they were happy? And what happened to their baby? See, a lot of unfinished business and the book series has ended. Don't feel right to me. Lady Potions **Elfy Reminder** Please post comments about list policy or procedure at the HPFGU Feedback group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/ From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 16:13:48 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:13:48 -0000 Subject: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173463 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? There's a quote in my > newspaper from it. JKR says she couldn't answer every question in the > books, " because I'm dealing with a level of obsession in some of my > fans that will not rest until they know the middle names of Harry's > great-great-grandparents." > > Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with > derision? I took umbrage with it (we were discussing jewelry at the > time). After all, she's the one who created the Black family tree and > leaked complex background stories for incredibly unimportant > characters. It reminds me of her reaction to H/H shippers or to the > idea that Snape was a vampire---as if there was nothing that might > suggest either idea. > > Disillusioned is the word that best describes how I feel after DH. The > only thing that sustains me is my long held belief that Snape is really > a Gary Stu. Dark Mirror, indeed! > Lisa: Yes, I saw it, and yes, she was pleased that there was such an obsession. In fact, she said, of the obsession, "I love it; I'm all for it!" Time to untwist the knickers! ;0) From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 15:49:59 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:49:59 -0000 Subject: Too quick and a sell out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173464 Carla: > Does anyone else feel this way? Empty deaths for shock and > effect....no back stories to explain the over simplified plot > devices. The previous 6 books were brilliant. Did she grow so tired > of Harry and those we love so much that she just did whatever to get > away from it? I hear she cried. Well so did those dedicated fans who > expected the same thoughtfulness, consideration, and love that the > other books contained. There better be one hell of an epilogue to > make up for the shabby treatment of the characters I've come to love > and cherish so much. This book hurt my heart. It's like losing > friends for no other cause but financial gain. Nothing noble there. > And to me, these characters were noble. Oh Carla I feel just like you do !!!! The 7th book leaves me in a state of unfinished business and has hurt my re-reading the previous books. I agree, there should have been another book, this 7th book which was suppose to tie up all the loose ends, made more questions than it answered. I do feel this book was rushed and a sell out. Just my 2 dents, Lady Potions From lmkos at earthlink.net Sat Jul 28 16:10:39 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:10:39 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mythic themes (was Re:That Whole Christian Thing) In-Reply-To: <772816.50612.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <00d601c7d11e$be2be400$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> <772816.50612.qm@web52704.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173465 >Anders: > History tells us that many of our Christian celebrations - especially >Christmas and Easter, - began as pagan festivals. Katie: (snips) > Maybe JKR did put some Biblical elements into the books, but she > also put elements of Classical and Norse mythology, elements of > British mythology (Arthur, specifically), and yes, elements of paganism. Lenore: Yes, the books are chock full of powerful, ancient symbols and themes from cultures all over the world, including some of those from Eastern (oriental) traditions which are even more ancient than the Western use of similar themes. These symbol patterns are embedded within the unconscious psyche of everyone, IMO, and this would help explain why we have such an inexplicably strong response whenever the deep patterns are triggered by an artistic work or by other means. Katie: > My mother often says that "Whatever is there, belongs to author." > Meaning, I've always assumed, that whether the author attempts to > or not, there are going to be many different levels of > interpretation in a work. Lenore: If it is true that all the ancient patterns (archetypes) are already in us, unconsciously, then it follows that they would influence our interpretation of an artistic work, and certain archetypes would be more powerful and meaningful to us as individuals than others. That brings us to a kind of paradox, in which we wonder: who does the story or work of art "belong" to, the author or the responder? JKR didn't create those powerful mythic images which evoke such passion in us. But she did gather them up and drop them liberally into the heady potion which became Harry Potter. She did use her imagination to weave her own artistic story form, in which the ancient symbols found a place. Katie: > So, on that hand, I appreciate the different interpretations. On > the other hand, however, I really think that boiling the whole > complicated and rich story down to Christian allegory really takes > a lot away from the books. First of all, that means that the story > was already made up for her, that JKR just had to rewrite it, > basically. Not very original. (snips) Lenore: Yes, NOT original. That brings us to another aspect of this topic. Maybe we could say that the manner in which authors or artists express the use of these themes is their own creation. But the materials which they have dipped into and used to form and shape their work are not theirs. They belong to all of us. We can think of ceramic art using earth; musical compositions using harmonics which have always existed; in painting, all the colors as materials come from earth but the principles of color have always been there. Also, a story can be told in many "languages", such as Christian, pagan, classical, oriental, and on and on. The language in which a story is told does not necessarily define the parameters of the story! Lenore From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sat Jul 28 16:14:36 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:14:36 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173466 > Sydney: > *takes a deep breath* Okay, here's the part where I get an inbox full > of flaming emails, but I just have to get this out. > > What is she giving us in Slytherin House? I'm not trying to be > provocative, I'm just laying out what it is we're looking at here. > This book has given us a population characterized by 'ambition' and > 'cunning', they are often described as having 'greedy' expressions. > They always seem to be in positions of power and have more money than > seems right. They're not admitted into certain clubs and quite right > too. They can't be trusted-- their loyalties are not those of the rest > of society. In a war they will probably run or switch sides or try to > profit from the suffering of others. They manipulate the government > from behind the scenes to their own purposes, using money and mesmeric > powers. They keep themselves to themselves and never fit in; who they > are seems to be partly by birth-- established by nasty inbreeding--, > partly by belief, and partly by some invisible taint. > > They killed Harry Potter and refused to accept his Salvation. > > What does a House like this sound like to you? A House associated with > reptiles and ghettoes like Nocturn Alley? A House whose Founder has a > 'monkey-like' face and a name that's suspiciously foreign? A House > with sinister ties to Eastern Europe? Whose Head-- redeemed only by a > passion, presented as kind of creepy and wrong, for a woman on the > 'pure' side-- has greasy black hair and a freakin' *hooked nose*??! > What was she *thinking*? JK Rowling, I appeal to you, *what were you > thinking*? > > I'm not, please believe me, I'm NOT accusing Rowling of anti- Semitism > here (I will guarantee 90% of replies to this post will say "OMG > you're saying JKR is an anti-Semite!!!"). Magpie: You're a braver woman than I for laying this out--I've literally been dancing around it since I finished the book. This is also why, in the other part of the thread where I've been talking to Ken about the ending, I can't see Harry and Ron as simply Princeton men to Draco's Yalie--those two groups are actually part of the same elite with a jokey rivalry. Yale is not Slytherin (even to a Harvard man!). And switching from this division to that one would be like having your cake and eating it too--keeping the Slytherins in this role for the story and then, realizing how weird it is, just asking us to pretend it never really existed. Like you, I don't think this has anything to do with Rowling being anti-Semitic. The Slytherins aren't supposed to "really" be Jews in an allegory (another reason this whole idea seems to kind of haunt threads about people being offered saving and rejecting it.) But they totally do seem to be playing that role, and I can't see why having Pansy Parkinson get up to hand Harry over, and the Slytherins then cast out as untrustworthy, would start us on a road to reconciliation. On the contrary, they just added their biggest crime to their rap sheet. So it's not about calling Rowling anti-Semitic, but it is about this villain that fits naturally into the story she eventually seemed to be telling. The funny thing is I actually did once write about this subject--but it was after OotP. That was the book where one of my first reactions was, "Wait, the Slytherins are Nazis...but they also seem to have a lot in common with certain representations of Jews." And what's strange is how it's like there's this house full of all these things you've described, only with a big Swastika hung over it so you can have it both ways and totally separate the stereotype from its historical meaning. The reason I think it really struck me first in OotP was because the problem with the whole Hitler Youth idea is that that was that was an idea, and OotP is where it seemed revealed that Slytherinism was not just an idea. Perhaps this is why JKR can tell us in an interview that there are DE children of DEs in other houses...yet can't show it to us because it really doesn't seem natural. You can have people like Peter who betray and fall in amongst them, but the more the books went on the more Voldemort and his beliefs were tied to Slytherin. Even to the point where Harry saves the hat and thus saves everyone not from being separate from each other, but from being Slytherin. Looking back on that old post I did, back then I had several lines that predicted the ending--that the Slytherins were perhaps not really loyal to Hogwarts at all, and that they rejected salvation. Only honestly back then I assumed I was exaggerating and there would be an integration. Sydney: She's just totally fine with the idea that there is *something different about them*, but our Heroes should be kind and magnanimous like they are to House Elves (and don't even get me started on the House Elves). Magpie: Yeah, that was weird. And interesting that the lesson of how people might actually be inspired to courage and being better people if you reach out to them and treat them with respect was restricted to the non-human House Elf slave desperate for a new loving master. Anders: I didn't read as much negativity into Jo's Slytherin descriptions as you seemed to get from them. To me, she was showing us that there are all kinds of people in this world, and some of them aren't as nice as others, but there were also Slytherins who turned out good. Harry Potter wasn't killed by Slytherins, he was killed by the evil which possessed Tom Riddle, who was a descendant of Slytherin, and seemed to have been possessed by the same evil attitude. Magpie: Jesus wasn't literally "killed by Jews" either. Pansy stood up to hand Harry over to Voldemort. He was killed by Voldemort (a Slytherin) whlie DEs (more Slytherins) watched. There was no nebulous force of evil possessing Tom. The Slytherins were never, that I saw, presented that way. They seemed actually even more directly involved in "killing" Harry than the Jews were in killing Jesus. I didn't see any Slytherins that turned out very good by the standards of these books--somewhat good, but never on the level of many of the most mundane people in other houses. And rather than there being "all kinds" in the world, I saw a real distinction between some of those kinds. Anders: I thought Jo fought against the labeling idea when Sirius told Harry that the world isn't divided into Death Eaters and good guys. I thought the biggest example of that in the last book was her treatment of Snape. Magpie: I do think she showed that DEs weren't the only bad guys, sure. But I had the same reaction as Sydney did to Snape's redemption. Anders: And finally, I thought by continuing with the sorting hat, I thought she was telling us that it's okay to be in a group with others of similar tastes and abilities as long as one group doesn't begin to think they are superior to others. Magpie: And nobody feels superior to Slytherins? I think they do--for obvious reasons. Anders: In book one we were also told that those same qualities could make a person great, and there were many Slytherins who had made good, as evidenced by Horace Slughorn's friends. Magpie: Who are these "and friends?" What I saw was a Horace Slughorn who was okay--as evidenced by him introducing himself by apologizing for his house--obviously he's one of the good ones (he too loves Lily as well). He ultimately could make the right choice, at least, after a bit of a struggle. Of Harry's generation--the one that's actually going to take over? Nobody. Snape? Was personally redeemed through his passion for a Gryffindor. I don't know where these "many" Slytherins making good are you're talking about. They're not wholly condemned. Anders: Jo also showed us negative qualities in Sirius who was a Gryffindor, Ernie MacMillan who was Hufflepuff, and Cho, who was Ravenclaw. I didn't feel Jo was slurring all Asians when Cho turned out to be, IMO, shallow. Magpie: Well, I don't think Cho was shallow at all, but regardless, negative qualities in other houses isn't the point. That didn't stop them from being, imo, the Elect. They could make as many mistakes as they wanted and still be that. Anders: How would you suggest she should have portrayed "the bad guys" to the readers? She had to make some type of distinction to move the story along. I didn't read her description of Bellatrix as a slur against any particular ethnic group, Magpie: As Sydney tried to exlain, this isn't about her making a slur against an ethnic group. She needed a way of making a distinction and the distinction she made was rather familiar. And fitting, imo, given the story she eventually seemed to be telling. Plenty of authors--even fantasy authors--manage to create bad guys without my ever thinking they sound a lot like this. And just to say it *again* since it can't be said enough, this is not any sort of accusation of anti-Semitism against Rowling. I don't think she intends the Slytherins to "be" Jews at all (she'd rather they be seen as Nazis, in fact). You can go through every single one of these traits, as you have, and explain them each away, but they still add up to the same collection of traits to me, with some other things thrown in here and there where necessary to throw other modern good qualities she wants to highlight into relief. (For instance, in a Medieval story the Jews could never be aristocrats, but rather than breaking the impression I had I just thought it was an update: those are bad in this universe, so the Slytherins are that too.) Anders: I also didn't see that Jo was slurring Eastern Europeans, but just chose Albania as a random place for Voldy to run to. Magpie: I believe Sydney's referring to more than Voldy happening to run to Albania. This perhaps just comes down to what things make an impression on one as one is reading. Anders: She also put in hints about Hitler and his attempts at genocide and creating a "pure race". I'm part German, but I didn't find any of those references offensive. Magpie: And Sydney acknowledged those Nazi references. The way you're bringing it up here still seems to suggest that Sydney is saying that Rowling is insulting Jews and is therefore offensive, which is not what she said. You recognized hints about Hitler--and why would you recognize them? Because you recognize that collection of things. The roles the Slytherins were playing also echoed other recognizable historical character types--at least to me. (I also see a lot of colonial steroetypes in GoF, btw.) Anders: In the end Jo showed us that anyone, regardless of their past, can be forgiven of evil if they want to change, but a price must be paid. Even the Malfoys who murdered, owned slaves, stole, were arrogant, - who did about everything "un-nice" Rowling could think of, - were still forgiven in the eleventh hour when they decided to turn against evil. Harry's act of saving Draco caused Narcissa to save Harry later on. I think Jo was telling us that no one is beyond redemption if they desire it. Magpie: And I didn't get that at all--certainly not from the Malfoys huddled in the Great Hall not being molested. Their being forgiven wasn't really the point (the main thing I thought wasn't that they were forgiven but that they weren't Saved). The good guys were known to do plenty of bad things too--I can't think of them as murderers, but they certainly were canonically known to steal and be arrogant and be un-nice--and own slaves. However, those sins seemed to clearly bounce off their souls in ways they did not the Malfoys. -m From remuslupin73 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 16:19:27 2007 From: remuslupin73 at hotmail.com (ronnie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:19:27 -0000 Subject: Molly's age was Re: James's age In-Reply-To: <002701c7d131$534c9900$4d62d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173467 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > Ronnie said: > ". I always thought that meant she was younger than the Mauraders, and was > underage, but how could thad be? She couldn't possibly have 5 > successfull pregnancies before the age of 17! (Charlie, Bill, Percy, > Fred & George, Ron. We know her brothers were at the order (the > Prewetts) - so how come she wasn't??" > > You need to go back and re-read GoF. She and Arthur are older than the Potters and Sirius. They were at Hogwarts before Hagrid became the gameskeeper. "Mrs Weasley was intrigued by the Whomping Willow, which had been planted after she left school, and reminisced at length about the gamekeeper before Hagrid, a man called Ogg." Quite possibly Fabian and Gideon were in the order because a: they were male, or b: they were unmarried. Arthur and Molly eloped, IIRC, during the uncertainty of the previous Voldywar, and started a family. According to the HP Lexicon, Bill was born Nov 29, 1970 and they came in pretty quick succession after than. > > CathyD > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ronnie: Thanks CathyD, i remembered the Ogg part, but not the Womping willow part. And more than the math part, I was wondering why Molly wasn't in the Order "last time". But I guess being a mother or 5 accounts for it.... From CariadMel at aol.com Sat Jul 28 16:28:33 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (CariadMel at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:28:33 EDT Subject: Lily's letter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173468 > Carodave: > A related question - how did they get the gifts to Harry (by owl???) and to Lily and James. I assume the muggle postman ddidn't deliver to GH and we know the muggle postman doesn't deliver to Hogwarts. Carodave ******** Just another of the many, many holes in the mystery of Muggle/wizard world. How do muggleborn kids get on to Platform 9 3/4, Harry got there by sheer luck. How did Mr and Mrs Granger get into Diagon Alley? (CoS, p47) when muggles have been charmed not to see the Leaky Cauldron. How did Hermione get away with practising spells before she got on board the Hogwarts express (PS, p79) There's probably more but it just jars a bit to read that when there is a big deal around the secrecy of Magic and the fforts of the MOM to keep the WW under wraps. cariad. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 16:36:38 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:36:38 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173469 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dana" wrote: > > Snape's Witch: > > Considering that Harry saw exactly the same scenes we've read and > > didn't think Severus was either a stalker or obsessed, I'll just > > accept his opinion of Severus Snape. > > Dana: > Sorry could not resist but why believe Harry now? Before DH Harry's > point of view on Snape has always been a major point of debate but now > suddenly he is right? If he is not a good judge of character when he > witnessed and experienced Snape's behavior towards him then why is he > now? Snape truly hated Harry and his dad that character assesment is > also still very much part of canon!Snape. Is the Harry filter suddenly > a reliable witness while before these revelations it wasn't? > > I'm just saying. > > Dana > Carol responds: I'm glad you asked that question. The "Harry filter" doesn't lift. We're still seeing it from his point of view. We've still got a hird-person-limited narrator. How do we, then, that the narrator is reliable on this point when he wasn't before? Part of it is plot structure. We've reached the end of the book. Aside from the new mystery of Dumbledore's past (and the Deathly Hallows complication), DH is the denouement of the series. JKR is trying to give us the answers, to tie up the major loose ends. And, of course, the biggest loose end of all is Snape. (Not will Harry live. Surely that was a given despite misdirection to make us think otherwise.) Anyway, we've been set up from the first book (in which Snape is the red herring villain) to the end of HBP (where he's the "murderer: of Dumbledore) for a reversal, a recognition scene in which the hero (Harry) has an epiphany about someone he thought was his enemy. "He would never forgive Snape. Never!" (OoP Am. ed. ) simply shouts that yes, he will forgive Snape--not for Snape's sake (though to me that brief moment of understanding is very important--it's more than Snape seeing Lily's eyes: it's Harry seeing Snape). Snape didn't have to provide those other memories, only the one that tells Harry he must sacrifice himself. But Snape, who seems to have reached his own belated epiphany, apparently wants them to die understanding each other. I don't think it could have happened if Harry had lived. The recognition scene/reversal is preceded by Harry's twice talking about what will happen if he meets Snape: "If I meet Severus snape along the way, so mush the worse for him, so much the better for me: (HBP Am. ed. ) and "I want nothing better than to meet Snape" [meaning fight him] (DH Am. ed. ). Snape, of course, appaears to have joined the DEs (misdirection), but there are clues along the way (the doe Patronus, the "terrible" detention with Hagrid in the forest), just as there have always been clues about where Snape's loyalties lie and even that he has a heart (clutching the back of his chair when he hears that a student has been taken into the CoS, for example). Harry doesn't get his showdown. What he gets is the shock of seeing Snape die in a terrible way for something that is not his fault. He knows that Snape was desperate to get to him, that he has something very important to say, and the fact that Snape gave him those memories as he was dying, that his last act words were a request for Harry to look at him, makes all the difference. Harry doesn't even think to question him. What motive could Snape have for fooling him now? He's dead. So Harry rushes to DD's office to see the memories. As he experiences the memories, too numb to feel much of anything but no longer suffused with hatred and a desire for vengeance, he reaches an understanding of Snape, the good and the bad. Snape shows him everything that's relevant to his relationship with Lily and with Dumbledore and his motive for protecting Harry. Harry understands that Snape was an unloved boy torn between love for his mother and the temptation of joining his Slytherin friends. He sees Snape making the wrong choice and begging Dumbledore to protect his mother (with no thought for himself and his father). He hears him promise to do "anything" and learns that he has kept his promise. He understands the significance of the doe Patronus, understands that Snape has helped him, that Snape has lied and spied and risked his life for Dumbledore theat snape was horrified that DD would (seemingly) set Harry up as a pig for the slaughter, hears him say that lately, he has only watched the people die that he could not save. And Harry's reaction, both to the revelation about Snape and what DD expects of him, is "at last the truth." Not quite the truth regarding Harry because DD concealed important information from both him and Snape, but, yes, the truth about Snape. Harry's hatred has been replaced by understanding and compassion. There's not even a moment of forgiveness because Snape has atoned for his sins, especially the one he could not forgive in himself, his role in the death of Harry's mother. And Harry is at last ready to face Voldemort, armed with the information Snape gave him and free of his corrupting desire to avenge himself on Severus Snape. To return to narrative technique: The unreliable narrator is only unreliable when Harry is seeing what's in front of him without understanding it. Take Thestrals, for example. At first, we're told that the carriages move by themselves or are pulled by invisible horses because Harry can't see the Thestrals at all. When he can see them, he thinks they're terrible. But in the epilogue, we get the definitive view of Thestrals: "Thestrals are nothing to worry about. They're gentle things, there's nothing scary about them" (757). The same is true for Snape, who is at first perceived as an unfair teacher, then a member of the Order of the Phoenix whom Harry is not sure can be trusted, then a traitor and a murderer, and, finally, the unloved boy who became a Death Eater and repented because of Lily, risking his life to protect Harry and serve Dumbledore even though he knew that DD was using him. In JKR's world, the highest virtue is courage. Love, too, is immensely important. And Harry, understanding that Snape's love of Lily, originally selfish, gave him the courage to do what was right against his nature and the influence of his Death Eater friends and in the face of terrible peril, names his second son after him, the son with Lily's eyes. That says everything we need to know about Snape. He was saved from evil by his love for Lily and he was immensely brave. And so we get the definitive view of Severus Snape from Harry himself: "[Snape] was a Slytherin, and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew" (758). JKR no longer needs Harry or Hermione to speak for her. Harry has grown up. He has passed through Innocence and Experience to Wisdom. His perception is no longer distorted. We can trust him, and the narrator, now. Carol, now wondering about the Thestrals as symbols of Harry's perception of death From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Sat Jul 28 16:22:47 2007 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:22:47 -0000 Subject: Ironic Justice Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173470 JKR used great irony with each chosen character. Umbridge, so strongly focused on Pure-Blood families ... yet had to invent a "family heirloom" pretending the locket with the "S" was for Selwyn descendants. For all we know, her toad-like face comes from being part-Hag. Dumbledore trusted Snape with things never told to any other Order member, yet never entrusted with the information given to Harry (Hallows and Horcruxes). Neville's bogart was Snape. Yet it was Neville who killed Snape's assassin, Nagini. (No-one would approach Voldemort, yet Neville charged at him. 10000 points to Gryffindor thanks to Neville.) Trelawney's ability as a seer shone. First, Moody would have been the first of the 13 to rise from the planning table to escort Harry from Privot Drive. (4th year Christmas dinner prediction for a 13 seat table) Then, she saw something in her crystal balls ... she saw TARGETS ! The vehicle the trio used to escape Gringotts would make Hagrid envious. Enlisting the aid of House Elves, Goblins, Centaurs, Thestrells, Hippogriffs, Mandrakes, plus one and a half giants. All the allies Umbridge would loathe. The role of Dumbledore will be argued extensively in other posts. But then for Harry to name his son after the 2 men who hide his most important life long secrets (Albus and Severus) instead of Fred, Dobby, Alister, Sirius, etc was a sign of Harry's ability to forgive more than credit to those past headmasters. And the famous Chapter 13. In other books it was the one that held the secret that had to be unravelled. In Deathly Hallow, it was the Anti- Muggleborn laws. A tribute to Amnesty International's intolerance for bigotry and prejudice. Hope you enjoyed the read, aussie From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 16:38:29 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:38:29 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173471 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dana" wrote: > > These two points become separate issues of debate. 1) Snape put > himself in a situation that could have gotten him killed 2) Sirius's > reasons for telling Snape how to get passed the willow. These two > issues are no longer part of the same event. If Snape had gotten > killed then it was not because Sirius tricked him but because Snape > wanted to go there to find out what the marauders were up to. > > It is like saying Snape wanted to kill Harry when he revealed Harry's > ability to speak parseltongue and thus giving Harry the tool to enter > the Chamber of Secrets. Harry knew what he could face in the chamber > but he went anyway. Snape had nothing to do with it. Harry to some > level could have find out by other means that he could speak > parceltongue but it was Snape who tricked him into revealing it. > > Lisa: While I disagree with everything I've snipped, there's little point in responding point-by-point, as we've now come to reiterating the same points we've already made. However, as to the above: Snape could not have put himself in a situation that could've gotten him killed if Sirius hadn't specifically told him how to do so. Smart as Snape was, he didn't know how to get into the Shrieking Shack. Only someone with knowledge of how to do so and a malicious intent could've done so. Somehow, I don't think Sirius told Snape, "This is how to get in, but since you're not an animagus, you won't be able to get away, so you'll be bitten or die." I guess you could believe that -- but that's not canon, either. The thing is, Snape didn't know there was no other way out. If the Marauders could survive, why couldn't he? As for Sirius' reasons for telling Snape how to get past the Willow? Not altruistic, wouldn't you say? He claims it was to "teach him a lesson." What lesson would that be? "Being nosy gets you killed?" That's quite a lesson, I would say ... And since Snape had no clue that Harry could speak Parseltongue, he didn't know the outcome of that action and couldn't have begun for foresee it, so the attempted allegorical situation ... isn't. Sirius knew the only possible outcomes (bite or death) of his "prank." From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 17:06:10 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:06:10 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron and Hermione in Deathly Hallows In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707281006k855eb98hc021430a6f7732c6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173472 Asselin: JKR presents their romance through Harry's eyes. He's not going to see a heart-to-heart that R/H might have, so we're not going to see it. > > Kris Lynda: Unlike some of the other posters I agree with you, Kris! I didn't expect to see the R/H romance from another perspective than Harry's and so I'm not disappointed with how it was presented. As for H/G, since Ginny went back to school and Harry didn't and since, unlike some have posted, Ginny never really gave up on Harry (read the end of HBP for canon support--my book's not handy) and since Harry never forgot her after they broke up and they still have feelings for each other, why would I be upset that they got back together? Yea! To paraphrase a certain Hogwarts professor a little more love in the world is a good thing! Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 17:07:59 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:07:59 -0000 Subject: Parseltongue and Ron ... (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173473 --- "ciraarana" wrote: > > Karina: > > I've been suspecting that Parseltongue is learnable > since Dumbledore didn't ask Harry for translation of > the Morfin's memory wherein he and Voldemort spoke > exclusively in Parseltongue. > > Lynda: > > It didn't bother me either, because any language is > learnable, really, if someone has enough initiative. > > > Cira: > > But if it was learnable, why isn't half of Slytherin > House speaking Parsel already? I rather think that > Salazar would have loved the idea of distinguishing > his students from all others by having them using a > "secret language". > bboyminn: I don't understand this controversy at all. First, Ron didn't learn Parseltongue, he simply repeated a single word that he had heard Harry use before, and that Harry had used recently, and it took him several tries to get it right. If is really so difficult to learn a single solitary word in a foreign language? Why don't more people speaker Parseltongue if it is 'learnable'? Well, who is going to teach them? Who can possibly document a language spoken by only three known people across the span of 1,000 years? You are all aware that many American celebrities appear in commercials in Japan, and in doing so appear to speak in Japanese, but they haven't learned Japanese at all. It's all phonetic. They are given a series of parsed sounds to repeat, which they do, but they have no idea what they are saying. How is this any different than what Ron did? Once again, Ron has not and did not 'learn Parseltongue', he simply repeated a short series of sounds he had heard previously, and did so with some difficulty. Something that any one could have done. That is quite a different feat than 'leaning Parseltongue'. Perspective, people, perspective. Steve/bboyminn From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 16:39:36 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:39:36 -0000 Subject: The mirror, parents, Black and Dumbledore Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173474 I was just reading someone's post (sorry don't recall the name) asking about the moral part of the series. I was sure that in the 7th book Harry because of his bravery he would get one chance to look in that mirror or that thing that Black fell into and get to choose only one of them to come back to life. Real living and not with that veil between them. Which one would Harry choose and why? His mom, dad, Black or Dumbledore - someone else? This is what I thought the whole series was going to lead to. Than after Harry finally chose only one, Death appears to Harry and says he will restore life to all the people and animals\elves that Harry sees in the mirror, IF Harry returns to him all of the Deathly Hallows - the Elder Wand, The Tiara and the Invisible Cloak. This is why I thought Rowlings killed off the characters the way she did. But to find out she killed them off for shock value or because she had a deadline to meet is really disheartening to me. I doubt I will get involved in another series of books if she writes them unless she wrote an alternate book. I doubt I will attend anymore movies. Lady Potions From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 16:58:40 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:58:40 -0000 Subject: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173475 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? There's a quote in > my newspaper from it. JKR says she couldn't answer every question > in the books, " because I'm dealing with a level of obsession in > some of my fans that will not rest until they know the middle names > of Harry's great-great-grandparents." > > Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with > derision? I took umbrage with it (we were discussing jewelry at > the time). After all, she's the one who created the Black family > tree and leaked complex background stories for incredibly > unimportant characters. Lady Potions: Oh yes I saw that interview when it aired. I taped it as well cause sometimes Rowling can be hard to understand what she says. I like to re-run the tape to try and understand what she says. Rowling said that line as a reprimand at first with her hand on her hip and then she instantly softened and eased into love for the people that wanted to know that much detail. I do believe she dearly loves her fans but at times they can be overwhelming. To me Rowling comes off like that princess that was told that the peasants do not have bread - the princess not understanding that that meant they had no food to eat, replied (knowing only of her own lifestyle) "well then let them eat cake." From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 17:24:49 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:24:49 -0000 Subject: James's age / Molly's Age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173476 --- Lenore wrote: > > > >ronnie here: > > > > ... > >The Potters had a son when they were 20 years old - > >young, but acceptable. However, in OotP, Lupin says > > to Molly Weasley after the boggart scene: "... but > > we're much better off than we were last time. > >You weren't in the Order then. ...". > > > > I always thought that meant she was younger than > > the Mauraders, ... > > Lenore: > I see what you mean. Molly was actually older than > James-Lupin-Sirius by several years! She had to be 26 > or 27 at the least, in order to already have six > children, at the time LV was vaporized. ... > > Lenore > bboyminn: Molly's apparent age is established in GoF. She is likely slightly older than Hagrid and likely slightly younger than McGonagall. That makes he at or near 70 through most of the series. The Marauders through most of the books are in their 30's. Molly was at school before Hagrid started working there, which was over 50 years ago. She remembers the previous Game Keeper. Molly and Arthur likely started having kids later in life relative to most muggles considering that they are in their 70's and their oldest son seems to be 30's at most. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From ken.fruit at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 17:41:51 2007 From: ken.fruit at gmail.com (rt11guru) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:41:51 -0000 Subject: Random Observations Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173477 I'm still 700 posts behind so forgive me if I cover old topics. Some random observations. Snape: How much of his public attitude towards Harry was because he hated James, and how much was "Secret Agent Snape" maintaining his cover. Was he acting a part and doing an excellent job of staying in character, at least some of the time? Someone in the wizarding world could get rich in the wand aftermarket by equiping them with a Wii controller type wrist strap. Wizards always seem to be loosing their wands at inopportune times. Has any one noticed that Xenophilius translates to "Strange Love" As far as who got their magic late in life, I have a feeling that it go edited out. It's like when you see the movie trailer 6 months before the final edit and theirs a joke in the trailer that didn't make the final cut of the movie. I have a feeling the JKR had the scene written in her head, and it just didn't work in the final version. In that case, my vote would go to Filch. Can you see him picking up a dropped wand in the Battle of Hogwarts and finding out that it works for him? Guru From mikesusangray at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 17:56:04 2007 From: mikesusangray at gmail.com (Aberforth's Goat / Mike Gray) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:56:04 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173478 Hi all - particularly Betsy! I've backtracked a little bit to pick up Betsy's post - in the knowledge that it's old now. However, she makes a number of very interesting observations. However, before I even start, I'm just curious: Betsy, have you had serious reservations about the religious and moral implications of the series all the way through or has something changed for you in DH? I ask because I can see good reasons why some Christians may have been very positive about the books' religious message until now but have had a severe allergic reaction since then. Anyway, I want to look at only two of your comments - one about Harry and one (indirect) on Dumbledore: > Just on a non-theological basis, Jesus was surrounded by the > living, not the dead. His disciples were there, they > protested when he was taken and in fact Peter attempted to > fight the soldiers leading Jesus away. (A move Jesus > rebuked, healing the soldier Peter had wounded.) Some similar observations came up in a discussion in a group I'm trying to start (not very successfully!)for discussions of fantasy and religion. The question was a comparison of Harry and Aslan's walks to their death. (Here's the group, if anyone is interested: http://groups.google.com/group/fantasy-and-religion) However, what I noticed reading your post was a different point: The people Harry had along with him on his walk towards Voldemort are people he looked up to - parental figures, comforting figures, even authority figures. And - in contrast to the disciples at the crucifixion - THEY DID THEIR JOB. That is, they didn't fall asleep, chop off ears, deny knowing him, run off naked and generally freak out. One of the central elements in the crucifixion stories is that the disciples blew it. And during the crucifixion itself, Jesus is shown taking care of his helpless mother - not seeking or finding consolation from her. The crucifixion narratives underscore Jesus' singularity and independence; DH underscores how deeply Harry relied on other people. It's a *very* interesting contrast. It fits into a lot of similar aspects of a contrast between Harry and Jesus. Harry is alone - but he finds friends; Harry needs help - and he gets it; Harry is young - but he matures; Harry is weak - but he becomes strong; Harry is fallible - but he becomes wise. The contrast also fits into the kind of change Harry brings about: to say that all of wizarding history flows to Harry and from Harry (the way Christian history flows to and from Christ) would be absurd; but he did get rid of a nasty wizard and make the world a better place. Is Harry a Christ figure? Yes. But he's a very human one - a sort of Messiah in minor key. > In contrast, Harry separates himself from his friends and > speaks to the dead. He goes to his death at the orders of a > *very* human man, not the word of God. Actually, the biblical scenario is more complex - and I'm starting a separate post on it. But here's a very interesting line of questions: Whose word sent Harry? Dumbledore's. And if there were one character in the series that you could cut out of the series and paste onto the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel - who would it be? Well, Dobby would look kind of cute, but there's only one reasonable candidate: Dumbledore. Dumbledore is the old man with the long, white beard. Dumbledore is a bit mysterious and unimaginably powerful and wise and knowing and loving. Dumbledore has a plan - just trust him and everything will work out OK. But wait - Dumbledore can't be God! Why not? Because he isn't all-powerful, all-wise, all-knowing, all-loving! We've had our doubts all along, and in HP he says so himself! He screwed up and hung out with Grindelwald. Well, yes - exactly. In fact, theologically speaking, that's the very interesting point thing in DH. The God figure turns out to be very human after all. It's almost as if Rowling first blew God into the series, then changed her mind and let the air out. What's so interesting about that? Well, this act of deflation mirrors a lot of Christian thinking over the last century or so. The "Heavenly Dumbledore" figure has certainly been the standard edition throughout most of the Christian history; however, many Christian theologians - feminists come to mind as do less known movements like liberation theology and process theology - have objected to it. Christians of these kinds have argued that the "Heavenly Dumbledore" image is overblown. They have pointed out that this sort of thinking about God has some dangerous aspects (people who think they're best friends with an all-powerful God have a weird habit of trying to be all-powerful too). Often they have simply insisted that to describe something like God is far more difficult than we realize (there's an old theological tradition called negative theology, but I won't get into that!) Oddly enough, however, the idea of a mysterious force that we call love - something that is at once impersonal and indescribable (after all, it's a force!) and yet deeply personal ? human, in fact - and tangible (after all, it's love!) is a kind of thought pattern that would fit remarkably well. Oh - and, btw, a very human Christ figure, who can't do it alone but relies on his friends - a figure who makes the world a better, safer place but doesn't actually turn the entire course of human history on its ear - that kind of Christ figure fits in remarkable well. Any of that sound familiar? What I'm shooting for is this: I think there is A LOT of theology going on in this book. It may not square with traditional Christian thinking, and a lot of conservative Christians will not like it at all. But it is there. Very much so. Mike Gray (aka Aberforth's Goat) _______________________ "Of course, I'm not entirely sure he can read, so that may not have been bravery...." JK Rowling, The Goblet of Fire. http://www.research-projects.unizh.ch/p8199.htm From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 17:59:54 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:59:54 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Parseltongue and Ron WAS: Deathly Hallows: My Review (SPOILERS!) In-Reply-To: <002001c7d060$cf2dedc0$0202a8c0@Lana> References: <002001c7d060$cf2dedc0$0202a8c0@Lana> Message-ID: <2795713f0707281059o13a7ddc9sc8ecfb7c1e1d8ca1@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173479 Cira: But if it was learnable, why isn't half of Slytherin House speaking > Parsel already? I rather think that Salazar would have loved the idea > of distunguishing his students from all others by having them using a > "secret language". Lynda: Further into the responses, my ideas have changed a bit. Ron was mimicing parseltongue, which is certainly a human capability. Mimicing, that is. Its one I do quite often, in fact. Do I understand the languages in which my choirs sing? Nope. Except for English and a bit of Spanish. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 18:06:08 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:06:08 -0000 Subject: King's Cross Station and DH as Christian Allegory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173480 Monica wrote: > I definitely saw some parallels to Nazi Germany, of course, or any other megalomaniacal world leader in recent years. I am more than > willing to accept this as the parallel rather than making it > necessarily a reflection of Jesus' cross (incidentally, I'm sure the > meaning of "King's Cross" has been discussed ad nauseam so I won't > bother going into it here). Carol responds: Actually, it hasn't been. IIRC, you and I are the only ones who've mentioned it. "King's Cross" jumped out at me as an obvious allusion to Jesus's death and resurrection (cross is obvious, especially in connection with the cross that Harry drew on the, erm, grave of Mad-Eye Moody's eyeball. I wondered whether "King's" (which, of course, in real life relates to the unsaintly George IV) was intended to suggest (to Christian readers, at least) "Christ the King." At any rate, Harry's glimpse of the afterlife (and the dead but healed Dumbledore once again wearing his benevolent facade) in what Harry interpreted to be a version of King's Cross Station (obviously not the real, earthly one) immediately confirmed what I already suspected: Harry was a Christ figure (not to be confused with Christ himself, whether you're Christian or not) who has "died" (entered the afterlife, passed through the veil) but is not really dead and will be resurrected. Meanwhile, Voldie has also "died" (his mangled soul has left his body, visible to Harry as a whimpering bundle of rags, and his followers aren't sure whether he's dead or in a coma). Se lerarn later that his only chance for redemption, to prevent himself from suffering this fate for all eternity, is remorse. And, of course, he rejects that choice. So Harry, willingly sacrificing himself, "dying" without really dying, will obviously be resurrected unless he chooses to take a symbolic train (cue a chorus of "This train don't carry no gamblers, this train") to the next great adventure. Of course, JKR could simply be using King's Cross Station because it has personal significance to her and was Harry's point of entry into what then seemed a wonderful new magical world. Here, it's his port of entry to what lies beyond if he chooses to go there, but he doesn't. So neither he nor we know what's beyond the Veil, but it seems to be a better world. Those who have "gone on," in NHN's words, seem to be themselves at their peak: Dumbledore's hand is healed; Sirius Black looks young and happy. Even Lupin looks younger and less grey. (Snape, I hope, will be the self he would have been if he hadn't been neglected like a plant deprived of light and made the wrong choice that ruined his life, redeemed by love and courage.) At any rate, I think I see now what NHN meant: he was afraid to go on and chose to live as a ghost; Myrtle preferred haunting Olive Hornsby to taking the train to the next great adventure. Instead, they became ghosts, pale imprints of souls remaining on earth instead of facing death, which is anything but terrible unless you're unredeemed like LV--or trapped forever in the terrible oblivion of a Dementor's spirit and not even allowed to properly die. Apropos of nothing, but I want to throw it in: Love, of course, is the highest Christian virtue, and sacrificial love (first Lily, now Harry) is, for JKR and probably many others, the highest form of love. We also have the secular virtue of courage, represented by Gryffindor and, of all people, Snape. It weems to me that the only person in the book who fights for the good for anything other than a personal reason (including Harry) is Hermione. She alone, as far as I can see right now, is motivated by principle. To return to the topic, I didn't catch all the biblical allusions because I was experiencing the story itself on an emotional level (and caught up in the whole Snape arc), but the signs that this book was more overtly Christian than the others were unmistakeable to me even on a cursory reading. I want to say, though, that the Christian allegory (which may have resulted in flaws in the story structure and inattention to other details (a consistent moral universe, for example; I can see no excuse for Harry morphing into Bellatrix to Crucio Amycus Carrow, scum though Amycus is) is not the only reading. The mythological elements are also there, as are the old stand-bys of genre, character development, and theme (love, death, choice, etc.). As long as we closely examine the text and try to avoid imposing our preconceptions and preferences on it--very hard to do at this stage of the game, and I for one am pretty sure that I've entered the game too early, before I've had time to experience the book as a whole without the manipulation of my emotions and expectations--we can analyze the books from whatever perspective works for us (even reder response or deconstructionism). IOW, we can see beyond the Christian allegory and symbolism (thank you to whoever looked up the white peacocks and what were they doing at *Malfoy's* place?) to other perspectives. I wonder, really, whether JKR got too caught up in what was meaningful to her (Harry as Christ figure) and forgot "small" matters like consistency and even logic (Tom Riddle not seeing everyone else's hidden items? A letter to Sirius written when he was living elsewhere in 12 GP?). IOW, the Christian symbolism is undeniably there for readers who want to see it. Readers who aren't Christian or don't like it are free to see from other perspectives (Tolkien's "applicability"), the more the better at this point. Carol, not at all sure this a a coherent post but wondering if anyone had a similar reaction to "King's Cross" From nitalynx at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 18:02:50 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:02:50 -0000 Subject: Harry Ain't Perfect, but he IS a Good Person/The Series has Morality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173481 I enjoy good stories with all sorts of protagonists - rough and ruthless vigilantes, humble and compassionate orphans, morally flexible tricksters... But I want the author to treat each of those types accordingly, and not try to have it both ways. I had no problem with Harry in OotP. He had emotional issues, he made mistakes, and he suffered the consequences. That's something I can sympathize with and possibly learn from. I expected Harry to learn and grow up a bit, too. But, while reading DH, I kept getting this unpleasant impression that the author was telling me "Harry is not just a good guy, he's a Good guy", while showing him doing more questionable stuff. And I didn't like that. A character can be like Rambo or like Jesus, but switching between the two modes at the author's convenience leaves me rather annoyed and unsympathetic. Half of Rowling's good messages don't work for me because she undermines them for the sake of saving the hero from moral trouble. Harry makes a questionable deal with someone who went through torture to help him, and - nothing, because the goblin never finds out. The Trio have a terrible row in the middle of their Very Important Mission, Ron leaves, and - nothing, because DD apparently has foreseen it. Harry wants to confront and punish Snape at the first opportunity, and - nothing, because Voldie gets him first. And McGonagall praises his gallant impulse to torture... Um, yay? I've concluded that I wouldn't want *any* of the central "good" characters in my life. Harry, Hermione, Ron, Dumbledore and Lily all seem rather more self-righteous and mean-spirited than most friends I've had. And that makes the whole story and its world rather bleak for me. Nita From k12listmomma at comcast.net Sat Jul 28 17:36:39 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:36:39 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's Letter References: Message-ID: <030d01c7d13d$dafde0f0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 173482 >> > Hollie wrote: >> > In the letter that Harry finds in Sirius's bedroom, >> > Lily mentioned that Harry had "smashed a horrible >> > vase Petunia sent me for Christmas..." (DH, page 180, US edition) >> > Haven't we been led to believe (unless I'm mistaken) that Petunia >> > more or less disowned her sister? Great snip >> colebiancardi >> Don't forget that the Dursleys do send Harry *Christmas* presents - >> and I use those words lightly. > >> >> Carodave: > A related question - how did they get the gifts to Harry (by owl???) > and to Lily and James. I assume the muggle postman ddidn't deliver > to GH and we know the muggle postman doesn't deliver to Hogwarts. Shelley: I can only image that the Wizards post a Wizard in the Muggle postal system, much like they posted a helper in the Muggle Prime Minister's office for protection. I am quite sure that there are Wizard contacts somewhere in the Muggle banking system too, because you need some means of exchange. The two systems would largely remain separate yes, but somewhere is a contact point. Otherwise, how would the Muggle postman be deliving Harry's first Hogwart's letter? From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 18:16:58 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:16:58 -0000 Subject: Viva la revolucion Was:Re: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173483 Potioncat wrote: > Disillusioned is the word that best describes how I feel after DH. The > only thing that sustains me is my long held belief that Snape is really > a Gary Stu. Dark Mirror, indeed! > She doesn't understand him. Or deserve him. Not only did she kill him off in cold blood and a bad vampire joke (bitten in the neck, are you kidding me?), but she burned up his book with nary a backward glance. I believe I'm off to Kmart to stock up on spray paint, so I can begin graffitiing on bridge abutments and the sides of warehouses the slogan "Snape Lives!"... ...or maybe just put it on T-shirts; more personal, and less arrogant rule-breaking. :P Annemehr From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 18:26:15 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:26:15 EDT Subject: Headmaster portraits (was Re: DH - unanswered (and irritating) questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173484 Susan My theory is that it's there. Remember the first time after Dumbledore's death that Harry went into the Headmaster's office? DD was asleep in his portrait. I theorize that it takes a while for the portraits to awaken after death... Cira Yes, DD was asleep, but his portrait was there. And between Snape's death and Harry's final visit to the headmaster's office more than one hour has passed. I'm sure that's time enough for the portrait to pop up. And I'd like to think that Harry would even have noticed a portrait of a sleeping Snape. Julie: I have a theory about the portraits. I've wondered before if the Headmasters sit for the portraits at some point. But it seems that Portrait!Dumbledore knew everything that happened right up to Snape "killing" him on the Tower. So his portrait wasn't "completed" until the moment he died. I think it is HOGWARTS that "paints" the portraits. Don't ask me how, but we do know that Hogwarts is a magical school, possessed of some magical properties of its own (the moving staircases, etc). So once someone becomes Headmaster/mistress, Hogwarts records that wizard's thoughts/actions in some way, incorporating it all into the portrait along the way, right up until the death (or stepping down?) of the Headmaster/mistress. The thing we don't know is how long it takes to "finalize" the portrait, though I'm guessing some period between the hour that passed between Snape's death and when Harry went to the Headmaster's office in DH, and however much time passed between Dumbledore's death and the time Harry arrived at the Headmaster's office in HBP. (That time could also vary depending on what's going on at Hogwarts, as when DD died the DEs immediately left, while when Snape died the battle of Hogwarts was still raging on and the structure of Hogwarts was sustaining serious damage--meaning the "spirit" or magical essence of Hogwarts might have been very busy at the moment, too busy to place Snape's portrait in the Headmaster's office yet). I'd also suggest the sleeping figure in the new portraits indicates there is still some time needed for the portrait entity (for want of a better term) to incorporate all the memories and whatever other essence is needed to fully animate it. That's my theory anyway, Julie, certain Headmaster!Snape would have his own portrait ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From va32h at comcast.net Sat Jul 28 18:28:25 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:28:25 -0000 Subject: Lily's Letter (and Petunia) In-Reply-To: <030d01c7d13d$dafde0f0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173485 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma" > I can only image that the Wizards post a Wizard in the Muggle postal system, much like they posted a helper in the Muggle Prime Minister's office for protection. I am quite sure that there are Wizard contacts somewhere in the Muggle banking system too, because you need some means of exchange. The two systems would largely remain separate yes, but somewhere is a contact point. Otherwise, how would the Muggle postman be deliving Harry's first Hogwart's > letter? va32h: We don't know that he did...it was with the other mail, but an owl could have left it there, as it is owls who deliver all the other letters. Anyway, in the Prince's Tale chapter, when Lily tells Petunia that she knows Petunia has written to Dumbledore, Lily also says that Snape says that there are wizards working undercover at the post office to intercept that kind of mail. So we do have an answer on that. On a related note, I was very disappointed that Petunia couldn't muster up -ANYTHING - to say to her nephew. Personally (and yes, again here I blaspheme against JKR) rather than finding out about Lily/Snape during *just* the Prince's Tale, I think a better device would have been Petunia giving Harry a bundle of letters containing the note Dumbledore left with baby Harry, and also letters from Lily that she sent home during school. Such letters could contain references to her friend Sev, their falling out, and perhaps something that explains why she decided to go out with James Potter? This would have made Harry's confusion over Dumbledore even more interesting - as he finds reasons to doubt Dumbledore, he finds reasons to trust Snape hmmm....that would have been interesting. va32h From k12listmomma at comcast.net Sat Jul 28 17:55:07 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:55:07 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: a Lupin Rant References: Message-ID: <032a01c7d140$6f809b80$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 173486 > Sherry wrote: > > I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. . > . . I liked Lupin in every previous book, but I wanted > shake him in DH, and no other supposedly good character came off > looking so disgusting to me. Shelley: That scene was so "unLupinlike" that my husband and I were actually discussing whether he had been Imperiused or taken over by a Death Eater- if he was a planted snoop for the other side to find out what it was that Harry was up to. If Lupin had succeeded, would he not have been able to pass along information to LV? So, when Harry gives him the lecture about being there for the baby, I was cheering for the wrong reason. I though Harry had averted a negative plot element- as I thought he should have followed the early lead of Lupin and Kingsley when they thought the had been double-crossed and asked pointed questions with a threatening wand to see if the person was who they really claimed to be. Then, later it's shown that Lupin was really Lupin, and it bugged me to no end that what he was asking amounted to running away or committing suicide, and it ruined the image I had of Lupin being one to consider the facts and weigh the cost before taking the action- I thought he had considered "the cost" of marrying Tonks- like all people marrying should consider- and that's the possibility of having kids and if they are mentally ready to handle those challenges. I was disappointed to learn of a Lupin who jumped into marriage, got his wife pregnant, and then quickly wanted to jump ship because the responsibility scared him. It seemed like he was too eager to jump at a possible suicide mission just to escape the social pressure of what he'd done. His later death was understandable- everyone who fought LV at the castle knew they could die, and some did. By then, it was "ok" that he die, but then I didn't expect Tonks's death also. Shelley From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 18:40:17 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:40:17 EDT Subject: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173487 Guzuguzu wrote: Among my disappointments in DH, one of my top ones was Peter Pettigrew. Here I thought Rowling had created an interesting and unusual character with incredible potential for a good storyline. Here's the set-up we have from the pre-DH books: -Peter was a friend of Harry's parents and former Order member (so presumably has a lot of important knowledge for Harry) - He joined Voldemort, though seemingly out of fear, not because he particularly agreed with the political cause - He outsmarted everyone (for years) with his betrayal and faked-death - Harry saved his life, so he owes him a life-debt - He practically saved Voldemort's life and was rewarded a silver hand (possibly important since we had werewolves, good and bad, running around) - Despite that, he did not seem too well-respected amongst the other Death Eaters and didn't seem to be too happy - He spent time living with (and presumably spying on) Snape in his childhood home Given all that, I was fairly sure Rowling was going to give a big finish to this character. I won't comment on what I thought she should have done, but there were so many ways she could have gone (full redemption by switching back over, double-crossing both sides, giving Voldemort some damaging info on Snape, etc.) but instead we got him choking himself in the closet in a two-line scene without one second of suspense. The life-debt (which seemed to be fairly important in book 3) may as well have not existed. What was the point of any of it? Julie: And I thought this was a great use of Peter's character, and that JKR made a point well. Peter's end was perfect to me. He lived an ignonimous life--he had very few redeeming qualities (the barest hint of mercy toward the son of his "friend" James being one of them), and he was a coward (I still don't know how he could have been sorted into Gryffindor, unless he simply *wanted* to be there and the Sorting Hat bowed to that desire even though Peter had no apparent Gryffindor qualities, which sets up a whole other discussion about the sorting and the Sorting Hat!). So to me Peter deserved an ignomious death, which is exactly what he got. I guess this is just another example of how we each see the characters differently and each had different desires and expections for their fates! Julie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 18:20:24 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:20:24 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR Cut Ron & Hermione Like a Movie Edit ...UNbelievable! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707281120r16891ca9rbf344fa9c17d74f1@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173488 Sara: I just could not believe or ever buy into the idea that Ron and, especially, Hermione could ever abandon Harry at the story's total crisis point while desperately rushing to view Snape's memories in Dumbledore's pensieve. How could Hermione or Ron possibly strip themselves away from Harry at this ultimate crisis point? Lynda: They had other things to do and knew that Harry was capapble of doing what he needed to. No problem there. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 18:46:21 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:46:21 -0000 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal / Unforgiveables In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173489 Matt wrote: > > Lee Kaiwen wrote about the "moral inconsistency" of characters portrayed as "good" using the unforgiveable curses, beginning with Snape (and Harry's attempt) at the end of HBP, and continuing through DH. Carol responds: I'm sorry, but I don't understand this paragraph. (I'm not arguing with your main point, which I agree with.) Do you think that Snape Crucio'd Harry in HBP? Harry tries to Crucio Snape, true, but Snape's supposed Crcuio is the unreliable narrator reflecting Harry's belief that Snape is going to Crucio him into insanity. The person performing the curse is actually one of the Death Eaters (probably the big blond, whose name I can't remember at the moment). Snape *stops* the Crucio: "'No!' roared Snape's voice and the pain stopped as suddenly as it had started. . . .'Have you forgotten our orders? Potter belongs to the Dark Lord--we are to leave him! Go! Go!" (HBP Am. ed. 603). Snape is saving Harry from the Crucio using a reason that the DEs will accept, protecting him as he has promised to do, and at the same time getting the DEs off the Hogwarts grounds. This incident occurs *after* Harry has tried to crucio Snape. Snape easily parries the curse and shouts "No Unforgiveable Curses from you, Potter! You haven't got the ability or the nerve!" (602). Again, obviously, he's giving a reason that sounds plausible for a DE, but (I think) he's trying to advise Harry not to use Dark curses, just as he's trying to get him to use nonverbal spells and close his mind to the Dark Lord. Harry, having just seen Snape "murder" DD, obviously doesn't take his advice seriously. But this scene, and the much-quoted scene in GoF where Sirius Black talks about the corrupting influence of the UC's (and we see what became of the two Crouches, who used them so freely) makes Harry's use of Crucio on Amycus Carrow (who would more fittingly have been turned into a cockroach, if Harry could manage it) extremely disturbing for some readers, including me, especially when he quotes Bellatrix's words about having to mean them. Bellatrix, the ubersadist, who Cruciod the Longbottoms into insanity, is now a role model and teacher? Snape *saves* Harry, whom he doesn't even like but has vowed to protect, from a Crucio. Harry *Crucios* Amycus Carrow (admittedly a contemptible piece of scum who deserves to spend eternity as a piece of gum on the bottom of someone's shoe) for the crime of spitting on McGonagall and she regards it as a "gallent" gesture! The moral universe we thought that Rowling had established has been turned upside-down. BTW, I don't recall McGonagall using the Imperius Curse. Can you point me to the passage? Carol, sharing your objection to Harry's use of the Unforgiveables but wanting to clarify that Snape does not use the Cruciatus Curse anywhere in the books, and particularly not on Harry From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Jul 28 18:52:22 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:52:22 -0000 Subject: Narcissa's choice Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173490 Narcissa fascinated me in this book. She was one whose characterization from HBP to DH seemed right on target, with a consistent and believable pattern of actions developing due to circumstances around her. From the start it's clear Draco is her priority and he remains her priority - likely grows as a priority - when the Dark Lord ups the ante by taking over Malfoy Manor. BTW, I found that a wise move on his part: He sensed a change in the family and/or had learned at least some of the particular events (Unbreakable?). Knowing the influence Lucius holds, it was a smart move on LV's part to clamp down on the Malfoys and keep them close by at all times, first by relieving Lucius of his wand and then by forcing Draco to do his torturing for him (one of several disturbing scenes for me in DH). As always though, Voldemort overlooked the power and influence of the Mother. Narcissa appears to be the one in control of the family from the start of DH, perhaps always the one at the head of the family? I'd assumed Lucius was, given his penchant for dominance and aggression. At least where Draco was concerned, Narcissa was the decision-maker; she was the one who wouldn't allow him to go to Durmstrang and ensured his safety the best way she knew how by going to Snape in HBP. In DH her influence grows (or we see it more directly) when Lucius turns to her after LV asks for his wand. I suspect her pressure on his arm to agree was motivated by fear for Draco as well as some resignation on her part to the situation. Moving to the end, a very captivating and well-written scene: What would Narcissa have shouted to LV if Harry had said 'No, Draco is dead'? Would she still have lied and said Harry was dead? I honestly don't know! People see Christian symbolism in this moment but that's not what came to my mind. She was 'just' a Mom first and foremost, concerned for her son; and perhaps, concerned for the sons of all the Mothers there that night when she said Harry was dead? Her choice certainly saved many sons and daughters whatever her motivation. Come to think of it, I'd rather not know what she would have done had Draco already died; I'll stick to the story as written and remember it as a moving moment in DH. Jen From sherriola at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 18:53:48 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:53:48 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] King's Cross Station and DH as Christian Allegory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46ab90c2.18bb720a.4ac1.00b5@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173491 Carol responds: Actually, it hasn't been. IIRC, you and I are the only ones who've mentioned it. "King's Cross" jumped out at me as an obvious allusion to Jesus's death and resurrection (cross is obvious, especially in connection with the cross that Harry drew on the, erm, grave of Mad-Eye Moody's eyeball. I wondered whether "King's" (which, of course, in real life relates to the unsaintly George IV) was intended to suggest (to Christian readers, at least) "Christ the King." At any rate, Harry's glimpse of the afterlife (and the dead but healed Dumbledore once again wearing his benevolent facade) in what Harry interpreted to be a version of King's Cross Station (obviously not the real, earthly one) immediately confirmed what I already suspected: Harry was a Christ figure (not to be confused with Christ himself, whether you're Christian or not) who has "died" (entered the afterlife, passed through the veil) but is not really dead and will be resurrected. Sherry: Laughing at myself here, but I didn't get any Christian, or Christ Figure feeling out of King's cross. I just thought it made perfect sense for Harry to find himself there in this moment. King's Cross is the place that has always meant going somewhere, going to Hogwarts or going back to the Dursleys. It's the place of departure to the place he considered home, Hogwarts. I thought, well, if he's going to have a sort of way station to get the last details or to make a decision to move on or go back, that station is the place I could most easily imagine Harry thinking of. I must be a simplistic reader, because that's all there was to it for me. Sherry From ida3 at planet.nl Sat Jul 28 18:58:57 2007 From: ida3 at planet.nl (Dana) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:58:57 -0000 Subject: Snape/Lily love or obsession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173492 > Carol responds: > I'm glad you asked that question. The "Harry filter" doesn't lift. > We're still seeing it from his point of view. We've still got a > hird-person-limited narrator. How do we, then, that the narrator is > reliable on this point when he wasn't before? > > Part of it is plot structure. We've reached the end of the book. > Aside from the new mystery of Dumbledore's past (and the Deathly > Hallows complication), DH is the denouement of the series. JKR is > trying to give us the answers, to tie up the major loose ends. And, > of course, the biggest loose end of all is Snape. (Not will Harry > live. Surely that was a given despite misdirection to make us think > otherwise.) Dana: Thanks Carol, I agree with your explanation so sorry to snip the rest of it. I do think JKR gave more to the reader to observe then what Harry actually got (understood/ needed) from these memories and that was basically my point. I tried to explain this in a different post then the one you are replying to. I was not specifically arguing if Snape's love was obsessive or not that is left to the readers interpretation or opinion of what they consider to be healthy love but more that reading the memories ourselves as objective observers (because the memories are objective) doesn't mean that Harry per definition would have come to the same conclusion as we the reader do about how to classify Snape's love for Lily other then Snape being loyal to his mother and because of it working against LV. (well and recognizing that he had certain elements in common with Snape, as you pointed out) So basically what I was trying to question is if the earlier argument (before DH) was that Harry's viewpoint is unreliable (in his conclusion for most) then it should still considered as such even post-DH and it therefore is not Harry's viewpoint that can be taken as an indication that Snape's love for Lily *wasn't* obsessive (still without trying to argue if it actually was or not). As you said in the part I snipped Harry by viewing the memory concludes that Snape is not his enemy as he thought he was and that even though he easily could have been Harry's biggest enemy because Snape sincerely hated him, the love Snape had for his mother prevented Snape from actually working against him but instead helped him in his battle against LV by working with DD. That is basically what Harry concludes and what he respects and tributes Snape for. He is not having a deep philosophical debate with himself if the love Snape had for is mother should be considered healthy or not, as it is of no further interest to Harry. I'm still tossing around varies ideas to see what fits best in to how to classify certain aspects of Snape and his reason's for giving these specific memories to Harry. Of course they are plot related in the sense of revealing the motivations of Snape's character but I also wonder if the memories were supposed to enforce a different plot line JKR set out through this book -> shedding doubt on the trustworthiness and the true motivations of DD's character. That is of course a different discussion altogether so I will leave it at that. JMHO Dana From moosiemlo at gmail.com Sat Jul 28 19:01:07 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:01:07 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707281201p39873bachcc3c0cb0185dc260@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173493 Rahel: Well, dear, people are different. Take it from another parent of a > 1 year old (and of a 3 years old). Under the conditions life > presented to the Lupins, I would have not hesitated but acted just > like Tonks did. I would have left my child under the best care I > know it would get, and went off to protect the loved one who was in > imminent danger - my husband. Thanks for the different point of view. I never would have believed a parent would do this (and I'm not saying this to denigrate your parenting skills, I really do mean that it never would have occurred to me that parents would trust the saftey of their infant to another under these circumstances). Lynda: I know many parents who leave infants and toddlers in the care of others to go to dangerous jobs and situations. Teddy Lupin was left in the care of his grandmother. He was safe and away from the danger of the battle at Hogwarts and his parents, after all, had jobs to do! It was a better alternative for Tonks (a law enforcement officer) than to be stuck at home worrying about Lupin et al. Same with Lupin. That doesn't mean they were bad parents. Just not homebodies! Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hexicon at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 19:10:29 2007 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:10:29 -0000 Subject: King's Cross Station and DH as Christian Allegory) In-Reply-To: <46ab90c2.18bb720a.4ac1.00b5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173494 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Gomes wrote: > > Carol responds: > Actually, it hasn't been. IIRC, you and I are the only ones who've mentioned > it. "King's Cross" jumped out at me as an obvious allusion to Jesus's death > and resurrection (cross is obvious, especially in connection with the cross > that Harry drew on the, erm, grave of Mad-Eye Moody's eyeball. I wondered > whether "King's" (which, of course, in real life relates to the unsaintly > George IV) was intended to suggest (to Christian readers, at least) "Christ > the King." At any rate, Harry's glimpse of the afterlife (and the dead but > healed Dumbledore once again wearing his benevolent facade) in what Harry > interpreted to be a version of King's Cross Station (obviously not the real, > earthly one) immediately confirmed what I already suspected: > Harry was a Christ figure (not to be confused with Christ himself, whether > you're Christian or not) who has "died" (entered the afterlife, passed > through the veil) but is not really dead and will be resurrected. > > > Sherry: > > Laughing at myself here, but I didn't get any Christian, or Christ Figure > feeling out of King's cross. I just thought it made perfect sense for Harry > to find himself there in this moment. King's Cross is the place that has > always meant going somewhere, going to Hogwarts or going back to the > Dursleys. It's the place of departure to the place he considered home, > Hogwarts. I thought, well, if he's going to have a sort of way station to > get the last details or to make a decision to move on or go back, that > station is the place I could most easily imagine Harry thinking of. I must > be a simplistic reader, because that's all there was to it for me. > > Sherry > Hexicon: A couple of days before DH came out, hpfan_mom posted this unbelievably prescient quotation from Howard's End. (Is that book perhaps a known favorite of JKR?) I thought this quote was very interesting in light of the "King's Cross" chapter. The name of the station is a gift, because one can read it many ways--as a religious metaphor, as Harry's gateway to Hogwarts, or in the manner described by Forster and called to our attention by the previous poster. hpfan_mom said in message 172064: Joined the library reading club this summer to kill time while waiting for July 21. Came across this passage from Chapter 2 of Howards End, by E.M. Forster: _____ "Like many others who have lived long in a great capital, she had strong feelings about the various railway termini. They are our gates to the glorious and the unknown. . . . To Margaret--I hope that it will not set the reader against her--the station of King's Cross had always suggested Infinity. Its very situation--withdrawn a little behind the facile splendours of St. Pancras--implied a comment on the materialism of life. Those two great arches, colourless, indifferent, shouldering between them an unlovely clock, were fit portals for some eternal adventure, whose issue might be prosperous, but would certainly not be expressed in the ordinary language of prosperity." From mac_tire at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 03:11:19 2007 From: mac_tire at hotmail.com (pattiemgsybb) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:11:19 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: <46aaa192.28d6720a.1cab.ffff9396@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173495 > Sherry now: > I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument > with Harry. I am a disabled person, and Lupin is a metaphor > for disabled people. My parents would have been ashamed of > me, if I'd come off with such a self-pitying attitude as > Lupin in that moment. My siblings and true friends would > give me a figurative kick in the rear if I tried it today. > Lupin had love, a baby, respect of people he respected. He > was doing something, fighting Voldemort. Yes, I know what > it's like to be unemployed because of a disability. I know > how I've had to prove I'm ten times better at a job than a > sighted person, in order to get and keep a job. Yet, I've > been steadily employed for 20 years, due to my determination > never to give up, never to give in to what the world thinks. > I'm stubborn and was taught that the only thing that could > stop me was me. I was taught to believe in me, a lesson > Lupin apparently never learned. Kit: What troubled me about that scene was that I felt it was completely out of character for Lupin. If we are really expected to believe that a teenager's lecture could prompt Lupin to attack in that way (blasting Harry against the wall), then what is the point of having this man in the book -- I thought Lupin was there to show that werewolves are dangerous during the full moon, but otherwise they are just like the rest of us. Based upon that scene, Lupin, the gentlest of men, cannot be trusted, may go mad any time someone angers him, and probably should be locked in an armed camp with others of his ilk. (It's noted in that scene that Harry sees the werewolf in Lupin for the first time, strongly suggesting that it's the wolf in him that spurred his violence.) I get what you're saying about the way you've confronted your disability and that's a very healthy approach. But in fairness to Lupin, in legal terms (and I suppose medically this is correct) the bite has made him only half-human, he is subject to viciously discriminatory laws, and he is not merely discriminated against -- he is feared and hated by most of wizard-kind. And, in fact, he must deal with the fact that for a night every month he is incredibly dangerous. He's coping with a lot more than an ordinary disability. He's also in chronically poor health due to his condition, AND he has no money and little chance of employment. I can't believe that Tonks and their friends pressured him to marry when he was resisting it for so many good reasons, and he clearly bitterly regrets it. (Had he been madly in love, it might've been something he'd want to risk; I know JKR's very big on love -- but the pressure was exerted on Tonks' behalf, with the goal of making HER happy and without considering whether it would add to Lupin's happiness.) And I think it's purely nuts for JKR to have written in a pregnancy. Do we really believe that Lupin would have allowed that, considering his strong feelings about not reproducing? Surely even Tonks must've had more sense. I do not understand JKR's inclusion of this relationship at all. And on top of all of it, both die ignobly off-camera -- and then we see Lupin in death, who doesn't offer a word about his new young wife (though he and Harry discuss Teddy), looking happier than he's ever been! I also think JKR undercut the logic of Harry's tirade (which I found too nasty to be in character for Harry, either) by the circumstances in which it took place. I don't care how talented the Trio is at dealing with danger; they're three KIDS who won't say what they're trying to do. Nothing could be more natural than for an adult who loves them to offer to help. I agree that Lupin was probably only too happy to get away from Tonks (who, as written, seems utterly clueless re. Lupin's misery -- an odd sort of love), but it's not unreasonable to see his motives as complex, is it? And I believe Harry's reaction says as much about his own abandonment issues as about his righteous anger on the pregnant Tonks' behalf. I read another's opinion that all the weirdness in Lupin was offered as a red herring to suggest Lupin might be the insider who betrayed Harry. I don't know if that's true, but if so...I don't think it succeeded. I think he (and Tonks) just came off as unbelievable, and that their relationship made no sense. ~Kit From allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 28 18:38:20 2007 From: allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk (allthecoolnamesgone) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:38:20 -0000 Subject: King's Cross Station and DH as Christian Allegory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173496 I too have pondered over Kings Cross. The Christian allusions are obvious to anyone brought up in Christian traditions or practising the faith. I perhaps would class myself as a non-ptactising Christian or perhaps a Chrisian Agnostic. However leaving aside the direct Christian overtones of the name, it is a railway station, a place of departure so it could be that Rowling used it purely on that level. If Harry had decided to travel on then perhaps we would have seen the train arrive. The idea of death being a journey onwards is a common one and I imagine that there would be some elements of purgatory in it too, Snape would have a longer harder road to travel than Harry for example. The story I found it recalled to mind is Tolkiens 'Leaf by Niggle'. In that the character found himself in a landscape he had created in his time on earth. 'Kings Cros' materialised out of Harrys growing conciousness and faded back into mist as he decided to go back. Anyway I mustn't ramble but thank you for your posts everyone. I too am still responding to the book too emotionally. Found myself crying in the car the other day just on thinking through Harrys 'Gethsemane' on the floor of Dumbledores office. Why didn't he talk to Dumbledores portrait at this point? allthecoolnamesgone From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jul 28 18:49:14 2007 From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:49:14 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173497 >>Lady Potions: > As I have pondered the seventh book I think I would like an alternate ending book. Think about it, so much death and for what? Rowling said she really thinks about the characters she kills but it doesn't read like that in this 7th book to me. It seems like she killed for the shock value and not all that concerned about the story line. Rowling claims differently of course. Why kill Hedwig? Why Dobby? There isn't an 8th book so there isn't a plot line to protect. I mean if you look at all the characters Rowling killed in the 7th book do you see any benefit to the story line as to why? >> Lesley: Hi, I agree with you about the unnecessary good guy deaths especially Hedwig's, which I found really upsetting but what I don't understand is why none of the death-eaters died until the final battle? The fighting that went on through the night resulted in the deaths of over 50 people but what about the death-eaters? Surely some of them would have died earlier in the night considering they were fighting Aurors and teachers as well as very good DA and OOTP members but they all seem to still be standing right until the very end. This has nothing to do with deaths earlier in the book just those on the final night. Lesley From slmshdy310 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 18:50:27 2007 From: slmshdy310 at yahoo.com (michelle) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:50:27 -0000 Subject: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173498 First time poster...lurking for a while...just wanted to come out and help clarify this situation. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: >Did anyone see the interview on the Today show? >Does anyone know if she said that with affectionate humor or with >derision? Michelle: You can read the parts of the interview at this link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/ and here is the snippet that specifically speaks of it: "More details to come? Rowling said she may eventually reveal more details in a Harry Potter encyclopedia, but even then, it will never be enough to satisfy the most ardent of her fans. "I'm dealing with a level of obsession in some of my fans that will not rest until they know the middle names of Harry's great-great-grandparents," she said. Not that she's discouraging the Potter devotion! "I love it," she said. "I'm all for that."" Hope that helps. -Michelle From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 19:47:51 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:47:51 EDT Subject: The Houses again (was Re: DH as Christian Allegory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173499 Anders wrote: I didn't read as much negativity into Jo's Slytherin descriptions as you seemed to get from them. To me, she was showing us that there are all kinds of people in this world, and some of them aren't as nice as others, but there were also Slytherins who turned out good. Harry Potter wasn't killed by Slytherins, he was killed by the evil which possessed Tom Riddle, who was a descendant of Slytherin, and seemed to have been possessed by the same evil attitude. Julie: You may be right, but where the real negativity comes in is from the other Houses. They all hate Slytherins. They boo whenever anyone is sorted into Slytherin. Slytherin is deliberately portrayed as the outcast house (which I supposed made it a good fit for Snape!). To students in the other Houses, just being Slytherin means you are undesirable, bad, "other." Anders: Slughorn didn't hate muggles although he was quite self-serving, and even Harry himself would likely have been a Slytherin had he not fought against it. It seemed to me that even Slytherin himself wasn't always a bad guy, since it said that at first all the houses got along. It was only after Slytherin developed his deep prejudice against muggles and mudbloods that problems erupted in the house system. He became obsessed with his own ideas, and his obsession was handed down through the generations of his family. I think Jo was also telling us that people who have a tendency toward cunning and self-serving can sometimes be steered into the wrong direction by people who play upon those tendencies. And she was telling us that sometimes we should question the things we've been told by our parents, such as, "Only purebloods are worthy." By the time Harry entered school, it seemed to me that Slytherin House had been corrupted by Salazar's ideas. It had nothing to do with who he was or what he looked like, although I must agree that I hadn't pictured him as monkey-like in my own mind, but rather as one who was very tall, handsome and haughty in manner who had developed a sneer over time. I thought Jo fought against the labeling idea when Sirius told Harry that the world isn't divided into Death Eaters and good guys. I thought the biggest example of that in the last book was her treatment of Snape. He had both good and bad tendencies, and he had been part of both worlds at various times. And finally, I thought by continuing with the sorting hat, I thought she was telling us that it's okay to be in a group with others of similar tastes and abilities as long as one group doesn't begin to think they are superior to others. I thought she was telling us that it wasn't the sorting which had caused the evil, but the bad ideas passed down from Slytherin's twisted mind which found fertile ground in some of those with qualities associated with Slytherin House. In book one we were also told that those same qualities could make a person great, and there were many Slytherins who had made good, as evidenced by Horace Slughorn's friends. Jo also showed us negative qualities in Sirius who was a Gryffindor, Ernie MacMillan who was Hufflepuff, and Cho, who was Ravenclaw. I didn't feel Jo was slurring all Asians when Cho turned out to be, IMO, shallow. Julie: Again your analysis may be right. Here is my problem. WHY, WHY, WHY would you put eleven year old CHILDREN into a House that has been corrupted, that is "fertile ground" for bringing out the very worst in qualities they *already* so strongly possess? For me it's not about the qualities themselves, which as you say can be used for good or bad, but that Slytherin House is allowed--nay, actively encouraged by its rejection and isolation from the other Houses, and by the fact that its very existence in its acknowledged "corrupted" state continues without an iota of interference--to pound these corrupted ideals into the minds of CHILDREN. So for me it's not Slytherin House per se, but what it has *become* that is the problem, though the real bigger problem is that no one, from the Headmaster and teachers at Hogwarts, to all the other "good" people in the WW, have not a single compunction about dumping these kids into the "Death Eaters in Training" house. Talk about paving the way to your own graves, or reaping what you sow! (Which, granted, may have been part of JKR's point. But I did want to see some indication in the end that the Hogwarts and the WW in general got the point too-- though the Sorting Hat apparently did get the point some time ago--and while Harry's comment to little AlSev might have indicated that he got the point, it didn't seem to go beyond that.) IMO, Julie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 20:06:49 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 20:06:49 -0000 Subject: 12GP & Secret-Keeper Snape (was Questions for JKR) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173500 Lyn wrote: > It seems clear that the entire Order believes Snape is now ESE. It also seems clear that, based on their understanding of the Fidelius Charm placed on the house, once DD died, everyone he'd let in on that particular secret also became a Secret Keeper. That meant Snape could (if he'd actually been ESE) revealed its location to LV and the DEs. > > What strikes me is odd is that the protections put in place to protect Snape from doing so, only seem designed to work if and when Snape actually enters the house. IIRC, the tongue-tying curse only takes effect when someone enters the front hall, then the image of Dead!Dumbledore appears and some code phrase along the lines of "I did not kill you" deactivates all of that. > > > > So I don't see how a tongue-tying curse could have kept Snape from writing down the same thing Dumbledore did on a piece of paper and handing it around to anybody he pleased, even if it somehow worked on him no matter where he was and not just if he walked in the front door again. And some of the Order had to know this, because they were *there* when the same thing via DD worked to reveal the place to Harry when they first took him there. > I don't see how the Order could've believed that the protections we see working in DH could've prevented Snape from communicating the location and therefore revealing the house to LV and the DEs. I guess they have to assume he didn't/couldn't do this, because it seems like even though the DEs know where it should be, because they're staking it out while HRH are there, they still can't see it or gain access to it until one of them is accidently Apparated with the trio right onto the doorstep. So were there other protections in place, that would keep Snape from revealing the place even by writing it down like DD did? It seems like the Order must have thought so, and assumed those protections were working. Carol responds: I've probably undersnipped, sorry. I agree that the protections seem inadequate (obviously Snape got through them) and they're lucky he was DDM. Maybe the protections didn't work against him because he didn't really murder Dumbledore. Either that, or being intelligent, he easily figured out what to say. Certainly, he wouldn't have been afraid of a seeming Inferius or avenging ghost of DD even if it were real (and it's unlikely that Mad-Eye would place an Inferius in the house to protect it). But the tongue-tying curse might have also made it impossible to write out the name; certainly, it gave him an excuse for telling the DEs and LV that he still couldn't reveal the secret. But the Order had also vacated 12 GP; it was no longer their headquarters. And they didn't expect HRH to go there; they were supposed to be at the Weasleys. As for Yaxley, Hermione didn't speak the name of the place or the secret formula, "The Headquarters of the Order of the Phoenix may be found at 12 Grimmauld Place," so Yaxley could not have seen the HQ, only it's surroundings. Bellatrix could have told him that her cousin Sirius had once lived in 12 GP and they could go there and watch the neighborhood, but they still wouldn't be able to see the house unless Snape told them, which he supposedly "can't" do because of the (unneeded) tongue-tying curse. At any rate, the fact that the DEs are there but can't see the house and the hint that Snape got in and ransacked the house are perhaps intended as clues that he's DDM. Obviosly, HRH can't see that, any more than Harry and Hermione picke up on the "terrible" detention with Hagrid in the hidden forest. Even McGonagall doesn't see that Snape, unlike Umbridge, is not locked out of the headmaster's office. (Does she know that the password is "Dumbledore"? Ginny must have said his name to get in and steal the fake sword of Gryffindor. The characters, however, are conveniently oblivious.) > Lyn: > Another thing - if Yaxley's Apparating onto the doorstep with the trio counts as revealing the secret, this means that just accidently being taken to a place reveals it, even if the the Secret Keeper who takes someone there doesn't actively communicate that information, which seems to be how such secrets had to be revealed before this point. Which seems to indicate that, say, if Peter Pettigrew (supposing he'd not been a, well, rat) had just paid a visit to the Potters in Godric Hollow, and they'd opened the door and he'd said, "Why, hello there, James and Lily Potter," upon seeing them, anyone who'd followed him there without his knowledge and saw and overheard this would now know exactly where the Potters were. Which raises some doubt in my mind as to the effectiveness of the Fidelius Charm, if a Secret Keeper can reveal the secret involved without intending to or even knowing he's done it. Carol: I don't think so. It's a Fidelius Charm and can only be broken by a breach of faith, and the Secret can only be revealed by being deliberately revealed by the Secret Keeper. It can't be revealed through Veritaserum or Legilimency (I'm not sure about torture), so how could it accidentally be revealed? PP had to deliberately betray the Potters for LV to know their location, and Snape (or Hermione) would have to deliberately betray the Order for the HQ location to be revealed. The tongue-tying curse was intended to prevent snape from revealing the Secret by whatever means (no doubt including a note, though he wasn't present when Mad-Eye handed the note to Moody), but as I said, I don't think they were counting on those protections. They removed anything of importance and vacated in case Snape got past the protections. (As for Snape himself, all he had to do is to say, "My lord, I have ransacked the place and found nothing of value. The Order have taken all their documents and fled," using Occlumency to hide the bit about the tear and the photograph/letter, which somehow didn't quite fit the image of Voldemort's ruthless right-hand man.) Lyn: > The other thing all this makes me wonder about, is whether or not Mad-Eye - who supposedly put all the protections on 12GP once DD was dead and Snape was presumed ESE - actually knew better, if DD had told him more about the overall plan and Snape's part in it than he told anyone else. We don't see his reaction to Snape's apparent murder of Dumbledore and flight from Hogwarts afterward, because he's not there. Carol: Interesting idea, but I don't think so. DD doesn't share information except when he has to, and only with the person most closely involved. Also, we saw Moody's attitude toward Snape in the Pensieve scene in GoF. I think he underestimate Snape's skill as a wizard just as he misjudged his loyalties. In the end, the main purpose the protections served (IMO) was to give Snape a cover story as to why he still couldn't reveal the secret and make the HQ visible even after the DEs knew where it was. Carol, who doubts that even much more sophisticated protections could have foiled ESE!Snape if he existed From juli17 at aol.com Sat Jul 28 20:08:45 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:08:45 EDT Subject: Come on folks (response to several criticisms) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173501 Carla's subject for her post: Re: Too quick and a sell out Lady Potions wrote in agreement: I do feel this book was rushed and a sell out. Annemehr wrote: She doesn't understand him. Or deserve him. Not only did she kill him off in cold blood and a bad vampire joke (bitten in the neck, are you kidding me?), but she burned up his book with nary a backward glance. Julie now: Come on folks! I think we are drifting into a dangerous territory, criticizing JKR as a person and assuming we can read her mind or her intentions, rather than criticizing her writing. We do NOT have any reason to conclude that JKR rushed her writing of this book (she wrote earlier books quicker). And whatever our opinion of how certain plotlines were resolved, I think it's unfair to accuse JKR of being a "sell out." She wrote the books the way SHE envisoned them. Even if that vision doesn't jibe with many of our visions of how it should have gone, that doesn't indicate that she "sold out" in any way. She merely told her story, and we can like the story or not. Finally, Snape and all the other characters are JKR's. SHE CREATED THEM. To say that she doesn't *deserve* them or *understand* them is the height of unfairness, IMO. We may understand them differently from our readings, and I do agree that in a literary sense our understanding of each character is as relevant as JKR's, to *each* of us. But I don't think it gives us license to impugn the author's own understanding of the characters as she wrote them. IMO. P.S. Do we know the Potions book burned? Was it even in the RoR anymore (I don't recall Harry mentioning its presence in that scene). If it was, do we know clever young Snape didn't put some charm on it to protect it? Just some thoughts, Julie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 19:12:46 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:12:46 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Sense of Betrayal / Unforgiveables In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AB952E.7050600@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173502 Matt blessed us with this gem On 28/07/2007 07:29: > 1) That a morality is not absolutist does not make it inconsistent. I > can say that "killing is wrong except in self-defense" ; the exception > is part of the normative rule, not an inconsistency. Firstly, thanks for the comments, Matt. Since no one has ever described killing as "unforgivable" (I think we all recognize it is not), I think the better analogy would be murder, rather than killing. > 2) The morality of an adult, operating in the adult world, is > frequently more nuanced than the moral rules that are typically (or > appropriately) taught to children. Each act must stand or its own merits (or fall on its lack thereof). I also agree that the real world (though I had thought we were discussing a work of fiction :-) ) is nearly one big mass of grey. Moral principles are, in fact, principles; rules intended to guide us in determining a course of action. And because the world is largely grey, it means most moral decisions are an exercise in balancing moral principles against each other. But not ALL is grey. There ARE a few absolutes. Not all killing is wrong; but all murder is. Not all physical assault is wrong; but all rape is. Not all war is wrong; but all genocide is. And so forth. Matt> How do those points bear on the use of unforgivables in the last Matt> two books? I would assert that what is disconcerting about Matt> the morality expressed in DH (and to a greater or lesser extent Matt> since OP) is that the characters are faced with more difficult Matt> moral choices. I would counter-assert that, even agreeing to that, the problem is that JKR never shows us the struggle. We catch not the slightest hint of any moral struggle in Harry before he fires off the Imperius in Gringotts. We don't catch the slightest whiff of moral hesitation before he Crucios Carrow. If the good guys are making difficult moral choices, you sure wouldn't know it from reading the book. The very least JKR is guilty of is flawed writing. Matt> These books (HBP and DH) are telling a war story Your not the first person to raise the "But it's war!" defense. The thing is, even wars have rules, and it IS possible for soldiers to commit murder during the performance of their duties. Just because war necessitates killing does not mean all killing in wartime is justified. The My Lai massacre springs to mind (if you're old enough to remember Viet Nam), as well as certain recent events in Iraq. And then there's torture, which is never excusable, even in war (arguments from a certain person with a botanical-sounding name to the contrary notwithstanding). LK> I explained to my son that Harry, caught up in his grief and LK> his anger, made a mistake, as even good people sometimes do. Matt> The morality Lee is expressing excuses mistakes of passion, Please re-read my words. What I said was that Harry's grief and passion made his mistake understandable, not excusable. In real-world terms, it might get the charges reduced to manslaughter (had Harry succeeded, that is). Matt> The morality Rowling expresses excuses classic euthanasia It's not that simple, however. You are correct in your assumption that there is no room for euthanasia in my moral system. However, even making allowance for that, there was any number of ways Snape could have finished Dumbledore off. But he chose the AK. Even assuming your moral code permits euthanasia, euthanasia hardly justifies an Unforgivable Curse. My personal guess is that JKR was trying to string along the ambiguity of Snape's character, but over-reached herself. Matt> ...but it is not fair to charge her with inconsistency. I believe it is, not only for the reason above, but for others (see below). LK> When Harry Imperiuses the goblins at Hermione's almost LK> casual suggestion, no less Matt> it is *not* the principled Hermione who urges Harry to use Matt> the curse, but rather Griphook You are correct. I had misremembered the scene. So Hermione's off the (Grip)hook. (Sorry :-) ). Matt> Third, Harry is anything but casual about the situation. I did not say Harry was casual about the "situation". I said he was apparently casual about throwing around the Imperius. Once again, if Harry was wrestling with his moral principles, then it behooves the author to show it to us. Certainly it wouldn't have taken more than a sentence to do so. Matt> He is portrayed as acting (as he often does) without thinking, Matt> but not as unconscious of the enormity of what he is doing. Here's the relevant passage. I'm having difficulty finding the part that shows Harry reflecting on the "enormity of what he is doing". DH> "Act now, act now", whispered Griphook in Harry's ear, "the DH> Imperius Curse!" Harry raised the hawthorn wand beneath the DH> cloak, pointed it at the old goblin, and whispered, for the DH> first time in his life, "Imperio!" A curious sensation shot DH> down Harry's arm, a feeling of tingling, warmth that seemed DH> to flow from his mind, down the sinews and veins connecting DH> him to the wand and the curse it had just cast. The goblin DH> took Bellatrix's wand, examined it closely, and then said, DH> "Ah, you have had a new wand made, Madam Lestrange!" DH> "What?" said Hermione, "No, no, that's mine--" DH> "A new wand?" said Travers, approaching the counter again; DH> still the goblins all around were watching. "But how could DH> you have done, which wand-maker did you use?" DH> Harry acted without thinking. Pointing his wand at Travers, DH> he muttered, "Imperio!" once more. DH> ... DH> "They're Imperiused," he added, in response to Hermione and DH> Ron's confused queries about Travers and Bogrod.... Matt> Cruciatus and Imperius curses in the Ravenclaw common room: Matt> Lee did not directly discuss this scene I may not have in the message to which you are replying -- it's impossible to keep up with the torrent of posts in this group. However, I have discussed it in other posts, in which I made many of the same points you did. In short, I agree it is the most disturbing and difficult to defend of all the scenes. It is also the scene which I believe most clearly makes the case for JKR's inconsistency. As you've indicated (and as I've said in other posts), both Harry's Cruciatus and McGonagall's Imperius were utterly unnecessary and excessive. A simply Expelliarmus from Harry would have disarmed Carrow quite effectively, and McGonagall could just as easily have Leviosa'ed Carrow over to his sister, or simply pointed her wand at the disarmed Carrow and said, "Lie there!" It is difficult even to conceive an excuse for Harry and McGonagall; and certainly JKR makes no attempt to show us any. Which is why it is difficult to reach any other conclusion than that JKR has by this point in the series either deliberately chosen to ignore the moral implications of the UCs, or simply forgotten about them. And having reached that conclusion here, it's much easier to reach the same conclusion elsewhere. Matt> Molly and Bellatrix: Matt> Does it matter whether the curse that kills is a killing curse? It does, but not, I think, for the reasons you're thinking. First, I would like to point out that I am NOT taking issue with Molly's killing of Bellatrix. Yes, it was a battle, and Bellatrix had explicitly stated her intent to kill Molly. This was clearly self-defense. As to the spell itself, I agree my guess is speculative, as the text neither names the spell, nor mentions the telltale green flash. There are but two possibilities: either Molly used the AK, or she didn't. If she did, then we're back to arguing over whether battlefield situations justify otherwise Unforgivable Curses. If, OTOH, it wasn't the Avadra Kedavra, we're faced with a morass of questions which are not easily answered. If the spell Molly used to kill Bellatrix was not the AK, then what we have here is proof positive that there are other killing curses (or at least, other curses that kill) than just the AK. And that leads us to the uncomfortable conclusion that the AK may not be necessary at all. If there ARE other killing curses than just the AK, then the difficulty of making the case for the AK has just been ratcheted up. If other killing curses do exist, then what conditions, specifically, would require the AK in lieu of them? And what is it about the AK which makes it alone among killing curses Unforgivable? Which brings us full circle back to Snape and Dumbledore at the end of book six. Granted that, as we now know, Snape is really performing an act of euthanasia. Granted even, for the sake of argument, that euthanasia is morally acceptable. Given that Molly has just demonstrated that at least one other killing curse (or curse that kills) exists, what could possibly justify Snape's use of the AK specifically? Sorry, but I still think JKR has woven a sorry knot of morality around the UCs that simply cannot be untangled. CJ, Taiwan From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 20:16:58 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:16:58 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Molly's curse - something other than AK? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ABA43A.1040901@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173503 jenanydot blessed us with this gem On 27/07/2007 11:36: J> we aren't told specifically what curse she uses. I have stated in other discussions that I guess she uses the AK, but my guess is admittedly speculative, based simply on the fact that there has been no mention of another killing curse in the Potter canon. You are correct that the telltale -- the green flash -- was missing, and that the curse is not named. There's the further argument that the AK renders its victim instantaneously dead, whereas Bellatrix seems to take a second or so to succumb, but that may have simply been literary license on JKR's part, to allow the audience to savor the second in which Bellatrix realises she has lost. We'll probably simply have to wait for JKR to clarify the question. CJ, Taiwan From chaomath at hitthenail.com Sat Jul 28 21:02:00 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:02:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3BC0F32A-675F-491D-B64B-4D4E53339DBA@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173504 Charles wrote: > The UC's were "unforgivable" because of ministry proscription. Whether > that stemmed from morality or not is not actually explored in the > books. The UC's were named UC's because the use of them on a human > earned a life sentence in Azkaban. I think there's some evidence in the series that UCs are just that for reasons of morality AND legality. Another poster quoted Sirius's comment about UCs that seems to suggest a strong moral opposition. Moody's lecture on UCs wasn't "don't use these curses because you'll get sent to prison forever" but rather "there's some bad things that people can do to other people, and I want you all to understand how horrific they are so you won't be afraid to stand up against those who would use these curses." Therefore, I think you've got it backward. They're not called Unforgivables because you get sent to prison for life; they're "unforgivable" because they're the ultimate sin against another (which is why you get sent to prison for life). Actually, it's more complex than that. It's a false dichotomy to separate law and morality. They both inform one another. To drag it back to discussion of Harry, I was surprised at Harry's reaction to his own use of Cruciatus. Well, not his first reaction (that Bellatrix was right). That's just a quick observation in the immediate aftermath. What surprised me was that there was no question in his mind that torturing someone was the right thing to do. Whether it was justified or not, Harry doesn't seem to think that he's crossed a line into new territory, nor that he should question what he's done to make sure it really was a measured response. I'd expect some twinge of doubt, if not actual repugnance at one's own actions (whether the action is justified or not). Given how "good" we're told Harry is, this struck me as totally out of character. In one blink of an eye, he became Vengeance!Harry without a conscience. It's canon, but I don't buy it, and it makes me care a lot less about what happens to him. Oh, and Charles? Insulting a fellow listie's child doesn't strengthen your argument. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From dougsamu at golden.net Sat Jul 28 21:04:56 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:04:56 -0400 Subject: "Today " interview Message-ID: <5716F8CF-8AEB-41E0-8A5C-4AF60A649E6F@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173505 Lady Potions: To me Rowling comes off like that princess that was told that the peasants do not have bread - the princess not understanding that that meant they had no food to eat, replied (knowing only of her own lifestyle) "well then let them eat cake." doug: That princess to whom you attribute the phrase, was Marie Antionette, to whom the phrase, "Let them eat cake!" has been attributed. Cake is the scrapings from the pan in which the bread was baked. ___ __ From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 20:44:17 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:44:17 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Sense of Betrayal / Unforgiveables In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ABAAA1.2040004@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173506 justcarol67 blessed us with this gem On 29/07/2007 02:46: > BTW, I don't recall McGonagall using the Imperius Curse. Can you point > me to the passage? (DH, "The Sacking of Severus Snape", p. 593, US) "He spat at you," said Harry. "Potter, I -- that was very -- very gallant of you -- but don't you realize--?" [Snipping 8 paragraphs](bottom of p. 594) There was a sound of movement, of clinking glass: Amycus was coming around. Before Harry or Luna could act, Professor McGonagall rose to her feet, pointing her wand at the groggy Death Eater, and said, "Imperio." CJ, Taiwan From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 20:08:26 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:08:26 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ABA23A.2010506@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173507 Charles Walker Jr blessed us with this gem On 28/07/2007 19:38: CJ> Is there any act, or category of acts, so barbarous that it cannot, CJ> under ANY circumstances, be justified? > I can only think of one I can think of nine without breaking a sweat: murder (note: NOT killing); rape; torture; genocide; child abuse (including child prostitution, molestation, et alia); slavery; terrorism; hostage-taking; chemical/biological warfare. It probably wouldn't take more than a couple of minutes' reflection to bring the list up to an even dozen, but I'm feeling a bit lazy at the moment. But the issue is not HOW MANY unforgivable crimes you can think of. I merely wanted to see if you acknowledge the possibility of morally unforgivable acts. CWJ> The UC's were "unforgivable" because of ministry proscription. CWJ> Whether that stemmed from morality or not is not actually explored CWJ> in the books. Would you please provide chapter and verse on this, Charles? As at least one other in this discussion has pointed out, while it may be YOUR contention that the Unforgivableness of the UCs was purely legal in nature, there does not seem to be anything in the texts to support you. The UCs stand at the pinnacle of the Dark Arts, and the DAs are clearly "dark" in a moral sense. In addition, in a passage I've previously cited, the lifting of the ban on UCs during the first Voldemort war was clearly associated with moral failings -- a descent into ruthlessness and villainy which left the good guys nearly indistinguishable from the bad (and NOT in a legal sense). Now, I know you question the source of that description, but it's the only canonical discussion of the matter we've got so anything else is speculation. CWJ> The UC's were named UC's because the use of them on a human CWJ> earned a life sentence in Azkaban. Again, chapter and verse, please. As far as I see, you've got it backward -- the life sentence stemmed from their Unforgivable nature, not vice versa. Could you please cite a passage from the texts that supports your contention? > I suspect your ten-year-old, learning from you, is also incapable of > distinguishing legality and morality. Ad hominems are uncalled for. It is not simply a matter of "distinguishing" the two. It is my (and at least one other's) contention that your whole legal argument around the UCs is speculative, and not support by the canon. CJ> Even wars have rules (just read the Geneva Conventions), and the CJ> only relevant question is whether Carrow presented a clear and CJ> present danger at the moment Harry ambushed him. CWJ> And now you are trying to insert real world legality Not legality -- morality. There's a difference. And yes, I AM trying to insert real world morality into a fictional universe. What makes a great fictional universe is, after all, precisely what it has to say to us about ours. CWJ> We're talking about morality not legality. Of course we are! > I've made my points, and they keep getting ignored. Not ignored, just disputed. You seem intent, Charles, on trying to drive some sort of wedge between legality and morality, as if they exist independent of each other, when in fact morality underlies nearly all law. Now why, do you think (granting your contention for the moment), the MoM would decree the UCs to be Unforgivable, unless it were that they were considered wrong in a moral sense? CJ, Taiwan From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 20:35:18 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:35:18 +0800 Subject: Missing from 'Harry Potter' ? a real moral struggle In-Reply-To: <711567.60336.qm@web52603.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <711567.60336.qm@web52603.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <46ABA886.3090406@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173508 Feng Zengkun blessed us with this gem On 28/07/2007 23:32: > Harry has no inner struggle - the > choices he has to make are easy Eggplant wrote: > It's easy to march into the Forbidden Forest to > be murdered by a maniac? Perhaps the issue here is the word "easy". For myself, the issue is not really whether Harry's decisions are easy -- clearly they are very difficult -- but simply that, given Harry's nature, the final decision is never really in doubt. I'm reminded of the Garden of Gethsemene. Though Christ wrestles mightily with the necessity of the Cross -- to the point of sweating blood -- there's never any real question of what decision he will make. This is what, for me, makes Harry a less compelling character than Snape. That lack of doubt robs him of drama. Frodo, in LOTR, was in some ways, the exact opposite. Good in the beginning, he was eventually worn down by the struggle against evil and in the end succumbed. It was not merely his struggle -- Harry had that, as well -- but the fact that we can see him slowly succumbing -- which makes Frodo by far the more dramatic character. CJ, Taiwan From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 21:26:23 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:26:23 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173509 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Alice Franceschini" wrote: > >Why kill Hedwig? Why Dobby? There isn't an 8th book so there isn't a plot line to protect. I mean if you look at all the characters Rowling killed in the 7th book do you see any benefit to the story line as to why? Why kill Lupin and Tonks, because they were happy? And what happened to their baby? See, a lot of unfinished business and the book series has ended. Don't feel right to me. Lisa: Well ... why were my dad's seven brothers killed in WWII? Why did my mother's brother lose an arm in Vietnam? Why did my husband's friend get shot and killed right next to him in the first Gulf War? Because it's war. People die during war -- there's rarely a purpose. From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 21:30:18 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:30:18 -0000 Subject: Questions for JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173510 > Dungrollin: >> How about this for an inconsistency: > Why didn't Voldemort become the master of the Elder wand when he AKed > Harry in the forest? > > Because he didn't kill him? DD didn't kill Grindelwald, either, > neither did Harry kill Malfoy. Needs some bending over backwards to > wriggle out of IMO. Jack-A-Roe: He didn't become master when he killed Harry because he didn't take his wand. The wand only changes loyalties when it is forcebly taken by another wizard who intends to take it. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Jul 28 21:52:28 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:52:28 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173511 Geoff: Warning. I think I am about to rant. :-) This post which has been brewing for some time was brought to a head because two days ago, I marked my fourth "birthday" as a member of the group and I sat and wondered why I wasn't enjoying reading the list at the moment; ploughing through a flood of new messages arriving while I am in the land of Nod in the UK each day seems to have become a chore. When I first came onto the group in the days when the world was young ? after all my first post was 73361! ? you could usually find a fair raft of threads on the go covering a wide range of topics: Riddle's diary, the location of Hogwarts, the Weasley family tree and many others which sometimes could be - sharp intake of breath - fun. After the publication of HBP, there was a sea change. We began to get lengthy threads which sometimes went on and on and on discussing Snape and Horcruxes and Dumbledore's death. OK, good enough. But when they turn into long version of what I have been credited with calling "tennis matches" ? yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't ad infinitum, ad nauseam - isn't it time to agree to disagree, accept our different points of view and remember that we are actually discussing fiction, written hopefully for us to be able to enter into the author's world and enjoy? Already, with DH only on the streets a week, these lines of demarcation are showing again. We`re already getting well established Snape threads again and the long threads on how we view the morality of the Wizarding world. As an example, the question of the Christian element of the book has been discussed. OK, I've had my say in this. and I stick to my line that Harry is not a Christ figure; he is not God. He is Christ-like insofar as any Christian attempts to be and if a person of a different faith or world view sees it otherwise, that is their choice. I hope that I'm not going to repeat myself for ever trying to bludgeon another member into accepting my point of view just to shut me up. There are other points of disharmony. I personally do not believe that Harry died and came back. When he found himself in "Kings Cross", I believe that he had a near-death experience which lasted just few seconds in real time when he had the vision of Dumbledore who told him that it was in his head before he returned to reality. Interestingly as and aside, I was strongly reminded of the scenes in Star Trek: Deep Space 9 when Benjamin Sisko meets the Prophets of Bajor in a vague and misty place outside real time. But again, that is my take on it and others may want to interpret it in a different way. And again, there are lots of unanswered questions; but isn't that the situation in our own real lives? My one wish, which was granted, was for Harry to survive. Beyond that, I left it to the will of the author. I read book 7 and was reasonably happy ? except for the wretched epilogue. So we lost Mad-Eye, Fred, Hedwig, Dobby et al. but this was war. Today in the UK, we lost another soldier in Afghanistan which is currently costing us more than Iraq. A teenager was shot in Manchester, another in the long litany of young lives wasted in his way this year. More parents mourn. This is real life again. In DH, JKR brings us to a similar place where hatred and war make mockery of what we would deem our desires. But, in real life and in the Potterverse, there are things which are positive. It isn't all doom and gloom despite what the Daily Prophet or the Telegraph or the New York times would have us believe. What I am trying to get at is instead of trying to score points off one another or run down what JKR has written, why don't we try looking for things to agree on; things that we like about the books. Instead of perpetual negativity, why don't we look for good things, encouraging things, things to say "wow" about? Instead of counting the dead, why don't we remember the numbers who came through the war and will go on beyond the last page ? in the epilogue or not ? Harry, Ron, Hermione, Luna, Neville, Bill, Charlie, Arthur and Molly, even Draco and his parents(!) and the rest. I read Tolkien and Lewis and Rowling first and foremost for pleasure. Perhaps I'm na?ve but I don't want to analyse them down to the last full stop; I just want to be an armchair hedonist for a couple of hours! There, I've got that off my chest. I think I'll go and find some soothing fanfic From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 21:56:27 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:56:27 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173512 Dumbledore the Godfather. I'm not talking about a Sirius Black sort of Godfather I'm talking about a Don Vito Corleone sort of Godfather. Dumbledore could be mighty cold blooded when he needed to be! That's not a criticism, you have to be cold blooded in a war, but some of the things he says in "The Prince's Tail" chapter are chilling; Dumbledore's remarks even horrified Snape, and something would have to be mighty damn bad to horrify Snape! For example: "If I know him [Harry] he will have arranged matters so that when he does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of Voldemort." And if Harry had managed to kill that snake as Dumbledore expected before he so bravely walked into the Forbidden Forest to meet oblivion then both Harry and Voldemort would indeed have died at that instant. This is what Dumbledore wanted this is what he expected. When Snape responds with horror (I never in my life dreamed I would someday write the words "Snape responds with horror", but there you go): "You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?" Dumbledore seems to dismiss Snape's reservations as trivial "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and woman have you watched die?" That is cold, that is very cold, but the next part is worse, it approaches absolute zero: Snape: You have been raising him like a pig for slaughter." Dumbledore: But this is touching Severus, have you grown to care for the boy after all? Dumbledore is sneering. Dumbledore is sneering at Snape because he is reluctant to murder a 17 year old boy. As I say I'm not criticizing Dumbledore, in a war you need someone who can make intelligent unemotional decisions, but I can't pretend I wasn't a bit shocked old jovial benign Dumbledore could act this way. Oh well, I suppose it could have been worse: Dumbledore: Grindelwald, Grindelwald. What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully? If you'd come to me in friendship, then this scum that ruined my sister would be suffering this very day. And if by chance an honest man like yourself should make enemies, then they would become my enemies. And then they would fear you. But you don't ask with respect. You don't offer friendship. You don't even think to call me Headmaster. Grindelwald: Be my friend- - Headmaster. (Dumbledore shrugs. Grindelwald bows toward the Headmaster and kisses Dumbledore's hand.) Dumbledore: Good. (The Headmaster puts his hand on Grindelwald's shoulder.) Someday, and that day may never come, I'll call upon you to do a service for me. But uh, until that day - accept this justice as a gift. Eggplant From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:19:24 2007 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Lynn) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:19:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] a Lupin Rant Message-ID: <125370.88689.qm@web32711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173513 Sherry Gomes wrote: I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. Lynn: There were also a number of other opinions as well but they pretty much meant the same thing. I see Lupin completely different in this scene. First, I see Lupin not as disabled but as an undesireable being hunted, much like those in Nazi Germany were hunted for whatever the Reich said was undesireable. Just as I saw the Muggleborns in the role of the Jews by having to prove their blood line, so too were other peoples persecuted, hunted and destroyed all because they had been villified by the government. Add people's own ignorance and a person such as Lupin can be put in an untenable position. However, he's been through that before so why is it so different this time? There are a number of reasons IMO. First, we have Lupin's loss. Harry's loss is the focus but we need to remember that Lupin has lost so much as well. He lost James, Lily and Sirius only to get Sirius back and lose him again. That is probably why we see Lupin in the scene in the forest younger and happier with the people who loved and accepted him. Then, the one person who showed faith in him, Dumbledore, is now dead. IMO, it was this death that prompted Lupin to behave rashly and marry Tonks, not that he didn't love her, I believe he did. I don't think he would have been encouraged to marry her if others didn't believe he loved her. I think it was a moment of weakness, that fear of being completely alone that caused him to override his concerns about how that marriage would affect Tonks. She was an Auror but was she allowed to keep that position since she married Lupin? We don't know that she was. And, even if she was, how did her being the breadwinner affect him? It's not an easy thing for a partner to feel that they are not properly contributing to various aspects of the relationship. Contrast this to Lupin's words that even Tonk's family doesn't accept him. How many people can related to this? How many people have had in-laws that will denigrate them at every opportunity? Add the pregnancy and I wouldn't be suprised to find that Lupin went to Harry and Co. right after having been in a confrontation with those same in-laws who probably told him that Tonks and the baby would be better off without him. I also find it interesting that there are those who still think birth control is 100% reliable. It's not and accidents do happen. There's only one sure way of not getting pregnant that I know of. The war is not going well. What may have, at one point, seemed promising, now seems impossible. I wonder how many parents have wished they didn't bring a child into the world due to various world events or even birth defects, etc. To so harshly criticize someone for expressing those fears and doubts are, IMO, intolerant. In this, I see Lupin as expressing the sentiments many parents have felt in similar situations and the reactions expressed is one reason why parents don't publically express it but instead hold it in and it damages them emotionally. For some reason, it appears parents are supposed to be superhuman and not show weakness. Yet, I have found that it is as a parent that I most question myself and my actions. What I would not have given a second thought to before now becomes a major decision simply because of the responsibility of this young life and how my decisions will affect it. Next, I think Lupin is very depressed rather that feeling sorry for himself or in the throes of self-pity and, unless you've been through a serious depression, there is no way to understand how easy it is to rationalize what would appear irrational to others. In this state, it is quite easy to take negative things on board as you are feeling so negative about yourself. The words JKR uses in describing what Lupin says hints to me of someone trying to cut off their feelings, to not feel, to wall off emotion. I have not doubt, that if I'm right in this, Lupin probably felt that Tonks and the baby would be better off if he were dead. That he could die in the defense of James' son and possibly a new world order for his son would appear to be the perfect way out. Does it make sense? Maybe not to some but it could make perfect sense to someone feeling so depressed or who has figuratively walked in his shoes. So why does Lupin attack Harry? That's simple, Harry has expressed how Lupin feels about himself and that inner rage sparks outward. Harry is motivated in his words at knowing what Teddy would feel in losing his father and therefore harsh in how he expresses himself. Still, to hear so baldly what Lupin may have been feeling about himself could prompt the rage that would cause him to attack Harry. Lupin needed to hear what Harry had to say, just not in the way Harry said it though Harry has the excuse of being too young to appreciate or understand what Lupin may be going through. Then again, I don't see where something like depression would be acceptable in the WW but would be treated in an intolerant matter. Lynn who, now that she thinks about it, finds it highly hypocritical of Snape to have jeered at Tonks over her pining over Lupin after seeing her Patronus given what his own Patronus was. --------------------------------- Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sydpad at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:22:01 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:22:01 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173514 Magpie: > You're a braver woman than I for laying this out--I've literally been > dancing around it since I finished the book. Sydney: I'm such a Slytherin. Whenever people tell me, "You're so brave for saying that!" I think, "Uh-oh". It's just the two of us, then, and also the 10 people who've told me, "I'm so glad you've said that! I was thinking the same thing! But you go ahead and post while I hide behind a plant!" LOL. Magpie: > Like you, I don't think this has anything to do with Rowling being > anti-Semitic. The Slytherins aren't supposed to "really" be Jews in > an allegory (another reason this whole idea seems to kind of haunt > threads about people being offered saving and rejecting it.) Sydney: Yes, exactly-- and I'll say again and again that I'm certain she never realized she was doing it. The problem is that if you're writing a story where the 'Other' actually *is* bad and fundamentally different, you're not going to be drawing from a very pretty stock of imagery. I mean, is there a *nice* set of stories where a section of the population is pernicious and needs to be kept apart from the clean people? Normally these fantasy epics deal with this by using actual monsters-- orcs, or the wolves in Narnia, or something like that. I'm really hard-pressed to think of books where the Other is actual humans and they never get reintegrated, never mind where the Other is *children*. Magpie: The funny thing is I actually did once write about this > subject--but it was after OotP. That was the book where one of my > first reactions was, "Wait, the Slytherins are Nazis...but they also > seem to have a lot in common with certain representations of Jews." > And what's strange is how it's like there's this house full of all > these things you've described, only with a big Swastika hung over it Sydney: Well, unfortunately using Nazi labels with anti-Semitic imagery isn't exactly unusual these days. In any event, it's all part of the same thing: the Shadow House, if I can still call it that, gets everything negative piled on. It's hard to think of anything more negative in the popular imagination than Nazis, so they get to be Nazis. They also get KKK hoods. They also get hook-noses and greedy expressions. It's all part of this nonsense melange of 'bad', like 'ambitious' and 'concerned with ancestry', 'cunning' yet 'stupid in a troll-like way'. When I thought these books were wiser I thought there was going to be a payoff where it actually WAS nonsense. Anders: > I thought Jo fought against the labeling idea when Sirius told Harry > that the world isn't divided into Death Eaters and good guys. I > thought the biggest example of that in the last book was her > treatment of Snape. Sydney: Yes, it was things like Sirius' line that made me think that JK was going to fight against the idea of labeling. I thought that right up until the tiniest last sliver of pages in the last book. At which point I had to concede that she thought labeling was fine, provided you had magic labels that were really accurate, not like our clumsy human labels that don't put the labels directly onto people's souls. *Labels right on your soul*, people. Anders: > Harry himself would likely have been a Slytherin had he not fought against > it. Sydney: Actually, this is again where I get totally confused. Because the only reason Harry 'fought against' going into Slytherin, is that Hagrid happened to mention that a Slytherin killed his parents, before he got the Sorting Hat experience. If he just arrived without that info, and the Hat said 'You'd do well in Slytherin', and Harry said, 'Uh, sure, whatever', what would have happened? I guess he would have hung out with the horrible racist kids, been ostracised by the rest of the school, and then died in CoS because he wouldn't have gotten the sword. How is that even a choice if you don't know what you're choosing? And the fact that you're allowed to question the Hat doesn't seem to be common knowledge, even 19 years later. It just seems so arbitrary. It's stuff like this that made the ending so totally shocking to me. Anders: It seemed to me that even Slytherin himself wasn't always a bad guy, > since it said that at first all the houses got along. Sydney: I know, I know! And this is precisely why I was ready to lay money (thank heaven's I didn't!) that we'd get the Founder's backstory, as opposed to what we did get, which was a totally random backstory of a kid of the Founders that did nothing to enlighten us about what happened. Sorry to keep bringing up "Little White Horse", but if you want to see what a really lovely complicating backstory and how it can mess up relations between communities for generations, read that book! As it is I don't have much choice but to stick with what the book ends on, which is that, yes, Slytherin was totally wrong (and 'monkey-like', with a foreign name..) and Gryffindor was totally pure and right (and all-British). You know what was every kind of weird? The thing with Gryffindor's sword and the Goblins. She starts heading down "Maybe Gryffindor wasn't totally awesome and good, he stole from the Goblins", and then hits the brakes, and then it's "The Goblins have this strange and unreasonable culture that makes it not REALLY stealing. Never mind." And then the Goblins get it back, but then it goes back to Our Heroes because.. I dunno, the Sword was more loyal to Goderic's culture so the Goblin's culture was just wrong. My head is just *spinning* with what post-colonial theorists are going to make of this. I'm not usually fan of post-colonial theorists, but in this instance I think I could write the paper myself. > Magpie: > Yeah, that was weird. And interesting that the lesson of how people > might actually be inspired to courage and being better people if you > reach out to them and treat them with respect was restricted to the > non-human House Elf slave desperate for a new loving master. Sydney: Okay, you got me started about the House Elves. So, children, if you have slaves, you should be nice to them because.. they'll be better servants! And more loyal! And serve in your armies, shouting 'Fight for my Master!' Of course they'll still be slaves, but they're happier that way. Some races are just born to serve. What??!?! I was so ready for a plot-line where they free Kreacher, and he goes over to the other side, but they do it anyways because you know, it's just the right thing to do. Slavery is wrong and if the freeing part is messy you just have to suck it up. I did not picture a resolution where they give Kreacher some glass beads and then he makes them pancakes and he tells them, 'Y'all bettuh wrap up wahm, chillun!' Yes, I know the House Elves aren't human, so it can't really be about slavery, can it? Yeah, whatever. On the other hand... oh Rowling. Rowling! You're like a lover who's so sweet, and then he's pure evil, and then he's so sweet again.. stop messing with my brain!! The Regulus/Kreacher backstory was so cool and awesome.. come back to me JK! But don't steal my rent money this time! Albers: > I also didn't see that Jo was slurring Eastern Europeans, but just > chose Albania as a random place for Voldy to run to. Sydney: But Durmstrang, the Dark Arts stronghold with the DE Headmaster, whose students all sit at the Slytherin table, is also in Eastern Europe. It kind of stops being random and becomes a pattern. And it's not that she's slurring Eastern Europeans-- it's the other way around. She's using the association with Eastern Europe to add an aura of shiftiness and foreigness and.. um..yeah.. , to tell us that there's something wrong with the Slytherins. Can I hide behind that plant, too? It feels awful just typing this out. But it feels pretty awful reading about the tear sliding down Snape's hooked nose, too, because it couldn't just slide down his face like a normal person. > Anders: > And finally, I thought by continuing with the sorting hat, I thought > she was telling us that it's okay to be in a group with others of > similar tastes and abilities as long as one group doesn't begin to > think they are superior to others. Sydney: I totally agree. When you lump people into a group and define your group as categorically better and nobler than that dirty group over there, all kinds of ugliness occurs. That's why I'm really shocked and heartbroken and feel betrayed that JK made a story that said actually that was okay. > Anders: > How would you suggest she should have portrayed "the bad guys" to the > readers? She had to make some type of distinction to move the story > along. I didn't read her description of Bellatrix as a slur against > any particular ethnic group, Sydney: It's very hard to express what I mean here.. of course there's no slur in the HP series against any particular ethnic group. But Rowling borrows the language, she borrows the imagery, and she borrows the mindset, that in the past was constructed and used by actual bigots, and then she creates a group in her world and and applies it all to them. That we are nice and they are bad; they are animal-like, monkey-like, bat-like, troll-like; it's okay when we do it; those people ALWAYS do that. She uses and she uses it, she uses it's power over the tribalism in the human soul, and in the end she validates it. --Sydney From nitalynx at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 21:16:34 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:16:34 -0000 Subject: Come on folks (response to several criticisms) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173515 Annemehr wrote: > She doesn't understand him. Or deserve him. Then, Julie wrote: > Finally, Snape and all the other characters are JKR's. SHE CREATED THEM. > To say that she doesn't *deserve* them or *understand* them is the height of > unfairness, IMO. Now, Nita responds: Well, I think both points of view are valid, actually :) About authors not understanding their characters... Characters are usually based on writers' observations and understanding of people, right? And we can only directly observe the appearance and behaviour of others, not their psychology or motivations. So, just like you can draw a convincing portrait without understanding facial anatomy, it's possible to write a character that behaves realistically without realizing the necessary motives for such behaviour. I don't know much about writing, but in visual arts problems with anatomy and perspective can detract from the impact of the work, even if the idea, the composition and the colours are wonderful. So, imagine you've been drawing a character's profile in various settings, with great results. People admire your talent and fall in love with the character. Then you draw a portrait from a different angle, and some of your fans feel disappointed. The illusion doesn't work for them any more. After DH, Snape's character doesn't really work for me either. On one hand, Lily seems to be very, very important to him since the age of nine or less. He always knew she was Muggleborn. When he tells her that it doesn't matter, it sounds like he's made his choice. Why on earth would he join the anti-Muggleborn brigade while he still wanted to be best friends (and more?) with her? When he comes to apologize, it seems like he'd do anything for her forgiveness. And then... It just doesn' t make sense to me, it feels artificial. Not at all like the satisfying "click" of fitting puzzle pieces I expected from the last book :/ So yes, Snape is hers, but he could be so much better (as a character) that the feeling of lost potential takes away from the story. Especially since the expectations were based on *her own* work. Nita From shimmertree at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:00:08 2007 From: shimmertree at yahoo.com (shimmertree) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:00:08 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: <3BC0F32A-675F-491D-B64B-4D4E53339DBA@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173516 Hope I format this correctly, as it's my first post. Maeg wrote: > To drag it back to discussion of Harry, I was surprised at Harry's > reaction to his own use of Cruciatus. ..... there was no question > in his mind that torturing someone was the right thing to do. ..... I'd expect > some twinge of doubt, if not actual repugnance at one's own actions > (whether the action is justified or not). > > Given how "good" we're told Harry is, this struck me as totally out > of character. In one blink of an eye, he became Vengeance!Harry > without a conscience. It's canon, but I don't buy it, and it makes me > care a lot less about what happens to him. Shimmertree replies: I think it's important to remember that Harry still has the Voldy soul fragment inside him at this point, and it's getting stronger. When I read this scene, I attributed Harry's callousness to the idea of torture, to the fragment's growing strength and influence on Harry's soul. After all, isn't that something Voldy would have done without a "twinge of doubt" or "actual repugnance"? Shimmertree From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:27:15 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:27:15 -0000 Subject: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173517 "guzuguzu" wrote: > > > > Peter Pettigrew: Wasted potential for a character: Clio responded: > I totally agree with your view on Pettigrew and DH in general. > Although I'm dissappointed with how many stories and detours we saw > during the previous books turned out to be irrelevant, I think the > problem may lie in our, or at least my 'wrong' perception of the > story. Let me explain. > > I think for JKR it was very important to make a point about how the > future is in the hands of children. The trio and their friends are the ones that save the world. The focus of the epilogue is on the newest generation of the wizarding world. And isn't the poem at the beginning of the books also about children? Carol responds: I think you're right here. It's always been clear that, for JKR, the book's are Harry's story. (Which doesn't prevent the rest of us for caring about her other characters or disagreeing with her perceptions. I don't think that authorial intentions are realizable because of the differences between any two human minds. Even if she said everything she wanted to say, conveying her message perfectly, I don't think any reader would accept all parts of it.) But, yes. this story is about HRH and the epilogue is about the next generation. Pettigrew was lost before the story began. James and Lily were dead. Black dies recklessly fighting Bellatrix, a Gryffindor to the last; Lupin struggles with his weakness and overcome its it before dying along with his wife (at least they produced a child); Snape struggled with guilt and redeemed himself through courage and love (if she had simply married James and lived, he would have stayed with the DEs; having brought about her death, tried and failed to prevent it, he wears his bereavement in the form of black robes and tries to expiate his guilt by protecting Harry, always for Lily. It's clear to me that he dies redeemed, providing invaluable help to Harry with his last act, but nevertheless, he dies. His generation must pass the torch to Harry's.) Clio: > I also think all whole generation of the marauders is killed on purpose as the books progress. They depicted as a generation lost. At least I think JKR intended it this way. That's why Lupin has to die at his climax of happiness. Although she gives us a lot of backstory, JKR isn't interested in the fate of that generation and that's why none of them is shown to overcome their limitations and torments. Sirius never get's to enjoy his freedom, Lupin can't live in acceptance of him being a werewolf. The even more conflicted characters Wormtail and Snape are not used to their full narrative potential and die unrecognized and in a rather dissappointing way. Carol responds: JKR didn't originally intend for Lupin to die (he replaced Mr. Weasley, who died in Book 5), but at some point, I think she came around to something like the view you're describing (although I'm not sure about "the climax of his happiness," which sound like poor Cedric to me). James we never knew (except for the arrogant, bullying berk of the Pensieve scene), but Lupin and Black are clearly happier in the afterlife, where, we can safely assume, Lupin is no longer a werewolf. I assume that Snape, having died atoning for the sin he was trying to expiate for so many years, is similarly happy, though, of course, he doesn't appear in the scene with Harry's loved ones. Lupin is only there because he was a Marauder; he wasn't really that close to Harry. I've discussed Snape's character arc and function in the narrative elsewhere; I never wanted his motivation to be Lily, but it works for his posthumous redemption scene in a way that no other motive would have worked. That Harry accepts Snape's love for his mother shows that it was not lust but devotion mixed with guilt over her death that he could not assuage while he lived. Harry's reaction is surely meant to guide ours; Snape gave him helped he never had a chance to acknowledge; at the end, a fleeting look into each other's eyes in which Snape, perhaps, sees Lily--or perhaps see, for the first time, Lily's son, who is about to sacrifice himself for the WW as Lily did for her son, and Harry sees a tormented and dying man desperate to convey some message, not at all the enemy he expected to confront. Shock becomes compassion and understanding, remarkable because Snape has also told him that he must sacrifice himself. It's not what we were expecting, but, IMO, it's powerful. Harry could not have done what he did without Snape. To give Pettigrew, a cringing rat who betrayed the Potters to Voldemort, hid for twelve years as a rat, escaped to resurrect Voldemort, murdered Cedric, and tied Harry to a gravestone while he took his blood to add to the restorative potion a redemption scene comparable to Snape's would have been (IMO) pointless and revolting. He has literally given his right hand for Voldemort's resurrection, and his reward is a cursed silver hand. "May your loyalty never waver," says LV as he bestows this Trojan horse of a gift. Perhaps he merely knows that Wormtail is weak, having heard him timidly suggest using another wizard than Harry for the potion. Perhaps he knows that Pettigrew owes Harry a lifedebt. Either way, when his loyalty does waver in the Malfoy's house as Harry reminds him of the lifedebt, DD's prediction comes true: "I'm much mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry Potter. . . . The time may come when you will be very glad that you saved Pettigrew's life" (GoF Am. ed. 427). So the life debt saves Harry and his friends, not by causing the ignoble Wormtail to redeem himself by some brave deed but by causing his death and allowing them to escape. Clio: > The point is, to me it looks like I have taken the wrong perspectives on the books. The marauder generation was never ment to be of key importance. That realization makes me feel hollow and dissappointed. Carol: I agree with regard to MWPP and Lily, but Snape is critical to the story. The Harry/Voldemort arc begins with Snape the eavesdropper bringing the partial Prophecy to Voldemort. Throughout the books, Snape has been helping Harry in ways that no one else could do, from teaching him about bezoars to killing DD on DD's orders. (The rapport between the HBP and Harry was not for nothing; it paved the way to the Pensieve scene in DH, as did the glimpse of Snape's memories in OoP.) Harry had to get past his hatred of Snape to be in the right state of mind to sacrifice himself. And Snape brings it all full circle by giving him the memory that not only shows Harry who he truly is, faults and all, but by making possible the willing self-sacrifice without which Harry could not have defeated Voldemort. Snape is and has always been an essential element of the main plot, whether he was off-page or on. Even so, I understand your feelings and empathize with them. Harry is the hero. This is his book. Snape as Snape is not important in JKR's view (adult readers obviously disagree); it's Harry's view of Snape that matters to the story. His eyes are opened and his perception is cleared, too late to save Snape but not too late to clear his name. And having Harry vindicate Snape publicly and name his second son after him means more to me than anything in the books. It's as much of a tribute to Snape as we can expect from JKR, who gave him the virtue that she values most highly but still does nto see him as a hero. That's her prerogative. For me, he's the most moving and dynamic character in the books, and he has loyalty, perseverance, and love as well as courage--not to mention intelligence and cunning. He can "hoodwink" Lord Voldemort and outduel any other character except posssibly LV. (Imagine if he'd fought McGonagall instead of defending himself! and George Weasley's ear was lost because the DE heard Snape shout Sectumsempra swerved out of the way, removing his hand from the path of the spell. But Snape's shout nevertheless saved Lupin, who hated him and thought the worst.) He has watched many people die (never killed anyone except DD, on DD's orders) but "Lately, only those I could not save." Surely, that's a huge change from the young man who cared only about Lily. Healer!Snape! How I wanted you back for DH. You'd have been such a boon to St. Mungo's. Clio: > And Snape and the reinforcemnt of his story through the Bloody Baron's background teaches us what? Don't trust a Slytherin, even if he is in love with you. They are all obsessive, sick stalkers, who will kill you? > Carol: I still don't see stalker Snape. He left her alone after she refused to forgive him and begged both Voldemort and DD to save her. I'm quite sure he would not have come near her, knowing that she would despise him as a Death Eater. He only wanted her alive, not understanding how terrible life would have been for her without her husband and son. His love was selfish at first, but I don't think it was ever sullied. And wouldn't you, coming upon a photograph of the person you had loved and lost in the home of a dead man, have at least been tempted to take that photograph and signature? They were all he would ever have of her. It wasn't an admirable act, but he had devoted his life to her. As for the Bloody Baron, surely he's meant to contrast with Snape. The Baron murdered the woman he loved; Snape tried and failed to save Lily, whose death was in large part his fault, and spent the rest of his life repenting that sin and the last seven years protecting her son and secretly fighting her murderer, at terrible cost to himself. Snape's love starts out selfish, but it's never as selfish as the Bloody Baron's. Nor will Snape spend eternity groaning and clanking on the Astronomy Tower. ;-) Carol, reconciled to Snape's fate because he must be happier in the afterlife, but missing snarky Snape from the early books From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:44:27 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:44:27 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707281201p39873bachcc3c0cb0185dc260@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173518 Rahel: "Well, dear, people are different. Take it from another parent of a 1 year old (and of a 3 years old). Under the conditions life presented to the Lupins, I would have not hesitated but acted just like Tonks did. I would have left my child under the best care I know it would get, and went off to protect the loved one who was in imminent danger - my husband." Lynda: "I know many parents who leave infants and toddlers in the care of others to go to dangerous jobs and situations. Teddy Lupin was left in the care of his grandmother. He was safe and away from the danger of the battle at Hogwarts and his parents, after all, had jobs to do! It was a better alternative for Tonks (a law enforcement officer) than to be stuck at home worrying about Lupin et al. Same with Lupin. That doesn't mean they were bad parents. Just not homebodies!" There's another dimension to this. The best way Remus and Tonks can defend Teddy is to do everything they can to make sure the Dark Lord is defeated. They have to give him a decent world to live in, and not leave to him the task of breaking the tyranny of Voldemort and his followers. It's sort of related to the famous quote that "the tree of liberty has be be refreshed with the blood of patriots..." I do wonder who brought Teddy up after his parents' death, if his grandmother was too old. First guess, the Weasleys. Jim Ferer From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Jul 28 22:50:02 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:50:02 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: <46aaa192.28d6720a.1cab.ffff9396@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173519 > > sherry now: > I was disgusted with Lupin in the scene of the argument with Harry. Until the scene at shell Cottage, where he had > obviously perhaps grown up a little and was finally doing the right thing. We didn't see his death, and I'm confident he died bravely, but I did not like him in the beginning of the book. > Pippin: I do have to thank JKR for making Lupin a credible red herring and allowing Harry to recognize that he did indeed have greater failings than cutting his friends too much slack. They were all evident in the earlier books, though Harry did not notice them. We need not ask now why Sirius would have suspected him as the spy, or Snape would have thought he was in on the prank or why Lupin would have killed Pettigrew without a visible qualm. None of that would have been out of character for the callous, cowardly, irresponsible Lupin of DH. I must suppose he escaped ESE!ness only because Voldemort undervalued werewolves. Anyway, just pass that crow over here. I used to say that ESE!Lupin was a theory about the plot, not the character, and actually as a theory about the plot it was pretty much right on. Harry *did* struggle with betrayal in Book Seven, an ESE! was revealed, and it was by golly the one who confessed on page to the death of Sirius Black ("It is my fault Sirius is dead.") It never occurred to me that Dumbledore could have been Grindelwald's ESE! of course. Did anybody guess that? Pippin From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:57:14 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:57:14 -0000 Subject: Good People Die (was alternate book ending) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173520 Lady Potions: " As I have pondered the seventh book I think I would like an alternate ending book. Think about it, so much death and for what?" "Why kill Hedwig? Why Dobby?" Death is random. Death is chance. Good people (and elves) die in wars, and it usually doesn't make sense which ones live or die, and that was JKR's powerful point. But all the good characters who died died for a reason: to rid the world of a great evil and to give those who were left a better world to live and grow up in. Lesley: "Hi, I agree with you about the unnecessary good guy deaths especially Hedwig's, which I found really upsetting but what I don't understand is why none of the death-eaters died until the final battle?" We likely just didn't see those deaths, but also they were more likely to cast Killing Curses than the good guys were. Jim Ferer From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sat Jul 28 23:06:45 2007 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:06:45 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ABCC05.5050602@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173521 Sydney wrote: > What is she giving us in Slytherin House? I'm not trying to be > provocative, I'm just laying out what it is we're looking at here. > This book has given us a population characterized by 'ambition' and > 'cunning', they are often described as having 'greedy' expressions. > They always seem to be in positions of power and have more money than > seems right. They're not admitted into certain clubs and quite right > too. They can't be trusted-- their loyalties are not those of the rest > of society. In a war they will probably run or switch sides or try to > profit from the suffering of others. They manipulate the government > from behind the scenes to their own purposes, using money and mesmeric > powers. They keep themselves to themselves and never fit in; who they > are seems to be partly by birth-- established by nasty inbreeding--, > partly by belief, and partly by some invisible taint. > > They killed Harry Potter and refused to accept his Salvation. I love and adore your for saying that. When Dumbledore said to Snape "we sort too soon", something that amounts to "you should have been a Gryffindor", it was like a knife to my heart. Because when you grow as a Jew in an antisemitic country, like I did, you hear that sort of thing a lot, from well-meaning people that try to cheer you up: "you are not a real proper Jew like those horrible nasty ones, you are OK, we really consider you one of us." That's what Dumbledore is essentially saying, and that's why Snape reacts this way. Also, Rowling's message about choices is a total cheat, and I should have seen it by book 2. When Dumbledore explains to Harry how he was different from Voldie by the virtue of his choices, apparently, Harry made the better choice by asking to be put "not in Slytherin". Could he be a Slytherin, and then by his actions choose to be a good person, different from Voldemort? Noooo, just the choice of Slytherin in and of itself would have put him on the road to evil, apparently. Irene From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 23:11:08 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 23:11:08 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173522 Pippin: "We need not ask now why Sirius would have suspected him as the spy, or Snape would have thought he was in on the prank or why Lupin would have killed Pettigrew without a visible qualm. None of that would have been out of character for the callous, cowardly, irresponsible Lupin of DH." That's way too strong, Pippin. Lupin was weak there, and gave in to it; he was intensely conflicted about having a child, dealing with all the ostracization he lived with a werewolf, and the guilt he expressed. He was in self-loathing for doing what seemed to him a selfish act in the first place by even marrying Tonks. It took Harry handling him so roughly to make him begin to come to his senses. One of JKR's minor themes here is redemption. Ron cuts out on Harry and comes back; Remus cuts out on his wife and son and comes back. Dumbledore feels his guilt for the way he's used people. Voldemort could have saved his soul with remorse, which Harry offered him. There's rebirth and forgiveness there. Lupin fought bravely in the Ministry fight and showed caring and compassion over and over. What Lupin did was wrong, dead wrong, but I am glad I have never had to live with the burdens Lupin did. In the end, he earned his forgiveness. Jim Ferer From kat7555 at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:43:09 2007 From: kat7555 at yahoo.com (kat7555) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:43:09 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173523 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: >> Dumbledore the Godfather. I'm not talking about a Sirius Black sort of Godfather I'm talking about a Don Vito Corleone sort of Godfather. Dumbledore could be mighty cold blooded when he needed to be! >> >> As I say I'm not criticizing Dumbledore, in a war you need someone who can make intelligent unemotional decisions, but I can't pretend I wasn't a bit shocked old jovial benign Dumbledore could act this way. Oh well, I suppose it could have been worse: << You bring up a good point. I think Dumbledore saw himself engaged in a chess game with Voldemort with Harry and the Order as pawns. I was angry with Dumbldore when he failed to repect Harry's feelings. He didn't want to hear that the Dursleys were treating Harry like dirt. His response to Sirius' death was appalling. Sirius wasn't perfect but he was the only father figure Harry ever knew. Harry deserved more compassion than he received. I believe that Dumbledore understood Voldemort far better than he did Harry. They both coveted great power the only thing Harry ever wanted was a family. Kathy Kulesza From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Sat Jul 28 23:22:16 2007 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:22:16 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH as Christian Allegory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173524 > To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com> From: sydpad at yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:22:01 +0000> Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH as Christian Allegory> > > Sydney: > I'm such a Slytherin. Whenever people tell me, "You're so brave for> saying that!" I think, "Uh-oh".> It's just the two of us, then, and also the 10 people who've told me,> "I'm so glad you've said that! I was thinking the same thing! But> you go ahead and post while I hide behind a plant!" LOL. PJ peeking out from a really nice Ficus... I also saw the Nazi symbolism but, if anything, I read muggles and muggleborn as her "Jews". They can not attend school, they are put in prison (camps) and they have to sign up on lists so that the Slitherins can keep track of them. While I, like you, truly believe JKR did not plan to show this in her books, it's inexcapable. Especially once you saw that statue in the MOM where the bodies of muggles were the throne proud Wizards sat upon... I can't imagine how she, or at least her editor, didn't catch it while reading the story after it was done. I really wish one of them had as it made me very uncomfortable and I wouldn't want my young grandson to read it until he was much older. PJ (taking her hat off to you and Magpie) _________________________________________________________________ PC Magazine?s 2007 editors? choice for best web mail?award-winning Windows Live Hotmail. http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HMWL_mini_pcmag_0707 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nitalynx at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 22:56:21 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:56:21 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173525 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > Dumbledore the Godfather. I'm not talking about a Sirius Black sort of > Godfather I'm talking about a Don Vito Corleone sort of Godfather. > Dumbledore could be mighty cold blooded when he needed to be! That's > not a criticism, you have to be cold blooded in a war, but some of the > things he says in "The Prince's Tail" chapter are chilling; > Dumbledore's remarks even horrified Snape, and something would have to > be mighty damn bad to horrify Snape! For example: > There's a huge difference between them, however. Vito Corleone lived his entire life according to the morals and traditions he grew up with, while Dumbledore was pretty much a law unto himself (see the attempt to arrest him in OotP). Vito never claimed to care about the "greater good" (which is a rather abstract concept), but did all he could for his family and circle of influence. Unlike our overly secretive Headmaster, the Godfather always had an adviser, because that was the way to rule a family. And I don't recall him sacrificing children for any purposes. Er, in fact, it seems that I find Albus "Epitome of Goodness" Dumbledore *more* chilling than Vito Corleone the mafia boss. No wonder Snape was horrified! ;) Nita From sydpad at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 23:27:50 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 23:27:50 -0000 Subject: Come on folks (response to several criticisms) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173526 Nita: > > About authors not understanding their characters... Characters are > usually based on writers' observations and understanding of people, > right? And we can only directly observe the appearance and behaviour > of others, not their psychology or motivations. So, just like you can > draw a convincing portrait without understanding facial anatomy, it's > possible to write a character that behaves realistically without > realizing the necessary motives for such behaviour. > So, > imagine you've been drawing a character's profile in various settings, > with great results. People admire your talent and fall in love with > the character. Then you draw a portrait from a different angle, and > some of your fans feel disappointed. The illusion doesn't work for > them any more. > > After DH, Snape's character doesn't really work for me either. Sydney: Every kind of ME TOO to this post! She turned the angle and suddenly he looked wonky. I simply can't make sense of this guy who on the one hand seems to be a complete moral vacuum, and on the other hand he can sustain this hopless Love for decades that's so pure it produces a Patronus of Dazzling Goodness. I wasn't quite sure how it was going to work before DH came out, but I was pretty sure it could; but it can't work like this. It's not accidental that Snape in DH suddenly seemed considerably slower on the uptake than in any previous book, or that his voice was so silenced. It wasn't even anything that Snape actually DID that broke the character; it was the author's need to 'explain' him. What's so frustrating is that it wasn't necessary-- it feels like Rowling deliberately took the character and crammed him back into a box after he had grown out of it. You'd have to cut very few lines out of DH and we'd all be back here happily arguing away about something that was still kind of ambiguous and fun. But she had kept hammering home this idea that no, everything good in Snape came from Lily and only Lily; and he did nothing on his own initiative but only directed by Dumbledore, who controlled him using this weird idee fixe, like a reverse Manchurian Candidate. I suppose this was originally due to some kind of symbolism thing with the Gryffindor/purity whatever connects with the corrupted Slytherin thingie, but with real people it just doesn't work. Of course the character was so vivid that people will continue to work around this, but I can't ignore the fact that Rowling sawed back all his green shoots and painted them over with herbicide. Or almost all.. he will keep sprouting out! Oh the other hand.. I'm going to do this a lot with this book because although I feel she gutted a lot of what had been my favorite stuff, her genius will shine through! We got some nice extra touches on Snape, like his inner Emo!kid, and his fascinatingly sick relationship with Dumbleodore (I think Snape latched onto a new father figure after dear old Da and Voldemort, when Dumbledore said, "You disgust me." Oh Snape, you poor messed up puppy). And even without ever meeting Eileen and Tobias, once you meet 'desperate for approval' Snape you can write a one-act play about them: EILEEN: I wouldn't have even married a worthless muggle like you if you hadn't knocked me up with that brat! TOBIAS: He's going to be a freak like you, and not a real man, isn't he? I'm sick of both of you. I'm off to the pub. (cuffs Eileen)(kicks little Snape)(SLAM!) EILEEN: (bursts into hysterical tears) Oh Sevvie.. promise me you'll grow up to great Slytherin wizard, then maybe my family will forgive me for having you. Argh. ARGH! It was so close... so close. It's funny because another one of my favorite fictional characters is rather Snape-like and was famously loathed by his author: Sherlock Holmes. At least Conan Doyle just killed Holmes body, not his soul! -- Sydney From tenne at redshift.bc.ca Sat Jul 28 23:13:07 2007 From: tenne at redshift.bc.ca (Tenne) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:13:07 -0600 Subject: why Harry had a choice in sorting References: <3BC0F32A-675F-491D-B64B-4D4E53339DBA@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: <016301c7d16c$dbccbe50$797ba8c0@terrilaptop> No: HPFGUIDX 173527 I was just thinking about the sorting hat and how Harry had a choice and if he hadn't made that choice, he would have been in Slythernin. Could it be that only Harry has been able to make that choice and it is because he is a Horcrux? Could the sorting hat react to the "evil" in him and that is why he wanted to put him in Slytherin? Tenne From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sat Jul 28 23:43:58 2007 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:43:58 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ABD4BE.2080007@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173528 eggplant107 wrote: > Dumbledore the Godfather. I'm not talking about a Sirius Black sort of > Godfather I'm talking about a Don Vito Corleone sort of Godfather. > Dumbledore could be mighty cold blooded when he needed to be! Dear Eggplant, I'd like to start with expressing my enormous respect to you. From all the anti-Snape people I had such fun arguing before DH, you took the revelations in book 7 with the utmost grace. Now to the business of scary Dumbledore and Sirius. I think JKR, without ever meaning too, gave us an answer as to why Dumbledore was not so eager to get Sirius a fair trial. Sirius, if he was free, and caught a whiff of Dumbledore's plans concerning Harry, would have killed Dumbledore - Elder wand or not. Or smuggled little Harry to a tropical country, at the very least, and wizarding world be damned. I wonder if Dumbledore was not secretly very pleased with book 5 finale as well. Irene From sydpad at yahoo.com Sat Jul 28 23:53:08 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 23:53:08 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: <46ABCC05.5050602@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173529 IreneMikhlin : > I love and adore your for saying that. When Dumbledore said to Snape "we > sort too soon", something that amounts to "you should have been a > Gryffindor", it was like a knife to my heart. Because when you grow as a > Jew in an antisemitic country, like I did, you hear that sort of thing > a lot, from well-meaning people that try to cheer you up: "you are not a > real proper Jew like those horrible nasty ones, you are OK, we really > consider you one of us." > > That's what Dumbledore is essentially saying, and that's why Snape > reacts this way. > Sydney: Thanks. :) I'm glad that my posting this line of thought served a purpose. I really agonized over doing it; I'm still not sure if I shouldn't have just kept my mouth shut, because there's no way to talk about this without it being incredibly hurtful both to people who see it and people who don't. That's enough for on this for me... it's really not fun to talk about it. -- Sydney From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sat Jul 28 23:56:47 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 23:56:47 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173530 Sydney: > I'm such a Slytherin. Whenever people tell me, "You're so brave for> saying that!" I think, "Uh-oh".> It's just the two of us, then, and also the 10 people who've told me,> "I'm so glad you've said that! I was thinking the same thing! But> you go ahead and post while I hide behind a plant!" LOL. PJ: > I also saw the Nazi symbolism but, if anything, I read muggles and muggleborn as her "Jews". > They can not attend school, they are put in prison (camps) and they have to sign up > on lists so that the Slitherins can keep track of them. While I, like you, truly believe JKR > did not plan to show this in her books, it's inexcapable. Especially once you saw that statue > in the MOM where the bodies of muggles were the throne proud Wizards sat upon... I can't imagine > how she, or at least her editor, didn't catch it while reading the story after it was done. I really > wish one of them had as it made me very uncomfortable and I wouldn't want my young grandson > to read it until he was much older. Magpie: That symbolism is intentional, though. The Muggle-borns are the innocent people who are being persecuted by others with the Slytherins in the Nazi role. We're supposed to see them in our mind as in a position like the Jews in Nazi Germany. I think that's being done blatantly. She wants the Slytherins to be seen as the Nazis. That's not problematic (well, unless as you say you just don't want that brought up at all in a book like this). The part where the Slytherins Jews is something completely different and seems to be unintentional--the Muggle-borns don't conform to any Nazi propaganda about Jews; they show up the lie that they're telling: they're not thieves, they're not any different from other wizards. The Slytherins actually do reflect a lot of the traits the Nazis claimed Jews had as justification for persecuting them. Geoff: What I am trying to get at is instead of trying to score points off one another or run down what JKR has written, why don't we try looking for things to agree on; things that we like about the books. Instead of perpetual negativity, why don't we look for good things, encouraging things, things to say "wow" about? Instead of counting the dead, why don't we remember the numbers who came through the war and will go on beyond the last page ? in the epilogue or not ? Harry, Ron, Hermione, Luna, Neville, Bill, Charlie, Arthur and Molly, even Draco and his parents(!) and the rest. I read Tolkien and Lewis and Rowling first and foremost for pleasure. Perhaps I'm na?ve but I don't want to analyse them down to the last full stop; I just want to be an armchair hedonist for a couple of hours! Magpie: How much are planning to pay me for writing posts for your entertainment instead of my own? Because I'm writing about what interests me in the books and in list discussion and skipping the stuff I'm not interested in.:-) -m (who would probably have had little interest in Riddle's diary, the Weasley family tree or the location of Hogwarts and pretty much entered HP fandom because she thought something in the books was whacked!) From lmkos at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 00:04:00 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:04:00 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Malfoys In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173531 Stephanie: >(snip) >The family really began to interest me in HBP when Narcissa took her >life in her hands, and threw pride to the winds in the interest of >preserving her son's safety. Lenore: Yes. She saw a chance and took it. That episode seems to show her as a soft, gentle woman, and I began to realize that I had never seen her characterized in any other way. I suppose she too was in Slytherin but, as far as Draco was concerned, she was the epitome of devotion. Stephanie: >Here, I thought, is an interesting character. >My interest in the Malfoy family was only further peaked in DH when I >saw the Lucius, Narcissa, and Draco's obvious love for one another. > >Draco's character seemed so on the verge of really blossoming in a >fascinating way but then the series ended! FINITO! Drop curtain!! >AIYEEE! > >It just struck me that Draco truly WAS a product of his upbringing, >and this showed itself quite plainly when, about to perish by >accursed fire and having been dragged out of the path of destruction >by Potter, his first words spoke his concern for the welfare of >his friend. >"C-Crabbe" chocked Malfoy as soon as he could speak, C-Crabbe..." > >Nor do I forget that while being chased by this same cursed fire, >Malfoy willingly slowed his own flight to drag a stunned Goyle along >with him and, with Harry's help, to ultimate safety. > >The origins of this sort of reaction were explained when Narcissa and >Lucius, at the height of the fighting weren't even remotely >interested in the battle, the dark lord, or any of the rest of it. >Their whole focus was on their son and his safety. (snipped) Lenore: Of course, Narcissa and Lucius had both lost their wands so they were powerless to join in the fighting. Thus stripped of power and pride, their only focus was for Draco; and as you say, we discover that the Malfoys had always enjoyed a strong family bond. It makes me wonder why they became Death Eaters in the first place. Possibly my favorite part in DH was when Draco was in dire peril from the FiendFyre, and Harry swooped alongside him to take him to safety-- over Ron's protest. We never find out whether Harry followed up on it, but that kind of shared 'war experience' would surely have helped to dissolve the hatred that existed between them. I had that hope. I wish that Harry could have made a minimal approach to them, sitting together apart after the battle was over. It might have been at least a start in rebuilding the WW with a bit more heart. What bothers me is that Harry seemed to expect Draco to come to him, and I recalled that Dudley came to Harry, not the other way around. But... maybe the time wasn't quite right for a detente with Draco. I'm with you. I would have liked another chapter to gather the threads together. This was one of the best things about the earlier books-- there was always the moment, often in the hospital, when many things were clarified. Lenore (hoping the formatting holds a lot better this time, ack!) From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:06:29 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:06:29 -0000 Subject: House Elves In-Reply-To: <46A7FC97.2030205@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173532 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Jones wrote: > I have a question about house-elves. We are told that their magic > is different and that it can be quite powerful as when Dobby blasted > Malfoy. Why then would they defend Hogwarts from Deatheaters with > frying pans and kitchen implements? I found it strange too, and I was able to come up with only one explanation so far. Remember how Fred (in CoS) explains to Harry that even though house-elves have a powerful magic of their own they cannot use it without their master's permission. I assume that the school's headmaster should be considered the Hogwarts' elves master, and there was none at the time of the battle, so no one could give them permission. I hope someone else can think of a better explanation :-). zanooda From cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com Sun Jul 29 00:06:29 2007 From: cfitzsimmons at kc.rr.com (clairvoyant812) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:06:29 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707261852t30a7b60ey98503cad9bec5c0e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173533 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lynda Cordova" wrote: > > snip > Lynda: > > Maybe that's it. I don't have a problem with Ron's mimicing in parseltongue > either, and I often sing in languages I don't understand. Latin, Italian, > German, Chinese, Japanese. All with my friends in front of audiences of > various sizes so that none of us feels singled out--except for the solos of > course. Point is, memorizing odd (to our own ears) sounds or approximating > them is possible. Eventually some people even learn them. After singing > Mozart's Requiem Mass in two different choirs, plus various sections of the > same piece three more times, I finally even started understanding what it > was I was singing. > > Lynda > > >Claire: After reading the book again, I think I may have come up with a reasonable explanation of why Ron could speak Parseltongue to open the Chamber of Secrets. If you remember, just before Ron destroys the locket, Harry thought he saw a flash of scarlet in Ron's eyes. Could not a Voldemort memory have flashed into Ron and allowed him to speak a good enough version of Parseltongue to get them into the Chamber? Sorry if this has already been mentioned but I haven't seen it yet. From marthaforhp at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:02:23 2007 From: marthaforhp at yahoo.com (marthaforhp) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:02:23 -0000 Subject: Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173534 I've wondered about the answer to this question since near the end of HBP, when Snape roars to the fleeing Death Eaters to remember their orders and leave Potter to the Dark Lord. And in DH, in Malfoy's Manor, Bellatrix doesn't simply kill Harry and be done with it. Yet the original prophecy says nothing about who has to kill whom, only that neither can live if the other survives. What have I missed? Martha PS And I have looked in the Fantastic Posts for an answer. From kaleeyj at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 00:24:23 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:24:23 -0000 Subject: Ron's Parseltongue ( was: Loved it!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173535 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "clairvoyant812" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lynda Cordova" > wrote: > > > > snip > > > Lynda: > > Maybe that's it. I don't have a problem with Ron's mimicing in > parseltongue > > either, and I often sing in languages I don't understand. > > > > > >Claire: > After reading the book again, I think I may have come up with a > reasonable explanation of why Ron could speak Parseltongue to open > the Chamber of Secrets. If you remember, just before Ron destroys > the locket, Harry thought he saw a flash of scarlet in Ron's eyes. > Could not a Voldemort memory have flashed into Ron and allowed him > to speak a good enough version of Parseltongue to get them into the > Chamber? Sorry if this has already been mentioned but I haven't > seen it yet. > Bex now: I think that "Open" is a very simple articulation - something Ron has heard before and can mimic with some effort and several attempts. Like Lynda said above, we can sing in languages we don't understand - I know a few Spanish songs and a bunch of Latin hymns through choir, but I don't speak Latin or Spanish. Another point on this matter: Most all of us who own dogs or cats at one time or another have imitated their bark/meow, or a similar cry. I do all the time with our cats, more so to annoy them than anything. And I don't have the slightest clue what I'm saying, but I can sufficiently mimic that noise. I think Ron remembered the last few encounters he had with Harry speaking Parseltongue, recalled what Harry 'said' (keep in mind, the times he's heard Harry speak Parseltongue have been very highly charged times - he'd have some clear memories of those events), and imitated him. Possibly the door wiggled a little as he got closer to the correct pronunciation. Really, this was not very hard for me to swallow. ~Bex From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:36:22 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:36:22 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173536 > Magpie: > That symbolism is intentional, though. The Muggle-borns are the > innocent people who are being persecuted by others with the > Slytherins in the Nazi role. We're supposed to see them in our mind > as in a position like the Jews in Nazi Germany. I think that's being > done blatantly. She wants the Slytherins to be seen as the Nazis. > That's not problematic (well, unless as you say you just don't want > that brought up at all in a book like this). > > The part where the Slytherins Jews is something completely different > and seems to be unintentional--the Muggle-borns don't conform to any > Nazi propaganda about Jews; they show up the lie that they're > telling: they're not thieves, they're not any different from other > wizards. The Slytherins actually do reflect a lot of the traits the > Nazis claimed Jews had as justification for persecuting them. > > Alla: You know, it is not the first time I read the argument that people see Slytherins cast in the part of persecuted Jews and they see the symbolism with jews from eastern Europe. And of course I cannot argue with anybody's right to see that symbolysm, intentional or not. But this jew from eastern Europe, who as I mentioned several times seen enough antisemitism in my life, is so scratching her head every time this argument comes out. I mean, whether I personally like Slytherins or not, I should be able to see those parallels at least on intellectual level, right? I mean, do not get me wrong, the fact that I do not see them, does not mean that other people cannot, but just on purely intellectual level I am trying to figure out why this so falls flat. Why I do not see Slytherins as **any** sort of metaphor for jews, but the contrary one - those who persecute. Well, the first reason should be obvious for me, I guess. That word **mudblood**. Um, as I mentioned several times in the past, this word works for me as very direct metaphor for the most despicable, most antisemitic nickname that every jew from former Soviet Union encountered at least once and maybe much more in their life. **Slytherins** are the ones who use that word, NOT anybody else, therefore the symbolism is that they ARE who persecute, not those who are persecuted. It how it is works for me, I am sure any other jew from eastern europe or any part of the world, can see it completely differently. I also agree with you that symbolism of seeing muggleborns as persecuted minority IS quite intentional, probably this is also why I cannot wrap my mind around to see it backwards - somehow see those who persecute Muggleborns as being prejudiced against. Because **to me** it is not prejudice, it is evil, real chilling evil and I just cannot see bigotry in anti Slytherin attitude. I see good people standing up against Evil. The funniest argument fot Slytherin as persecuted jews symbolism to me is of course Snape's hooked nose. Um, why? I have blue eyes, blond hair and all my family does and we are all very very jewish. On the other hand, there are people with hooked noses, who are jews and NOT jews, had never been jews, you know? Am I suppose to think of Jew the moment I read about Snape's hooked nose? Well, I really do not. Oh, oh another thing that falls flat for me is the power thing. I see for example Malfoys as being one of the most powerful families in WW - like every door is opens towards them and for Jews in Eastern europe, well that is really really not true in general, was not true at least ten years ago. As I also mentioned before, I had to fight tooth and nail, reall with tears and sweat to get in to college I wanted and I always **almost** got in. Malfoys can go to any school they want ( Durmstrang, Hogwarts), I am guessing to take any job they want, so this parallels as **persecuted minority** falls for me again. AS I mentioned before, I also wish that JKR would find a way to NOT subject eleven years old to this ideology, to save little ones from it. I AM puzzled why Slytherin house still exists at the end with it **to me** being so obviously House of Evil, shouldn't these kids be going to another Houses to absorb the traits that Potterverse considers better ones? Or I would have enjoyed as well House Slytherin denouncing their ideology at the end and leaving ambition as key criteria for sorting. I mean, what is wrong with ambition, I will never know, but having said all that, I will **never** be able to see the symbolism that Slytherins are being prejudiced against. Fighting against evil is not prejudice in my mind. From nitalynx at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:29:23 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:29:23 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173537 Anders: > > How would you suggest she should have portrayed "the bad guys" to the > > readers? She had to make some type of distinction to move the story > > along. I didn't read her description of Bellatrix as a slur against > > any particular ethnic group, Nita: Well, there's this radical idea... How about making the bad guys distinguishable from the good guys by their - actions? If the antagonist is a sadistic torturer / cruel bully / sociopathic murderer, why is there a need to add more superficial negative qualities to make the character *really* bad? Sydney: > It's very hard to express what I mean here.. of course there's no slur > in the HP series against any particular ethnic group. But Rowling > borrows the language, she borrows the imagery, and she borrows the > mindset, that in the past was constructed and used by actual bigots, > and then she creates a group in her world and and applies it all to > them. That we are nice and they are bad; they are animal-like, > monkey-like, bat-like, troll-like; it's okay when we do it; those > people ALWAYS do that. She uses and she uses it, she uses it's power > over the tribalism in the human soul, and in the end she validates it. Nita: The similarities may be there simply because both real-life bigotry and the authorial treatment of Slytherins include some intense, almost over the top "othering". If you keep throwing every bad quality you can think of into the characterization of the Other, the end result will be pretty much the same no matter what the Other originally was (within a given cultural context, obviously). I still don't understand how she managed not to notice it, however. It's not exactly subtle... But it might be like her fat jokes in the books and anti-anorexia statements on her website, I suppose. Nita From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:27:38 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 08:27:38 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ABDEFA.3070106@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173538 shimmertree blessed us with this gem On 29/07/2007 06:00: > Maeg wrote: > > I was surprised at Harry's reaction to his own use of Cruciatus. > Shimmertree replies: > I attributed Harry's callousness to the idea of torture, to the > fragment's growing strength This is a possibility. However, I wish JKR had given us some clue that this was the case. In a movie, an evil act is accompanied by a quick glint of evil in the actor's eye; in LOTR, for example, Frodo's decline into evil was accompanied by strange behavior that allowed us to see the inner conflict; reactions of others around him -- shock, surprise, grief -- further corroborated the unusualness of the behavior. If it were the case that Harry were being overcome by the LV soul fragment, I would have liked to see some clues in the text; perhaps a twinge in his scar, a description of sudden, uncharacteristic rage flaring up, and perhaps some shock from McGonagall at the viciousness of Harry's attack -- something to let us know that yes, this was indeed uncharacteristic of Harry. CJ, Taiwan From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:43:47 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:43:47 -0000 Subject: That Whole Christian Thing (plus assorted others) In-Reply-To: <00d601c7d11e$be2be400$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173539 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ricky & LeAnn" wrote: > > Joe wrote: > >> "I'm of the opinion that JKR included some parallels/allusions to Christianty. This is different than saying these books are allegories for the Crucifixion of Christ, etc. > > And yet! > > She also included some elements that are clearly non-Christian." << > > > Anders: > > I am one who strongly sees the Christ allegory in the last book since I'm a devout Christian. (Harry went to King's Cross to speak to DD, Pettigrew/Judas sold Harry out for silver and died by his own hand, Harry's "baptism" in the lake by Ron/John, in book five we had Seamus/Doubting Thomas, - I could go on and on about episodes in the books which seemed to me to parallel Christian examples.) However, the question is whether or not Jo did a C.S. Lewis and intentionally wrote the series with that purpose, or whether her own Christian background merely came through in the writing on occasion, or whether I'm reading something into them which doesn't exist at > all. I believe the first, but I understand the opinions of others who > believe one of the latter two. Me, once more: Let me try this a different way. I agree with the Christian elements you pointed out (I clearly remember the graveyard scene and saying to myself "Hey! That's St. Paul she's quoting!"). However, what I meant is that while there are these elements present they are not the only elements present. The King's Cross -- and to an attentive Christian that name clearly resonates -- scene is interpretable both from the Christian perspective (Harry dies and resurrects, just like Christ) or from a Greco-Roman one (Harry goes to the dead and speaks with his mentor to get that last bit of wisdom needed to complete the task, just like Odysseus). What is obvious is that if there are other plausible interpretations with strong evidence to support them, then JKR must have wanted some level of ambiguity. Or, said another way, it's correct to intepret this from a Christian standpoint because there is strong evidence pointing thereto, just as it's equally correct to do so from the Classical Mythology angle, etc., etc. My own take is "all of the above." As a Christian the Christian elements resonated, but as someone who put in a LOT of time with Latin and Greco-Roman mythology, those references popped out as well. If I could ever be bothered to read LOTR -- sorry, just not my thing -- I'm sure I'd pick up on even more. By all this I mean that I doubt JKR meant this *exclusively* as a Christian work. (I really dislike the word "allegory" as being too simplistic.) Hope I made more sense of my opinion this time... -Joe From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:51:26 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:51:26 -0000 Subject: Viva la revolucion Was:Re: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173540 Annemehr: > She doesn't understand him. Or deserve him. Not only did she kill > him off in cold blood and a bad vampire joke (bitten in the neck, are > you kidding me?), but she burned up his book with nary a backward > glance. > Alla: I guess somebody else who understands Snape better or deserves him, should have created him. Alla, posting her first one-liner ever. From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 00:50:03 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 08:50:03 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ABE43B.8020301@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173541 marthaforhp blessed us with this gem On 29/07/2007 08:02: > Snape roars to the fleeing Death Eaters to remember their > orders and leave Potter to the Dark Lord. I took this only as an indication of Voldemort desiring the satisfaction of finishing off Harry himself, not that it necessarily HAD to be. Perhaps there's more to it and I just missed the reference. In any case, it always has to come down to the Hero and the Bad Guy mano-a-mano at the end, doesn't it? CJ, Taiwan From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 00:50:33 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:50:33 -0000 Subject: Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173542 > Carol responds: > Of course Lily isn't responsible for his choices or his mistakes. > But IMO he hadn't made his choice until that point. As you say, she > was the only thing keeping him from joining his fellow Slytherins, > the people he thought were his friends whose evil deeds he has been > excusing because he doesn't want to see them as evil. He's in > denial, as far as I can see, and certainly, if it hadn't been for > Lily, he would have joined them earlier. they are his house, and he > never loses his affection for Slytherin and Lucius Malfoy and the > people who made him feel that Hogwarts was his home, at the same > time indoctrinating him with their pure-blood prejudices (which he > clearly did not yet have on the Hogwarts Express or he would not > have been friends with Lily and wanted her to join him in > Slytherin: Slytherin = brains; Gryffindor = brawn in his early > view). He's clearly torn. He has to choose between Slytherin and > Lily and he can't do it until her rejection leaves him, in his > mind, nowhere to go but to his friends. He has not yet acquired > the courage to do the right thing regardless of consequences. > Without Lily's friendship and support, there's nothing to hold him > back from his ambition to become a DE. Jen: Wow Carol, after all our debates about Snape since HBP, I was shocked to read this passage and find myself agreeing with most everything in your analysis. What a surprise, eh?! I also understand that you're analyzing the reason why Snape became a DE rather than blaming Lily for that choice, which was how I first interpreted your post. That's a very important question since we know the timing of the Prank now (as you mentioned). Like you, I expected the Prank would turn out to be the root of Snape's motivation for siding with Voldemort or the final straw at least. The only thing I'm not certain about is if Snape had no indoctrination prior to being sorted into Slytherin. You've mentioned the Muggle prejudice he exhibited toward Petunia, which is something many magical people seem to be raised with or at least exposed to; I find it more relevant for Snape's story as opposed to another magical person only because he joined the DEs. It's possible he was influenced to look down on Muggles because of his father's behavior or things he heard from the Prince family about Tobias. Re: Muggleborn witches and wizards, I do believe his hesitation when Lily asked, "Does it make a difference, being Muggleborn?" indicated Snape was well aware before arriving at Hogwarts that there was a division in the WW, that Muggleborns were looked down on by pureblood families. Again perhaps this knowledge came from the Princes. After his eyes roved over Lily's face he decided...what? To tell her a little white lie because he thinks she's so wonderful that everyone else will? Or to spare her the anxiety of knowing? I don't know, but something happened during that hesitation and his answer wasn't truthful, I don't think. Whatever indoctrination Snape may have had, someone, most likely Eileen, *was* telling him other types of information, such as Slytherin being associated with brains (and Gryffindor with brawn, lol - must be before Harry arrived ). Carol: > But it seems to me that Severus, unlike his "little Death Eater > friends" who openly express their ambition to become DEs, is torn > between Lily and the DEs. IMO, He's teetering on the edge like > Draco in HBP trying to choose between killing and not killing DD > and. like Draco, is unable to choose. Yes, *she* says that he has > made his choice, but that's her interpretation based on his > friends and his use of the word "Mudblood." Jen: I'm not sure about this point. On one hand, Snape doesn't object or defend himself when Lily says he can't wait to join You Know-Who, even though it's clear he will help his case with Lily if he does so. Maybe he hasn't made a final, irreversible decision, but I sensed he's very much torn between Lily and *something* that attracts him to his friends and You-Know-Who. Perhaps it's intellectual, hoping to learn from LV; intellectual pursuits appear to be a passion for him, almost as strong a pull as his feelings for Lily. I picture him teetering between his two interests at this point, Lily or his friends/Voldemort? Carol: > But surely, this is the defining moment. If she'd forgiven him, > given him the second chance that DD later gives him, perhaps he'd > have found the courage not to join the DEs. Jen: I got the sense Lily had already given him a second chance when she continued their friendship despite her friend's objections, despite what Snape's friends had done to Mary, a fellow Gryffindor (whatever it was). I would imagine Lily heard very strong opposition to her friendship with 'Sev' after that incident and she still made a choice to stick with him. Anyway, I agree that the Worst Memory was the definining moment for both of them in their mutual friendship: Snape because he couldn't change Lily's mind and Lily because she believed his act was significant enough to show the path he'd chosen. Carol: > A word of explanation. I had always thought that the life debt to > James was the reason he went to Dumbledore, and I believed that he > also regretted that Voldemort had targeted Potter's innocent wife > and child. It turns out to be only Lily (but his loyalty to > Dumbledore and his determination to protect Lily's son for her sake > grows into something more, a desire to bring down Voldemort and to > do "anything"--to spy, to lie, to risk his life--to serve > Dumbledore's cause. yes, it's because of Lily, but Lily helps him > to do what's right rather than what's easy. Jen: I also thought the life-debt brought Snape to Dumbledore initially, although harbored an icky feeling it might have to do with Lily, not wanting her to be his motivation. But you know what? Very surprisingly, I found the fact that the two had known each other since childhood and had a relationship over several years at Hogwarts to be very believable after I read the Prince's Tale several times. I also wondered if the Houses mingled more when Severus and Lily first arrived at Hogwarts? Obviously the house prejudice was already in place given the talk in the train compartment, but I noticed Lily didn't say her friends objected because Snape was a Slytherin but because of the actions of his friends and their use of Dark Magic. Maybe I'm making fine distinctions that didn't exist though, and being a Slytherin was already considered practically synonymous with being a DE. Carol: > And James? We still don't know what turned him around. It must have > been Lily (who still, apparently, didn't want him to hex Severus, > who had once been her friend). And James, of course, would have had > to stop running with a werewolf and get serious about his > responsibilities once he married and fathered a child. Jen: Love of Lily no doubt. She couldn't change Snape so turned her sights on James. I'm kidding although without any information to go on it read that way. Likely James had to clean up his act *before* Lily became interested in him, if her characterization is consistent. Carol: > His friends in Slytherin seem to have recognized those talents and > admitted him into their gang despite his being a Half-Blood. The > choice between them and Lily must have been painful, and it's easy > to see why he turned a blind eye to what they really were, just as > Remus Lupin ignored his friends' bullying despite his qualms of > conscience. Jen: Interesting thought there, comparing Lupin and Snape in regard to their friends. This strikes me as very true, especially since we learn Snape's courage comes to him later in life. I'd say Lupin's does as well, when he returns to his responsibilities as a married man and father instead of running away as he wants to do initially. Too bad Snape's memories didn't include a snippet of him interacting with his Slytherin friends to see exactly what his experience was as a half-blood in that house. Carol: > "Lately, only those that I could not save" says it all. > And by DH, Hermione, that insufferable know-it-all, is to be called > Miss Granger. Jen: Nice writing by JKR in both these instances. I have to say, Dumbledore and Snape were like two sides of a balance for me while reading The Prince's Tale: While my estimation of Dumbledore went down, my impression of Snape went up. I'm still sorting out Dumbledore; King's Cross helped with my understanding. Jen From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Sun Jul 29 00:55:54 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:55:54 -0000 Subject: Immortality vs. Immediate Death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173543 Anne Squires: Charity Burbage, Hedwig, Mad-Eye Moody, Dirk Cresswell, Ted Tonks, Dobby a Free Elf, Fred Weasley, Severus Snape, Remus Lupin, Nympadora Tonks Lupin, Colin Creevey, and countless others died in the book. Some Harry witnessed and others he found out about after the fact. Why did so many have to die? I think because it is war and in war there is a lot of death, meaningless death. It seems so very pointless and yet, I think that is the whole point that JKR is making. OTOH, many people survived. And the side of light won. So, the sacrifice of those who did die wasn't for naught. Their life has meaning because they laid down their lives in a struggle in which their side triumphed. Beyond the fact that war is brutal, I think that all of the death in the book is part of Harry's journey, and therefore necessary literarily speaking. All the death in the novel is an essential part of the hero's journey. I think Harry is on a journey to come to terms with death and accept it for himself. All of these deaths prepare the way for Harry to accept that he must walk willingly into the forest. Harry has to force himself into death's waiting arms. The earlier deaths prepare his way. In the novel Death is all around Harry. It seems to stalk him as Harry, in turn, is pushing Lord Voldemort ever closer to his own end. Little does Harry realize, despite the prophecy, that as he chips away at Lord Voldemort immortality, he is chipping away at his own life. Death is all around him like a shroud and Harry is on a quest to accept it. Harry has encountered numerous kinds of death. He has been exposed to death which is quick (Hedwig, Cedric), sacrificial death (his parents, and Dobby), heroic death in which the deceased met his/her death in combat (Sirius, Mad-Eye, Fred, Lupin, Tonks, Colin). He has heard about people being put to death by the new regime (Dirk Cresswell, Ted Tonks). These are all examples of various ways to die. However, none of these characters set out to die as Harry must. None of them walked up to Voldemort unarmed. Yet, they did forge the trail that Harry must tread; they led the way. They were Harry's courage and his motivation. He does not want another person to have to die as these others have. When Lord Voldemort taunts Harry with the fact that people have been dying for him Harry knows that for once Lord Voldemort is not lying. And Harry wants this dying to stop. I have read some arguments on the list that Harry did not face a moral struggle in the novel; that his choice to make that fateful walk into the forest was too simple given Harry's nature: To defeat Lord Voldemort or not to defeat Lord Voldemort. I have seen it postulated that Harry's response was too predictable, too obvious. Thus, there was no true moral struggle. I completely understand how someone could read it that way; however, I disagree. I do see a moral struggle that goes beyond that. To die and defeat Lord Voldemort vs. to live and therefore allow Lord Voldemort to continue to exist. No, to me it goes far beyond that choice. I see an internal conflict Dumbledore had faced; but had failed to overcome. Twice. In his youth Dumbledore and Grindlewald had been tempted by the Deathly Hallows. That obsession led to Ariana Dumbledore's death, probably at Albus's hand. That obsession was reawakened again decades later when Dumbledore found Gaunt's ring. Even knowing the potential evil of the Hallows, Dumbledore could not resist the ring. The allure of the Hallows was too great. Unfortunately, the ring was not only a Hallow, but also a cursed Horcrux. When Dumbledore put it on he cursed himself which meant he would have to die before he could finish his mission for the Order which was to find and destroy more Horcruxes and prepare Harry for his ultimate fate. In that one act Dumbledore condemned himself to death. And, let's not forget he betrayed both Harry and the Order. Ah, yes, the Deathly Hallows definitely are not simply a fairy tale. They are true. And they are powerful both in their allure and in what they can grant their owner. Harry is given the opportunity to become their master. At one point he is the master of all three. When Harry walks into the forest he has the cloak, the ring/stone, and he is the master of the wand even though it is in Lord Voldemort's possession. However, Harry had decided on destroying the Horcruxes as opposed to mastering the Hallows long before this point in the story. Harry's moral struggle was not just to live vs. to die. It was to become the Master of Death (Master of the Hallows) vs. to die. When Harry made the choice at Shell cottage he thought the choice was: to become the Master of Death vs. to find and destroy the Horcruxes. But, Harry didn't have all of the information. We see Harry struggling with this decision at the cottage. And, I for one think it was a true struggle. I think he could have gone either way, especially when one considers Dumbledore who gave into the temptation twice before. When Harry walks into the forest he is facing his own death; but it goes much further than that. He is giving up his mastery of death. He is rejecting the Deathly Hallows at the point they all come together. Mastery of the Hallows is a greater temptation than just giving up one's life and therefore, in giving up the Hallows Harry's sacrifice becomes greater still. Notice, for the first time in centuries the Hallows are united. Yet what does Harry do? He drops the ring and doesn't even consider picking it up again or even looking for it until much later. Later, he rejects that route once again. I think Harry had to decide between Immortality vs. Immediate Death. The fact that Harry did sacrifice himself as he did, to me, is much more powerful when one examines it in this light. Harry is not a Christ like figure at this point because when Christ laid down his life he was gaining immortality for himself and all his followers. Harry, otoh, is actively rejecting immortality along with the power of the Deathly Hallows. Anne Squires From rkelley at blazingisp.net Sun Jul 29 00:59:14 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Ricky & LeAnn) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:59:14 -0500 Subject: The Houses again (was Re: DH as Christian Allegory Message-ID: <00df01c7d17b$affb8ef0$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> No: HPFGUIDX 173544 < Julie: You may be right, but where the real negativity comes in is from the other Houses. They all hate Slytherins. They boo whenever anyone is sorted into Slytherin. Slytherin is deliberately portrayed as the outcast house (which I supposed made it a good fit for Snape!). To students in the other Houses, just being Slytherin means you are undesirable, bad, "other."> Anders: Slytherins are the ones who thought they were superior to the other houses, not the other way around. They were booed because of the superior attitude they showed toward members of the other houses. As they were written in the books, they brought the dislike of others onto their own heads, but they were written as being so arrogant, they didn't care what the "inferiors" thought of them and probably assumed everyone else was jealous of them. < Julie: Here is my problem. WHY, WHY, WHY would you put eleven year old CHILDREN into a House that has been corrupted, that is "fertile ground" for bringing out the very worst in qualities they *already* so strongly possess? For me it's not about the qualities themselves, which as you say can be used for good or bad, but that Slytherin House is allowed--nay, actively encouraged by its rejection and isolation from the other Houses, and by the fact that its very existence in its acknowledged "corrupted" state continues without an iota of interference--to pound these corrupted ideals into the minds of CHILDREN. So for me it's not Slytherin House per se, but what it has *become* that is the problem, though the real bigger problem is that no one, from the Headmaster and teachers at Hogwarts, to all the other "good" people in the WW, have not a single compunction about dumping these kids into the "Death Eaters in Training" house.> Anders: For one thing, aside from the Order, no one admitted that the Death Eaters and Voldy still existed. Lucius, Fudge, and company would never have allowed DD to disband Slytherin House. The most DD could do was carefully watch the students for signs of dark arts dabbling, as he saw in Tom and Draco. He tried to prevent the "pounding into their heads of corrupted ideas" but he and the other teachers couldn't always overcome what they were taught at home. If someone had been able to disband Slytherin house, then those students would likely have transferred to Durmstrang, where they didn't have DD overseeing their training. DD may also have believed that the other students will have to face people like Slytherins in the adult world, and they would be better prepared for that after having learned to live with them at Hogwarts. That's the only reason why I can see DD would have allowed the free rein given to Snape to favor Slytherin students over the others, although McGonagall and others did their fair share of showing favoritism to Harry and other Gryffindors on occasion. For the theme of the book, I think Jo used those in Slytherin to show that we all have freedom of choice in our actions regardless of our innate qualities. It's not who we are born that matters, - even if we are born with Death Eaters as parents, or have the Slytherin qualities which give us perhaps more potential for bad choices than the other houses, we aren't locked into pursuing a dark path. Those same qualities of ambition and cunning would give Slytherins potential to be successful businessmen, politicians, etc. It still comes back down to the choices we make. I assume there were many Slytherins whose parents weren't Death Eaters, - those who were are merely the only ones we saw in the story. It would be interesting to see how Jo characterizes Slytherin House members after this book. Anders From severussnape at shaw.ca Sun Jul 29 01:29:56 2007 From: severussnape at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 01:29:56 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173545 Geoff wrote: > enter into the author's world and enjoy? dan: Hear hear!! Of course, look at my two posts this week - one in response to someone else who identified the activist political core of Rowling, which I jumped on, as if saying,"at last, a new direction!" and one in defense of the camping trip as THE most important part of book seven. Number of responses, zero. Why is this? I think there is resentment and confusion that the books hold sway without a lot of introspection, and that ethical implications are just that, implied and not written out as sermons - the television cues are missing, the literal moral at the end of the story is complex, and slightly unfamiliar. Also, they remain children's books, while not avoiding large symbolic gestures that can be parsed as systems, but of course do not MEAN those systems. > He is Christ-like insofar as any Christian attempts to be and if a person of a different faith or world view sees it otherwise, that is their choice. I hope that I'm not going to repeat myself for ever trying to bludgeon another member into accepting my point of view just to shut me up. dan: Of course, again. Harry's journey is toward the enlightenment of the heart and mind as promoted by Islam, or socialism, of Taoism, just as much as it is Christian. But the identity of the books withing the spectrum of fantasy, and the weight of those far more Christian writers Lewis and Tolkien, act by association as evidence of Christian intent. But this begs the question of what is it specifically that indicates Christianity in the narrative. > ...there are lots of unanswered questions; but isn't that the > situation in our own real lives? dan: Well, exactly, again. I identified the camping narrative as essential because it was our lives in literary form - we, if we are to ever move completely from the deathly banality of Dursley-like muggledom, or from rote learning, must be willing, like Harry and Ron and Hermione, to risk everything (not just about everything, or a lot, or some bits). In the great battle of Hogwarts, we see finally a situation that allows all characters the chance for such truth. That is why it is moving. > In DH, JKR brings us to a similar place where hatred and war make mockery of what we would deem our desires. But, in real life and in the Potterverse, there are things which are positive. It isn't all doom and gloom despite what the Daily Prophet or the Telegraph or the New York times would have us believe. dan: And I have said many times in Harry Potter debates, the real joy in the series is that the real joy in the series comes from acknowledging the true state of things, and still being able to laugh and dream - to only laugh and dream by ignoring reality is just awful - and yet, I suspect, much of blockbuster land is jsut such banality. I think of some recent movies for example, that are supposed to be funny, but are really just puerile. > I think I'll go and find some soothing fanfic dan: This is partially a response to your own post, right? Cause much resentment seems to come from a proprietorial sense of the books that is entirely false. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Jul 29 01:19:11 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 01:19:11 -0000 Subject: The hardest parts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173546 I love this place. I have been a part of HPfGU since May '03, and I love this place. In this post I'm going to talk a little about the part of the book which was hardest for me to take, but I'm also going to talk a little about what's been the hardest thing for me since finishing DH. The latter first. It has been very hard for me to read posts from those who are upset with the books, whether that's evidenced by disappointment, flatness, outrage or contempt. It's been very hard to feel happy, enthused, positive and *content* at the end of the adventure (knowing I'm one of the lucky ones who can and does feel that way) and then be surrounded by long-time HPfGU chums, people I've loved sharing with over the years, and seeing their disappointment and even anger. Please note: this is not a gripe or a complaint; I am not annoyed as much as that I am simply saddened. There really isn't anything anyone can do about it, either, so this is merely an emotional remark. Now on to the hardest part of the book. For me it is one that has proven to be hard for many. It's the Slytherins. I've never been a 'fan' of the Slytherins. I've never comprehended those who adored people like Draco. I saw some growth in him, I pitied him, too, in HBP, but I've never *liked* him or felt tremendous respect for the presented worldview of Slytherins. But I wanted to see *some* House unity. I wanted to find *some* good Slytherins, even if they were not the Dracos and Goyles but were unnamed Slytherins. So I share some of the disappointment that many feel over the lack of blatent, overt signs of the above. In the scene where Pansy Parkinson is such an ass and shouts out, "But he's there! Potter's there! Someone grab him!," right after McGonagall has agreed that of-age students could stay to fight, it would have been so easy for JKR to have had *someone* from Slytherin say, "Oh, shut UP, Pansy!" and have decided to join the fight. Maybe just 4 or 5 someones. And think what that would have done! If only JKR would have done it. Instead, we get McGonagall (sob, my *favorite* teacher!) instantly deciding to dismiss all the Slytherins on the spot, I'm assuming based opon Pansy's behavior, for she says, "Thank you, Miss Parkinson. You will leave the Hall first with Mr. Filch. If the rest of your House could follow" (US, p. 610). I don't know... maybe there was still a chance there for *some* Slytherin to pipe up and say, "Not me! I'm staying!" But alas, it was not to be. And that's my biggest disappointment in JKR's story. So know that I'm not sitting here making excuses; this was the hardest part for me to accept and her greatest omission, imo. At this point, there may be people who say, "Then how can you be happy with the book, content with the story??" And it's hard to know how to answer that. Except that in spite of what *more* she could have done, I also feel that she *did* include some things which showed us progress. Some examples: (1) We see Narcissa, LYING to Lord Voldemort, telling him that Harry is dead. Sure, she did it because she was crazy to find her child, but she did it! And if she had not done so, what would the outcome have been?? Nagini had not yet been destroyed. It was a necessary, vital piece of the puzzle that had to be put into place (p.726). (2) We have Sluggy, Slytherin HoH, fighting *Voldemort himself,* right alongside McGonagall & Kingsley, demonstrating he's *not* on the side of the Death Eaters, showing he can fight alongside colleagues outside his house (p.735). (3) We see Lucius, Narcissa & Draco in the Great Hall after it's all over. Yes, alone; yes, not sure hot to fit in; but they're THERE. They did not flee with the other Death Eaters. Doesn't that show something? (pp. 745-746) (4) We have Phineas's glee over his house's role: "And let it be noted that Slytherin House played its part! Let our contribution not be forgotten!" (p. 747) (5) And why DON'T more of us put any weight on Harry's remarks to Albus at Platform 9 3/4?? He's telling his child it's OKAY; he's reminding Albus that one of his namesakes -- the one which Harry calls the bravest, mind you, moreso than his other namesake, DD! -- was a Slyth. *************************** "Albus Severus," Harry said quietly... "you were named for two headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin and he was probably the bravest man I ever knew." "But *just say*--" "--then Slytherin House will have gained an excellent student, won't it? It doesn't matter to us, Al. But if it matters to you, you'll be able to choose Gryffindor over Slytherin." (p.758) *************************** Yes, there was that bit there at the end, about how one's own preference gets counted by the Sorting Hat, but I believed Harry was sincere when he reminded Albus about Snape's bravery, when he said Slytherin would simply be gaining an excellent student, when he said his house selection *doesn't matter* to him & Ginny. Doesn't all of this show progress? Many objected that the Epilogue was too sappy. (I thought it was, too, though it sat better on a 2nd reading for me.) Yet 19 years had gone by and there HADN'T been a new Voldemort; we see Draco & Harry/Ron acknowledging one another, even if curtly; and we hear Harry explaining to Albus Severus that being sorted into Slytherin is truly okay. If JKR had included in her Epilogue the fact that, whee!!, everyone got along perfectly now, that Slytherins were fully accepted by all, fully integrated into life at Hogwarts, would it have been believable? Would it, too, have been called simply too sappy? I feel like JKR *did* take steps in that direction, of showing some change for the good and towards acceptance, and I felt like the scene at Platform 9 3/4 was intended to provide hope for continued change. Am I the only one? Siriusly Snapey Susan From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 01:42:34 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 01:42:34 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173547 > -- Sydney, heavy-hearted Ceridwen: Oh, Sydney, Sydney! Come here, behind the potted plant, a while, and enjoy the tequila. What it doesn't burn, it purifies. That's why there's a dead worm in the bottle. Sydney: > But.. yeah, the total and utter validation of labelling people, labelling them at such a young age, and then having the people with good labels and people with bad ones.. it just goes so deeply against me it makes me feel sick. Ceridwen: I think she tried to show predestination. The Calvanist belief that we are chosen before birth, that only certain people make the cut, and it doesn't matter what they do or how bad or good they are, they will go to Heaven, fits very well with this story as an alternative reading. Harry and the Gryffindors are the Chosen. They can swell Dudley's tongue, scar Marietta's face, shove Montague into a misfiring Vanishing Cabinet, and not suffer punishment. Everyone else, the ones who are not Chosen, can do pennance forever and never quite measure up. I may be misreading the Wikipedia article about Predestination, of course, but this is what it seems to say. Sydney: > When 11-year-old Harry looks over at the 11-year-olds at the Slytherin table, after being told all about 'what they're like', and thinks to himself that they do look rather nasty, this to me was obviously about how bigotry works. Ceridwen: To me, too. I was taken aback when Harry refused to shake hands with Draco Malfoy in the first book. Granted, Draco made a complete idiot out of himself with all those things he was saying, and granted also that Harry didn't have a good upbringing to that point, but it seemed to be more alienating than showing Harry's strength. I waited for seven books to see a reversal. All that stuff about house unity spouted by the Sorting Hat didn't help. I really, really thought that's where it was going, that Harry's last and best lesson would be that bigotry, for any reason, is wrong. Instead, we get, "Old Greaseball died, so I can safely say he was brave without having to mea culpa to him." Sydney: > I'm not, please believe me, I'm NOT accusing Rowling of anti- Semitism here (I will guarantee 90% of replies to this post will say "OMG you're saying JKR is an anti-Semite!!!"). I wholeheartedly believe all this stuff is entirely unconscious-- it is inconceivable that she could have written that kind of symbolism otherwise. Ceridwen: I wholeheartedly believe the symbolism was unconscious. Anti- semitism was rampant until WWII, when the scope of the horror was just too much for anyone to ignore. Even then, it hasn't died out all the way, and the symbols are still around. These symbols are part of our recent unconscious experience. It isn't surprising that JKR uses what is cultural to denote the Bad Guys, unconsciously. The Bad Guys are now generically ugly in kid's fare, but some of our ideas of ugly are also the left-over stereotypes like the hooked nose and dead black eyes, pointed faces, pale skin. Kids react to these without the context we as adults see. I think that, consciously, this is why she uses them, because they will be a signpost for young readers, her target audience. That they are still negative stereotypes in this day and age says a lot more about our culture than it says about JKR. Sydney: > What is she giving us in Slytherin House? I'm not trying to be provocative, I'm just laying out what it is we're looking at here. Ceridwen: You're not being provocative, in my opinion. A lot of people have mentioned these same things before DH. That was without the resolution, so we didn't know where things were going. Now, DH is out, it's closed canon, and we have all the threads we need to discuss. Sydney: > I think I was reading Slytherin as obviously the Shadow House and looking for Jungian integration, whereas the concerns of the HP series were much more about spiritual purification, something I suppose that comes from the Alchemy thing. From what little I know, this features burning away and separating the impure elements. Hence the ritual 'exclusion' scene for the Slytherins at the end of every book, which (in my parallel universe of HP) were set up to be reversed with an inclusionary scene in the final book; but in fact were just recapitulated. Ceridwen: Yes, and I was waiting to see Harry grow out of trying to cast Unforgivables, and to notice and listen to other people who have just as valid a take on things, and perhaps a more comprehensive one since they're older and have more experience. I thought the houses would have to be integrated to heal the scarring in the WW that began with the rift between Griffindor and Slytherin. I thought that Harry would have to shake Draco's hand after all, and learn from Snape, while teaching both of them from his perspective and experience. Give and take, working together to root out the evil. I thought we would get tolerance for different viewpoints, and acceptance for different methods of doing things, the very things we see every day in the Real World. Instead, we got the message that it's okay to dislike Other, to treat them badly, and to even break laws because of course, I'm right and everybody else is just toothpaste. There is no understanding of others, no growing, no moving beyond a selfish stage of existence. *sigh* It's nice here behind the potted palm. There's tequila and latte and good music. Come, join us. Ceridwen, responding backward tonight. From bloggertracy at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 01:04:28 2007 From: bloggertracy at gmail.com (Tracy Woods) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:04:28 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <19f52d580707281804y33d53505qc5a4642904a6220d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173548 Martha: " Yet the original prophecy says nothing about who has to kill whom, only that neither can live if the other survives. What have I missed?" **************** Newbie jumping in here. The prophecy also states that Harry is the one "with the power to destroy the dark lord." I think that it's important to remember, when speaking about LV, that we are dealing with an immensely arrogant, event narcissistic personality here. He would want to prove that this little boy cannot destroy him, and he would want to do it all while having the satisfaction of destroying this boy himself. Without coming down to a battle between him and the boy, who is to ever say that the boy would not have destroyed him? Then other people may begin to think that whoever killed the boy would be able to destroy LV as well, since they destroyed the boy with the power to destroy him. Is that making sense? It's LV's way of proving that prophecy wrong. bloggertracy From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 02:02:50 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 02:02:50 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173549 > >>Mike Gray (aka Aberforth's Goat): > Hi all - particularly Betsy! Betsy Hp: Hiya, Mike! > >>Mike Gray: > > However, before I even start, I'm just curious: Betsy, have you had > serious reservations about the religious and moral implications of > the series all the way through or has something changed for you in > DH? > Betsy Hp: As far as religious implications, I didn't really see any within the Potterverse pre-DH. I mean, JKR is British, so as a writer she's standing on the shoulders of Western Civilization and all that implies (Christianity, the mythologies and philosophies of Ancient Greece, etc). So yeah, there were things that pinged "Christian" to me. For example, I thought the story of Snape might have echoed the story of Paul. And I saw the three times Dumbledore told Draco he was not a killer as echoing Jesus asking Peter three times if he loved him. Boy did I get those both wrong! But I didn't think JKR was setting out to write a Christian allegory a la CS Lewis. I did expect that the conclusion would echo a certain morality that could be seen as Christian, but not in an evangelical way. IOWs, the ending would have a good moral lesson anyone could take away with them, and those who wished could use as an example in Sunday School, if that makes sense. As for moral implications, I was very uncomfortable with some of the actions and over all attitude of the Trio pre-DH, so much so I decided not to reread the series, but I thought the end would redeem them. I think that discomfort started in OotP. There'd been issues all the way through of course, but I think that's where I started disliking the three main characters to an extent. Though again, I thought they were issues to be fixed. HBP deepened my dislike. And DH, by refusing to tackle any of the issues raised, cemented it. And then there's the "moral" of the tale. Honestly I'd have never called that JKR would take the story in the direction she did. It's such an out-dated way of looking at the world, one that has (I thought) been rather universally condemned. But it is what it is. DH, by approving of the WW's morals, changed the entire series for me. What I thought was something to be fixed became something to be accepted and maybe even celebrated. > >>Mike Gray: > However, what I noticed reading your post was a different point: > > The people Harry had along with him on his walk towards Voldemort > are people he looked up to - parental figures, comforting figures, > even authority figures. And - in contrast to the disciples at the > crucifixion - THEY DID THEIR JOB. That is, they didn't fall asleep, > chop off ears, deny knowing him, run off naked and generally freak > out. One of the central elements in the crucifixion stories is that > the disciples blew it. > Betsy Hp: But the disciples were alive. Of course they freaked out, got tired, etc. Also, they weren't really clear on what exactly Jesus was about to do. Harry's support were all dead people who had nothing to lose and seemed pretty content with how everything was going. And one of the more beautiful things in the resurrection part of the story, IMO, is that Christ forgave his disciples their earlier weaknesses, giving them a chance to make good. That question session with Peter, for example. There was a level of grace there that Harry and his friends, with all their false "perfection" could not achieve. > >>Mike Gray: > The crucifixion narratives underscore Jesus' singularity and > independence; DH underscores how deeply Harry relied on other > people. > It's a *very* interesting contrast. It fits into a lot of similar > aspects of a contrast between Harry and Jesus. Harry is alone - but > he finds friends; Harry needs help - and he gets it; Harry is > young - but he matures; Harry is weak - but he becomes strong; > Harry is fallible - but he becomes wise. Betsy Hp: Honestly, I don't see Harry maturing the way you do. Probably because everything worked out so smoothly for him. I didn't see Harry become strong, he just lucked into a kick-ass wand. And as he was content with the way the WW worked in the end, I certainly didn't see any wisdom points coming his way. (Frankly, IMO, Harry never seemed stupider than he did in this book. Fortunately for Harry, Voldemort lost a ton of smart points himself.) > >>Mike Gray: > The contrast also fits into the kind of change Harry brings about: > to say that all of wizarding history flows to Harry and from Harry > (the way Christian history flows to and from Christ) would be > absurd; but he did get rid of a nasty wizard and make the world a > better place. Betsy Hp: Not even the world. Just a tiny little isolated community in Britain. And again, that tiny little community is just as twisted as ever, so another Dark Lord will rise. All Harry did was get rid of a rather nasty crime lord. There are police out there right now doing the sort of job. It's good work and it's heroic. But it's not all that epic. > >>Mike Gray: > Is Harry a Christ figure? Yes. But he's a very human one - a sort > of Messiah in minor key. Betsy Hp: I just cannot get that. I really, really can't. Harry doesn't *change* anything. He gets rid of a particularly icky crime lord, but he doesn't take on any sort of forces of evil or anything. And gosh, he really just stumbles into the ability to take that crime lord down. Plus, there's that whole lack of compassion and his comfort in seeing others as pariahs. I can't see a Messiah in someone like that. > >>Mike Gray: > > And if there were one character in the series that you could cut > out of the series and paste onto the ceiling of the Sistine > Chapel - who would it be? > > Dumbledore is the old man with the long, white beard. Dumbledore is > a bit mysterious and unimaginably powerful and wise and knowing and > loving. Dumbledore has a plan - just trust him and everything will > work out OK. > But wait - Dumbledore can't be God! > Why not? Betsy Hp: Um, because he's evil? Seriously, Dumbledore worked to take over the world, killed his sister, got cold feet and went into hiding. He wasn't even that great of a headmaster since he barricaded himself into his office and used his position to hide from the world. At best, Dumbledore is a coward. He could have been powerful, but the power scared him. Like Peter Parker's Uncle Ben said, "With great power comes great responsibility" and Dumbledore passed the buck. To a baby. Nicely done there, Dumbledore. He had an odd fixation on the Deathly Hollows that may have led to the Potters' deaths (what would James have done if his cloak was avaliable to him, I wonder?), and definitely led to his own death right when he was needed most. So Dumbledore, while incredibly clever, wasn't all that wise. > >>Mike Gray: > > In fact, theologically speaking, that's the very interesting point > thing in DH. The God figure turns out to be very human after all. > It's almost as if Rowling first blew God into the series, then > changed her mind and let the air out. > > What's so interesting about that? Well, this act of deflation > mirrors a lot of Christian thinking over the last century or so. > Betsy Hp: Interesting, but not something I agree with personally. I don't see any gain coming from an attempt to squeeze God into anything less than the omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient Father-Mother. Which, hmm... Maybe that *is* what JKR is doing? Trying to humanize and weaken God, leading to rather weak and impotent Messiah, morals that are completely relative, and the scapegoats gathered all conveniently together to blame and punish when things inevitably go wrong. Explains why I found DH (and therefore the series) so distasteful. Betsy Hp From muellem at bc.edu Sun Jul 29 02:11:56 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 02:11:56 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173550 > > Magpie: > > > That symbolism is intentional, though. The Muggle-borns are the > > innocent people who are being persecuted by others with the > > Slytherins in the Nazi role. We're supposed to see them in our > mind > > as in a position like the Jews in Nazi Germany. I think that's > being > > done blatantly. She wants the Slytherins to be seen as the Nazis. > > That's not problematic (well, unless as you say you just don't > want > > that brought up at all in a book like this). > > > > The part where the Slytherins Jews is something completely > different > > and seems to be unintentional--the Muggle-borns don't conform to > any > > Nazi propaganda about Jews; they show up the lie that they're > > telling: they're not thieves, they're not any different from other > > wizards. The Slytherins actually do reflect a lot of the traits > the > > Nazis claimed Jews had as justification for persecuting them. > > > > > > > Alla: > > You know, it is not the first time I read the argument that people > see Slytherins cast in the part of persecuted Jews and they see the > symbolism with jews from eastern Europe. > > > I AM puzzled why Slytherin house still exists at the end with it > **to me** being so obviously House of Evil, shouldn't these kids be > going to another Houses to absorb the traits that Potterverse > considers better ones? > > Or I would have enjoyed as well House Slytherin denouncing their > ideology at the end and leaving ambition as key criteria for sorting. > colebiancardi: Of course, I can see both Magpie's & Alla's sides here. I think that in JKR's world, the biases against Jews and the evil of the Nazis got merged into one. Let's take a step back before the rise of Nazism and look at the historical biases and stereotypes of Jews in the *Christian* world. Please don't flame me - I am only repeating history here and by no means do I believe this of the Jewish race, nor is this a knock against Christianity. In order for Christians to dominate and become a *world* religion, they had to knock down Jews - looking back at the last 2000 years, the Church did a good job of vilifying Jews - Jews became the ones that killed Jesus, instead of the Romans (look how Acts is written - it is basically sucking up to the Romans), they passed decrees that prohibited Jews from going to universities, from marrying Christians, wearing special clothing, living in special places and even what type of occupations they could hold in Europe. Which leads us to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, where we have Shylock, the Jewish moneylender who demands a "pound of flesh" from a debtor? Jews in that play were forced to live in ghettos. As we progress further down the time-line, Jews were depicted as hook-nosed, sallow-skin, simian-like and untrustworthy. Blood Libel, which is totally false and has never been shown to happen, was used to show that Jews ate Christian babies in their religious ceremonies. And guess who promoted all of this? That's right, the Church. All of this BEFORE the rise of Nazism. Hitler took those pre-existing biases, ignorance & hatred and used the Church's historical decrees as the excuse to do what he did to Jews. He took it one step further, of course, with the Final Solution. It must be said that the Church did not want to kill off all Jews, unlike Hitler. Hitler used the pure-blood of the Aryan race to promote his vision of the world. So, back to Harry Potter's WW - Slytherins, physically, appear like the classic stereotype of Jews. They are also untrustworthy to the other Houses. Slytherins also take on the Nazi credo of pure-blood mania and the intent to suppress and even wipe out those that are muggleborn or muggles. In the aftermath of WWII, the Vatican took a hard look at how and why Hitler was able to do what he did and why they did not do anything to prevent this. This became the Vatican II and it has stopped (at least opening and from the pulpit) Jew hatred and bashing. Not to say that there are not those that hate a group of people because of their religious beliefs, but those Jewish stereotypes that prevailed for hundreds of years don't seem to be holding up in the Western culture. What was disappointing to me in the aftermath of the WW war, there was no Vatican II. We still see Slytherin as being stereotyped as *evil* and bad. We do not see the reconciliation between these worlds as aggressively as we did after WWII. It did not take 40, 50 years to get that reconciliation between Germany and the rest of the world. In fact, they were incorporated back into Western society fairly quickly, in less than a decade. The Roman Catholic Church was able to come up with the Vatican II within 15 years. This is what I wanted at the end of DH. Not this *nudge-nudge, wink-wink, know what I mean* sticky sweet talk. I wanted real change. It does happen. I don't know why other posters state this *takes* time. We were able to do this fairly quickly after WWII ourselves. colebiancardi (still upset that the Slytherin House, 19 years later, is depicted as evil and bad. It isn't. Just as the Germans aren't all necessarily evil and bad because of Hitler, the Slytherins aren't all necessarily evil and bad because of Voldy. All of us have both bad and good within us.) From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 02:33:09 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 02:33:09 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173551 > Alla: > > You know, it is not the first time I read the argument that people > see Slytherins cast in the part of persecuted Jews and they see the > symbolism with jews from eastern Europe. > > And of course I cannot argue with anybody's right to see that > symbolysm, intentional or not. > > But this jew from eastern Europe, who as I mentioned several times > seen enough antisemitism in my life, is so scratching her head every > time this argument comes out. > > I mean, whether I personally like Slytherins or not, I should be > able to see those parallels at least on intellectual level, right? > > I mean, do not get me wrong, the fact that I do not see them, does > not mean that other people cannot, but just on purely intellectual > level I am trying to figure out why this so falls flat. > > Why I do not see Slytherins as **any** sort of metaphor for jews, > but the contrary one - those who persecute. Magpie: As has been said a number of times, we're not saying the Slytherins are metaphors for Jews. We're saying that they are a group who is the "other" in this universe, and along with persecuting others themselves they have a lot of qualities that generally make them bad, and many of the things chosen to make them bad are similar to certain Jewish stereotypes (not actual Jews, but negative stereotypes). The point isn't that Rowling is saying anything about Jews, or making Slytherins Jews. It's that this character (whether or not it's actually Jewish) has appealed to people for a long time, and some of us have some problems with it in itself. That's not to say that there couldn't be plenty of anti-Semitic people who *would* look at those traits and make that connection. These particular hateful stereotypes are still all too prevelent in the world. Alla: > Well, the first reason should be obvious for me, I guess. That word > **mudblood**. Um, as I mentioned several times in the past, this > word works for me as very direct metaphor for the most despicable, > most antisemitic nickname that every jew from former Soviet Union > encountered at least once and maybe much more in their life. Magpie: Yes, that's the correlation to Jews I said was explicit in the text. The Muggle-borns are supposed to be like Jews with the Slytherins being anti-Semitic Nazis. And the Muggle-borns are like "real" Jews in that everything that's being said about them is untrue--they're not liars, they're not stealing from wizards, they're just like all other wizards. If one were to look at Nazi propaganda about Jews--or historical negative presentations of Jews--this is where you'd find some of the same hints of badness. I noticed the similarity back in Book V and I still see it. Rowling for some reason has a need for a group like that in her book. Alla:> > **Slytherins** are the ones who use that word, NOT anybody else, > therefore the symbolism is that they ARE who persecute, not those > who are persecuted. It how it is works for me, I am sure any other > jew from eastern europe or any part of the world, can see it > completely differently. Magpie: Yes, I realize that. I'm not confused about how the Nazi metaphors are supposed to line up in that part. What Sydney brought up was a totally different connection to anti-Semitism that she assumed was unconscious but was working in tandem with this one. Alla: > I also agree with you that symbolism of seeing muggleborns as > persecuted minority IS quite intentional, probably this is also why > I cannot wrap my mind around to see it backwards - somehow see those > who persecute Muggleborns as being prejudiced against. Magpie: This isn't about Slytherins being prejudiced against. That they can't be is part of the point. What they can do is on the one hand be Nazis and on the other hand borrow a lot of qualities from anti-Semitic historical depictions of Jews. It's perfectly easy to take the same villainous character that was once called "the jew" and simply remove the label and the ethnicity and add other qualities. As much as the "Mudblood" line reminded you of what it did (and me too) other things reminded me of other familiar scenarios. After all, although the Slytherins were often like Nazis they weren't literally Nazis-- they were shifting things, whatever was needed to be the opposite of the good guys. Alla: > Because **to me** it is not prejudice, it is evil, real chilling > evil and I just cannot see bigotry in anti Slytherin attitude. > > I see good people standing up against Evil. Magpie: If you mean that you don't see people hating the Slytherins as prejudice because they're evil, I agree. That's the point. I think they are being presented as the Evil that the good people are standing up against. (Or at best they can't ever be as good.) It's not prejudice, because they really are as bad as they are said to be. That's not a good thing for me. I also don't have a problem with the kids being Sorted at the age they are, since it seems like the Sorting just "shows who you are," as Dumbledore would say, and always will be. Choosing the easy, corrupt path at 11 means you'd have chosen it at 40 too, I'd guess. It seems like it might even just be decided before you're born--it's predestination. Alla: > The funniest argument fot Slytherin as persecuted jews symbolism to > me is of course Snape's hooked nose. Um, why? > > I have blue eyes, blond hair and all my family does and we are all > very very jewish. On the other hand, there are people with hooked > noses, who are jews and NOT jews, had never been jews, you know? Magpie: Because that's traditionally been a symbol of a Jew in Western tradition. It's got nothing to do with what actual Jews look like, it's the charicature. Thought I don't think that alone would have made anyone make the connection. It's Snape in this whole context that makes it seem more possible. Alla: > Oh, oh another thing that falls flat for me is the power thing. I > see for example Malfoys as being one of the most powerful families > in WW - like every door is opens towards them and for Jews in > Eastern europe, well that is really really not true in general, was > not true at least ten years ago. Mgapie: Yes, that's what I said about the stereotypes being updated. If we were really talking about Jewish characters in medieval lit or something, of course they couldn't be aristocrats. but Rowling isn't trying to depict the Slytherins according to things that are true about Jews or the way Jews were presented historically. In Rowling's world aristocracy is bad, so the Slytherins are that too. As I said, this isn't an accusation of Rowling being anti-Semitic or saying *anything* about real Jews. It's saying that she created a group of people and othered them like a mad thing, and validated that othering. She wanted somebody playing the kind of role that Jews might have played if this were a medieval story (it does feel like one to me often). I realize that other people never thought this at all, and I'm not saying everybody should, but to me this was part of the experience reading it. That she needed somebody filling that role, not that she was being anti-Semitic. Alla: > As I also mentioned before, I had to fight tooth and nail, reall > with tears and sweat to get in to college I wanted and I always > **almost** got in. > > Malfoys can go to any school they want ( Durmstrang, Hogwarts), I am > guessing to take any job they want, so this parallels as > **persecuted minority** falls for me again. Magpie: Because you're trying to make it a parallel to real Jews, and it isn't. It's a parallel to an "Other" stereotype--one that seems to borrow a little more heavily from the Jewish version than one of the other versions out there (though as someone else said, underneath they're all similar). You can have a stereotype that "those people" get anything they want and hold all the power secretly even while the real people you're talking about are oppressed and discriminated against. You can assume all of "those people" are greedy and have piles of gold even if they're really struggling. (Certainly real Jews have also been hated for allegedly holding themselves above others.) In Rowling's universe, of course, we're not talking about real people but her characters, and her characters really are controlling things behind the scenes with their money and Dark Arts. Um, yay? Alla: > I mean, what is wrong with ambition, I will never know, but having > said all that, I will **never** be able to see the symbolism that > Slytherins are being prejudiced against. Fighting against evil is > not prejudice in my mind. Magpie: I know some people are saying that, but I am not. I'm saying that Rowling has created characters who are *rightly* prejudiced against-- well, really it's not so much prejudice since it's true. Our heroes not wrong for fighting against the bad that is Slytherin. Harry's instinctual repulsion was right. But I'm uncomfortable with creating that situation even when it's only fictional people. Ceridwen: Instead, we get, "Old Greaseball died, so I can safely say he was brave without having to mea culpa to him." Magpie: Yup. And I can rest easy knowing the family of Evil are now in my holy debt after they totally proved they didn't deserve it in any way. Anders: For the theme of the book, I think Jo used those in Slytherin to show that we all have freedom of choice in our actions regardless of our innate qualities. It's not who we are born that matters, - even if we are born with Death Eaters as parents, or have the Slytherin qualities which give us perhaps more potential for bad choices than the other houses, we aren't locked into pursuing a dark path. Magpie: Yes, and the choice of "I want to be in Slytherin" is one of the most important. Sirius came from bad parents who might as well have been Death Eaters, but he was rejecting that choice already when he got on the train. He was never a Slytherin, and never made choices like a Slytherin. -m From k12listmomma at comcast.net Sun Jul 29 02:02:59 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 20:02:59 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) References: Message-ID: <001a01c7d184$9709d240$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 173552 > Carol: >> And James? We still don't know what turned him around. It must have >> been Lily (who still, apparently, didn't want him to hex Severus, >> who had once been her friend). And James, of course, would have had >> to stop running with a werewolf and get serious about his >> responsibilities once he married and fathered a child. > > Jen: Love of Lily no doubt. She couldn't change Snape so turned her > sights on James. I'm kidding although without any information to > go on it read that way. Likely James had to clean up his act > *before* Lily became interested in him, if her characterization is > consistent. Shelley I have to wonder if Lily gave the same talk to James as she did Snape- "I don't like how you are acting, what you are like with your friends." The difference between Snape and James is that Snape didn't change for Lily, but I think James did. I think James could have put pressure on the other Marauders to keep a clean act in public so that Lilly would approve of him/them, and because of it, he won her love and ultimately her hand in marriage. I wonder if part of the vexation for James was only deepened in Snape because James did what he should have the first time. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 03:03:54 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:03:54 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173553 > Magpie: > As has been said a number of times, we're not saying the Slytherins > are metaphors for Jews. We're saying that they are a group who is > the "other" in this universe, and along with persecuting others > themselves they have a lot of qualities that generally make them bad, > and many of the things chosen to make them bad are similar to certain > Jewish stereotypes (not actual Jews, but negative stereotypes). Alla: Right, I totally got the part that you or Sydney or anybody else are not accusing Rowling of being antisemitic or anything like that. It is the part that Slytherins are reflecting the certain Jewish stereotypes I am disagreeing with. I mean not even disagreeing - I just do not **see** them > Magpie: > Yes, I realize that. I'm not confused about how the Nazi metaphors > are supposed to line up in that part. What Sydney brought up was a > totally different connection to anti-Semitism that she assumed was > unconscious but was working in tandem with this one. Alla: Yes again, I am just saying that this **unconscious connection** is not working for me and I tried to explain why and want to figure out where Cydney, you or anybody else see it. Just on intellectual level. >> Magpie: > This isn't about Slytherins being prejudiced against. That they can't > be is part of the point. What they can do is on the one hand be Nazis > and on the other hand borrow a lot of qualities from anti-Semitic > historical depictions of Jews. It's perfectly easy to take the same > villainous character that was once called "the jew" and simply remove > the label and the ethnicity and add other qualities. As much as > the "Mudblood" line reminded you of what it did (and me too) other > things reminded me of other familiar scenarios. After all, although > the Slytherins were often like Nazis they weren't literally Nazis-- > they were shifting things, whatever was needed to be the opposite of > the good guys. Alla: Here, I guess I misunderstood in part. I totally keep hearing that Slytherins are being prejudiced again and this is how bigotry works from this thread in general. But no, I see Slytherins as close to Natzis, as possibly could be. I mean, they are not real, obviously, but Muggle born registration commission gives me very real metaphors. So, I guess it all boils down to this - what antisemitic stereotypes you see depicted in Slytherins besides Snape hooked nose? I mean, I think I also misunderstood something else - I thought Sydney was making a point that not only Slytherins are being portrayed as antiJewish stereotypes, BUT what Potterverse heroes **do** to them can be seen as what was done to Jews. If I imagined that part of the argument, sorry about that, because that I am having even bigger problems seeing than Slytherins being stereotypically portrayed. Mgapie: Yes, that's what I said about the stereotypes being updated. If we were really talking about Jewish characters in medieval lit or something, of course they couldn't be aristocrats. but Rowling isn't trying to depict the Slytherins according to things that are true about Jews or the way Jews were presented historically. In Rowling's world aristocracy is bad, so the Slytherins are that too. As I said, this isn't an accusation of Rowling being anti-Semitic or saying *anything* about real Jews. It's saying that she created a group of people and othered them like a mad thing, and validated that othering. She wanted somebody playing the kind of role that Jews might have played if this were a medieval story (it does feel like one to me often). I realize that other people never thought this at all, and I'm not saying everybody should, but to me this was part of the experience reading it. That she needed somebody filling that role, not that she was being anti-Semitic. Alla: Yes, again I get that this is not the accusation of Rowling being antisemitic, I do. I guess I do not see the problem of depicting *Evil* as other, you know? True evil, I mean, not people who are really not. Wait, wait I think I got it, my another problem, I mean. You are saying that you are thinking that in her story Slytherins are playing same role as stereotypical Jews could have been playing in the medieval story, yes? I suppose the reason why I am not seeing the **parallels** is because to me as a person it is clear now that the role that those jews characters, steretypical or not were supposed to portray was incorrect, you know? Does it make sense or am I totally confused you? Like despite the assertions that it is so, Jews were not eating christian babies for dinner and all that crap, Slytherins on the hand **ARE** doing everything they had been accused of. Slytherins DE I mean, but it seems that Slytherins and DE are pretty much the same, no? That part I do find unfortunate, but it is different from your POV, no? Like if you are saying that you are seeing stereotypes in Slytherins, my question is how they can be stereotypes if stereotypes are usually do not come true? Or am I totally confused myself? colebiancardi: Of course, I can see both Magpie's & Alla's sides here. I think that in JKR's world, the biases against Jews and the evil of the Nazis got merged into one. Alla: Aha, now I am beginning to at least understand this POV but not quite :). colebiancardi: So, back to Harry Potter's WW - Slytherins, physically, appear like the classic stereotype of Jews. They are also untrustworthy to the other Houses. Slytherins also take on the Nazi credo of pure-blood mania and the intent to suppress and even wipe out those that are muggleborn or muggles. Alla: Right, the question about classic stereotype of jews remains for me. But surely yes about Nazi credo of pureblood mania. colebiancardi: What was disappointing to me in the aftermath of the WW war, there was no Vatican II. We still see Slytherin as being stereotyped as *evil* and bad. We do not see the reconciliation between these worlds as aggressively as we did after WWII. Alla: Right, I like what SSSusan wrote, I think some small steps are happening, but more agressive steps could be nice too. JMO, Alla From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 03:12:45 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:12:45 -0000 Subject: Snape's turn to DEs (Re: The Prince interpreted) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173554 > Jen: > > But it seems to me that Severus, unlike his "little Death Eater > > friends" who openly express their ambition to become DEs, is torn > > between Lily and the DEs. IMO, He's teetering on the edge like > > Draco in HBP trying to choose between killing and not killing DD > > and. like Draco, is unable to choose. Yes, *she* says that he has > > made his choice, but that's her interpretation based on his > > friends and his use of the word "Mudblood." zgirnius: It is probably the romantic in me rearing her sappy head, but I think the reason Snape says so darned little in that post-SWM scene is that he has reached a point where he is desperate enough to confess his feelings to Lily in the hope this will make a diference to her. But is so insecure/lacking in social polish that he can't find a way to bring it up. Her parting shot, "Why should I be any different?" caused him to 'strugle on the verge of speech' (it was probably the best lead-in she gave him, if I am right...) But that was when she spun around and went back inside the Common Room. > Jen: I got the sense Lily had already given him a second chance when > she continued their friendship despite her friend's objections, > despite what Snape's friends had done to Mary, a fellow Gryffindor > (whatever it was). zgirnius: Not necessarily even second chance. We got just the one chapter, so every scene had to count. I think the first scene is there to establish that there was a pattern or trend in the relationship before its end, not necessarily to suggest that he got exactly two chances. Harry sees that Snape pays no attention to her comments about his friends in that scene, after he is reassured on the point that Lily still sees James as a 'toerag'. I wonder if she noticed that inattention, and ascribed it to the wrong reason. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 03:14:07 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:14:07 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173555 Alla: > You know, it is not the first time I read the argument that people see Slytherins cast in the part of persecuted Jews and they see the symbolism with jews from eastern Europe. And of course I cannot argue with anybody's right to see that symbolysm, intentional or not. But this jew from eastern Europe, who as I mentioned several times seen enough antisemitism in my life, is so scratching her head every time this argument comes out. Ceridwen: It isn't about symbolism, it's about stereotypes. "All" Jews have large, hooked noses, sweep around in old-fashioned cloaks, cackle over charging exorbitant amounts of interest, and are evil, evil, evil. Look at pre-WWII cartoons. You'll see this very guy, hunched over, his cape swirling out around him, his nose large, hooked and (presumably, since these cartoons are in black and white) red, carrying his money box and bedevilling Our Hero or his girlfriend, starting horrible things the main character needs to get out of. Many Western stereotypes of Jews involve money and power. In the Middle Ages, Christians weren't supposed to charge each other interest. People who needed money either had to take a loan from the lord of their property, or go to the Jews outside the walls of town and secure a loan with interest payments added. Since charging interest was seen then as un-Christian, Jews were suspect for doing so. There is still a conspiracy theory going around about Jews, the World Bank, and various positions of power. They are, to hear this theory, all in cahoots with one another and reap the benefits of wars, Depression, stock market crashes, and the like. It was supposedly set out in a document called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It uses the spectre of power to emotionally convince people to believe this theory. Believing this is ignorant, but some people do believe it. This plays on the same stereotypes some of us see depicted in Slytherin House. Lucius Malfoy had the MoM in his pocket. He threatened the Board of Governors to oust Dumbledore. He has money, tons of money, with no explanation of where he got it. This is not a symbol of the real life of an Eastern European Jew, but it has been a Western stereotype of the Eastern European Jew for centuries. Snape, with his greasy hair, large hooked nose, and dead black eyes, is another stereotype that has nothing to do with reality. It's just a stereotype to turn Eastern European Jews into something different than the Christian population, into Other. Like Snape, they are not capable of growing beyond their one great sin, that of killing Jesus, or Lily, in Snape's case. They can do pennance through eternity, but they will never be redeemed. Snape is the Wandering Jew. He goes through life, trying to atone. But, dead is dead. He can't undo what he has done, and he is reprobate. The most he can hope for is to somehow aid the Good Guys and earn a small measure, a pat on the head, someone saying he probably wouldn't have been a Slytherin at all, if they only Sorted later. It isn't about symbolism. That would mean a likeness on some level. The Muggle and Muggle-born story line was about symbols. There is a very conscious, I think, tie to the Jews of WWII era and the Muggle- borns of the WW. That statue in the MoM was chilling. Seeing the poor jobless begging in Diagon Alley was breath-taking. This was a direct and, I think, conscious parallel between the Nazis and the WW. This was where the symbolism came in. Slytherin House and its story line is about stereotypes, which teach people to hate. *All* Slytherins are Pureblood Supremacists, even the Half-bloods. Of course, these half-bloods are magical on their mothers' sides. *All* Slytherins are not fit to stick around for the final battle, because they'll betray Hogwarts, or at least Harry Potter. I agree with Sydney and Magpie, JKR didn't consciously do this. The stereotypes, which before WWII were understood to be about Jews, have spread into the culture as traits of the generic Bad Guy, and she applied them to Slytherin House and its various members we saw in the books. Given that these traits, in some circles, denote a generic Bad Guy, I don't think JKR realizes that these are stereotypes which are still applied to Jews in certain circles even now. I really hate this, this is the second attempt I've made at this post. I don't like the idea that such stereotypes that are still so recognizable in our world. Thinking about it makes me afraid, because there are still people who believe this drivel. People like identifying Other by easily-discernable traits. If they used symbolism, there would be some humanity in the depictions, some basis for truth in there somewhere. But these are stereotypes, caricatures. And their only purpose is to divide. And, some of us see these stereotypes being applied, unconsciously, to Slytherin House, and to various Slytherins. Unredeemable, completely reprobate, ugly, untrustworthy, unlovable, better to be gotten rid of than to keep. When Slytherin House was not redeemed in the end, when it was still the house the Good Guys didn't want to be in, the entire storyline of redemption and unity crashed and burned around our ears. I'm afraid of what some people might learn from this. Ceridwen. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 03:28:20 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:28:20 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173556 This is a fascinating thread-- I'm not going to comment because it's too overwhelming really to think about--too much stuff there-- but here are a couple of links if anyone is interested, from Jewish sites, actually. http://www.jewcy.com/tags/snape http://sabbathmeals.typepad.com/sabbath_meals/2005/08/i_am_going_to_t.ht ml From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 03:28:46 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:28:46 -0000 Subject: The hardest parts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173557 SSSusan: > I feel like JKR *did* take steps in that direction, of showing some > change for the good and towards acceptance, and I felt like the > scene at Platform 9 3/4 was intended to provide hope for continued > change. > > Am I the only one? zgirnius: Nope! Not at all. I agree with you. (About this point, and in my overall enjoyment of the final installment of the series). I too would have preferred to see some little bit more than we got (some Slyth telling Pansy to shut up is a great suggestion! lol). But for me, Slughorn, Snape, Phineas (who in addition to his comment at the end of the book, helped Headmaster Snape (sorry, just really wanted to type that) by keeping an ear on the Trio), and Cissy were enough. I just find it an odd choice in a book where in many ways the emphasis was so much more on the kids that the Slyths we got being 'good' or at least useful, were all among the adults. Well, I suppose Draco pretending not to recognize Ron and Hermione was something, though it didn't do any good. From juli17 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 03:38:27 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (julie) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:38:27 -0000 Subject: Snape, again...(was Re: Come on folks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173558 > Sydney: > > Every kind of ME TOO to this post! She turned the angle and suddenly > he looked wonky. I simply can't make sense of this guy who on the one > hand seems to be a complete moral vacuum, and on the other hand he can > sustain this hopless Love for decades that's so pure it produces a > Patronus of Dazzling Goodness. Julie: I just want to insert here that I don't think Snape's patronus represented any kind of "Dazzling Goodness." It represented only one thing--Lily--the woman Snape loved, the person who was his "happy thought" (of their childhood friendship obviously, not what came later) and the motivation for all his actions. I also don't see Snape in a complete moral vacuum even as a DE (he could love, and because of that he tried to protect that person he loved), nor do I see him sustained by a hopeless love for decades. Yes, I guess you can call it "hopeless" in the sense that she's dead and will never love him back, but I don't know that loving someone who won't ever love you back is hopeless. That just sounds too sad, like loving is a pathetic thing if it isn't returned in kind. Love is love. If it inspires you to act in good ways, what's wrong with it, or with admitting it? (I also think what sustained Snape even more was his determination to make up for his part in Lily's death--to make up for his betrayal by protecting her son. Not hopeless, pathetic love, but motivating, instrumental love.) Betsy: I wasn't quite sure how it was going > to work before DH came out, but I was pretty sure it could; but it > can't work like this. It's not accidental that Snape in DH suddenly > seemed considerably slower on the uptake than in any previous book, or > that his voice was so silenced. It wasn't even anything that Snape > actually DID that broke the character; it was the author's need to > 'explain' him. Julie: Regarding Snape's voice being silenced, I felt stunned at first myself that Snape was so...subdued. Especially in the scene with Voldemort where he put up no fight whatsoever. Later, after thinking about it for awhile, I came away feeling it was in fact in character. For the first time Snape sees Nagini being kept close to Voldemort (what Dumbledore warned him about) and he realizes that the end has come. (Harry watching from under the Invisibility Cloak had an immediate sense that Snape was in mortal danger, and I think Snape may have felt it too.) Could Snape have run, or pulled out his wand and duelled? I suppose he could have tried something. He's not going to win, because no one except Harry Potter has a chance to beat Voldemort one-on-one, but he could have gone down fighting. Except it wasn't about what he wanted to do, but the job he still had to finish, and the possibility that he would be able to get it done was in serious jeopardy. He had to get those memories to Harry, it was what he'd sacrifice his life for (figuratively as well as soon to be literally). So I can buy that he is so desperate, looking at Nagini, and begging Voldemort to let him go get Harry Potter. (And, yes, it would have been smart to have already put the memories in a vial in case something happened to him, but Snape can take care of himself in almost any circumstance except against Voldemort, and he had absolutely no reason to expect that Voldemort would turn on him before the battle was finished). Betsy: > What's so frustrating is that it wasn't necessary-- it feels like > Rowling deliberately took the character and crammed him back into a > box after he had grown out of it. You'd have to cut very few lines > out of DH and we'd all be back here happily arguing away about > something that was still kind of ambiguous and fun. But she had kept > hammering home this idea that no, everything good in Snape came from > Lily and only Lily; and he did nothing on his own initiative but only > directed by Dumbledore, who controlled him using this weird idee fixe, > like a reverse Manchurian Candidate. Julie: I admit that I was hoping against the whole Snape loves Lily thing myself. I wanted Snape to be acting on principle, and to be less damaged by his life (and I speak here of both his choices and his truly horrid childhood). And while he did agree to do whatever Dumbledore wanted because of Lily and only Lily--and he kept his WORD, no easy thing to do when you consider Dumbledore wasn't neither nice or subtle about that promise even as the years passed), I don't believe everything good about Snape came from Lily, only that it *started* with Lily. Some of Snape's good eventually came from Snape himself, the Snape who saved Lupin, and who said he watched those die "Lately, only those I cannot save." Betsy: I suppose this was originally > due to some kind of symbolism thing with the Gryffindor/purity > whatever connects with the corrupted Slytherin thingie, but with real > people it just doesn't work. Of course the character was so vivid > that people will continue to work around this, but I can't ignore the > fact that Rowling sawed back all his green shoots and painted them > over with herbicide. Or almost all.. he will keep sprouting out! > > Oh the other hand.. I'm going to do this a lot with this book because > although I feel she gutted a lot of what had been my favorite stuff, > her genius will shine through! We got some nice extra touches on > Snape, like his inner Emo!kid, and his fascinatingly sick relationship > with Dumbleodore (I think Snape latched onto a new father figure after > dear old Da and Voldemort, when Dumbledore said, "You disgust me." Oh > Snape, you poor messed up puppy). And even without ever meeting > Eileen and Tobias, once you meet 'desperate for approval' Snape you > can write a one-act play about them: > > EILEEN: I wouldn't have even married a worthless muggle like you if > you hadn't knocked me up with that brat! > TOBIAS: He's going to be a freak like you, and not a real man, isn't > he? I'm sick of both of you. I'm off to the pub. (cuffs Eileen) (kicks > little Snape)(SLAM!) > EILEEN: (bursts into hysterical tears) Oh Sevvie.. promise me you'll > grow up to great Slytherin wizard, then maybe my family will forgive > me for having you. Julie: Thank you for breaking my heart with this scene :-( Seriously this is exactly how I see Snape's childhood and why I have so much sympathy for him. The scene between Lily and Snape after he referred to her as a "filthy Mudblood!" is used as an example that Snape had a choice between sinking further into evil or aligning himself with Lily, and one theory is that if he loved her so much, then he would have stuck with her. But someone else also said that choices aren't made in a vacuum. Snape made the wrong choice, but throughout his childhood and youth he was given little incentive to make that right choice. That he did make it later, even if the incentive was a completely personal reason, doesn't change the fact that he did finally make that right choice. Julie, who might have strayed a bit from the original topic... From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 03:46:50 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 20:46:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] I am about to rant.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <756897.41114.qm@web52710.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173559 Geoff Bannister wrote: Geoff: Warning. I think I am about to rant. :-) <<>> What I am trying to get at is instead of trying to score points off one another or run down what JKR has written, why don't we try looking for things to agree on; things that we like about the books. Instead of perpetual negativity, why don't we look for good things, encouraging things, things to say "wow" about? Instead of counting the dead, why don't we remember the numbers who came through the war and will go on beyond the last page ? in the epilogue or not ? Harry, Ron, Hermione, Luna, Neville, Bill, Charlie, Arthur and Molly, even Draco and his parents(!) and the rest. I read Tolkien and Lewis and Rowling first and foremost for pleasure. Perhaps I'm na?ve but I don't want to analyse them down to the last full stop; I just want to be an armchair hedonist for a couple of hours! There, I've got that off my chest. I think I'll go and find some soothing fanfic ****Katie Replies: THANK YOU. I have been sucked into this black hole of negativity myself recently and I have been disliking my OWN posts. I DID love DH and I DO love the series (sans wretched epilogue) and I would love to discuss all the things I love about it. I think sometimes we all get so involved in our own feelings about how things "should" be in Potterverse that we forget we didn't actually write it! : ) I love JKR's story, and I love these characters. I don't know why many people dislike HRH, or other main characters. To me, they are lively, funny, flawed, and completely loveable. These books have made me laugh, cry, rediscover the magic in my own soul, and these characters have grown to be my dear friends over the years. I don't particularly like ripping them, or their story, to shreds. If I didn't love the books, I wouldn't be here. That said, I believe I will lurk for a while until things settle down...and go off to bed, my copy of DH clutched in my hand, and reread it for the 3rd time since last week...Good Night, Everyone...KATIE --------------------------------- Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 03:50:58 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:50:58 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173560 > Alla: > > Here, I guess I misunderstood in part. I totally keep hearing that > Slytherins are being prejudiced again and this is how bigotry works > from this thread in general. Magpie: I know some people are feeling that Slytherins are prejudiced against, but I think what Sydney said about it was that she *thought* this storyline would end with some real education for the heroes where they saw they had contributed to the problem through misunderstanding etc. But that's not what happened, so the feelings about the house didn't say anything about how bigotry works. It more said: this is what bad people look like. Alla: > But no, I see Slytherins as close to Natzis, as possibly could be. I > mean, they are not real, obviously, but Muggle born registration > commission gives me very real metaphors. > > So, I guess it all boils down to this - what antisemitic stereotypes > you see depicted in Slytherins besides Snape hooked nose? Magpie: I think Sydney summed them up well in her original post: Sydney: a population characterized by 'ambition' and 'cunning', they are often described as having 'greedy' expressions. They always seem to be in positions of power and have more money than seems right. They're not admitted into certain clubs and quite right too. They can't be trusted-- their loyalties are not those of the rest of society. In a war they will probably run or switch sides or try to profit from the suffering of others. They manipulate the government from behind the scenes to their own purposes, using money and mesmeric powers. They keep themselves to themselves and never fit in; who they are seems to be partly by birth-- established by nasty inbreeding--, partly by belief, and partly by some invisible taint. They killed Harry Potter and refused to accept his Salvation. What does a House like this sound like to you? A House associated with reptiles and ghettoes like Nocturn Alley? A House whose Founder has a 'monkey-like' face and a name that's suspiciously foreign? A House with sinister ties to Eastern Europe? Whose Head-- redeemed only by a passion, presented as kind of creepy and wrong, for a woman on the 'pure' side-- has greasy black hair and a freakin' *hooked nose*??! Magpie: It's not a description of Jews, but it is rather a mish-mosh of the stereotypes. I admit, the moment Pansy stood up and fingered Harry, I thought that was the nail in the coffin (and things are supposed to get better after this series? Yipes!). It's not even a coherent pattern of stereotypical traits. There's a mixture of things that are probably from different time periods, but they all work because they're all about an enemy within. Alla:> > I mean, I think I also misunderstood something else - I thought > Sydney was making a point that not only Slytherins are being > portrayed as antiJewish stereotypes, BUT what Potterverse heroes > **do** to them can be seen as what was done to Jews. If I imagined > that part of the argument, sorry about that, because that I am > having even bigger problems seeing than Slytherins being > stereotypically portrayed. Magpie: I'm not sure she meant that. It seemed like she was ultimately disappointed that this wasn't the case at all, that the view we had of the Slytherins was completely correct and the heroes didn't need to ally with them. They just have to treat them magnanimously while they have to deal with them. > Alla: > > Yes, again I get that this is not the accusation of Rowling being > antisemitic, I do. I guess I do not see the problem of depicting > *Evil* as other, you know? True evil, I mean, not people who are > really not. Wait, wait I think I got it, my another problem, I mean. Magpie: I don't think the problem is making Evil the other, it's making Evil the other by making people the other. As someone else said, other fantasy sometimes gets around this by using monsters. Here it's a group of people. (People that the author will even happily say are like those you will meet in real life so here's how to deal with them. But even without that I wouldn't like that set up.) Alla: > You are saying that you are thinking that in her story Slytherins > are playing same role as stereotypical Jews could have been playing > in the medieval story, yes? > > I suppose the reason why I am not seeing the **parallels** is > because to me as a person it is clear now that the role that those > jews characters, steretypical or not were supposed to portray was > incorrect, you know? > > Does it make sense or am I totally confused you? Magpie: It seems like you're saying that even if the Slytherins are playing the same role as the Jews might have played if this were a medieval story, that it doesn't matter because Slytherins are totally fictional and so have no real-life counterparts that would suffer for it? Alla: > Like despite the assertions that it is so, Jews were not eating > christian babies for dinner and all that crap, Slytherins on the > hand **ARE** doing everything they had been accused of. Slytherins > DE I mean, but it seems that Slytherins and DE are pretty much the > same, no? That part I do find unfortunate, but it is different from > your POV, no? Magpie: Yes, I think the difference we have is that we both agree that Slytherins (who are totally fictional) turn out to really be doing this stuff while Jews (who are real) most certainly were not doing those things. For me I don't like the role in itself whether the characters are based on real people or not. I think either way it says something ugly about the world and supports doing it to real people more than another premise might. Of course I'm not claiming that Rowling is making people run out and treat anyone badly, but she is putting across a story of good and evil and this helps me see it as being a good story about that idea. She's not saying anything against the idea of identifying the Slytherins in your world. Alla: > Like if you are saying that you are seeing stereotypes in > Slytherins, my question is how they can be stereotypes if > stereotypes are usually do not come true? Or am I totally confused > myself? Magpie: I think the stereotypes have a life of their own. But regardless, my problem isn't just places where things might happen to reflect other stereotypes but the whole way it's set up. It all seems to be saying stuff about good and evil I find icky. I find it easiest to talk about it in terms of the real life ideas that it reminds me of, but I just didn't like it in the story. I didn't like the ending configuration we wound up with. The stereotype connection gives an idea of why this kind of scenario isn't great, imo, but I don't like it on its own. -m From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 04:06:32 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:06:32 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: <46ABCC05.5050602@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173561 Sydney: > > They killed Harry Potter and refused to accept his Salvation. Jen: 'They' didn't though, Voldemort did. And Harry can't offer salvation to anyone save Voldemort; he's seen the state of LV's soul because it's attached to his own soul, evidence there are 'other ways to destroy a man,' and Harry offers LV the only thing that can heal his soul - a chance to feel remorse. The rest of the WW? All Harry can offer is the defeat of Voldemort and everyone, including himself, a second chance to get things right. He's part of the problem as well, having heard and integrated the stereotypes of the different houses (and Slytherin stereotypes are not the only ones perpetuated at Hogwarts). I too expected more evidence of the houses uniting, was very surprised by the moment in the Great Hall when no Slytherins stepped forward to fight, when no Gryffindors extended a hand after Pansy's announcement. But the sense of the 'unclean otherness' of Slytherin wasn't a thought that crossed my mind until reading this list. In fact, my first thought after reading the Great Hall scene was, 'I wonder how many Slytherins in that group might have wanted to step forward but were too fearful of retaliation from Voldemort and the DEs and some of their own housemates if they took such a stand?' Because Voldemort appears to be oppressing Muggles, those less than pureblood and half-humans as his primary victims, but his most heinous acts are against his own house. Sydney, you've mentioned the burning of the Sorting Hat and Harry stopping Voldemort from doing so as a defining moment for you. I read that as a defining moment as well, in an entirely different direction: The burning of the Hat symbolized the last vestiges of refuge for those oppressed groups who would never be allowed into Hogwarts again and in addition, everyone would be in Slytherin from there on out, the house that has experienced the *most* oppression from Voldemort, the house he made certain was indoctrinated with his values by holding captive generation after generation of families as his followers. Certainly some followed him zealously, but how many more were like Slughorn, giving up his life and freedom to hide in Muggle homes so he wouldn't be conscripted against his will? How many were like Narcissa, her home taken over, her son in jeopardy, her husband a shaking mess of a man? How many were like Regulus, doing the only thing he knew to do to stop Voldemort and being dragged down into the lake and turned into an Inferi for his troubles? It's frightening and *sad* to me is what it is now, after struggling with my thoughts and feelings about DH & Slytherin ever since I started reading. Irene: > Also, Rowling's message about choices is a total cheat, and I > should have seen it by book 2. When Dumbledore explains to Harry > how he was different from Voldie by the virtue of his choices, > apparently, Harry made the better choice by asking to be put "not > in Slytherin". Could he be a Slytherin, and then by his actions > choose to be a good person, different from Voldemort? Noooo, just > the choice of Slytherin in and of itself would have put him on the > road to evil, apparently. Jen: Maybe, or maybe Harry would be derided as Saint Harry right now and the story as lame and predictable if Harry looked around and decided there needed to be a change in Slytherin house, that he refused to follow the indoctrination being espoused by many in the house because that's what they heard at home for 11 years and he hadn't. That instead, Voldemort had murdered his parents and Hagrid told him they were heroes and Harry held onto that belief instead of the prejudice being passed down from generation to generation in certain pureblood families. And had he held onto what he believed was true, perhaps Harry would have found compatriots in Slytherin, those willing to step forward and join him, finding their own courage as some of the other graduates of Slytherin house did in the series. Jen From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 04:11:06 2007 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:11:06 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The hardest parts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40707282111x4a435e17sb6c90b7fed83dd2d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173562 > SSS: > ... snipped ... > > Now on to the hardest part of the book. For me it is one that has > proven to be hard for many. It's the Slytherins. > > I've never been a 'fan' of the Slytherins. I've never comprehended > those who adored people like Draco. I saw some growth in him, I > pitied him, too, in HBP, but I've never *liked* him or felt > tremendous respect for the presented worldview of Slytherins. > > But I wanted to see *some* House unity. I wanted to find *some* > good Slytherins, even if they were not the Dracos and Goyles but > were unnamed Slytherins. > > So I share some of the disappointment that many feel over the lack > of blatent, overt signs of the above. > > ... snipped ... > > At this point, there may be people who say, "Then how can you be > happy with the book, content with the story??" And it's hard to > know how to answer that. Except that in spite of what *more* she > could have done, I also feel that she *did* include some things > which showed us progress. > > ... snipped examples of good Slytherins ... > > Yes, there was that bit there at the end, about how one's own > preference gets counted by the Sorting Hat, but I believed Harry was > sincere when he reminded Albus about Snape's bravery, when he said > Slytherin would simply be gaining an excellent student, when he said > his house selection *doesn't matter* to him & Ginny. > > Doesn't all of this show progress? Kemper now: I agree. It shows progress. And to add... yes, all of us wanted to see house unity. We thought it was even foreshadowed by the Hat. But if the great House Unity would have occurred, would we have believed it? I don't think so even though we hungered for it. One of the characters (Nick?) said that the Hat has advocated for house unity in the past during difficult times with little results. Its just an effing hat. Why should this time be any different? On September 1 following the Battle of Hogwarts, I wonder how many first years were sorted into Slytherin. As JKR's central theme is choice, which of those 11 year olds would choose that particular house knowing what it has been a symbol of? I think very few as I imagine many kids would want to be associated with Gryffindore or Hufflepuff (wtf Ravenclaw?!), and therefore choose those over Slytherin even though they would do well there. The House Unity shouldn't come from the students necessarily. It should come from the students' parents/guardians. Harry and Ginny and probably Hermione have shifted their views, and Ginny came from a family culture of kids being in Gryffindore. Her parents placed that pressure and therefore division on her and her brothers. Does Draco put pressure on his son to be in Slytherin? He has been disillusioned. He must have heard of Voldemort's plan to kill him after duelling Harry when he thought Draco was the proper possessor of the Elder Wand. Yes, nineteen years later he exchanged a curt nod, but it wasn't a hateful glare. (I know, the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.) He may not want his boy in Gryffindore, but I bet Hufflepuf would be ok. > SSS: > I feel like JKR *did* take steps in that direction, of showing some > change for the good and towards acceptance, and I felt like the > scene at Platform 9 3/4 was intended to provide hope for continued > change. > > Am I the only one? Others may say you are a dreamer, but you aren't the only one. Change is a process (Nineteen Years Later) not an event (Battle of Hogwarts). Rambling on, Kemper From va32h at comcast.net Sun Jul 29 04:18:41 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:18:41 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173563 In light of a request for topics we can agree on - can we agree that there was a heck of a lot of innuendo in this book? "Ooh Harry, you look a lot tastier than Crabbe and Goyle." "Twelve Fail Safe Ways to Charm Witches." Endless jokes about wands, wand lengths, and how men feel about the size of their wands. "Come here Ron, so I can do you." Bella and Voldemort talking of highest pleasures. I found most of it amusing (Voldie and Bella the disgusting exception). It all went right over my daughter's head, but I can imagine her re- reading in 6 or 7 years and saying "Mother! Did you read that!" va32h From intrignfantacie at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 03:02:54 2007 From: intrignfantacie at yahoo.com (Ann) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:02:54 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: <46ABDEFA.3070106@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173564 I have read all the replies and I am surprised, stunned, and a bit insulted, however, I have not noted the strength and conviction of this "Fiction" novel portraying a "Fictional" main character who has previously exhibited consistent tendencies to bend or blatantly break rules throughout this series of "Fiction" novels. In real life, growing and learning is also achieved by periodically bending and breaking a few rules, albeit murder and sooo many other unforgivable actions an exception, in exception of defense even in a state of war. Unfortunately this seems to be the situation (a state of war) in this "Fiction" novel. This glorious work of art addresses the fine thin and often opaque lines between morally and legally correct in `a state of war' under the transfiguring veils of fear and survival. It is one personal judgement that affects many besides the MoM is corrupt. Therefore wouldn't all laws recede to a moral good as opposed to a legal good until the state of war diminishes. I feel that fear is very personal and being such is as individualized as people are. Meaning: my cause and level of fears is different than yours and conversely. Therefore, as I read and reread this, and a few other passages, as I read this "Fiction" novel, twice, I understood that Harry was in fear due to his prior experience with DE's and LV, (not merely this DE), that Harry's apparent chivalry was shocking to McGonagall, (the way I read it, DH Chapter 30), and Harry's intent was not internally intense as other DE's or LV using the UC's but merely a survival and protection in a state of war. I feel it was an external intensive reaction because of his response to using it (DH Chapter 30) and other specifics of this fictional story (his pursuit of Horcrux in the midst of monumental obstacles - other people with other priorities & time (before LV arrived to regain control of Horcrux) in this chapter. I was surprised to read Harry used an UC, but it was not the only thing I read in this "Fiction" novel that Harry did which surprised me; more surprised at what I have read in this topic posts. But I do believe, and strongly, that anything read and discussed anywhere does not consent reproach or discredit to anyone's families. all this in my humble opinion, ann From purplecatdork at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 04:36:42 2007 From: purplecatdork at yahoo.com (purplecatdork) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:36:42 -0000 Subject: Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173565 It's because of the prophecy made by Trelawney in the fifth book: neither can live while the other survives. Plus Voldie would rather kill Harry himself, just for the satisfaction of it. purplecatdork From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 05:05:32 2007 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:05:32 -0000 Subject: Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173566 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marthaforhp" wrote: > > I've wondered about the answer to this question since near the end of HBP, when Snape roars to the fleeing Death Eaters to remember their orders and leave Potter to the Dark Lord. And in DH, in Malfoy's Manor, Bellatrix doesn't simply kill Harry and > be done with it. Yet the original prophecy says nothing about who has to kill whom, > only that neither can live if the other survives. > > What have I missed? > > Martha > Doddie here: First...Voldie is a megalomaniac with narcissitic tendencies... Second: If any but Voldie killed harry then they would usurp Voldie's hold on the DE's...(somehow I get the picture that if any of the DE's attempted such a feat then they would be killed through their dark mark...much like Wormtails hand...(hence why Fenrir still doesn't have the dark mark...wow...no one wants to be the last survivor supporter.) Third...given my theories above this is why voldie never sends Malfoy, nor Snape to do the dirty work yet again in DH....(I think Snape may have had an idea about the protean charm Voldie branded into their skin...and voldie never sent malfoy because he worried Lucious was only going to retrieve his son.(sad, yet true--come on...lucious is begging voldie to send him into Hogwarts to retrieve Harry without a wand) would be laughable if we didn't examine motives.. Fourth...Snape asks to "retrieve harry"...and voldie refuses.. (unfortunately by this point voldie is power hungry and wants all the power for his very own.. Voldie believes he alone, must kill Harry so he can live in legend and there can be no dispute to his power...but the truth is..that no power can destroy love....and even if one considers the deathly hallows...it was not the power they coveted over others as much as the power they themselves wanted...of which voldie had much(hence he only had the wand) and harry, who has neither power or everlasting life(nor hungry for either) is the true master of death(whether he has the artifacts or not)...and he had the ring, and the cloak--two against one...that's what was going on in Harry's corner in no one's mind but DD's..Snape had to die..DD did not trust snape in the end...the patronus may have been the clue to dd...snape wants harry to have "power"..Harry wants to live for his love..Snape well I don't believe Snape understands love..lily did though(or else harry would have died that night)...battling against the elderwand of which voldie had no power over...(something so simple as harry wanting to see those he loved and voldemort having no love--closest thing was bellatrix sychophanitic worship).. Any of Voldy's DE's could have killed him over and over and over again...those that were the most powerfull(in voldies mind he gave them a "treasure to protect and cherish)... The diary(the only po' ol' DE that wanted to ursurp some of those powers) The cup to bellatrix... the only DE who probably in all likelihood loved him...but voldie was so sick and twisted I'd hate to see the marriage contract between Bella and Adolpholus..(I'll not delve into voldie's scream of rage at her death)... The locket...well go Reg and Kreacher! The ring..no one would link voldie's ancestors to live as the "tramps" in a muggle village...I believe that Vodlie thought this was an added protection against the DE's. And the Diadem...the artifact only the most gifted of professors of hoggy's could have found(in voldie's mind)...(I'm sure he counted snape as one)..yet Voldie sent a young DE to work around w/in the room for many months...and even Draco had a suspicion about said room... I suppose the sad fact is that Voldie felt he must kill harry himself so that his rule would remain supreme after his "take-over" of the ww... Doddie, (who knows this may be potter fact as Lucious not only dumped a horcrux but tried to usurp power over Hoggys in COS) From dvdavins at pobox.com Sun Jul 29 04:40:21 2007 From: dvdavins at pobox.com (barkingiguana) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:40:21 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173567 --- "eggplant107" wrote: > And if Harry had managed to kill that snake as Dumbledore expected > before he so bravely walked into the Forbidden Forest to meet > oblivion then both Harry and Voldemort would indeed have died at > that instant. barkingiguana: Are you sure? Harry was the last horcrux. Perhaps killing the horcrux within him was all that cursing could ever have done. Eggplant: > This is what Dumbledore wanted this is what he expected. barkingiguana: It is what he led Snape and Harry to believe he wanted and expected. And *if* there were no other ways of ridding the world of Voldemort, I agree it's what he would have wanted. I'm not convinced one way or the other whether Dumbledore actually thought that that's the way it would play out. Eggplant: > "If I know him [Harry] he will have arranged matters so that when he > does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of > Voldemort." ... When Snape responds with horror (I never in my life > dreamed I would someday write the words "Snape responds with > horror", but there you go): > > "You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?" > > Dumbledore seems to dismiss Snape's reservations as trivial > > "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and woman have you watched > die?" > > That is cold, that is very cold, but the next part is worse, it > approaches absolute zero: > > Snape: You have been raising him like a pig for slaughter." > > Dumbledore: But this is touching Severus, have you grown to care for > the boy after all? > > Dumbledore is sneering. Dumbledore is sneering at Snape because he > is reluctant to murder a 17 year old boy. barkingiguana: That all reads quite differently if Dumbledore thinks that Harry must believe he is going to to his doom, but that only the belief, not that actual doom, is necessary. With that reading, Dumbledore's amusement is much less cold. From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 05:18:31 2007 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:18:31 -0000 Subject: Slytherins are not Jews... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173568 Nor are they hindi's, Sikh's, or anything else besides somesort of christian religion...seeing as they always take Christmas and Easter holiday's...make appearances(aside from Draco) for holiday feasts... Also during hogsmead weekends they never go to temple on Saturday..nor are Saturday or Sundays mentioned for the most part in the entire series...nor during Ramadon to we hear of fasting for any members of staff(any Jew would probably notice).. I'm guessing hogsmeade weekends happen on saturdays...yet everyone seems to go.(perhaps Jewish witches and wizards attend kosher school in jeruslalem?)...would be a different feasting table...as meat is butchered in another fashion... And most quidditch matches occurr on saturdays in cannon. Besides which...if all slytherins are jews(which I doubt as Jews had been around thousands of years before hogwarts)...how can you explain that they celebrate Halloween, Christmas, and easter(among a few)...but not any Jewish holidays--the big one being roshashana...or even muslims cellebrating ramadan.. DeeDEe From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 05:23:09 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:23:09 -0000 Subject: Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173569 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "purplecatdork" wrote: > > It's because of the prophecy made by Trelawney in the fifth book: > neither can live while the other survives. Plus Voldie would rather > kill Harry himself, just for the satisfaction of it. > > purplecatdork > Lisa: Well, that, and the earlier part: "For either must die at the hand of the other ... " From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 05:30:34 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:30:34 -0000 Subject: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: <3BC0F32A-675F-491D-B64B-4D4E53339DBA@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173570 Maeg wrote: > I think there's some evidence in > the series that UCs are just that > for reasons of morality AND legality. I would maintain that the question of the legality of the curse is moot. At the time Harry performed the curse the only law making and law enforcing body in the entire wizard world was operated by a fellow by the name of Voldemort. > I was surprised at Harry's reaction > to his own use of Cruciatus. And I was not at all surprised at Harry's reaction; in fact I'd say JKR had to include a scene like that for the character to ring true. Harry is still a very good person but let's face facts, he's not an eleven year old boy getting on the Hogwarts express for the first time. How many people have tried to kill Harry in the last seven years, how many horrors has he seen? If somebody ties you to a tombstone and tortures you so hideously you want to die, well, you're just not going to be the same person afterward; I'm not saying you're going to become a monster or anything, but you're not going to be the same. I am convinced that the battle scared veterans of Iwo Jima are very good people, but after the hell they went through to expect them to be squeamish when they hear a howl of pain from the enemy after they pull the trigger is just not realistic. Eggplant From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 05:43:10 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:43:10 -0000 Subject: Responding to the responses to a LONG collection of DH related thoug In-Reply-To: <6467e1f0707261323i3d37d054xf82d733a8c90fe6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173571 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Asl? T?merkan" wrote: > Carrows spat on McGonagall. This was very upsetting for Harry, as it > would be for any of us. I think Carrows spatting on McGonagall was just the last straw, this alone wouldn't make Harry do what he did. Take into consideration that Harry just met his friends in RoR and found out that Carrows hurt them all that year, that he hunted them and tortured them. zanooda From snapes_witch at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 05:46:23 2007 From: snapes_witch at yahoo.com (Elizabeth Snape) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:46:23 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Tonks - What about the baby? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173573 Jim Ferer: > I do wonder who brought Teddy up after his parents' death, if his > grandmother was too old. First guess, the Weasleys. > Andromeda isn't extremely elderly even '19 years later'; she's the middle Black sister and Bella was born in 1951 according to the auction tapestry (and TMTMNBN -- hope I got that right!). She might have been born around 1954. So even in 2017 she'd only be in her mid 60's, a spring chicken by wizarding standards according to the author. Snape's Witch Always! From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 05:45:35 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:45:35 -0000 Subject: The Houses again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173574 --- juli17 at ... wrote: > > > Anders wrote: > I didn't read as much negativity into Jo's Slytherin > descriptions as you seemed to get from them. To me, > she was showing us that there are all kinds of people > in this world, and some of them aren't as nice as > others, but there were also Slytherins who turned out > good. ... > > > Julie: > You may be right, but where the real negativity comes > in is from the other Houses. They all hate Slytherins. > They boo whenever anyone is sorted into Slytherin. > Slytherin is deliberately portrayed as the outcast > house (which I supposed made it a good fit for Snape!). > To students in the other Houses, just being Slytherin > means you are undesirable, bad, "other." > bboyminn: The question is, which came first the chicken or the egg? Do you really think Slytherins are sweet innocent kids who have been wrongly put upon by the other houses, or do you think Slytherin acted in a manner that made them deserving of all the scorn they received? Personally, I think Slytherin has created their own alienation from the other houses. It is their own actions repeated over time that has given them an unsavory reputation. If they want to change their reputation and the attitudes of others, they need to change their own actions. You reap what you sow. Slytherin has sown a lot of contempt and self-proclaimed superiority, and now they are reaping the scorn of the other Houses because of it. The blame falls squarely on their shoulders, not on the other Houses. Slytherin House caused the problem, and if they choose to, they can cause the solution. Simple as that. Steve/bboyminn From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 06:07:24 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 06:07:24 -0000 Subject: Snape, again...(was Re: Come on folks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173575 Julie: > So I can buy that he is so desperate, looking at Nagini, and > begging Voldemort to let him go get Harry Potter. (And, yes, > it would have been smart to have already put the memories in > a vial in case something happened to him, but Snape can take > care of himself in almost any circumstance except against > Voldemort, and he had absolutely no reason to expect that > Voldemort would turn on him before the battle was finished). Jen: And if he'd put those memories in a vial or handed them over to Harry in strands what a *lost* moment that would have been. Those memories gushing out as he died because finally in death, Snape could release everything he'd shielded using Occlumency, everything lost to him when he became bitter and resentful and determined he would never again show weakness, never 'wear his heart on his sleeve'. I can't do the image justice but found it to be another one of JKR's fine moments of writing, using imagery to convey what words could not. Jen, trying to find the words anyway. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 06:35:38 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 06:35:38 -0000 Subject: Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173576 "marthaforhp" wrote: > And in DH, in Malfoy's Manor, Bellatrix > doesn't simply kill Harry and be done > with it. Voldemort issued strict instructions that NOBODY should kill Harry Potter, they should just capture him, and it's not difficult to figure out why. Voldemort tried to kill Harry, I don't know how often I've lot count, a dozen times or so. And Voldemort has failed each and every time! How would it look if some low ranking Death Eater accomplished something mighty Lord Voldemort could not? Dictators are very sensitive to that sort of thing. It really would be bad public relations, and like any other celebrity Voldemort has to think about his image. Eggplant From srpripas at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 05:33:03 2007 From: srpripas at yahoo.com (srpripas) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:33:03 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173577 > > Pippin: > I do have to thank JKR for making Lupin a credible red herring and > allowing Harry to recognize that he did indeed have greater failings > than cutting his friends too much slack. They were all evident in the > earlier books, though Harry did not notice them. > > We need not ask now why Sirius would have suspected him as the spy, > or Snape would have thought he was in on the prank or why Lupin would > have killed Pettigrew without a visible qualm. None of that would have > been out of character for the callous, cowardly, irresponsible Lupin > of DH. > I don't think JKR intended to portray DH Lupin as a coward. Since HBP (and maybe even earlier) I've seen him as very brave about "Big and Important" things like battles, but a coward about everyday things like forming lasting relationships. And even there, he was able to get over it in the end and was apparently a happy father. Since the first book JKR has established that there are different kinds of braveries within the "Gryffindor" banner. And it's a side point, but I really don't think we're supposed to trust Snape's assessment of the Prank as grounded in objective reality. He clearly has a grudge. Sarah From dvdavins at pobox.com Sun Jul 29 05:58:55 2007 From: dvdavins at pobox.com (barkingiguana) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:58:55 -0000 Subject: 'crushing the magic out of him' Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173578 I'm new to the group, and I don't know if this has been discussed in the past. I hope if none of it is new, you'll forgive me. I think the Dursleys locking Harry up in the house and believing that by being awful to him--by crushing his soul--they can stamp 'that nonsense' out of him, we are meant to see the treatment many young homosexuals receive in homophobic families. As a high school teacher, there are students I've thought would especially benefit from reading Harry Potter for that reason. On another note, before DH came out, I and most of my friends were pretty sure Snape would wear the white hat in the end. But one of my more perceptive friends pointed out that Snape was nonetheless Judas. The Judas from those Christian traditions that see Judas as Jesus' best freind, who with Jesus' instruction, does what he must so that Jesus may be freed from his body and become the immortal beacon that must be. Also, the reason that Voldemort killed Snape is something I've seen before, but I can't remember where. I don't know if it was in literature or made up many years ago by a friend was who was DMing a D&D campaign I was in, or what. But the murder of an ally so that an already delivered magic item would accept the murderer as its true owner was not new to me. Does anyone else here recall having seen that plot device before? -- Dvd Avins (The Barking Iguana) From marika_thestral at yahoo.se Sun Jul 29 07:15:59 2007 From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 07:15:59 -0000 Subject: Krum jewish WAS Slytherins as jews In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173579 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > You know, it is not the first time I read the argument that people > see Slytherins cast in the part of persecuted Jews and they see the > symbolism with jews from eastern Europe. > > And of course I cannot argue with anybody's right to see that > symbolysm, intentional or not. Marika: I'm not getting into the jewish/Slytherin discussion, because I did not see that connection at all. Krum played that role to me. He reacted very stronlgy against the DH symbol Mr. Lovegood wore. Krum said it was Grindelwalds symbol, and that Grindelwald had killed relatives of his. Lovegood tells that this symbol originally meant something else. Hard not to think of how somebody who lost relatives during the Holocaust reacts when they see a swastika (which before Hitler "stole" it stood for something else). Marika From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 29 08:30:07 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 08:30:07 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173580 Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. From what I've read of the many many many enjoyable, varied and informative posts regarding a wide raft of subjects to do with the book, is how Voldermort was meant to be an ugly baby under a bench. I don't understand the symbolism or maybe the reality? Could anyone enlighten me as to what it all meant because it's all been lost on me. I go along with Geoff's line (always good to read your views, Mr Bannister!) on it being a brief near-death experience for Harry, that's how I read it in the first place, but the baby made it unpleasant reading and I still don't get it. Maybe I 'll leave the decaff alone today, if that's going to help. Sandra x. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun Jul 29 09:30:59 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 09:30:59 -0000 Subject: The hardest parts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173582 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Zara" wrote: > > SSSusan: > > I feel like JKR *did* take steps in that direction, of showing some > > change for the good and towards acceptance, and I felt like the > > scene at Platform 9 3/4 was intended to provide hope for continued > > change. > > > > Am I the only one? > > zgirnius: > Nope! Not at all. I agree with you. (About this point, and in my > overall enjoyment of the final installment of the series). > > I too would have preferred to see some little bit more than we got > (some Slyth telling Pansy to shut up is a great suggestion! lol). But > for me, Slughorn, Snape, Phineas (who in addition to his comment at > the end of the book, helped Headmaster Snape (sorry, just really > wanted to type that) by keeping an ear on the Trio), and Cissy were > enough. I just find it an odd choice in a book where in many ways the > emphasis was so much more on the kids that the Slyths we got > being 'good' or at least useful, were all among the adults. > > Well, I suppose Draco pretending not to recognize Ron and Hermione > was something, though it didn't do any good. > Hickengruendler: I think the point is, that she decided to redeem (at least partly) the individuals. Quite a few Slytherins got some redemption. I would add Draco to that list, who, even though somewhat clumsily, did try to save the Trio twice and of course Regulus. If we list all the main characters from Slytherin house, more will come away rather positive than negative, in the end. But, where she fails a bit, is in the portrayal of the background characters. They are all written the same way Tolkien writes the Orks, horrid, stupid and mostly unredeemable. For me personally, the redemption of the individuals is enough. I would have loved to see more from the other Slytherins (particularly the students), but their portrayal didn't in any way effect my overall enjoyment of the book. But I can see, why people would have loved to see more, than just some individuals redeemed. From CariadMel at aol.com Sun Jul 29 09:35:50 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 09:35:50 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173583 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sandra Collins" wrote: > > Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter > again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. From what I've > read of the many many many enjoyable, varied and informative > posts regarding a wide raft of subjects to do with the book, is > how Voldermort was meant to be an ugly baby under a bench. I > don't understand the symbolism or maybe the reality? Could > anyone enlighten me as to what it all meant because it's all been > lost on me. I go along with Geoff's line (always good to read your > views, Mr Bannister!) on it being a brief near-death experience for > Harry, that's how I read it in the first place, but the baby made it > unpleasant reading and I still don't get it. > Maybe I 'll leave the decaff alone today, if that's going to help. > > Sandra x. > yes that scene disturbed me too Sandra. I don't get what the ugly baby was all about either. Like you and Geoff I subscribe to the near- death experience theory, a moment in earth-bound time and space but one in which Harry 'sees the light'. My take on the 'creature' was that it was symbolic of evil, DD said that it was beyond help. Despite that the 'creature' was pleading and seemed remorseful, it was whining and totally disturbed. Maybe it wasn't vocalising it well, but it made me feel very uncomfortable that it was being ignored. I don't know what it is, good or bad? Voldemorts soul? the Harry horcrux? it just leaves a bad taste. Besides if I don't know how to understand this, how will I explain it to my grandson? Children are much more literal and need the facts. cariad. From dwalker696 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 07:52:50 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 07:52:50 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173584 > dan responded to the post " I think I'll go and find some soothing fanfic " with: > This is partially a response to your own post, right? Cause much > resentment seems to come from a proprietorial sense of the books > that is entirely false. > Donna replies: Hi, I just wanted to say that I have read your posts, Dan, and 'ear 'ear, I agree. I must say I have actually been rather embarrassed at times for this group over the last week. The overwhelming number of posts with such an outrageous sense of entitlement just floors me. The gripes, the complaints, that JKR didn't fullfill what so many posters felt they were due, entitled to, is bewildering to me. The only person who owns the story is JKR. That doesn't mean she is perfect (well, she might be), that her pen is moved by the divine, and that everything she writes will be unquestionably loved by all. It is one thing to debate the structure and form of the work, and by all means, isn't that this group is for? However- it is quite another for readers to post that she didn't write it FOR THEM, that she didn't write what they needed or wanted, that she left things out they were somehow entitled to. It is confusing to me beyond my ability to express it. I know I never received my personal questionnaire from JKR asking me how best she could tailor book seven to my reading pleasure. If readers feel there are elements missing, I feel it is much more interesting to hear those arguments discussed within the realm of literary analysis and comparison, as opposed to a proprietorial standpoint. Case in point, the camping trip. I intially was frustrated with the camping and the camping and the camping, primarily because the peak of my frustration came AFTER Ron left, and then I thought "Aha!" JKR needs US to feel the frustration, the boredom with the journey, to empathize a bit with what HRH are feeling (and we only had to read it for about 300 pages or so, not endure it from the first of September 'till past Christmas). I might have not been as surprised by Ron's departure had I felt that frustration earlier, but OK, hit me with a 2X4, I got it. > dan earlier wrote: > ...look at my two posts this week - one in > response to someone else who identified the activist political core > of Rowling, which I jumped on, as if saying,"at last, a new > direction!" and one in defense of the camping trip as THE most > important part of book seven. Number of responses, zero. Why is > this? > > I think there is resentment and confusion that the books hold sway > without a lot of introspection, and that ethical implications are > just that, implied and not written out as sermons - the television > cues are missing, the literal moral at the end of the story is > complex, and slightly unfamiliar. Also, they remain children's > books, while not avoiding large symbolic gestures that can be parsed > as systems, but of course do not MEAN those systems. Another reason I now have appreciation for the camping and the camping and the camping, is, similar to what Dan has written. The long, tedious camping is congruent with 1. The use of The Journey in literature, from everything from mythology to folklore to modern literature (LOTR, The Wizard of Oz, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, etc) 2. The camping is also reflective of pilgrimages that are seen in many religions. Buddhism, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, and even Christianity embrace sites of pilgrimage, and the older, eastern religions also embrace pilgramage for the sake of the spiritual growth one gains from the journey 3. HRH's camping can also be seen as a reflection of several psycho-social and psycho-moral development models. Outside of the microcosm of DH to include the entire series, Harry certainly follows much of Erik Erikson's model throughout the books- one could relate the camping and camping and camping to Erikson's Generativity Vs. Stagnation crisis, except Harry isn't working towards having a family and establishing himself as socially valuable, his work is a bit more specific and desperate (find and destory the horcruxes). But certainly this camping phase leads directly into Erikson's final stage, Integrity vs. Despair, and certainly Harry has resolved and found meaning in his life, has overcome doubts that his life will have had meaning even if only with his death, and as he strides out to the forest he has certainly conquered his fear of death. I have heard readers decry the absence of a moral struggle for Harry. I personally don't see it. The most overwhelming emotion I had after finishing DH was pride- I was so proud of Harry, he could have been a real person. I actually called a relative of mine and cried discussing with her that I was so proud of him, he felt more like a real person than a fictional character, I was so proud. I was proud like a mother is proud (and I am one). Not all moral or internal struggles are worn on our character's sleeves, and Harry certainly has done a good job of stuffing emotion over the years. We only briefly see his grapple with this in OOP, but see it more in HBP "He was not ready to see their expressions when he told them that he must be either murderer or victim, there was no other way..." (OOP pg. 849) I think it was perfectly clear that Harry didn't relish the idea of murdering anyone, even LV. And I rather suspected that JKR wouldn't require Harry to end up being a murderer, per se, I hoped it would be a device where he would be responsible for LVs death but not through a direct act of murder (the AK curse) - that is, "the Disney Death" - (Beast doesn't actually kill Gaston, Gaston falls to his death trying to attack Beast; Simba doesn't actually kill Scar, Scar falls to his death trying to attack Simba, etc) Heck, even with all the hatred Harry had towards any number of assorted DE's (namely Bella), he can't completely bring himself to a successful Crucio untill DH. And if choosing to Expelliarmus Stan vs. casting a spell on him that would make him fall to his death (has he been watching Disney films?) wasn't a moral decision (albeit a quickly made decision) I don't know what I am missing. I LOVED that JKR wrote Harry as maintaining his moral fiber throughout the book, I am sad that other fans might not see how hard it would be for Harry to do some of the things he did, if they have really considered what I believed JKR has intended his true character to be. Donna From Nickismom1228 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 08:01:45 2007 From: Nickismom1228 at aol.com (Nickismom1228 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:01:45 EDT Subject: Draco..I'm new to list Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173585 I finished the book yesterday. I plan to go back over it again. I think I missed some things. Does the book say at the end there if Draco was alive and if his mother found him? Jeannie From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 10:52:48 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:52:48 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173586 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annette" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sandra Collins" > wrote: > > > > Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter > > again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. From what I've > > read of the many many many enjoyable, varied and informative > > posts regarding a wide raft of subjects to do with the book, is > > how Voldermort was meant to be an ugly baby under a bench. I > > don't understand the symbolism or maybe the reality? Could > > anyone enlighten me as to what it all meant because it's all been > > lost on me. I go along with Geoff's line (always good to read your > > views, Mr Bannister!) on it being a brief near-death experience for > > Harry, that's how I read it in the first place, but the baby made > it > > unpleasant reading and I still don't get it. > > Maybe I 'll leave the decaff alone today, if that's going to help. > > > > Sandra x. > > > > yes that scene disturbed me too Sandra. I don't get what the ugly > baby was all about either. Like you and Geoff I subscribe to the near- > death experience theory, a moment in earth-bound time and space but > one in which Harry 'sees the light'. My take on the 'creature' was > that it was symbolic of evil, DD said that it was beyond help. > Despite that the 'creature' was pleading and seemed remorseful, it > was whining and totally disturbed. Maybe it wasn't vocalising it > well, but it made me feel very uncomfortable that it was being > ignored. I don't know what it is, good or bad? Voldemorts soul? the > Harry horcrux? it just leaves a bad taste. > > Besides if I don't know how to understand this, how will I explain it > to my grandson? Children are much more literal and need the facts. > > cariad. > I believe that thing under the chair was the bit of Voldemort's soul that had been attached to Harry, but is so no longer. Dumbledore tells Harry there is nothing they can do for it, because only Voldemort's remorse can help it. Yet, it seems, this is a detached soul-piece -- not the piece Voldemort feels as "I" -- so it cannot be remorseful on its own. Later, in the Great Hall, when Harry tells Voldemort his only chance is to feel remorse, he says "I've seen what you'll be otherwise..." Now think back to GoF, just before Wormtail put Voldemort into the rebirthing cauldron, Harry saw LV's temporary body, and the description is much the same as the baby thing in Kings Cross. In fact, even before Wormtail unwrapped him, he struggled and moved on the ground in much the same way as the thing does in the station. This shows that the soul-piece that Voldemort calls "I" is in much the same state as the thing Harry saw under the chair. JKR's point, I believe, is that Tom Riddle destroyed himself, and he is the only one who can help himself now, through remorse. How that squares with him being a psychopath, I don't know. Annemehr From angellima at xtra.co.nz Sun Jul 29 10:24:18 2007 From: angellima at xtra.co.nz (angellima at xtra.co.nz) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:24:18 +1200 Subject: That ugly baby thing. Message-ID: <29702694.1185704658306.JavaMail.root@sf1441> No: HPFGUIDX 173587 Sandra wrote: > Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter > again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. > ... but the baby made it unpleasant reading and I still don't > get it. Cariad Replied: yes that scene disturbed me too Sandra. I don't get what the ugly baby was all about either. Like you and Geoff I subscribe to the near-death experience theory, a moment in earth-bound time and space but one in which Harry 'sees the light'. My take on the 'creature' was that it was symbolic of evil, DD said that it was beyond help. Angel Now: Yes that was disturbing. But I remember representations of St Michael as a child where he is crushing a baby...I used to wonder how it was possible that a good angelic being, an angel could do that. It touched me because I was a child seeing those images and though I still view children as chaste, I understand why those particular babies were kept out of heaven by St Michael in the icons. They were the devil. Uncleansed. Tainted still by original sin. The baby in DH represents such a being tainted by original sin not yet baptised. The other horcruxes showed themselves in all forms - diary at the age Riddle was when he wrote it. The locket, would be likewise I assume especially as it was lucid enough to read and taunt Ron. The baby however may have taken on Harry's form as it entered Harry when Harry was a baby and his growth was stilted. He forever remained the twisted parasite, uncleansed where as Harry grew and sprouted. At least that is my interpretation. Very Christian but then I am very Christian From unicornspride at centurytel.net Sat Jul 28 17:46:35 2007 From: unicornspride at centurytel.net (Lana) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:46:35 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's Letter References: Message-ID: <013b01c7d13f$3fcf17f0$0202a8c0@Lana> No: HPFGUIDX 173588 >> > Hollie wrote: >> > In the letter that Harry finds in >> > Sirius's bedroom, Lily mentioned that Harry had "smashed a > horrible >> > vase Petunia sent me for Christmas..." (DH, page 180, US > edition) >> > Haven't we been led to believe (unless I'm mistaken) that Petunia >> > more or less disowned her sister? >> > >> > >> > Lesley: >> > >> >> > He says it on the very first page (PS UK edition). I wondered > about >> > this as well but I've just quickly re-read it and although it > says >> > they've not met in several years I think they must have kept in >> touch as they knew about Harry's existence. >> > >> > Perhaps it was just a birthday and Christmas thing, I think if > the >> > Potters sent them cards or presents they would feel obligated to >> > send something back. What do you think? >> >> colebiancardi >> >> Don't forget that the Dursleys do send Harry *Christmas* presents - >> and I use those words lightly. > >> >> Carodave: >> > A related question - how did they get the gifts to Harry (by owl???) > and to Lily and James. I assume the muggle postman ddidn't deliver > to GH and we know the muggle postman doesn't deliver to Hogwarts. > > Carodave > Lana: shot in the dark, but I am assuming that DD sent one of the house elves to get the packages for the muggleborn students and those with no other way to get htem there. As for Lily and Petunia.. I am sure that Lily used either the Potter house elf. Maybe the elves brought them back when delivering. Lana From breakfree at xtra.co.nz Sun Jul 29 11:14:15 2007 From: breakfree at xtra.co.nz (David) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:14:15 -0000 Subject: The Houses again (was Re: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173589 > Julie wrote: > So for me it's not Slytherin House per se, but what it has *become* that is the problem, though the real bigger problem is that no one, from the Headmaster and teachers at Hogwarts, to all the other "good" people in the WW, have not a single compunction about dumping these kids into the "Death Eaters in Training" house. Daimauwr replies When I first entered boarding school we were selected in to "houses". Primarily for the purpose of sporting and scholastic competition. Like Harry I was 11 yrs old and travelled by train (However my journey was nearly 2000 miles and took 4 days and nights.) Our houses were determined by which building we were domiciled in, even though as we grew older we were often reassigned to a more senior house. Because JK's stories are all about the interplay of the students (as well as facing major evil)and the houses are based on the 4 founders from nearly a 1000 years previous, IMO we start with the status quo of the Sorting Hat. After all this is a MAGIC school and the start of Harry's story. I would find it difficult to imagine Draco in Ravenclaw or Gryffindor for one simple reason - IT DOESN'T FIT WITH THE STORY LINE. We tend to forget that 7 books have come from one person's very fertile imagination. Beyond DH, without the houses, there would be no competing in Quidditch, no points deducted, no house winner at the end of the year. As for all Slytherins being condemned to the grave - BS. Every person is judged by the Hat by 'reading the latency of the mind'. I personally ended up in year 4 in a dormitory called the Poison Belt, for no other reason than that I gravitated to breaking the rules and spent more time on sport than academics. But in my final year I had achieved residence in a 2 person study (one of only 2 allocated to our house). So for all the bleeding hearts out there who wanted a different version to that which JK wrote - "get over it" - it's her story not anyone elses. And for the record - I loved every book with DH being the best IMO. From estelle_clements at yahoo.ca Sun Jul 29 11:27:58 2007 From: estelle_clements at yahoo.ca (estelle_clements) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:27:58 -0000 Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173590 I don't read the boards constantly, so I hope that I haven't repeated too many things... I suppose a few things have been cycling through my mind the past week after reading the book. I have enjoyed the series to the end, and although I enjoyed the last book and knowing how it all turns out, I had a few points that I wondered if anyone else noticed? Not the least of which is whether JKR was thinking about (or rather criticizing) the 11 plus when Dumbledore says he thinks they sort too soon. This sort of realization that people can have latent gifts and talents and 11 is too young an age to be streaming. And really, the four houses provide a unique set up for streaming by supposed personality (a system I'm sure myers-briggs would be fascinated by ). But even though this spectre of doubt is cast on the streaming of children at 11, nothing is done about it- its not resolved, just sort of left hanging in the air. No one says, if we think of changing this sorting system, maybe we wouldn't create these huge divisions, maybe we could have reconciliation between the houses. (On another educational note- did anyone else think of Ofsted when they read about Umbridge in book 5?) It seems that what has left me unsatisfied is lack of reconciliation in many areas of the book. That's life I suppose, we don't get to see everything reconcile neatly before our eyes, but I also feel that in art (such as writing) we like to be left with a clear notion that it has occurred, or at least that we can see definitive signs telling us that it will one day. We're left to wonder (assuming an afterlife)- will Lily forgive Snape in the afterlife, is there reconciliation between them? Is there reconciliation and forgiveness between he and the mauraders? (I know its JKR's book, not mine, but I wish I'd seen him show up with Lily MWPP when he calls them to walk with him to Voldemort, this could have very simply expressed reconciliation between all parties, and show the support between Harry and Snape as he has been so central to Harry's survival since book 1.) The Slytherin's don't seem to experience a huge change- and you're left wondering, will this whole messy situation just occur again in 50 or 60 years time when people have started to forget (is that what we're supposed to think?) Considering G.Gryffindor and S. Slytherin used to be so close, it would have been nice to see some strong reconciliation between the two of them symbolically in the present I was given to understand from the sorting hat some time back that the four houses would have to work together, and you don't exactly get the impression that there's an even weighting of working together Almost all the Slytherin children leave (in fact they're ordered out first by Minerva) then some Ravenclaws, more Hufflepuffs and of course you can barely get the Gryffindors to leave Hardly an expression of everybody working together. Did I miss something, or was the sorting hat song a red herring? I'm left wondering not only about minor characters (like Fudge, I always wondered what happened to him), but even the major ones (what do HRH do for a living now? And Ginny? It was a shame we didn't get to see her reach her potential in the battle at Hogwarts.) Also, what is the deal with non-verbal spells they were such a huge part of HBP Snape made such a huge deal out of them (practically saying Harry couldn't defeat the dark lord til he learned them) it's the last thing he tells Harry before the words `take it, take it, look at me.', and now, they're not even mentioned again- another red herring? Overall though, as I said, I have really enjoyed the books, and I think that they've made a really interesting study in nature versus nurture. I've really really enjoyed reading everyone's comments and ideas here. Thanks, Estelle (who is wondering how safe it is to have the deathly hallows all so close together at Hogwarts- especially as one of them is just sort of floating around the forbidden forest.) From rvink7 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 12:06:08 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:06:08 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173591 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > Pippin: > I do have to thank JKR for making Lupin a credible red herring and > allowing Harry to recognize that he did indeed have greater failings > than cutting his friends too much slack. They were all evident in the > earlier books, though Harry did not notice them. > > We need not ask now why Sirius would have suspected him as the spy, > or Snape would have thought he was in on the prank or why Lupin would > have killed Pettigrew without a visible qualm. None of that would have > been out of character for the callous, cowardly, irresponsible Lupin > of DH. > > I must suppose he escaped ESE!ness only because Voldemort undervalued > werewolves. > > Anyway, just pass that crow over here. Renee: If you're going to define a character by his worst moment(s), then Snape is nothing more than a loathsome, evil bastard and Harry belongs in Azkaban for using the Cruciatus on Amycus Carrow. (I won't mention Dumbledore, as your final verdict on him seems to be he was ESE.) Are you sure you're really going to eat that crow? I, for one, am happy Lupin repented, admitted Harry was right, died for the good cause and got to join Harry's parents and Sirius to accompany Harry to his death. Renee From breakfree at xtra.co.nz Sun Jul 29 11:59:31 2007 From: breakfree at xtra.co.nz (David) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:59:31 -0000 Subject: Draco..I'm new to list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173592 > Jeannie > I finished the book yesterday. I plan to go back over it again. I > think I missed some things. Does the book say at the end there if > Draco was alive and if his mother found him? Daimauwr Yes Jeannie, in the wrap-up after the fight the Malfoys (all 3) are sitting at a table. the impression I got was that they were not integrated with others, rather on their own. Probably contemplating a bleak future lol From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Jul 29 12:27:01 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:27:01 -0000 Subject: Draco..I'm new to list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173593 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nickismom1228 at ... wrote: Jeannie: > I finished the book yesterday. I plan to go back over it again. I > think I missed some things. Does the book say at the end there if > Draco was alive and if his mother found him? Geoff: Well, Draco is certtainly alive in the epilogue - he's at the station....... From danielle.conger at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 12:30:49 2007 From: danielle.conger at gmail.com (Danielle) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:30:49 -0000 Subject: Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173594 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marthaforhp" wrote: >snip*** > > And in DH, in Malfoy's Manor, Bellatrix doesn't simply kill Harry and > be done with it. > > Yet the original prophecy says nothing about who has to kill whom, > only that neither can live if the other survives. > Newbie here...thanks for such thoughtful discussion of the books. I'm really enjoying reading through all the threads. As a couple others have intimated, I think Voldy's need to destroy Harry for himself goes far deeper than the mere satisfaction it would provide. Rather, the very legitimacy of his power rests upon it. The only thing that has publicly called LV's power into question is *the boy who lived*, which is why LV needs to make such an absolute and public display of his dominance at the end of GoF. He not only needs to destroy Harry himself, but he needs *witnesses* and lots of them, particularly among his followers in order to solidify his rule. He needs a strong, public display of his superior power in order to lay any questions of his absolute power to rest. If LV allowed someone else to kill Harry, there would always be the question of who was more powerful, of whether Voldy was, indeed, powerful enough to conquer the great Harry Potter. The fact that Harry survived the killing curse as a baby has become the stuff of legend, imbuing Harry with an innate power that others in the WW can only imagine. The fact that Harry has continued to evade and outright defeat LV as he's grown older only adds to that lore, making Harry even larger than he is--part of why Harry's so adamant that it's his wand and not something inside himself that gets Voldy on the flight to the Tonks' in DH. Harry has taken on mythological status, and that's a perception he's decidedly uncomfortable with throughout the series (think back to the beginnings of the DA where he insists a good deal of his advantage has been pure luck, for instance). Voldemort must conquer the myth as much as the boy for his power to be legitimate and absolute in the WW. Danielle From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 12:42:12 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:42:12 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173595 Sandra: "From what I've read of the many many many enjoyable, varied and informative posts regarding a wide raft of subjects to do with the book, is how Voldermort was meant to be an ugly baby under a bench. I don't understand the symbolism or maybe the reality?" I took it like this: Harry and Voldemort are both at the border between this world and the next - the "on." The symbolism of King's Cross as a station is good, especially since King's Cross already acts as a gateway between one world and the next for Hogwarts students. The dead, such as Dumbledore, can come back that far but no farther. Harry's soul is normal, whole, complete - he doesn't even need his glasses. The little soul Voldemort has left is a hideously damaged fragment that reminds me of the deformed thing that Wormtail dropped into the vat in the graveyard at the end of GoF. Harry chooses not to go "on" but to return, as Gandalf once returned. How Voldemort goes back we're not sure. What if Harry had gone on? Jim Ferer From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 13:01:52 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:01:52 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173596 Va32h: "In light of a request for topics we can agree on - can we agree that there was a heck of a lot of innuendo in this book? "Ooh Harry, you look a lot tastier than Crabbe and Goyle." "Twelve Fail Safe Ways to Charm Witches." = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = The first one is probably mostly British idiom. People may not realize what it sounds like who are used to it. _Twelve Fail Safe Ways to Charm Witches_ seems a mild innuendo to me, maybe mostly about getting a date, but at least it's not as bad as some of the books I see advertised in the back of magazines. ;) Va32h: "Endless jokes about wands, wand lengths, and how men feel about the size of their wands." Sigh, and all I keep hearing is that it's all about the magic. Va32h: "Come here Ron, so I can do you." That's a bit of a stretch. My daughters say that to me when they're going to comb my hair. They just don't call me Ron. Va32h: "Bella and Voldemort talking of highest pleasures." "I found most of it amusing (Voldie and Bella the disgusting exception)." That's an image I don't need either, but you know there'll be a drawing posted on the Internet in a matter of weeks, if it's not out there already. You can get innuendo out of picking carrots if you want. JKR isn't afraid of slightly naughty stuff - if she chose, she'd be great at it. In a broader sense, JKR is wonderful at inserting a little bit here and there to lighten the atmosphere just when it's needed. I admire writing that has humor on more than one level, and subtle risqu? stuff is the funniest. Jim Ferer From catlady at wicca.net Sun Jul 29 13:09:54 2007 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:09:54 -0000 Subject: replies to 1000 posts, scroll down to look for YOUR reply Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173597 Laura Lindsay wrote in : << how on earth did DD beat Grindelwald in the duel if Gr had an _unbeatable_ wand??? Isn't that what they say the whole point was of the elder wand: It can't be eaten in a duel? >> Unless Dumbledore cheated. He's supposed to be really clever, as well as having, at age 18, 'done things with a wand' that his NEWT examiner 'had never seen before'. Is it possible that the Deathstick doesn't auto-block a spell that isn't supposed to be dangerous, and Dumbledore figured out how to use a non-dangerous spell to disarm GeeGee (or would it be GayGay in German?) Susan McGee wrote in : << I thought Kreacher's total reversal was a little difficult to believe - but it was fun. >> If a few kind words could do it, he would have stopped calling Hermione 'mudblood filth' long ago. I figure the opportunity to fulfill Master Reggie's last command made him sane again -- maybe not obeying a command drives House Elves insane -- and part of House Elf sanity is to love Master. I also think there was some magical effect of giving him Regulus's decoy locket -- not that it was the famous Locket of Loving Loyalty, but that it had Regulus vibes on it that filled a hole in his heart. I think Hermione's little speech about Kreacher being loyal to those who were nice to him only meant members of his owning family that were nice to him, as he sure never formed any loyalty to Hermione in OoP when she was trying so hard, even giving him a Christmas present. << What was Harry's son James' middle name (Sirius?) What was Harry's daughter Lily's middle name? >> Harry. Ginevra. In JKR's wizarding world, the first-born child of each sex gets the name of the parent of that sex as a middle name. Look at all the times she tells the middle name of an oldest son or daughter -- the latest is William Arthur Weasley. (And I have to eat some crow over my certainty that 'Bill' was short for Bilius rather than for William.) Doug Samu wrote in : << So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time and not the second? Why was the house at Godric's Hollow destroyed but nothing in the Forbidden Forest? >> Because he had 6 Horcruxes the first time, and only the accidental Horcrux in Harry the second time. Neri wrote in : << And what about an explanation for "in essence divided"? >> As Lisa wrote in , DD was checking whether the bit of Voldy soul inside Harry had merged into Harry's soul, and found that it had stayed separate. << What was that golden light, anyway? >> The combination of Harry's red light and Voldie's green light, as we saw when they met and formed a golden cage in the GoF duel. Apparently a previously unknown part of the Priori Incantatem effect when brother wands collide is that the winning wand absorbs some of the magic from the losing wand, and is able to shoot it back at the wizard who wielded the losing wand even when he is using a different wand. The Priori Incantatem effect is called rare -- I guess it could be so rare that there is no previous record of a re-match between the two wizards, so that no one, not even Ollivander, knew what would happen if there were a re-match. Katie wrote in : << Hagrid (snip) marries Madame Maxime, and together they teach Care of Magical Creatures >> Is there any reason to think that Olympe has any special expertise on Care of Magical Creatures? That she knows that her giant flying horses drink only single malt whiskey is not evidence that she cared for them herself instead of letting grooms or House Elves do it. It doesn't make any sense to me that Olympe would marry Hagrid and move into his hut; I expected that, if Hagrid lived, he would not need to stay at Hogwarts with Dumbledore gone, so he would marry Olympe and move to Beauxbatons. He could care for magical creatures there, even if he could only teach kids who spoke English. Sue wrote in : << Also, DD was correct about 11 being to soon to be sorted. They should wait a year, >> The first thing about the school Houses is that they are residences. Being teams and gangs and fraternities only comes after being residences. If student aren't Sorted on their first 'day' at Hogwarts, where will they sleep that night? Lady Potions wrote in : <> I imagine that either twin was clever and knowledgeable and imaginative to invent all those things on his own, but that they were totally in the habit of saying everything out loud to each other as they worked, so George might be terribly distracted by getting no reply as he talked to himself while gadgeteering. So I thought maybe Ginny would become his new partner in the joke shop, as OoP and HBP showed her very similar to the twins. Then I thought he might just get a mirror, an ordinary wizarding talking mirror like the one that told Harry to 'Tuck in your shirt, scruffy!' and talk to his reflection in it. Carol wrote in : << Lupin's ranting about Sectumsempra as Snape's signature curse made me think *he* might be ESE. What nonsense! Severus would have been kicked out of school if he'd been using a cutting curse that wouldn't heal on fellow students >> It's not a cutting curse that wouldn't heal. Molly staunched the bleeding of George's ear (without singing) and it eventually healed. She just couldn't regrow the ear. Lupin could have learned about Snape's fighting style while they were in the Order of the Phoenix, on the same side, from the end of GoF when DD sent Sirius to summon 'the old crowd' until the end of HBP when Snape killed DD. << Clearly, [Snape] has never killed anyone before. >> On your hand, DD asked Snape how many people he had watched die, not how many he had killed. On another hand, Snape's concern for tearing his soul is no proof that he hadn't torn his soul before. He could have previously killed one or more people but believe he had repaired his soul by repentance. Or he could have previously killed one or more people and therefore be concerned that one more rip would make the whole thing fall apart. DD's line to Draco about killing being more difficult than the innocent (i.e. those who have not killed before) expect gave me the feeling that it would be foolish of him to count on Snape killing him if Snape had not already proved his ability to kill. Suppose he turned out to be as squeamish as Draco? Btw, the line about 'Lately, only those whom I could not save' means that *previously*, he watched people die whom he could have saved, but didn't try to save them. Maria wrote in : << I am trying to remember how much choice one had in the animal one transforms into when becoming an animagus. There is some degree of choice, I am quite sure, as I recall Sirius or Lupin saying that Sirius and James transformed into big animals and could keep Lupin under control. >> People have no control at all over what animal they will turn into. JKR has confirmed in interviews that the Animagus doesn't get to choose his/her animal form, but instead the animal form is a reflection of his/her personality. James, Sirius, and Peter originally planned that if they turned into any kind of animal, the werewolf wouldn't go crazy to bite them, and they wouldn't be infected if he did, so they could wait with him in the Shrieking Shack. Only when they succeeded in the Animagus spell did they discovered what animals they turned into. Then they decided that, because they were such large animals, they could do more than wait around indoors. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-aol-chat.htm Q: Does the animal one turns into as an Animagi reflect your personality? JKR: Very well deduced, Narri! I personally would like to think that I would transform into an otter, which is my favorite animal. Imagine how horrible it would be if I turned out to be a cockroach! http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/author/transcript2.htm Q: If you were Animagus, what kind of animal would you be? A: I'd like to be an otter -- that's my favourite animal. It would be depressing if I turned out to be a slug or something. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2004/0304-wbd.htm Q: When you turn into an Animagus, can you choose what animal you become? Or does this get "assigned" to you? JK Rowling replies -> No, you can't choose. You become the animal that suits you best. Imagine the humiliation when you finally transform after years of study and find that you most closely resemble a warthog. Julie wrote in : << Anyone with half a brain, who could think at all outside his own needs and experiences, who could *strategize* worth crap, would have given Snape what he wanted, as it came with no downside whatsoever. >> It has the downside of leaving someone alive with a strong cause for desiring revenge on you. I suppose LV would have expected Snape to keep her permanently under Imperius, under command to love and obey Snape and be loyal to to LV, but sometimes Imperius wears off. Joan of Anarchy wrote in : <> I'm sure Umbridge was lying. Not only lying about where she got the locket (she said she inherited it from a relative, but she really 'bought' it from a thief), but about being related to the Selwyns or any other pureblood family. Angel Lima wrote in : << to have both his parents given precedence in their children's names felt awkward - not only selfish of Harry but docile of Ginny >> There is the detail that both Harry's parents were dead and both Ginny's parents were alive. Lenore wrote in : << That episode seems to show [Narcissa] as a soft, gentle woman, and I began to realize that I had never seen her characterized in any other way >> Even in Madam Malkin's shop when she said: "I expect Potter will be reunited with dear Sirius before I am reunited with Lucius"? That sounded like a hard woman to me, and before that she had threatened Harry with DE violence. Ceridwen wrote in : << To me, too. I was taken aback when Harry refused to shake hands with Draco Malfoy in the first book. >> That wasn't anti-Slytherin prejudice. Harry was having a nice conversation with Ron when Draco walked up and insulted Ron, then offered his hand to Harry. Harry stood up for Ron. It might have been more cautious if he'd told Draco 'Whatever is between you two, leave me out of it'. But shaking Draco's hand then would have been taking Draco's side. David breakfree wrote in : << without the houses, there would be no competing in Quidditch, no points deducted, no house winner at the end of the year. >> They could have Quidditch separate from the House system. The try-outs at the beginning of every year could be for everyone who wanted to play, not just new players, and the whole school try-out together. Then Madam Hooch or a committee of professors could pick four or six of the best to be team captains, and the captains could pick their team members from everyone who had tried out. Like pro league drafts or Harry's elementary school, the captains take turns picking their first each, then turns picking their second each, and so on. The sequence could be chosen by random drawing or assigned so that the captain who got the best score in the try-outs picked first and so on. Then there would be people from each House on each team. People would have to choose which team to cheer for by which team had one of their friends on it rather than by House Loyalty. Estelle wrote in : << did anyone else think of Ofsted when they read about Umbridge in book 5? >> As an American, I thought of 'No Child Left Behind', but yes. << We're left to wonder (assuming an afterlife)- will Lily forgive Snape in the afterlife, is there reconciliation between them? Is there reconciliation and forgiveness between he and the mauraders? (I know its JKR's book, not mine, but I wish I'd seen him show up with Lily MWPP when he calls them to walk with him to Voldemort, this could have very simply expressed reconciliation between all parties, and show the support between Harry and Snape as he has been so central to Harry's survival since book 1.) >> If there isn't an afterlife, James and Lily and Sirius and Remus showing up to walk Harry to his sacrifce was some kind of fake. If there is an afterlife, I hope people don't just hang around forever the same as they were when they died (or on the last healthy day before they died). If they can't get over their hatreds and obsessive infatuations, they'll have a pretty unpleasant time of it. Lily can't have to commute between being Sevvie's friend and being James & Sirius's friend just because Sevvie and James & Sirius are always squabbling. Remus only wants to be with James & Sirius, but Tonks would pursue him as relentlessly after death as she did in life. From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 13:23:42 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:23:42 -0000 Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173598 Estelle: "I had a few points that I wondered if anyone else noticed? Not the least of which is whether JKR was thinking about (or rather criticizing) the 11 plus when Dumbledore says he thinks they sort too soon. This sort of realization that people can have latent gifts and talents and 11 is too young an age to be streaming. And really, the four houses provide a unique set up for streaming by supposed personality (a system I'm sure myers-briggs would be fascinated by )." I took it as the kind of musings that intelligent people have pondering systems that can never be perfect. The Sorting Hat sees into the minds and hearts of its subjects better than Myers or Briggs could dream of. If I ran Hogwarts, I would rather end Slytherin House than leave it as a pariah or as a "suspect" house. Estelle: "We're left to wonder (assuming an afterlife)- will Lily forgive Snape in the afterlife, is there reconciliation between them? Is there reconciliation and forgiveness between he and the marauders?" The afterlife - the "on" - is unknowable, and I think JKR was wise to leave it so. You speak of the frustration of the many, many threads JKR left hanging out of the tapestry. There are endless stories left to tell in this universe, and we're going to tell them, which leads to a prediction: Within a year or two, there will be officially sanctioned volumes of fiction written by us, the fans, published by Bloomsbury / Scholastic et. al., perhaps selected and even introduced by JKR. There's plenty of precedent for it. Jim Ferer From estelle_clements at yahoo.ca Sun Jul 29 13:39:37 2007 From: estelle_clements at yahoo.ca (estelle_clements) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:39:37 -0000 Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173599 > Jim: I took it as the kind of musings that intelligent people have pondering > systems that can never be perfect. Its true, the system can never be perfect, but don't we still try to improve it? I guess I'm curious as to whether this is a bit of JKR speaking through DD (her views of education do seep out of the work in how classrooms are set up, what the ideals are etc.) or is it just a device to show DD compliment Snape. I guess, ultimately, the question is, is there a a problem with the system (in that people end up in the wrong houses) or is this just a minor glitch and there's really nothing wrong on the whole. (But then that's the sort of discussion that leads you to ask about educational philosophy in general). > >Jim: which leads to a prediction: > Within a year or two, there will be officially sanctioned volumes of > fiction written by us, the fans, published by Bloomsbury / Scholastic > et. al., perhaps selected and even introduced by JKR. There's plenty > of precedent for it. I think you've hit that on the head! Estelle. From rvink7 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 13:47:12 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:47:12 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173600 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > Jen: All Harry can offer is the defeat of Voldemort > and everyone, including himself, a second chance to get things > right. He's part of the problem as well, having heard and integrated > the stereotypes of the different houses (and Slytherin stereotypes > are not the only ones perpetuated at Hogwarts). Renee: You've really got a point there. And if the WWW takes its cue from Harry - didn't JKR say something like this in her most recent interview? - the prospects for Slytherin aren't as bleak as several people here on the list suggest. IIRC, JKR holds a lot of sympathy for the ideas of the Fabian Society, and they preferred gradual, slow change to revolution. The ending certainly seems in keeping with this. Jen: Voldemort appears to be oppressing Muggles, those less than > pureblood and half-humans as his primary victims, but his most > heinous acts are against his own house. Sydney, you've mentioned the > burning of the Sorting Hat and Harry stopping Voldemort from doing so > as a defining moment for you. I read that as a defining moment as > well, in an entirely different direction: The burning of the Hat > symbolized the last vestiges of refuge for those oppressed groups who > would never be allowed into Hogwarts again and in addition, everyone > would be in Slytherin from there on out, the house that has > experienced the *most* oppression from Voldemort, the house he made > certain was indoctrinated with his values by holding captive > generation after generation of families as his followers. Renee: That's an interesting take on the burning of the Sorting Hat; I hadn't thought of this. Not an unlikely scenario. OTOH, it sounds a little like blaming Hitler for what he did to Germany, while it's obvious that Hitler would never have gained power without the support of the (or at least many) Germans. If no Slytherins, or only a few, had ever rallied to Voldemorts banners, his plans would have failed. Voldemort didn't create Slytherin House; it was already there and the mindset we see in Harry's days does not result from his influence. You could even argue that had he been in a different House, Tom Riddle wouldn't have turned out quite so bad. That is, unless it's true that the books attest to Rowlings belief in predestination... Jen: > Certainly some followed him zealously, but how many more were like > Slughorn, giving up his life and freedom to hide in Muggle homes so > he wouldn't be conscripted against his will? How many were like > Narcissa, her home taken over, her son in jeopardy, her husband a > shaking mess of a man? How many were like Regulus, doing the only > thing he knew to do to stop Voldemort and being dragged down into the > lake and turned into an Inferi for his troubles? Renee: Quite a few, I suppose, but having primarily their own interest in mind and/or agreeing with the prejudices of their House, they would have lacked the incentive to go against him until something happened that shook them to the core. They weren't raised/predisposed do do so in principle - and that had nothing to do with Voldemorts influence on Slytherin House. Renee From nelliot at ozemail.com.au Sun Jul 29 13:46:23 2007 From: nelliot at ozemail.com.au (njelliot2003) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:46:23 -0000 Subject: Why Snape's love for Lily was real In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173601 Julie I liked your analysis of Snape and I'd like to contribute a couple of thoughts of my own. I'd like to examine Snape's motives for taking on the role of spy. I don't believe it was purely for revenge of Voldermort and love of Lily. Snape was attracted to the role of double agent for both those motives and because he showed he was, in a sense, greater than Voldermort. He bested him - V never discovered the traitor in his midst. Being a doulbe agent takes enormous courage which is why he screamed at Harry in HBP for calling him a coward "I AM NOT A COWARD". But I believe a more important reason for his spying is that Snape wanted to prove to himself (and to others eventually) that he was a good a wizard as V. He wasn't bad enough to be Voldermort, but he wanted to be somebody. He'd been a loser, a loner and an object of ridicule all his life, why wouldn't he want to stick it up his enemies. The man had talents. He was a very good wizard (witness his potions textbook - I imagine him to be as talented as DD and V and Grindelwald) but his attraction for the dark arts was destructive - it caused him to lose Lily and it overcame any leanings he may (should) have had to become the greatest potioneer of the age if he had been a man with a better moral fibre. Unfortunately his moral compass was not strong, whether due to his inheritance or his unfortunate upbringing we don't know. Besting the evilest man around, and all his followers, was an incredible achievement and perhaps in his mind he believed he was showing Lily what a talented and worthy man he was, as well as showing her that he had renounced his career as a deatheater by working towards their overthrow. However I don't think his morals for being a double agent were entirely pure. I believe he never fully let go of his attraction for the dark arts - it was satisfied by sitting at the right hand of Voldemort and by participating vicariously in their cruelty. He was having it both ways. If he couldn't give up the dark arts for Lily when she was alive then he certainly wouldn't when she was dead - he deluded himself if he thought his role as a double agent made him entirely noble in Lily's eyes. I guess that deluding yourself comes with the territory if you're a successful double agent. And deluding himself was one of his flaws - he thought he could have the dark arts and Lily - up until the moment she rejected him I'd guess. Severus Snape is a great fictional character. The debates for and against him in this forum prove that. Nicholas Elliot From rkelley at blazingisp.net Sun Jul 29 13:42:59 2007 From: rkelley at blazingisp.net (Ricky & LeAnn) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 08:42:59 -0500 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to r Message-ID: <00e301c7d1e6$621253c0$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> No: HPFGUIDX 173602 Anders: To me, Sirius continued to exhibit traits of Slytherin in his treatment of Kreacher, in his near-fatal trick on Snape, in his self-serving recklessness, etc. I LOVE Sirius and I like to think he had good reason for those actions, but he definitely had Slytherin tendencies IMO. I think his initial choice under the hat was made in rebellion against his parents rather than in rejection of them. That act of rebellion showed he had the bravery which made him fit into Gryffindor. Once away from his parents' world Sirius continued to grow and eventually rejected his family and fought against their insidious ideas. It seems that Sirius became a true Gryffindor, but he never completely ridded himself of his Slytherin tendencies. He simply overcame them most of the time. From dougsamu at golden.net Sun Jul 29 14:00:37 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:00:37 -0400 Subject: regarding moral change, and mastering death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173603 I didn't see a moral change in Harry, as in a change in the principles which guide one's life... or did we? and that Master of Death thing... Remember how Harry describes himself as "Harry, just Harry?" . He wants just a normal life, not really one of high adventure, danger, nor to be pivotally critical in history. He doesn't want to be 'The Chosen One." What he thinks he wants and what he *is* are two different things. He thinks that he can fight Voldemort, but might die trying. He is still attached to the idea of being alive, to being 'just Harry', and when this is over, he can be, just Harry. He casts off Ginny, for instance, knowing the threat to her. He knows that he is protecting her future, because his future life is with her. He is attached to Life. It is when he gives up this attachment to Life that he becomes Master of Death. The paradox of the prophecy has been discussed to death - of one, or the other, or both, or not. The paradox is not resolvable as long as we cling to Life? as lonfg as we cling to thinking that Life and Death are not the same thing. But when Harry gives up attachment to Life, when he gives up the idea of coming out of the exchange alive, then - he is truly alive? ? and, consequently can't be killed. Is this the moral change? When he gives up all his conceptions and ideas about what his life is, or could be, or what he wants it to be, when he sees clearly that the only inevitable thing is dying, then he can't be killed. That is Master of Death. ___ __ From liliput99ar at yahoo.com.ar Sun Jul 29 13:24:38 2007 From: liliput99ar at yahoo.com.ar (liliput99ar) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:24:38 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173604 Jim: > I took it like this: Harry and Voldemort are both at the border > between this world and the next - the "on." The symbolism of King's > Cross as a station is good, especially since King's Cross already > acts as a gateway between one world and the next for Hogwarts > students. The dead, such as Dumbledore, can come back that far but > no farther. > > Harry's soul is normal, whole, complete - he doesn't even need his > glasses. The little soul Voldemort has left is a hideously damaged > fragment that reminds me of the deformed thing that Wormtail dropped > into the vat in the graveyard at the end of GoF. Harry chooses not > to go "on" but to return, as Gandalf once returned. How Voldemort > goes back we're not sure. What if Harry had gone on? Nora: I think he doesn't go back. He still has two pieces of his soul alive: Nagini and himself. That is why, or how, he remains in this world. However, it seems that the piece of soul that was inside Harry had something special, as this is the first time that having a horcrux finished down have some impact on him. We see him falling in the forest, while before he never noticed that the horcruxes were destroyed. Even when Nagini is killed, he does not show anything but fury. Nora (second, or so, post ever. By the way, I love how the series finished!!) From csh at stanfordalumni.org Sun Jul 29 14:06:27 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:06:27 -0000 Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173605 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "estelle_clements" wrote: > ... > (I know its JKR's book, not mine, but I wish I'd seen him show up > with Lily MWPP when he calls them to walk with him to Voldemort, > this could have very simply expressed reconciliation between all > parties, and show the support between Harry and Snape as he has been > so central to Harry's survival since book 1.) > ... I was thinking about Snape coming out of the Resurrection Stone too during Harry's death march. However, even though Harry is respectful enough of Snape's bravery to name his second son "Albus Severus," he never loves him the way he loves the ones he resurrects. But then, what about Dumbledore? His love for Dumbledore is complex whereas his love for his parents, Sirius, and Remus is that of "family." While we will/may never see the reconciliation Estelle seeks, we can be sure that Harry's "family" will be eternally grateful for Snape's protection of Harry regardless of the path Snape took to get there: For me, the most interesting scene in the pensive is when Snape admits to Dumbledore that he did indeed ask Voldemort to spare Lily's life and take James and Harry. Snape's remorse over her death is so complete that I don't think that Dumbledore and Harry continue to hold that against him... Chuck Han From terrianking at aol.com Sun Jul 29 14:01:56 2007 From: terrianking at aol.com (terrianking at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:01:56 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173606 In a message dated 7/28/2007 7:37:12 P.M. Central Daylight Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: Alla: You know, it is not the first time I read the argument that people see Slytherins cast in the part of persecuted Jews and they see the symbolism with jews from eastern Europe. And of course I cannot argue with anybody's right to see that symbolysm, intentional or not. But this jew from eastern Europe, who as I mentioned several times seen enough antisemitism in my life, is so scratching her head every time this argument comes out. I mean, whether I personally like Slytherins or not, I should be able to see those parallels at least on intellectual level, right? I mean, do not get me wrong, the fact that I do not see them, does not mean that other people cannot, but just on purely intellectual level I am trying to figure out why this so falls flat. Why I do not see Slytherins as **any** sort of metaphor for jews, but the contrary one - those who persecute. Well, the first reason should be obvious for me, I guess. That word **mudblood****mudblood**. Um, as I mentioned several times i word works for me as very direct metaphor for the most despicable, most antisemitic nickname that every jew from former Soviet Union encountered at least once and maybe much more in their life. **Slytherins***Slytherins** are the ones who use that word, NOT therefore the symbolism is that they ARE who persecute, not those who are persecuted. It how it is works for me, I am sure any other jew from eastern europe or any part of the world, can see it completely differently. Robert: I rarely come out of lurkdom and post so my opinions don't mean a whole lot, but I agree with everything you said in your post. I am not a Jew. I am an American Indian whose life inside the US is very much as a "Mudblood" or Muggleborn in the WW. "Redskin" is the term we hear most often, to the point where we have turned it into a name we use for ourselves. Skins is a shortening of the one meant to be a slur. I believe it was Hermione who said call her a mudblood because that is what she is, a mudblood and proud of it. I'm a skin and proud of it. You can't make prejudice go away. Not in the real world and not in the WW. JKR knows this so how could she end her book with the wizarding world all of a sudden becoming free of such things? There are always going to be people in ALL worlds to perpetrate prejudice and hatred, who will never stop believing this type of person is better than all others. They will teach this to their children and those children will carry it on in succeeding generations. Along the way there will be some born who will break away from this teaching and turn their back on it, as happened in the books. The pureblood belief of the WW is always going to be there, but there are always going to be people who fight against it, too. It's a never ending fight. Interest in the dark arts, ambition are things students other than Slytherins have at Hogwarts, and the sorting hat sees all of it, but IMO it also sorts according to who has been taught the belief that pureblood is superior and how strongly they believe it. This is not to say it will always be right, it is just an enchanted hat after all. As Regulus and Pettigrew proved, people change as they grow older and enter the world as adults Alla: The funniest argument fot Slytherin as persecuted jews symbolism to me is of course Snape's hooked nose. Um, why? I have blue eyes, blond hair and all my family does and we are all very very jewish. On the other hand, there are people with hooked noses, who are jews and NOT jews, had never been jews, you know? Am I suppose to think of Jew the moment I read about Snape's hooked nose? Well, I really do not. Robert: As an aside, the elves may delete this if they wish: Look at almost any painting done of American Indians throughout the last of the 1800s and early 1900s, and look at any portrayal of American Indians in pre-1970s Hollywood films and you will notice that almost all of the NDNs fit that description, too. (I don't have one and no on in my family has one.) I believe the descriptions both come under the heading "stereotype." From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 14:25:42 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:25:42 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173607 Jim Ferer wrote: > I took it like this: Harry and Voldemort are both at the border > between this world and the next - the "on." I don't think the "ugly baby thing" at Kings Cross can be the bit of soul from Voldemort's body (the bit he calls "I"), because that is the part which is still tied to earth by the Nagini Horcrux. For that reason, even though LV collapsed in the Forest like Harry did, he could not have had the same near-death experience. That's why I feel sure the fetal thing under the chair is the soul-bit that had been attached to Harry, and it "came along for the ride" with him. Annemehr From CariadMel at aol.com Sun Jul 29 15:00:48 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:00:48 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173608 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" wrote: > > > Jim Ferer wrote: > > I took it like this: Harry and Voldemort are both at the border > > between this world and the next - the "on." > > > I don't think the "ugly baby thing" at Kings Cross can be the bit of > soul from Voldemort's body (the bit he calls "I"), because that is the > part which is still tied to earth by the Nagini Horcrux. For that > reason, even though LV collapsed in the Forest like Harry did, he could > not have had the same near-death experience. That's why I feel sure > the fetal thing under the chair is the soul-bit that had been attached > to Harry, and it "came along for the ride" with him. > > Annemehr Cariad: Thank you for the responses to this interesting thread that Sandra started. I can see that this baby is a representation of the evilness of LV's soul, whether or not it is the horcrux baby that Harry became, I'm not sure. The disturbing images of St Michael and the baby about to be crushed are new to me. I guess that these images are in a Traditional Catholic iconography as they deal with Original Sin, a concept which I don't know much about. I read the scene in GOF again re. LV's rebirth in the cauldron and I can see the similarities, thanks to whoever pointed that out. At the first time of reading I thought it was some sort of sacrificial animal. Certainly, as much as 'Kings Cross' is a time where Harry is enlightened, this for me proves one of the darkest passages in the book. cariad. > From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 15:08:41 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:08:41 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173609 Annemehr: > I don't think the "ugly baby thing" at Kings Cross can be the bit > of soul from Voldemort's body (the bit he calls "I"), because that > is the part which is still tied to earth by the Nagini Horcrux. For > that reason, even though LV collapsed in the Forest like Harry did, > he could not have had the same near-death experience. That's why I > feel sure the fetal thing under the chair is the soul-bit that had > been attached to Harry, and it "came along for the ride" with him. Jen: I don't think it's the soul left in his body either, for the same reason - Nagini. LV's still anchored. The attempt to destroy one of his own unintentional Horcruxes might have caused him to collapse or perhaps it had to do with Voldemort using the Elder wand against Harry, who is the real master at that moment...I'm still re- reading and not certain about canon yet. Anyway, I'm glad you pointed out the fetal soul was connected to the fetal Voldemort who rebirthed in the graveyard (upthread); JKR had promised that would play later and I was looking for it then completely passed by the reference, duh. She seems to be trying to say something with both the fetal body and fetal soul. That there's always a possibility to start over, even for one with the most damaged of souls? That even as a psychopath he can feel remorse and start again (at least in the magical world since none of this soul-splitting stuff works by our own rules anyway .) Voldemort responded to the choice of feeling remorse that Harry presented to him, he had a fearful reaction to it. Was that meant to be a moment of recognition or merely the dawning of yet another flawed plan when it came to Harry Potter? Probably the latter. Jen, who thought of Annemehr when reading about Dumbledore in 'The Prince's Tale'. ;) From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 14:41:45 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:41:45 -0000 Subject: DH rambles and crows eating _ LOVEd this book In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173610 > Jack-A-Roe wrote: > > > > - He agrees not to run away like Karkaroff. > > Carol responds: > Not agrees. Chooses. It's not DD's suggestion. It's his own free > choice > Jack_A-Roe: > > - He goes back to Voldemort as DD's spy. > > Carol: > "You know what I must ask you to do," says DD. "If you are > ready; if you are prepared." "I am," says Snape (GoF 713). They have > obviously planned his return to LV. Jack-A-Roe: He is asked by Dumbledore and he agrees to go back to Voldemort. Dumbledore has not ordered him to do it, he asks and Snape agrees. I agree that they have already talked about it and Dumbledore is giving him one final chance to not do it. Carol: > As he tells DD later, he has spied and lied and risked his life > because DD wanted him to (DH 687). And note that he says he's doing it > *for Dumbledore*, not just for Lily. Jack-A-Roe: No he is still doing it for Lilly. He is working with Dumbledore because of Lilly. The best use of his talents is to be a spy. One more body vocally opposing Voldemort will not make a difference, but a spy would. > Jack_A-Roe: > > - He provides info the Order, although we don't know exactly what. > > Carol: > snip> > And yet, DD seems to have known that the DEs would > infiltrate the Ministry and take over Hogwarts. Where can that > information have come from other than Snaape? Jack-A-Roe: Well that bit seems like common sense to me. The two biggest institutions in the WW are the ministry and the school. It only makes sense that he would try to take them over. With Dumbledore at the school, taking over the ministry by stealth would be the obvious approach. > > Jack_A-Roe: > > - He basically admits that his soul is not perfect and agrees to be > the one to kill DD. > > Carol: > I interpret this scene differently. He wouldn't be concerned for the > state of his soul if he had murdered before. DD asks him how many > people he has watched die, not how many he has killed. And Snape says, > "Lately, only those whom I could not save" (687). That, for me, says > everything. Jack-A-Roe: Dumbledore's phrasing is much more polite than asking directly how many have you killed in your past. It also allows for Snape not to answer directly. Which he doesn't but he still agrees to kill Dumbledore which leads one to think that his soul is already more damaged than Draco's. > > Jack_A-Roe: > > - He would have failed to give his information to Harry if Voldemort > had killed him outright or if Harry hadn't been right there. > > Carol: > Sadly and ironically, that's true, but how it can be blamed on Snape > escapes me. He's dying from a snake bite, and rather than die in vain > (which is what he fears throughout this scene), he gives the memory to > Harry (along with the memories that will allow Harry at last to > understand him) before he makes his last request for Harry to look at him. Jack-A-Roe: I would like to believe that he did have a backup plan but we can't prove that either way. He did have a brief chance in the hallway before he fled to tell Minerva that he needed to speak to harry. I also think he knew Harry was there. The only reason I can come up with is that he wasn't sure that this was the time to do it. > > Jack_A-Roe: > > So we are left with a man who's obsessive love for a women, drove > him to try to make up for the fact that he got her killed. > > > > Did he ever care about Harry? No, he tells us this by showing his > doe patronus when DD asked him. > > Carol: > I read that scene differently. He has made DD promise never to tell > Harry that he's protecting him. He wants Harry at the last to look > into his eyes, not only to see Lily but so that Harry could at last > see him for what he was. he didn't have to provide those other > memories, only the one about the soul bit. but he wanted Harry to know > that it was his Patronus that had led him to the Sword of Gryffindor; > that he had been Dumbledore's man since Dumbledore gave him that > second chance, even when DD didn't fully appreciate him. By the time > of his arrest as a DE, Dumbledore values him enought to say before the > whole Wizengamot that "Severus Snape is now no more a Death Eater than > I am" (GoF Jack-A-Roe: I read the scene as a dying man wanting someone to know what he did. The memories are specifically chosen and none really show Snape in a bad light. It's more like an autobiography with the bad things left out and only the good things left in. > > > Jack_A-Roe: > > Did he end up helping the light side? Yes. Not because he saw the > errors of his ways but because he was trying to make it up to Lilly. > > > > And since results do matter, I will say that he redeemed himself > somewhat. But he was still a poor human being who only truly cared > about himself and Lilly. > > > > And no I would not have named my child after him. > > Carol responds: > JKR apparently sees it differently. The virtue she values most is > courage, and there can be no question that Snape had that virtue in > spades. > Give the man a posthumous Order of Merlin. > > Carol, who would gladly have named her son Severus but is not so sure > about Albus Jack-A-Roe: I don't think I ever said he wasn't brave or that he didn't try to carry out his mission. I agree with JKR, that he was brave but he was still a bully, etc. So I can say that he redeemed himself somewhat, but he wasn't a great man or a hero. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 15:20:28 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:20:28 -0000 Subject: Slytherins/Krum are/are not Jews.../The Houses Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173611 doddiemoemoe: > > Nor are they hindi's, Sikh's, or anything else besides somesort of > christian religion...seeing as they always take Christmas and Easter > holiday's...make appearances(aside from Draco) for holiday feasts... > > Also during hogsmead weekends they never go to temple on > Saturday..nor are Saturday or Sundays mentioned for the most part in > the entire series...nor during Ramadon to we hear of fasting for any > members of staff(any Jew would probably notice).. Magpie: Dude, how often does it have to be explained that nobody is calling the Slytherins Jews? That's even been stated flat out: Nobody is suggesting that the Slytherins are supposed to be Jews or represent Jewish people in any way shape or form. The only character in all of canon I can think of that I ever remotely thought might be actually Jewish was Anthony Goldstein because of his name. Marika: Krum played that role to me. He reacted very stronlgy against the DH symbol Mr. Lovegood wore. Krum said it was Grindelwalds symbol, and that Grindelwald had killed relatives of his. Lovegood tells that this symbol originally meant something else. Hard not to think of how somebody who lost relatives during the Holocaust reacts when they see a swastika (which before Hitler "stole" it stood for something else). Magpie: I think every time she makes an explicit connection bewteen bad guys and Nazis, pretty much everybody they persecute becomes an obvious parallel for Jews. (Though of course Nazis persecuted others as well, that's just the one people tend to think of first.) bboyminn: The question is, which came first the chicken or the egg? Do you really think Slytherins are sweet innocent kids who have been wrongly put upon by the other houses, or do you think Slytherin acted in a manner that made them deserving of all the scorn they received? Personally, I think Slytherin has created their own alienation from the other houses. It is their own actions repeated over time that has given them an unsavory reputation. If they want to change their reputation and the attitudes of others, they need to change their own actions. You reap what you sow. Slytherin has sown a lot of contempt and self-proclaimed superiority, and now they are reaping the scorn of the other Houses because of it. The blame falls squarely on their shoulders, not on the other Houses. Slytherin House caused the problem, and if they choose to, they can cause the solution. Simple as that. Magpie: Exactly. There's nothing the other houses should or could do. Their behavior regarding Slytherins has been completely right and they aren't responsible for any badness in Slytherin at all. The best they can do is be magnanimous to this group of people in their school. It's nice to hope that one day they'll change, but until they do they're the flaw in the school. Renee: You've really got a point there. And if the WWW takes its cue from Harry - didn't JKR say something like this in her most recent interview? - the prospects for Slytherin aren't as bleak as several people here on the list suggest. Magpie: Actually, the WW has never been much shown to take it's cues from Harry--and while that's sometimes bad, in general I'd say it's a good thing. Because why would anyone want a society that followed one guy like they were a big clique in high school and he was the most popular girl? Nor does Harry seem to be leading any sort of campaign of Slytherin- appreciation. It's not like anybody that I've seen has suggested that Slytherins are now going to be hunted down and killed. We said that in the end Slytherin (as Steve said above) has proved itself to be a rather disgraceful house compared to other houses (but some of them even personally redeem themselves through bravery) and good guys just need to treat it magnanimously because they're good guys--which is pretty much what Harry's doing. Jen: > Certainly some followed him zealously, but how many more were like > Slughorn, giving up his life and freedom to hide in Muggle homes so > he wouldn't be conscripted against his will? How many were like > Narcissa, her home taken over, her son in jeopardy, her husband a > shaking mess of a man? How many were like Regulus, doing the only > thing he knew to do to stop Voldemort and being dragged down into the > lake and turned into an Inferi for his troubles? Renee: Quite a few, I suppose, but having primarily their own interest in mind and/or agreeing with the prejudices of their House, they would have lacked the incentive to go against him until something happened that shook them to the core. They weren't raised/predisposed do do so in principle - and that had nothing to do with Voldemorts influence on Slytherin House. Magpie: Basically that would make them cowards, which in this universe is one of the worst things you could be. Plenty of students in other houses also had reason to fear that kind of retribution, but they fought anyway. Being afraid wasn't really an excuse. Everybody's afraid. Anders: To me, Sirius continued to exhibit traits of Slytherin in his treatment of Kreacher, in his near-fatal trick on Snape, in his self- serving recklessness, etc. I LOVE Sirius and I like to think he had good reason for those actions, but he definitely had Slytherin tendencies IMO. Magpie: I think having Slytherin tendencies is completely different from being a Slytherin. Sometimes what one might think of as Slytherin qualities are admirable when found in, for instance, Harry. Daimauwr: So for all the bleeding hearts out there who wanted a different version to that which JK wrote - "get over it" - it's her story not anyone elses. Magpie; Acutually Daimauwr, it's you who need to get over it. The list is for discussing canon, and if they *don't* agree with something in canon, they can say that too--and it's always good for a group to have at least a few bleeding hearts, imo, even if the WW has none. Yes, many fans have unreasonable specific expectations and want the story written to suit them, but they're allowed to say that. Especially because, imo, getting rid of them would also probably entail getting rid of perfectly valid criticism of the books. Why should people who think the story had an awesome message and that Harry was a brilliant hero who had a great moral development be allowed to say so without anyone who disagrees speaking up just because JKR wrote the book? We know she wrote the book. We're responding to what she wrote--as was that professional reviewer whose article was posted. I've never read a book in my life I thought couldn't be criticized harshly if somebody wanted to do that--even if I personally thought it was great. And btw, I don't think your description of the Sorting based on your expeirences in boarding school, matches up with the canon I see in JKR's books. -m (who tends to respond to any post about how people are ruining the list by being negative or talking about stuff somebody else doesn't like by gleefully posting twice as much about whatever they don't like--I'm in ur list, criticizing ur books!!!!) From nitalynx at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 14:44:03 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:44:03 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am about to r In-Reply-To: <00e301c7d1e6$621253c0$cc09f504@yourat5qgaac3z> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173612 > Anders: > To me, Sirius continued to exhibit traits of Slytherin in his treatment of > Kreacher, in his near-fatal trick on Snape, in his self-serving > recklessness, etc. Nita: See, this is exactly the problem I have with the "othering" of Slytherins. It's not that I think "Oh, poor sweet Slyths, how could JKR treat them like that?". It's that it makes it extremely easy to ascribe *all* bad qualities, even those that are obviously the downsides of the heroes' virtues, to the Other. So, we're told they're ambitious (passionate about fulfilling their dreams?) and cunning (resourceful?)... And then, as it becomes convenient, it also appears that they're disloyal, cowardly, cold, ugly, stupid, arrogant, sadistic... and now reckless, too? Really. It's natural for humans to think in terms of "us vs them" and point fingers at "them" as the source of evil. The problem is that there are people on *both* sides of every conflict. Every person and every group like to think of themselves as Good and Right. I think hardly anyone wakes up and thinks "yay, another fine day for Evil, mwahahahaha!". And I don't see how a story where the finger-pointing is happily validated helps anyone make better moral decisions. I also don't like the related smaller, everyday stuff like "if you have an argument with a friend and you're Right, wait until the friend comes crawling back to you, so you can be magnanimously forgiving". It seems like a good way to lose people you care about, to me. Nita From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 15:19:44 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:19:44 -0000 Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173613 Estelle: > It seems that what has left me unsatisfied is lack of > reconciliation in many areas of the book. > will Lily forgive Snape in the afterlife, is there reconciliation between them? Is > there reconciliation and forgiveness between he and the mauraders? > The Slytherin's don't seem to experience a huge change- and > you're left wondering, will this whole messy situation just occur > again in 50 or 60 years time when people have started to forget (is > that what we're supposed to think?) > > Considering G.Gryffindor and S. Slytherin used to be so close, it > would have been nice to see some strong reconciliation between the > two of them symbolically in the present Annemehr: Yes, and there are other great rifts: Dumbledore/Grindelwald (which seems to parallel Godric/Salazar), Lily/Petunia, Wormtail/Marauders, Crouch Jr./Sr. (even though they lived together for years), Wizarding World/Muggle World ("That rift is permanent," according to JKR), and Tom Riddle/everyone else. All together, they seem like quite a lot, even considering the length of the series. There are comparitively fewer instances of reconciliation that I can bring to mind: Ron/Harry and Hermione (well, the boy's got a hot head, but a good heart!), Harry/Cho, Percy/Weasley family, Harry/Dudley (a biggie!). (I don't think I'll count Sirius/Remus, as they didn't reconcile differences, they got new information.) Harry and Draco occupy a sort of middle ground here, but I am content that it's enough to be going on with. ;) I have the feeling that JKR has a sense that once a certain line is crossed, reconciliation becomes all but impossible. And though each instance of a permanent break seems to have a definite "good" and "bad" side, those for which we are given details become much less black-and-white. I wish I were competent to explore the issues of free will (or lack of it) involved among the personalities and situations people find themselves saddled with, but I wonder if anyone else feels any sense of inevitability in some of these situations? Our choices *show* who we are, but how much choice do we have in *being* who we are? How much is nature, how much nurture, and how much does that leave left over to be actually in our control? Annemehr From allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 29 14:26:03 2007 From: allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk (allthecoolnamesgone) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:26:03 -0000 Subject: The Prince interpreted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173614 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > >> I'm not sure about Dumbledore, but I wholly admire and, yes, love, > Severus Snape. > > Carol, sure that Snape has earned freedom and happiness in the > afterlife and hoping that he is honored in the WW > allthecoolnamesgone: Thank you for that post. I am totally with you. Snape is a tragic hero because having repented his part life and taken on the role of Harrys protector he had to maintain his 'cover'. Dumbledore knew that V would return and that for Snape to resume his DE role he would have to play the part,he could never step outside that role or his usefulness to Dumbledore once V returned would have been lost. Dumbledore 'knew' he had turned to the good but Voldemort believed and had to believe that he was 'his'. The truly tragic part for Snape was that he could not in life 'progress' in his change of heart as he was locked in to his cover story. As you say, had V allowed him to leave the Shack in search of Harry, Harry would not have listened to him or accepted his explanation. His dying gift of his memories to Harry was the only way that Harry would accept their veracity. A true 'dying declaration'. Snapes death and on re-reading the earlier books his life are the parts that have given me the most emotional turmoil. He was a terribly flawed character and yet a man of great courage condemned to a life of great danger and isolation. Alan Rickman has been a perfect choice for him in the films and the death scene will be crucial. I suspect that it will be Hermione who reaches Snape first as her compassion for a fellow human in extremis will outway her repugnance at who it is. Only then will Harry come within Snapes reach for the final 'look at me' ********************************************** ELF NOTE: Please remember when responding that any discussion of the HP films should be sent to Movie: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/ From AllieS426 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 15:27:42 2007 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:27:42 -0000 Subject: Molly's curse - something other than AK? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173615 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jenanydot" wrote: > > > Personally, I think it's likely that Molly used some other powerful > curse to finish Bellatrix off. I think that if she specifically used > Avada Kedavra, Rowling would have said so. Also, it's stressed that > Molly's curse hits Bellatrix in the heart: > > "Molly's curse soared beneath Bellatrix's outstretched arm and hit her > squarely in the chest, directly over her heart." > > It seems to me that because Rowling is so specific as to WHERE the > curse hits, Molly may very well have used a different curse, one that > is only fatal if it hits a fatal mark. The lack of any mention of a > green light, which has been so prevalent throughout the series > whenever a Killing Curse was used, also strikes me as odd if Molly > indeed used that particular curse. > Allie: I like the idea that it was something other than AK, because despite the war situation, I still don't like the "good guys" using the Unforgivables. At the end of OoTP, they're horrified when Professor McGonagall is hit with "three stunners to the chest, and at her age," and she has to be treated at St. Mungo's. Maybe Molly's spell was a particularly powerful stunner to the heart. That would do it. :) From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 15:53:25 2007 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (Annemehr) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:53:25 -0000 Subject: Slytherins/Krum are/are not Jews.../The Houses Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173616 > bboyminn: > > The question is, which came first the chicken or the > egg? Do you really think Slytherins are sweet innocent > kids who have been wrongly put upon by the other houses, > or do you think Slytherin acted in a manner that made > them deserving of all the scorn they received? > > Personally, I think Slytherin has created their own > alienation from the other houses. > Magpie: > Exactly. There's nothing the other houses should or could do. Their > behavior regarding Slytherins has been completely right and they > aren't responsible for any badness in Slytherin at all. The best they > can do is be magnanimous to this group of people in their school. > It's nice to hope that one day they'll change, but until they do > they're the flaw in the school. Annemehr: This reminds me of an old thread from 2004 about the Sorting Hat and the "Permanent problem of Slytherin House." Back then, I thought JKR had set up the situation in order to resolve it in the series (or begin to), but perhaps whoever put the word "Permanent" in the title was prescient. Anyway, I still believe *most* of what I said then, and this is the most pertinent part: I believe (and would guess that JKR intends) that the 11-year-olds who are sorted into each House have very similar *amounts* of character flaws. The thing that really makes the difference, though, are that in Gryffindor, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw, those flaws are likely to be very randomly distributed among their students. However, in Slytherin, though the first years are as a group *no more* flawed than their counterparts, there is likely to be an unusually high concentration of children who would tend to believe that the ends justifies the means and/or that having been raised in the WW or having purer blood is inherently "better." This means that SSlytherin's choice of students is going to have very real consequences to the students even of today. For example, in any one Gryffindor dorm, you may get an ambitious student, a lazy one, and one who is neither of those but a bit of a bully. They are all different, and with luck may tend to moderate each other's faults. But in Slytherin, where the faults that exist will tend to be more similar, they will feed an reinforce each other. Not only that, but there is the absence of Muggleborns who may have acted as a counterbalance, the "us against them" mentality that's engendered, and the likelihood that a Slytherinly way of thinking and acting has by now become an actual tradition of the house to be passed down to the new members. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/99587 The Slytherins have a rough road ahead, because of the way Salazar Slytherin arranged his House a thousand years or more ago. Annemehr P.S. From two of the Hat's songs we know, we do find some justification for Snape's comment to James and Sirius that Slytherin is a house for brains, not brawn, whatever connotation you take from the word "cunning": Book 1: '...Or perhaps in Slytherin, You'll make your real friends Those Cunning folk use any means, to achieve their ends....' Book 5: > > 'Said Slytherin, "We'll just teach those whose ancestry is purest... > > For instance, Slytherin > > Took only pure-blood wizards > > Of great cunning, just like him...' From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 29 16:08:23 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:08:23 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173617 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annette" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" wrote: > > > > > > Jim Ferer wrote: > > > I took it like this: Harry and Voldemort are both at the border > > > between this world and the next - the "on." > > > > > > I don't think the "ugly baby thing" at Kings Cross can be the bit of soul from Voldemort's body (the bit he calls "I"), because that is the part which is still tied to earth by the Nagini Horcrux. For that reason, even though LV collapsed in the Forest like Harry did, he could not have had the same near-death experience. That's why I feel sure the fetal thing under the chair is the soul-bit that had been attached to Harry, and it "came along for the ride" with him. > > Annemehr > > Cariad: Thank you for the responses to this interesting thread that Sandra started. I can see that this baby is a representation of the evilness of LV's soul, whether or not it is the horcrux baby that Harry became, I'm not sure. The disturbing images of St Michael and the baby about to be crushed are new to me. I guess that these images are in a Traditional Catholic iconography as they deal with Original Sin, a concept which I don't know much about. > > I read the scene in GOF again re. LV's rebirth in the cauldron and I can see the similarities, thanks to whoever pointed that out. At the first time of reading I thought it was some sort of sacrificial animal. Certainly, as much as 'Kings Cross' is a time where Harry is enlightened, this for me proves one of the darkest passages in the book. > cariad. Thanks everyone so much for giving your thoughts on this, it's given me more to think about and also to look up! I have revisited TGOF earlier on to see the rebirth bit and it's reminded me of a lot, even though it's all pretty grim stuff. I feel the Kings Cross part was the most inspired part of TDH and I'm glad JKR took a small diversion to take us there, even though it was an unpleasant section in certain places. I go along wth the general feeling that the ugly baby thing was part of LV's soul carried by Harry, but that raises many questions which weren't even hinted at in the book. For example I mean what if Harry had gone to the distressed baby and been caring and loving to it, or what if he had waited for a train and then sent the baby off to wherever before H himself returned to the real world? Or what if he'd recognised it as part of LV and killed it? Or left it on the track? It was certainly a very good chapter and a great setting, and Dumbledore came across very well with a little too much to explain, but the baby situation was confusing and unsettling to me. But thanks to everyone here I'm feeling like I understand it a bit better, even though the number of possible answers and even bigger number of questions make it a very open ended scenario to have put into a conclusive book. I'm hoping JKR might say something in an interview or address it if she every has a Q&A session on a website. Cariad - I know even less about original sin and catholic iconography, so the thought of St Michael crushing babies will stop me shopping at Marks & Spencer ever again! Thanks everyone, Sandra x. From monkshoodgardens at cox.net Sun Jul 29 14:44:51 2007 From: monkshoodgardens at cox.net (Paula) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:44:51 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173618 > Alla: > The funniest argument fot Slytherin as persecuted jews symbolism > to me is of course Snape's hooked nose. Um, why? > > I have blue eyes, blond hair and all my family does and we are all > very very jewish. On the other hand, there are people with hooked > noses, who are jews and NOT jews, had never been jews, you know? > > Am I suppose to think of Jew the moment I read about Snape's hooked nose? Well, I really do not. > I'm Jewish with all of my grandparents/relatives and those before them from Eastern Europe - I never thought of Snape of Jewish as I do not think of "hook noses" of being exclusively Jewish. We are also not dark...I'm very fair with red hair as is my mother, daughter and her son - certain mannerisms and names are clues for those of us that are Jewish because, perhaps this is something we have grown up with in our families as well as those of us who have relatives from the "old country". This is what is true for me. That being said, I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could ever see the Slytherins are being Jewish! They were the Pure Bloods trying to wipe out those that were night. Clearly it was those that were considered impure that were not acceptable. Hitler = Voldemort. Paula (First post in all of the years I have been a part of this list as this subject touched a nerve - Thank you for reading) From dougsamu at golden.net Sun Jul 29 16:25:16 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:25:16 -0400 Subject: replies to 1000 posts, scroll down to look for YOUR reply Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173619 Catlady wrote: > Doug Samu wrote in > : > > << So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time and not the > second? Why was the house at Godric's Hollow destroyed but nothing in > the Forbidden Forest? >> > > Because he had 6 Horcruxes the first time, and only the accidental > Horcrux in Harry the second time. That doesn't explain anything. ___ __ From GAP5685 at AOL.com Sun Jul 29 16:37:27 2007 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:37:27 -0000 Subject: Petunia (was: Lily's Letter (and Petunia)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173620 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > On a related note, I was very disappointed that Petunia couldn't muster up -ANYTHING - to say to her nephew. Personally (and yes, again here I > blaspheme against JKR) rather than finding out about Lily/Snape during > *just* the Prince's Tale, I think a better device would have been > Petunia giving Harry a bundle of letters containing the note > Dumbledore left with baby Harry, and also letters from Lily that she > sent home during school. Such letters could contain references to her > friend Sev, their falling out, and perhaps something that explains why > she decided to go out with James Potter? This would have made Harry's > confusion over Dumbledore even more interesting - as he finds reasons > to doubt Dumbledore, he finds reasons to trust Snape hmmm....that would > have been interesting. > > va32h > I was also disappointed that Petunia didn't communicate anything to Harry. Ever since her "breakthrough" scene in OOTP, where she shares her knowledge of the dementors and Harry realizes that "he was not the only person in the room who had an inkling of what Lord Voldemort being back might mean." (OOTP, chapter2 A Peck of Owls), I was really, really hoping that JKR would start the transformation of Petunia from a cardboard-cutout wicked stepmother to a full-fledged character. Especially in light of the Prince's Tale - which gives us so much insight into Petunia. (Loved finding out that the "awful boy" she heard about dementors from was Snape - not James) Suddenly, you could see her treatment of Dudley v. Harry arising from her jealousy of her sister. If she could not show her "perfect" sister what it felt like to be the one who was not special, not gifted and not favored, then she would show it to the boy with her sister's eyes. She was determined to make Harry as miserable for being magical as her sister was treasured. Maybe she saw sheltering Harry as her chance to be a part of the magical world she was denied entrance to so long ago, and became disappointed yet again? Or maybe her anger came from being required to do something from the man (Dumbledore)who had turned down her request to join Lily at Hogwarts. I am quite pleased that we were spared a trite, cheesy scene where everyone is suddenly and inexplicably reconciled to each other, so its not that the farewell scence disappointed me. But I feel that Petunia had a lot of potential depth that was left completely unexplored in the series, and her silence here did not speak the volumes that one or two carefully crafted lines could have. Gwen From CariadMel at aol.com Sun Jul 29 16:36:00 2007 From: CariadMel at aol.com (CariadMel at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:36:00 EDT Subject: That ugly baby thing Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173621 Sandra said: I'm hoping JKR might say something in an interview or address it if she every has a Q&A session on a website. Cariad - I know even less about original sin and catholic iconography, so the thought of St Michael crushing babies will stop me shopping at Marks & Spencer ever again! cariad: LOL! Hope there will be a very long webchat with JKR, she's got a lot of explaining to do ;) Do you think she'll come round for tea? There'll be cakes. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Jul 29 16:45:55 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:45:55 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: snape and lily BEFORE DH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ACC443.2070702@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173622 colebiancardi wrote: > well, as long-standing member against LOLLIPOPS ("Love Of Lily Left > Ire Polluting Our Poor Severus" which can be read at > http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#lollipops), I was > dismayed (and that is stating it mildly) that it became canon. Bart: To me, there was one major difference between the canon and the gist of the bad ship Snapelily, one that made all the difference; that they were friends BEFORE they even entered Hogwarts. This makes all the difference. One aspect that is SOP in teen movies is the initial static situation. Up until the beginning of the movie, the kids were always stratified into their social positions. You forget that, in small towns, they probably knew each other all their lives, and might have been quite different when they were kids. I've seen a few cases of the movies breaking out of that mold in the last few years, where it's revealed that two arch enemies at 15 or 16 were actually friends when they were 5 or 6 (or vice versa). When I read the description of the friendship in book 7, especially the meeting after the "Worst Memory", I was immediately reminded of a passage from Dickens' A CHRISTMAS CAROL, which, thanks to the fact that it's in the public domain, I can quote in its entirety (the passage, that is). --- "He was not alone, but sat by the side of a fair young girl in a mourning-dress: in whose eyes there were tears, which sparkled in the light that shone out of the Ghost of Christmas Past. 'It matters little,' she said, softly. 'To you, very little. Another idol has displaced me; and if it can cheer and comfort you in time to come, as I would have tried to do, I have no just cause to grieve.' 'What Idol has displaced you?' he rejoined. 'A golden one.' 'This is the even-handed dealing of the world!' he said. 'There is nothing on which it is so hard as poverty; and there is nothing it professes to condemn with such severity as the pursuit of wealth!' 'You fear the world too much,' she answered, gently. 'All your other hopes have merged into the hope of being beyond the chance of its sordid reproach. I have seen your nobler aspirations fall off one by one, until the master-passion, Gain, engrosses you. Have I not?' 'What then?' he retorted. 'Even if I have grown so much wiser, what then? I am not changed towards you.' She shook her head. 'Am I?' 'Our contract is an old one. It was made when we were both poor and content to be so, until, in good season, we could improve our worldly fortune by our patient industry. You are changed. When it was made, you were another man.' 'I was a boy,' he said impatiently. 'Your own feeling tells you that you were not what you are,' she returned. 'I am. That which promised happiness when we were one in heart, is fraught with misery now that we are two. How often and how keenly I have thought of this, I will not say. It is enough that I have thought of it, and can release you.' 'Have I ever sought release?' 'In words. No. Never.' 'In what, then?' 'In a changed nature; in an altered spirit; in another atmosphere of life; another Hope as its great end. In everything that made my love of any worth or value in your sight. If this had never been between us,' said the girl, looking mildly, but with steadiness, upon him; 'tell me, would you seek me out and try to win me now? Ah, no!' He seemed to yield to the justice of this supposition, in spite of himself. But he said with a struggle, 'You think not.' 'I would gladly think otherwise if I could,' she answered, 'Heaven knows! When I have learned a Truth like this, I know how strong and irresistible it must be. But if you were free to-day, to-morrow, yesterday, can even I believe that you would choose a dowerless girlyou who, in your very confidence with her, weigh everything by Gain: or, choosing her, if for a moment you were false enough to your one guiding principle to do so, do I not know that your repentance and regret would surely follow? I do; and I release you. With a full heart, for the love of him you once were.' He was about to speak; but with her head turned from him, she resumed. 'You maythe memory of what is past half makes me hope you willhave pain in this. A very, very brief time, and you will dismiss the recollection of it, gladly, as an unprofitable dream, from which it happened well that you awoke. May you be happy in the life you have chosen!' She left him, and they parted. 'Spirit!' said Scrooge, 'show me no more! Conduct me home. Why do you delight to torture me?' " --- Bart From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Jul 29 16:58:37 2007 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 29 Jul 2007 16:58:37 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 7/29/2007, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1185728317.10.21220.m55@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173623 Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal Weekly Chat Sunday July 29, 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 k12listmomma at comcast.net Sun Jul 29 16:44:21 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:44:21 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Red Herrings and Reconciliation References: Message-ID: <021d01c7d1ff$b6b4b3f0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 173624 Jim Ferer: You speak of the frustration of the many, many threads JKR left hanging out of the tapestry. There are endless stories left to tell in this universe, and we're going to tell them, which leads to a prediction: Within a year or two, there will be officially sanctioned volumes of fiction written by us, the fans, published by Bloomsbury / Scholastic et. al., perhaps selected and even introduced by JKR. There's plenty of precedent for it. Shelley: I think you are right in that the fans will indeed take over- heck, you see by the proponderance of fanfiction already out there that Rowling has inspired a large writing movement already, but I am not so sure that Rowling would "endorse" such a book or story. I think, and this is my prediction, that she will see the fanfiction and rather than to be able to "pass that torch" mentally to the fans, that it will instead inspire her to "take back control" over her world to continue the story. I see the Rowling of the future unable to let Harry go. So I see the road forward as people divided into two camps- the Rowling purists, the ones who will only consider to be canon the items that Rowling wrote or said in an interview, and those that embrace the entire scope of Harry Potter works, to include the really good fan books that continue Rowling's works in a solid connective and meaningful fashion (versus those nearly meaningless Mary-Sues that place the author firmly in bed with one of the main characters in the story.) From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sun Jul 29 17:23:54 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:23:54 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > Anyway, I'm glad you pointed out the fetal soul was connected to the > fetal Voldemort who rebirthed in the graveyard (upthread); JKR had > promised that would play later and I was looking for it then > completely passed by the reference, duh. It reminded me of Dante's Inferno, where "the punishment fits the crime" - e.g., the souls of suicides are trapped within gnarled, stunted trees, because the suicides who sinfully renounced their physical bodies while still alive are not permitted to retain their bodies in the afterlife. Voldemort violated the natural order by creating the Horcruxes and later using them to be physically reborn as a hideous homunculus. This then is the form his soul will be compelled to retain. - CMC From write2stephenie at bellsouth.net Sun Jul 29 17:05:16 2007 From: write2stephenie at bellsouth.net (StephanieCurrier) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:05:16 -0400 Subject: Re; Red Herrings and Reconciliation Message-ID: <001f01c7d202$a326b920$6501a8c0@S0027642347> No: HPFGUIDX 173626 Posted by: "estelle_clements: >>>Not the least of which is whether JKR was thinking about (or rather criticizing) the 11 plus when Dumbledore says he thinks they sort too soon. This sort of realization that people can have latent gifts and talents and 11 is too young an age to be streaming. And really, the four houses provide a unique set up for streaming by supposed personality (a system I'm sure myers-briggs would be fascinated by.). But even though this spectre of doubt is cast on the streaming of children at 11, nothing is done about it- its not resolved, just sort of left hanging in the air. No one says, if we think of changing this sorting system, maybe we wouldn't create these huge divisions, maybe we could have reconciliation between the houses.<<<< Right. There is no resolution. Just as there is no resolution today in most mainstream schools. Children are often expected to mature academically/emotionally at a similar rate, and little care is taken for those who aren't developing "evenly." Those who are labeled early often get privileges and exceptions and special care that those who are not labeled do not have access to. Children whose parents are not on top of things often fall through-the-cracks. I'm not sure that this has relevance to JKR personally, but it is worth noting. I knew a few people growing up that were told all the time how intelligent they were, etc. For some of them it killed momentum. Some who felt behind (and therefore worked harder-ala Neville) often achieved more. Some, who "ruthlessly" put friends and family behind their goals of success went on to do well to outer appearances, but seem to be going through breakdowns/crisis..working to find balance. Interesting parallels. -Stephanie From write2stephenie at bellsouth.net Sun Jul 29 16:32:34 2007 From: write2stephenie at bellsouth.net (StephanieCurrier) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:32:34 -0400 Subject: The Hardest Parts Message-ID: <001201c7d1fe$128bd200$6501a8c0@S0027642347> No: HPFGUIDX 173627 Seriously Snapey Susan wrote: >>>(1) We see Narcissa, LYING to Lord Voldemort, telling him that Harry is dead. Sure, she did it because she was crazy to find her child, but she did it! And if she had not done so, what would the outcome have been?? Nagini had not yet been destroyed. It was a necessary, vital piece of the puzzle that had to be put into place (p.726).<<< And >>> (3) We see Lucius, Narcissa & Draco in the Great Hall after it's all over. Yes, alone; yes, not sure hot to fit in; but they're THERE. They did not flee with the other Death Eaters. Doesn't that show something? (pp. 745-746)<<< YES, and the reason Narcissa was asking about her son, was that Draco did not return to Voldemort. Cowardice and all, he stayed at the castle even after he was rescued, etc. Maybe Draco's role is up for debate (I'm going to read the book again this week) but I read it as his staying by will at some point. I believe JKR showed progress, but little progress, because that is how she sees our current circumstances. She wanted to show where authentic progress was being made, and how slooooowwwllly that happens. I believe it was her way of leaving a sense of obligation to the "next generation" to make more efforts. There are countries that have made little movement toward human rights, and countries which formerly worked to make strides but are fatigued, etc. She was working to show a spectrum of development, (some characters making large leaps and others making moves at a snail's pace) within a school paradigm. Yes, some things could have been clearer, but especially with regard to Snape's looks, I believe a small part of what she saying is the simple message: "Don't judge a person by outward appearance." / "You can never tell what is going on in someone's heart." I'm so happy for the back-story there, although of course I was left wanting because I'd have liked the whole book to have been about Snape's motivations, etc. I THINK that the frustration she has left over Snape is going to cause people (not just in fanfiction but fiction period), to write more ambiguous and multi-faceted anti-hero characters. I cannot wait. Lily wasn't just Snapes best friend, btw, she has written as really, his *only* Friend. He may have known people, but he was solitary for the most part, in the memories. In the end its what made him useful because no one in Voldy's camp knew him well enough to be able to really tell when things were *off.* Harry (whose journey of change we've been on) will never see Gryffindor as a "perfect" house again. He will see that he was part of a house where his dad and friends were able to bully and think too highly of themselves, as well as a house in which certain qualities are expected. He will never see Slytherin as an "evil" house again. Slytherin's place might not be so clear and simple, but Harry will never see it as a sign of a dark destiny again. What about Hufflepuff? I'm surprised no one cares how weak and useless Hufflepuff still comes out. Slytherin's talked about: It is important and mysterious and Matters. Ravenclaw is intelligent: One can be proud of being sorted there. What of Hufflepuff? I think it would be worse to be in the house that seems of not much consequence, unless I'm simply missing its great part in things. I think the *best* message is found with Neville, who stood up to his friends, which is something neither Lupin nor Snape were able to do. That's a message I see the greatest significance in. One can't stand up to traditions and systems until they are able to stand up to their friends/family members/etc. -Stephanie, who has her issues with the book, but doesn't see the ill intent some ascribe. From annbosco at rogers.com Sun Jul 29 17:06:43 2007 From: annbosco at rogers.com (poetryfreedom) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:06:43 -0000 Subject: Griffindor's sword Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173628 In case someone has the answers... How does the sword get back "into" the sorting hat if Griphook took it? Who on earth is Fabian Prewett? (Harry's watch) Poetry is Freedom From dwalker696 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 17:26:26 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:26:26 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173629 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sandra Collins" > wrote: > > > > Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter > > again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. From what I've > > read of the many many many enjoyable, varied and informative > > posts regarding a wide raft of subjects to do with the book, is > > how Voldermort was meant to be an ugly baby under a bench. I > > don't understand the symbolism or maybe the reality? Could > > anyone enlighten me as to what it all meant because it's all been > > lost on me. My interpretation of the baby thing is not that it is Voldemort himself, it is only that part of his soul (the accidental horcrux) that was in Harry. That piece can't be reunited with Voldemort, so it is doomed to exist in it's afterlife as exactly what it is - a broken, damaged, fragment of a soul, not a whole entity. So, at that point in time, we get the idea that the rest of LV's soul shards, the other destroyed horcruxes, are miserably writhing around, lost...unable to rejoin the soul, but certainly unable to enjoy a "functional" afterlife experience. And when the last piece of soul that is in LV is sent off when LV dies from his own rebounded AK against Harry in the end, I get the distinct impression that the creature under the bench (whether literally or metaphorically speaking) is the fate of that last piece of soul in LV as well; Harry tries to save LV from that fate, he tells him "Think, and try for some remorse, Riddle...It's your last chance...I've seen what you'll be otherwise". Dumbledore warned Voldy as well, "...your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness." (OOP pg 814) Personally, with the anticipation of DH, I had been waiting to see what kind of anguished fate LV would be left to endure. (I was also rather hoping for an ending of retribution for the Durselys as well. Not death, mind you...but I used to humor myself imaging that the Dursley's fate would be to be stuck with LV and conversely that LV would be stuck with the Dursleys for all eternity ;0) Just makes a humorous image.) Anyway, I knew LV's fate would be "much worse than death", but I was curious to know what JKR had in store for him, and I am personally pleased with what she came up with. I was imagining torture and torment, enduring what he made all his victims suffer as his fate, but the idea of Voldemort suffering as a miserable and more importantly HELPLESS creature is gratifying, though certainly sad. Particularly Voldemort, who valued power so much, would be very miserable as powerless, helpless. And I kind of liked Harry going to him like the Ghost of Christmas Future, warning him to repent or forever wear the chains of his misdoings. Donna From technomad at intergate.com Sun Jul 29 17:42:27 2007 From: technomad at intergate.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:42:27 -0500 Subject: DH: Slytherins and attitudes toward them Message-ID: <003701c7d207$d59eb2e0$be570043@D6L2G391> No: HPFGUIDX 173630 I've noticed that some of my Learned Friends (apologies; I get the list in digest form and don't always note who says what) feel that equating the DE-dominated MoM after the coup with Slytherins, and refer to the ones who persecuted Muggleborns as "Slytherins." Er---how do we KNOW? AFAICR, nobody has ever seen a single line of canon saying that Darling Dolores Umbridge was a Slytherin. She could have been Hufflepuff for all we know! (I've actually seen an interesting case made that Dolores was a Hufflepuff---she's clearly a lot more of a follower than a leader, and Hufflepuff House seems to be mainly about working together for a common goal) Herself has said in interviews and elsewhere that there _were_ DEs from all four Houses. And nobody at all seems to have had any trouble believing that Sirius Black, who _chose_ Gryffindor and broke with his all-Slytherin family partly over that little issue, was not only a DE, but one of the most fanatical ones of all. And Peter Pettigrew seems to have been despised by his new friends, but that's because he was despicable and a turncoat, not because he was a Gryffindor. Little Albus Severus' fears strike me as more the result of having grown up in a family with a very strong Gryffindor tradition---all the Weasleys were in Gryffindor, even Percy (who I think would have been far happier in another house, particularly once the Twins arrived to make his life hell; they'd have had fewer opportunities to plague him if he'd been in, say, Hufflepuff---or Slytherin) and both of Harry's hero-parents were Gryffindors. When you have that sort of weight of expectations on your shoulders, it's hard to imagine having to do something that different, particularly since House rivalries do not seem to be dead. It's not that different from a boy who'd grown up as the son of a professional Army officer reacting in horror to the idea of joining the Navy, or even worse, the Air Force. Now, if they held off on Sorting until the kids were sixteen, you might get some very interesting results. A lot of kids from families with strong traditions for one house would be begging the hat to put them anywhere BUT where their family tradition would dictate: "Not Gryffindor! My dad went there, and he's totally out of it! Anywhere but Gryffindor---I don't want to be uncool!" From muellem at bc.edu Sun Jul 29 17:54:09 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:54:09 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173631 > Paula wrote: > I'm Jewish with all of my grandparents/relatives and those before > them from Eastern Europe - I never thought of Snape of Jewish as I do > not think of "hook noses" of being exclusively Jewish. We are also > not dark...I'm very fair with red hair as is my mother, daughter and > her son - certain mannerisms and names are clues for those of us that > are Jewish because, perhaps this is something we have grown up with in our families as well as those of us who have relatives from the "old country". This is what is true for me. That being said, I > cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could ever see the > Slytherins are being Jewish! They were the Pure Bloods trying to wipe out those that were night. Clearly it was those that were considered impure that were not acceptable. Hitler = Voldemort. > > colebiancardi: as many have pointed out, no one is stating that the Slyternins are Jewish. However, if you look at propaganda from thru-out the ages, not just in Hitler's era, the hook-nosed feature, as well as the other characteristics mentioned, were attributed to Jews - this is a historically given fact (not nice nor accurate, but there you have it - stereotypes are ususually not nice or accurate). I cannot help what history shows us - just go back and read the description of Shylock from Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice. No one here is making that up. What I and others were pointing to was the historically given fact how the Western World demonized Jews and gave them unsavory characteristics. Jews were put in roles of evil villians and untrustworthy people. All this prior to WWII. I mentioned this all in post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173550 What I also mentioned is that JKR took the unsavority and inaccurate stereotypes that were placed on Jews and made them Slytherin characteristics. And then she mixed in the Nazi credo of pure-bloodism. Does that know make sense? No one here is stating that Slytherins are Jews. But one cannot ignore historically given facts about stereotypes of Jewish people and not see them being applied to Slytherins in JKR's WW, as well as the Nazi metaphors. colebiancardi (no one here is trying to offend ANY races or religions - in fact, I am disappointed that JKR didn't break thru those stereotypes and paint a world that healed properly) From clio44a at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 17:54:10 2007 From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:54:10 -0000 Subject: Slytherins in love Was: Wasted potential in Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173632 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > > Clio wrote: > > And Snape and the reinforcemnt of his story through the Bloody > Baron's background teaches us what? Don't trust a Slytherin, even if > he is in love with you. They are all obsessive, sick stalkers, who > will kill you? > > > Carol answered: > I still don't see stalker Snape. He left her alone after she refused > to forgive him and begged both Voldemort and DD to save her. I'm quite > sure he would not have come near her, knowing that she would despise > him as a Death Eater. He only wanted her alive, not understanding how > terrible life would have been for her without her husband and son. His > love was selfish at first, but I don't think it was ever sullied. And > wouldn't you, coming upon a photograph of the person you had loved and > lost in the home of a dead man, have at least been tempted to take > that photograph and signature? They were all he would ever have of > her. It wasn't an admirable act, but he had devoted his life to her. > > As for the Bloody Baron, surely he's meant to contrast with Snape. The > Baron murdered the woman he loved; Snape tried and failed to save > Lily, whose death was in large part his fault, and spent the rest of > his life repenting that sin and the last seven years protecting her > son and secretly fighting her murderer, at terrible cost to himself. > Snape's love starts out selfish, but it's never as selfish as the > Bloody Baron's. Nor will Snape spend eternity groaning and clanking on > the Astronomy Tower. ;-) > Clio: I agree with you Carol in almost everything you wrote about Snape (which I had to cut from your post). I, too, dearly loved him as a fictional character and would have loved to see more from him in DH, especially a confrontation scene with Harry. Well, I am happy with the story arc as it is, and I must admit it moved me to tears when I read 'The Prince's tale' and when I went back and read again 'Look at me' in the chapter before. Still, I am not so sure if you and I read and see Snape the way it is intended by the author. I am all for 'sweetly in love' Snape, but I have to admit his love for Lily has an obsessive quality. I'm not so sure if he would have left Lily alone had the Dark Lord spared her. As for the letter he takes in Sirius old bedroom, I wouldn't see that as sick stalking either, but as the very human act of a desperate and verly lonesome man. Has I been in his shoes, I would have done exactely the same. I have to disagree with you on the role of the Bloody Baron. He is not meant as a contrast to Snape. I think he and Snape have a lot in common. Snape may not be 'groaning and clanking on the Astronomy Tower' as you put it, but he is all through the HP series sulking in the dungeons, flaying himself for Lily's death and obviously hating everything happy and light around him, and especially dead!James Potter and his offspring. And had Ddore not shown him a new goal in life (help Harry survive), I am not sure if Snape had not killed himself just like the Bloody Baron. I think both examples are meant to show how love can turn from a good thing into something dangerous and destructive. Just in Snape's case the destruction is channeled by Ddore for a noble cause. Isn't Ddore (or Slughorn?) telling Harry in HBP 'never underestimate the power of obsessive love'? I bet Ddore had Snape in mind when he said that. Coming to think about it, Merope Gaunt certainly qualifies as a person hopelessly and obsessively in love, too. Do you see, how all these people are Slytherins? Gives me the chills, and I wonder if that was intended by JKR. The point remains, Snape's love isn't something pure and shining, but obsessive, desperate and selfish. Just, I think this is realistic and human to the extreme, and therefore to me Snape is the best character JKR has written. Like it or not, Snape is not Saint Severus. Actually he is one of the few people in the series who don't act 'For the Greater Good' which we were told to fear in DH, but out of human feelings. Clio, who thinks in her next post she should aim for 'Saint Severus, protector of all wayward sons of desperate mothers' From sydpad at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 17:57:49 2007 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:57:49 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173633 > > Alla: > > > The funniest argument fot Slytherin as persecuted jews symbolism > > to me is of course Snape's hooked nose. Um, why? ... > > Am I suppose to think of Jew the moment I read about Snape's > hooked nose? Well, I really do not. > > > Paula: > I'm Jewish with all of my grandparents/relatives and those before > them from Eastern Europe - I never thought of Snape of Jewish as I do > not think of "hook noses" of being exclusively Jewish. Sydney: Guh... I said I wouldn't continue with this but obviously I don't have to clear up again what I meant in my initial post. What was making me uncomfortable with the Slytherin's portrayal-- the hooked noses and greasy hair and oiliness and monkey-like founder and inbreeding and cunning and greediness and having too much money and Eastern Europeaness and mesmeric powers and puppet governments-- obviously has NOTHING TO DO WITH ACTUAL PEOPLE WHO ARE JEWISH. Jewish people also do not eat babies as far as I'm aware. It has everything to do with anti-semitic stereotypes that would have been much more recognizable, I'm thankful to say, a hundred years ago. Anyone who has read much Victorian fiction stumbles across the 'Jewish character' (Fagin would have been a bit of a cliche in that period) and goes 'yikes!'. I think it must be Rowling's immersion not only in the fiction of this period but also from the 1930's, that put these characteristics (for the benefit of people skimming this, I repeat, *nothing to do with actual Jewish people*), I say again *unconsciously*, into her brain and that she drew from to create the classic Enemy Within-type Other (thanks Magpie), a role the Jew has traditionally played for centuries. I am ecstatic that this stereotype has evidently become so rare as to be unrecognizable-- though there are parts of the world where it might be less so. It's like the kerfuffle over Jar-Jar Binks that gave George Lucas so much grief a few years ago. When people said it was an outrageous reference to sterotypes about Blacks, they obviously didn't mean actual African-Americans were shuffling, amusing idiots. They meant that it was in poor taste to use a character that was so instantly recognizable as the shiftless Step-n-Fetchit type from films of the 20's and 30's. I get that on the overt level that JKR was writing, the Sltytherins are supposed to be the Nazis and the muggleborns are supposed to be the Jews. There are potted plants who get that. --Definitely retreating back behind the potted plant, Sydney From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sun Jul 29 17:59:23 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:59:23 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173634 One of the most delicious images in DH for me was during the Muggle- Born trial sequence, where Umbridge's Cat Patronus rubs up against the inquisitors, keeping them safe from the dementors' baleful influence. I had always wondered how the likes of Cornelius Fudge was able to deal with dementors ("I've never seen them so angry," he says in PoA) without ill effect. I believe that on her website, JKR said that the Patronus spell was invented by Dumbledore. We know from PoA how much Dumbldore detests dementors, and what a mistake it was for the Ministry to work with them. But did Dumbledore inadvertently make that unhealthy alliance possible through his creation of the Patronus spell, or is there another way to deal with dementors without the side effects? - CMC From penhaligon at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 17:56:02 2007 From: penhaligon at gmail.com (Jane "Panhandle" Penhaligon) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:56:02 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Griffindor's sword In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2A97FCF791954556B53FFEDE3FA5B61E@Home> No: HPFGUIDX 173635 Poetry is Freedom asks: > In case someone has the answers... > How does the sword get back "into" the sorting hat if Griphook took it? It is truly Griffyndor's sword ... even Scrimgeour says when refusing to give Harry the sword even though it was in Dumbledore's will: "According to reliable historical sources, the sword may present itself to any worthy Gryffindor." (Scholastic, page 129). Which indeed it did, when Neville had need of it. > Who on earth is Fabian Prewett? (Harry's watch) Molly's brother, who was killed during the first Voldemort war. Hope that helps, Panhandle -- Jane Penhaligon penhaligon at gmail.com From kaleeyj at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 18:04:56 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:04:56 -0000 Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173636 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annemehr" wrote: > > > Estelle: > > It seems that what has left me unsatisfied is lack of > > reconciliation in many areas of the book. > > > will Lily forgive Snape in the afterlife, is there reconciliation > between them? Is > > there reconciliation and forgiveness between he and the mauraders? > > > Annemehr: > Yes, and there are other great rifts: Dumbledore/Grindelwald (which > seems to parallel Godric/Salazar), Lily/Petunia, Wormtail/Marauders, > Crouch Jr./Sr. (even though they lived together for years), Wizarding > World/Muggle World ("That rift is permanent," according to JKR), and > Tom Riddle/everyone else. All together, they seem like quite a lot, > even considering the length of the series. > > There are comparitively fewer instances of reconciliation that I can > bring to mind: Ron/Harry and Hermione (well, the boy's got a hot > head, but a good heart!), Harry/Cho, Percy/Weasley family, > Harry/Dudley (a biggie!). (I don't think I'll count Sirius/Remus, as > they didn't reconcile differences, they got new information.) > > > I have the feeling that JKR has a sense that once a certain line is > crossed, reconciliation becomes all but impossible. And though each > instance of a permanent break seems to have a definite "good" > and "bad" side, those for which we are given details become much less > black-and-white. Bex now: I think that Annemehr is on the right track here - for Tommy Riddle, you can only go so far and still be able to go back. IMO, I think JK is telling us, especially with Lily/Snape, and MMWP/Snape, W/MMP, and Lily/Petunia, that the saddest part of a war is that someitmes, you don't get that chance for reconciliation. Surely Petunia feels awful for not making up with Lily before she died, once she realized what had happened at GH. And poor, poor Severus never did get the chance to show Lily that he had finally made the right choice. I think JKR is getting at the fact that when people die, there ARE threads left loose in the tapestry - not everything gets tied up all neat and tidy. (Or she could have left me with that impression unintentionally - though I think my opinion is a little closer to the mark than most of my theories have been as of late.) ~Bex From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jul 29 18:05:50 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:05:50 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant.... AND The Hardest Part In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173637 > Geoff: > Warning. I think I am about to rant. :-) Potioncat: Those of who do not know, Geoff does not rant very often. >Geoff: > After the publication of HBP, there was a sea change. Potioncat: I think HP4GU has gone through several changes over the years, such that a poster who returned after an absense might not recognise it from his active days. There are definite styles that have come and gone. Also some stages occur as each new book is anticipated, reacted to, compared to earlier books, looked at within the whole story, and a new anticipation again. Sadly, we've done the last stage for the last time. I'm encouraged though, that it looks like we might go through the others. I was afraid folk would show up, post once, and move on. Geoff: But again, that > is my take on it and others may want to interpret it in a different way. > And again, there are lots of unanswered questions; but isn't that the > situation in our own real lives? Potioncat: May have snipped a bit too much there. But I have to agree with the unanswered questions...at least to a point. In the first place, we wouldn't want every single question answered. (Particularly if it's going to conflict with the way I want it to be answered. As long as JKR hasn't said anthing about it, I can imagine things however I want them.) On the other hand there are some lines of the story that should have had some sort of closure that didn't. > Geoff: > What I am trying to get at is instead of trying to score points off one > another or run down what JKR has written, why don't we try looking > for things to agree on; things that we like about the books. Instead > of perpetual negativity, why don't we look for good things, encouraging > things, things to say "wow" about? Potioncat: To be honest, except for the camping, I was loving the book right up till some point in Chapter 32. After that it's all a teary-eyed blur. I wanted Snape to live almost as much as I wanted Harry to live. I was emotionally drained and disillusioned afterwards so that it's been much easier to latch onto the failings rather to see any positives. It didn't help that the transcripts of JKR's interviews seemed to make everything worse. Oh, let me quickly say, I wasn't unhappy just because Snape died. I expected that. It all reminds me of going on a very good and perhaps too long vacation. We're almost home and all we can concentrate on is the sun burn, not the beach; the long lines, not the fun rides; the flat- tire, not how quickly the nice man fixed it. There are flaws, no doubt about it. I'm sure I'll join in some of those discussions---if I can ever catch up with any of the threads. Geoff: Perhaps I'm na?ve but I don't want to > analyse them down to the last full stop; I just want to be an armchair > hedonist for a couple of hours! > > There, I've got that off my chest. I think I'll go and find some > soothing fanfic Potioncat: Do you write fanfic, or just read it? Maybe we need a Tag for positive posts---like we have for SHIPPING or T-BAY---just so those of us who need a boost can find it! :-) "cubfanbudwoman" (173546,I think) wrote: > It's been very hard to feel happy, enthused, positive and *content* > at the end of the adventure (knowing I'm one of the lucky ones who > can and does feel that way) and then be surrounded by long-time > HPfGU chums, people I've loved sharing with over the years, and > seeing their disappointment and even anger. Potioncat: I couldn't wait for the list to open so I could get another viewpoint. I felt so drained that I was sure someone would have something to say that could give me a more optimistic view. To a certain extent, I have. I've also found lots of unhappy fans. But I can sort of pick and choose what I read while you have to read almost everything. >cubfanbudwoman: > Please note: this is not a gripe or a complaint; I am not annoyed > as much as that I am simply saddened. There really isn't anything > anyone can do about it, either, so this is merely an emotional > remark. Potioncat: There was one post in particular that saddened me. It wasn't that what was being said wasn't true, It was that I was sad the writer felt so bad. You know, at least part of the situation is that we are all going to have to have to grieve to some point. (I saw that smirk, and you know who you are!) I mean, whether we liked DH or not----the HP experience is over. You know, this isn't going the way I intended. So, understanding that there are flaws and not pretending there aren't, let's look at the good things. Some of the flaws are what made the HP experience fun. Because when all is said and done, for those of us here, it hasn't just been seven books, it's been a real experience! Potioncat, as usual with a very large teapot at the ready. From allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 29 17:30:06 2007 From: allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk (allthecoolnamesgone) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:30:06 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173638 I assumed that the creature at Kings Cross was the 'unintentional' horcrux that V created when he tried to kill Harry at Godrics Hollow. I think the unusual reaction that V experienced at its death was because he himself had killed it and that it was part of the unique link between him and Harry. Once it was gone the only link left was that of Lilys blood which was what anchored Harry to life and enabled his return. Once he retutned to life and Nagini was killed the only part of V's soul left was the bit in his body. Maimed though that was there seemed to be a possibility still for his redemption the first step was remorse. He could not even take that small step he was too far gone, his response was again to attempt murder and the result was his death. Presumably ,horrific though the thought is and it is probably meant to be, that the disparate parts of V's soul were all there in the afterlife but so maimed that all possibility of travelling onward had been lost. Harry, Dumbledore and all the other characters of whom we had a post death glimpse seemd restored and more 'whole' than they had been in life but Voldemort was the opposite. He chose damnation! I agree that the image of the helpless maimed 'baby' lying unwanted on the floor is disturbing. But I also think that it was meant to be. The message conveyed was that evil of this magnitude has consequences for the evildoer and that a point is reached where no redemption is possible. It echoes Dumbledores concern that Draco should not 'rip' his soul by his murder he considered that Snape would not be committing murder as he knew that Dumbledore was dying so it was a mercy killing not murder. Even so for Snape it was a horrendous act hence his look of anger and revulsion as he carried it out. "allthecoolnamesgone" From allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 29 17:44:16 2007 From: allthecoolnamesgone at yahoo.co.uk (allthecoolnamesgone) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:44:16 -0000 Subject: regarding moral change, and mastering death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173639 i'm not sure it was a case of a moral change. It seems to me that the end hinged on Harry's willingness to give up his life. He had no promise of resurrection/return. He expected to die. Even after the conversation with Dumbledore he was not promised life if he went back to face Voldemort just the knowledge that for him a death was not to be feared, his soul was whole. Voldemort's death would bring him to Kings Cross in the form Harry had seen, a maimed soul beyond hope. It reminded me 'he gave what he could not keep, to gain that which he could not lose' "allthecoolnamesgone" From dwalker696 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 17:56:38 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:56:38 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173640 Cariad wrote: > yes that scene disturbed me too Sandra. I don't get what the ugly > baby was all about either. Like you and Geoff I subscribe to the near- > death experience theory, a moment in earth-bound time and space but > one in which Harry 'sees the light'. My take on the 'creature' was > that it was symbolic of evil, DD said that it was beyond help. > Despite that the 'creature' was pleading and seemed remorseful, it > was whining and totally disturbed. Maybe it wasn't vocalising it > well, but it made me feel very uncomfortable that it was being > ignored. I don't know what it is, good or bad? Voldemorts soul? the > Harry horcrux? it just leaves a bad taste. > > Besides if I don't know how to understand this, how will I explain it > to my grandson? Children are much more literal and need the facts. > > cariad. Donna replies: I just replied to Sandra's, but I wanted to address your post too. Without a doubt, that image leaves a bad taste, and if it did, then I believe JKR accomplished what she meant to with that image. I should hope no one would find the idea of exisiting like that anything but replusive and unsettling. And again, a testament to Harry's pure heart and character that he continues to be disturbed by it, he continues to ask if they can't help it in someway, even though Dumbledore tells him it is beyond any kind of hope or help, there is nothing that can be done to save Voldemort's self-damaged and ruined soul fragment. I don't know how old your grandson is, but my daughter is nine, and if she needs help processing it, I will tell her something like this: I believe one of the messages JKR wanted us to gain from the book is the idea that we continue to live, even after our bodies are dead. Some people call that heaven, but no matter what people call it, most people believe that our souls continue to live even after our bodies don't. We see that when Harry's parents, Sirius, and Lupin's souls come back to join him to walk into the forest. He heard Luna talking that she knows she will see her mother again one day. Well, unfortunately for Lord Voldemort, he broke his soul up into pieces. If I took a hammer and broke your little brother's toy robot up into pieces, would it still work and walk around and talk the way it is supposed to? No, because I broke it into pieces. And Voldemort did the same thing with his soul, he used evil to break it up. When those pieces don't have a living thing or a horcrux to protect them anymore, they can't go all back together and make a whole robot, a whole Voldemort again, those pieces have to go on to heaven just the way they are, broken. So if we got to read about Tom Riddle's soul in heaven, we wouldn't see him the way we see Harry's parents, who are just like the way they were when they were alive, we would see the broken pieces of his soul. And the way JKR imagined that those broken soul pieces would look like, and what they would be like, is that poor, helpless creature under the bench, who can't walk around and talk and work the way it is supposed to, because it is a broken piece, and not a whole soul anymore. Hope this helps! Donna From kaleeyj at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 18:26:48 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:26:48 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173641 CMC: > One of the most delicious images in DH for me was during the Muggle- > Born trial sequence, where Umbridge's Cat Patronus rubs up against the > inquisitors, keeping them safe from the dementors' baleful influence. > > I believe that on her website, JKR said that the Patronus spell was > invented by Dumbledore. We know from PoA how much Dumbledore detests > dementors, and what a mistake it was for the Ministry to work with > them. But did Dumbledore inadvertently make that unhealthy alliance > possible through his creation of the Patronus spell, or is there > another way to deal with dementors without the side effects? > Bex: I don't recall anything about DD creating the Patronus spell - perhaps you refer to DD developing Patronus communication (where a Patronus carries a message to the recipient)? And the Lethifold (FB) is also chased away by the Patronus charm - I believe it was here long before DD, as well. If you find your quote, post it in reply - I'd like to see it! BTW, I think that Snape's other method of dealing with dementors was something regarding Occlumency (it was mentioned in HBP, but JK never did elaborate of follow-up) - though I would love to know for sure. Snape did have another method, for sure - but Harry didn't like it. Still looking for the quote. ~Bex From chaomath at hitthenail.com Sun Jul 29 18:42:48 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:42:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unforgivables. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173642 On Jul 29, 2007, at 12:30 AM, eggplant107 wrote: > And I was not at all surprised at Harry's reaction; in fact I'd say > JKR had to include a scene like that for the character to ring true. > Harry is still a very good person but let's face facts, he's not an > eleven year old boy getting on the Hogwarts express for the first > time. How many people have tried to kill Harry in the last seven > years, how many horrors has he seen? If somebody ties you to a > tombstone and tortures you so hideously you want to die, well, you're > just not going to be the same person afterward; I'm not saying you're > going to become a monster or anything, but you're not going to be the > same. I am convinced that the battle scared veterans of Iwo Jima are > very good people, but after the hell they went through to expect them > to be squeamish when they hear a howl of pain from the enemy after > they pull the trigger is just not realistic. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear: I didn't have a problem with Harry's immediate reaction to throwing an Unforgivable Curse. But I do have a problem with him having no apparent psychological repercussions. From what I've read about those who survive war, it's more the awful things they do -- rather than are done to them or their friends -- that haunt them. Killing and torturing others does lasting damage to one's psyche. This is recently become a bit area of study (with the rise in understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder) and JKR herself used this quite effectively in her horcrux theory. So, to see Harry totally unconcerned, well, it didn't ring true with reality and with JKR's themes of the series. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From kaleeyj at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 18:43:59 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:43:59 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173643 Bex, previously: > BTW, I think that Snape's other method of dealing with dementors was > something regarding Occlumency (it was mentioned in HBP, but JK never > did elaborate of follow-up) - though I would love to know for sure. > Snape did have another method, for sure - but Harry didn't like it. > Still looking for the quote. > Bex, again: Apologies for a double post - I found it: "Harry fully expected to receive low marks on his [essay], because he had disagreed with Snape on the best way to tackle dementors, ..." (HBP, US PB, Pg448 - chap 21, "The Unknowable Room") ~Bex, who is exceptionally delighted that she found that. From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 18:50:57 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:50:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <875527.101.qm@web55013.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173644 Caius Marcius wrote: >I believe that on her website, JKR said that the Patronus spell was >invented by Dumbledore. We know from PoA how much Dumbldore detests >dementors, and what a mistake it was for the Ministry to work with >them. But did Dumbledore inadvertently make that unhealthy alliance >possible through his creation of the Patronus spell, or is there >another way to deal with dementors without the side effects? I believe that what JKR said is that Dumbledore came up with the idea and means for Order members to use their Patronuses for communication, not that he invented the Patronus Charm itself. Her words from her FAQ section: "Members of the Order use their Patronuses to communicate with each other. They are the only wizards who know how to use their spirit guardians in this way and they have been taught to do so by Dumbledore (he invented this method of communication.) The Patronus is an immensely efficient messenger for several reasons: it is an anti-Dark Arts device, which makes it highly resilient to interference from Dark wizards; it is not hindered by physical barriers; each Patronus is unique and distinctive, so that there is never any doubt which Order member has sent it; nobody else can conjure another person's Patronus, so there is no danger of false messages being passed between Order members; nothing conspicuous needs to be carried by the Order member to create a Patronus." I find it interesting that Snape apparently communicated with Black and Lupin in OOTP via Patronuses using a form that represented their best friend's wife and they didn't know it. Wouldn't they be curious that this dark wizard had a doe -- a rather meek creature and the mate of a stag -- for a Patronus? How many of us assumed his Patronus would be a bat, or vulture, or spider, or some other unappealing creature? Christy From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 18:17:30 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:17:30 -0000 Subject: The Malfoys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173645 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Stephanie" wrote: > > Hey all, > I'm really hoping that JKR will come out with more information on the > future of the Malfoys. Jack-A-Roe: I would assume that their future held jail time. Lucius was in prison before the corrupted government freed him. He did nothing to redeem himself at all. He would have fought for Voldemort if he had been allowed to. Draco was on the run from the ministry. He sent in a cursed object which harmed Katie, he sent poisoned mead which almost killed Ron, he brought death eaters into Hogwarts including Greyback. His only defense is that he didn't actually kill DD but he did disarm him. He also didn't immediately say he recognized Harry and the others. But he wanted to capture Harry and take him to Voldemort. Sorry but it's prison time for Draco. Narcissa would probably get off with the help of Harry backing her story that she helped him. Stephanie: > My interest in the Malfoy family was only further peaked in DH when I > saw the Lucius, Narcissa, and Draco's obvious love for one another. > > Draco's character seemed so on the verge of really blossoming in a > fascinating way but then the series ended! Jack-A-Roe: It seems that they were circling the wagons. No one else cared about them so they had nothing but each other to cling to. Stephanie: > The origins of this sort of reaction were explained when Narcissa and > Lucius, at the height of the fighting weren't even remotely > interested in the battle, the dark lord, or any of the rest of it. > Their whole focus was on their son and his safety. Jack-A-Roe: That was because they had no wands and couldn't fight. Given the chance they would have done anything that Voldemort asked. Stephanie: > While Draco may have been a brat, and a little terror, raised with an > overwhelming sense of racial---pure blood---superiority, he also > seems to have imbibed, at his mother's knee, a strong "people first" > ethos. > Jack-A-Roe: People first??? More of a "save your own skin" and that of your family. Yes, he did help Goyle and was upset about Crabbe, but then again he still had to explain to the other DE's how he survived and they died. With his family out of favor I don't think he would have been welcomed back with open arms. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 19:06:12 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:06:12 -0000 Subject: a Lupin Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173646 Sarah wrote: > I don't think JKR intended to portray DH Lupin as a coward. Since HBP (and maybe even earlier) I've seen him as very brave about "Big and Important" things like battles, but a coward about everyday things like forming lasting relationships. And even there, he was able to get over it in the end and was apparently a happy father. Since the first book JKR has established that there are different kinds of braveries within the "Gryffindor" banner. > > And it's a side point, but I really don't think we're supposed to trust Snape's assessment of the Prank as grounded in objective reality. He clearly has a grudge. > > Sarah > Carol responds: Possibly, JKR wanted to leave the so-called Prank unresolved so that we could arrive at our own interpretation. In the absence of canon to the contrary, I choose Snape's version. Also, of course, the memories that Snape gives Harry as he dies are not about Lupin or the Marauders. They are about Snape, so that Harry, whom Snape believes is being sent to his death by Dumbledore, will finally understand him. Snape may dislike Lupin, but he saves his life, even though the thanks he gets is that Lupin thinks DE Snape deliberately cursed George's ear off. As for Lupin, he has always been weak from the time he was Hogwarts' most ineffectual prefect to the time he hid Sirius Black's Animagus form and knowledge of the secret passages from Dumbledore even though he thought that Black was trying to murder Harry because he didn't want Dumbledore to know that he and the Marauders had endangered the citizens of Hogsmeade twenty years before. Snape, being observant and intelligent, knows quite well why Tonks is pining in HBP and why her Patronus has changed, and spiteful though his comment on Tonks' Patronus certainly is, it reflects (IMO) a clear insight into Lupin. True to form, Lupin wants to protect Tonks knowing that marrying him will subject her to great danger, but succumbs to peer pressure, quietly marries her, and brilliantly gets her pregnant (probably yielding to her persuasion). In DH, we see him depressed and suffering. He is presumably no longer skulking among "his fellows" since DD is dead and there's no one to spy for, and in any case, his cover is blown, but we've seen him growing more lined, more grey, more tattered, old beyond his 37 years, because he has no Snape to make him wolfsbane potion and no employment other than the Order. Now his mistake of marrying Tonks before Voldemort is defeated and of getting her pregnant brings him to his lowest point, the wish to desert his wife and unborn child to accompany HRH on their mission as their werewolf guardian. Harry recognizes this offer as a death wish: Lupin wants to die like Sirius, the last Marauder defending Harry to the death. He calls him a coward and sends him home to Tonks to defend his wife (or rather, to stand beside her since she's an Auror and can defend herself) for her sake and that of their unborn child (whom he fears will be a werewolf like himself). We don't get to see him pull himself together, but we know that he does. Lupin triumphs over his worst enemy, himself, by becoming a proud and almost happy father (naming Harry godfather perhaps because he rightly fears that Teddy will be orphaned) and by dying bravely, fighting alongside the other Order members. Tonks, who loved him more than he perhaps deserved, dies beside him. (Her House, JKR has informed us, is not Gryffindor, the House of courage, but Hufflepuff, the House of loyalty.) Ever so weak Lupin serves the plot purpose of letting the reader think he may be a traitor to the Order, but it's (IMO) completely in character, the culmination of the self-doubt and self-hatred that have always been his greatest weakness. Carol, agreeing that there are many kinds of courage in the HP books and facing your inner demons is certainly one of them From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 19:10:53 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:10:53 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173647 > > Alla: > > > The funniest argument fot Slytherin as persecuted jews symbolism > > to me is of course Snape's hooked nose. Um, why? > > > > I have blue eyes, blond hair and all my family does and we are all > > very very jewish. On the other hand, there are people with hooked > > noses, who are jews and NOT jews, had never been jews, you know? > > > > Am I suppose to think of Jew the moment I read about Snape's > hooked nose? Well, I really do not. > > Paula > I'm Jewish with all of my grandparents/relatives and those before > them from Eastern Europe - I never thought of Snape of Jewish as I do > not think of "hook noses" of being exclusively Jewish. We are also > not dark...I'm very fair with red hair as is my mother, daughter and > her son - certain mannerisms and names are clues for those of us that > are Jewish because, perhaps this is something we have grown up with in our families as well as those of us who have relatives from the "old country". This is what is true for me. That being said, I > cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could ever see the > Slytherins are being Jewish! They were the Pure Bloods trying to wipe out those that were night. Clearly it was those that were considered impure that were not acceptable. Hitler = Voldemort. Magpie: When Sydney brought up what she did, she stated that she was worried people would think she was actually calling Rowling anti-Semitic. It turns out there's a far worse misunderstanding, one that suggests that people are actually supporting anti-Semitic claims. I would hate to think that any person on this list feels that, and I think that's why the subject was brought up only with wariness. I would hope we could discuss the issue *because* we're all starting from the understanding that we were talking about stereotypes and how they work and not any actual people at all. Nobody (that I have read) thinks that Slytherins are supposed to be Jews or say anything about Jews. Even more important, no one has expressed any views that actual Jewish people all have hooked noses or are dark. Sydney was describing a *stereotype* that has been used historically, not actual Jewish people. Perhaps the stereotype is no longer known as much as it was, and that's great--but it's been a familiar part of Western literature. Rowling draws on a lot of things like that that might not be recognizable by all readers today, but do exist and still "work" on some level. I don't want anybody on the list to think that anyone here *believes* this stereotype to the point where you have to defend yourself against it. Hooked nose does not to me, equal being Jewish any more than it does you. Stereotypes are an ugly subject, but that's why we're bringing them up to talk about something that to some of us wasn't that pretty in the story. I didn't want to offend anybody in talking about it, but it honestly seemed like something we should be able to talk about without offending anyone. In fact, I think that any real analysis of the books *can't* avoid discussions like this, because Rowling draws so blatantly from all sorts of traditions. The Slytherins aren't at all unique in this. In talking to Alla, I agreed with her that the Slytherins (unlike Jews) actually *were* this collection of traits. It seemed like where we disagreed was that for her, since there were no real life Slytherins who were really not like this and so were being libeled by the depiction of Slytherins, it was okay. I think it sends a similar bad message regardless. Also, seeing those parallels to stereotypes does not in any way mean one also missed the the many dropped anvils that Voldemort's views about blood impurity are supposed to be like Hitler, with the "Mudbloods" being like the people he considered impure. So to reiterate as many times as it needs to be said: Jews do not all have hooked noses, nor are they all dark. They actually don't look (or act) any one way at all. When Rowling has Muggle-borns being forced to prove their bloodline, that's like Hitler going after Jewish people. In fact, the Slytherin belief system of blood purity is in itself racist in the same way Hitler was. Slytherins are not being persecuted in canon the way Jews were persecuted by Hitler. Nor are they in any way victims in canon the way Hitler's victims were. Eric: I've noticed that some of my Learned Friends (apologies; I get the list in digest form and don't always note who says what) feel that equating the DE-dominated MoM after the coup with Slytherins, and refer to the ones who persecuted Muggleborns as "Slytherins." Er---how do we KNOW? AFAICR, nobody has ever seen a single line of canon saying that Darling Dolores Umbridge was a Slytherin. Magpie: No, but we have Slytherin as the house that Sorts people due to blood purity, Voldemort wanting to Sort everyone under Slytherin's values and people knowing to claim to be Slytherin to get away from the snatchers--and the Slytherin banner naturally being missing from the RoR. The only DE we actually know who was in another house was Peter (who btw, is one DE not associated with the Pureblood agenda). Do you have to be Slytherin to support the Pureblood agenda that the Ministry is pushing in DH? Not at all. Is Slytherin explicitly associated with the Pureblood agenda? Yes. Rowling didn't happen to do a Nazi parallel where the whole country and all four houses because caught up in fascism, for instance. Not that she had to--she just wasn't writing about racism that way. There is no "what have we done/become?" element to the story. It's the other who has/is the problem. -m From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 18:35:05 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Gryffindor's sword In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <283608.78026.qm@web55002.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173648 poetryfreedom wrote: >In case someone has the answers... >How does the sword get back "into" the sorting hat if Griphook took it? >Who on earth is Fabian Prewett? (Harry's watch) I have an assumption about your first question and an answer for your second. I simply assumed that Gryffindor's magic ensures that a worthly Gryffindor has access to the sword in a moment of great need ... as Harry had accessed to it in the Chamber of Secrets. (Yes, I know, Fawkes brought the hat and sword, and Harry demonstrated loyalty to Dumbledore as well as great need and worthiness -- but perhaps, it is loyalty to Hogwarts and the Wizarding World that is paramount.) Even though my degree is in English and I made an academic career of literary analysis, I try not to over-analyze. So, in a magical world, I accept that 'magic happens.' As for Fabian Prewett, he is Molly's older brother and an original member of the Order of the Phoenix. There's another brother whose name escapes me but I believe Mad Eye points them out to Harry in OOTP while showing him the photograph, telling Harry that they were both killed but went down fighting. A friend has my book so I can't reference it exactly. However, in SS Hagrid says to Harry regarding Voldemort: "...an' he'd killed some o' the best witches an' wizards of the age -- the McKinnons, the Bones, the Prewetts..." On her website (under Other Stuff), JKR explains, "Before her marriage Mrs. Weasley was Molly Prewett. As you will note from chapter one, Philospher's Stone, she has lost close family members to Voldemort." (I found Hagrid's quotation above in chapter four; I didn't find anything in chapter one though.) Christy From ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 17:46:00 2007 From: ladypotentpotions1 at yahoo.com (Alice Franceschini) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:46:00 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173649 > Lisa: > Well ... why were my dad's seven brothers killed in WWII? Why did > my mother's brother lose an arm in Vietnam? Why did my husband's > friend get shot and killed right next to him in the first Gulf War? > > Because it's war. People die during war -- there's rarely a purpose. Hi Lisa, I don't think your argument is well founded unless you are trying to say that you think fictional stories and reality are the same thing. I do not think you can compare one with the other. I am sad that you have such a sad past but Rowling did not have to make a sad past for the last book and I do think a fictional writer is accountable for killing off loved characters in a fictional book such as Harry Potter is. Rowling changed her mind about killing Mr. Weasley and she was going to kill him in the 5th book. She could have easily changed her mind on all of these pointless killings in the 7th book. Lady Potions From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Jul 29 19:20:20 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:20:20 -0400 Subject: More Funny Lines Message-ID: <000a01c7d215$81a2e130$4dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173650 "How -- how're we going to get in?" panted Ron. "I can -- see the place -- if we just had -- Crookshanks again --" "Crookshanks?" wheezed Hermione, bent double, clutching her chest. "Are you a wizard, or what?" (DH Can Ed pg 523) Took me right back to this spot in PS: "So light a fire!" Harry choked. "Yes -- of couse -- but there's no wood!" Hermione cried, wringing her hands. "HAVE YOU GONE MAD?" Ron bellowed. "ARE YOU A WITCH OR NOT!" And this, where Bill is warning Harry about making bargains with Griphook: "We are talking about a different breed of being. Dealings between wizards and goblins have been fraught for centuries -- but you'll know all that from History of Magic." Our Harry? CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From c.harmon at mchsi.com Sun Jul 29 17:52:07 2007 From: c.harmon at mchsi.com (Clell Harmon) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:52:07 -0500 Subject: Griffindor's sword In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ACD3C7.9040800@mchsi.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173651 Magic: > Who on earth is Fabian Prewett? (Harry's watch) Clell: One of Molly Weasley's brothers, killed in Wizard War I. From dwalker696 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 18:18:51 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:18:51 -0000 Subject: 'crushing the magic out of him' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173652 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "barkingiguana" wrote: > Also, the reason that Voldemort killed Snape is something I've seen > before, but I can't remember where. I don't know if it was in > literature or made up many years ago by a friend was who was DMing a > D&D campaign I was in, or what. But the murder of an ally so that an > already delivered magic item would accept the murderer as its true > owner was not new to me. Does anyone else here recall having seen > that plot device before? Donna replies: Hi, your post intrigued me, and I started skimming through my books of mythology, celtic legend and lore, etc....And after I walked away from the computer it hit me - I don't know why this has me laughing and a little embarrassed, it's not exactly the literary example I was looking for - the movie 'The Ring' with Naomi Watts? You have to show the video to someone else (which could kill them) in order to save yourself? I am sure there is something more respectable in ancient Norse Mythology or something like that, but for now... Donna From e2fanbev at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 19:16:08 2007 From: e2fanbev at yahoo.com (e2fanbev) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:16:08 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173653 > Robert: > > I rarely come out of lurkdom and post so my opinions don't mean a whole lot, > but I agree with everything you said in your post. Bev: As a fellow lurker, Robert, I'd like to invite you to email me directly to discuss the book. I have posted before, long ago, and been ignored just a your post is being overlooked. I haven't wasted time trying to post until now. I agree that intolerance in the wizarding world is going to be just as hard to get rid of as it is in the real world. There will always be a need for the four houses as they stand. It isn't a pretty thought but... Yes, I also believe JKR understands this. It would be nice if it could disappear, but it will not. Bev P.S. I want to say something about potted plants but I won't. ;) From karen.eidukas at googlemail.com Sun Jul 29 18:58:24 2007 From: karen.eidukas at googlemail.com (karen.eidukas@ntlworld.com eidukas) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:58:24 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] I am about to rant.... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49312c440707291158x72a87bf6kdd1bbb20327b556d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173654 Hello everyone, In response to this post from Geoff, and comments following it, can I just say as a new member, I am so glad that Geoff has started this because I had actually decided to leave the group having only posted, I think twice, I am now looking forward to continuing to lurk and hoping things will turn out ok after all. I have been away for the weekend, and returned to lists of emails, all seeming to be JKR 'Bashing', no positive thoughts or enjoyment of the book seemed to be being voiced at all. DEEP Deep analysis of the story line, making me feel inferior..... because I LOVED the book..... read it and was transported along in tears and laughter. Had I read a different book? or is it because I accepted that this is JKRs story, and I am happy to read it and enjoy it without demanding that she provide things that I wanted to happen, happy to be able to share in her world. I didnt even realise that such a thing as fanfic existed!!! or that these people seem to expect JKR to pen the story as they wish, not as she wanted to. If anyone isnt happy with her style of writing or storylines, why have so many books sold and been re read by so many people? I have always told my children...'If you cannot say anything nice, then keep your opinions to yourself!' so a balance would be good, some nice things and then a tiny bit of a whinge, at the most! back to lurking for awhile I think. Karen [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From purplecatdork at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 19:08:34 2007 From: purplecatdork at yahoo.com (purplecatdork) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:08:34 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: <29702694.1185704658306.JavaMail.root@sf1441> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173655 The baby thing was representative of the piece of Voldemort's soul that was ripped from Harry when Voldemort cursed him. There was nothing they could do for it because it was bound to die from the beginning. purplecatdork From rvink7 at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 19:45:46 2007 From: rvink7 at hotmail.com (Renee) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:45:46 -0000 Subject: Slytherins/Krum are/are not Jews.../The Houses Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173656 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > >> Renee: > but having primarily their own interest in > mind and/or agreeing with the prejudices of their House, they would > have lacked the incentive to go against him until something happened > that shook them to the core. They weren't raised/predisposed do do so > in principle - and that had nothing to do with Voldemorts influence on > Slytherin House. > > Magpie: > Basically that would make them cowards, which in this universe is one > of the worst things you could be. Plenty of students in other houses > also had reason to fear that kind of retribution, but they fought > anyway. Being afraid wasn't really an excuse. Everybody's afraid. > Renee: I wasn't talking about fear of retribution. What I was trying to say was that their upbringing and their outlook on life did not predispose them to truly see the evil in Voldemort, or to go against it. Not because they were necessarily cowards, but because they just didn't feel too strongly about the issue to fight. Regulus was no coward, he just wasn't aware of any good reasons to go against Voldemort before the Kreacher episode. This opened his eyes, and he showed plenty of courage then. Maybe Slughorn was a coward, but he came around eventually. I'm not sure about Narcissa, but coward is not the first epithet that springs to mind when I think of her. Renee From purplecatdork at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 19:23:36 2007 From: purplecatdork at yahoo.com (purplecatdork) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:23:36 -0000 Subject: Petunia (was: Lily's Letter (and Petunia)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173657 Gwen wrote: > you could see [Petunia's] treatment of Dudley v. Harry arising > from her jealousy of her sister. If she could not show her > "perfect" sister what it felt like to be the one who was not > special, not gifted and not favored, then she would show it to > the boy with her sister's eyes. She was determined to make Harry > as miserable for being magical as her sister was treasured. CD replies: I've always seen Petunia's treatment of Harry as a result of jealousy. It seems like she could no longer take things out on Lily, so she redirected them into him. I have to wonder though, why are we just finding out about the connection between Snape and Lily? A relationship like that seems like it should have been mentioned in earlier books. CD From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 19:57:05 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:57:05 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173658 --- "mandorino222" wrote: > > Am I simply late to the discussion? Has someone else > brought up the fact that Harry has control of all > three Deathly Hallows when Voldemort hits him with AK > in the forest? Dumbledore can talk all he wants about > blood; the Deathly Hallows are why Harry survives. > > Nick > bboyminn: In theory, yes, Harry has the allegiance of the three Hallows, but does he? He has the Cloak, but he has abandon the Ring/Stone in the forest. Since he abandon it, does he really have control of it? Note, Harry was able to use the Ring/Stone in an unselfish way. He did call back the dead, but not with the intent of keeping them in the realm of the living. He simply needed a moments company to bolster his courage. He full intended to let them return to resting in peace. It is possible that that unselfish act solidified the Ring/Stones allegiance to him, but because he abandon it, we can't be sure. As to the wand, we have a similarly convoluted path of allegiance. Draco disarmed Dumbledore, but he never really took possession of the wand. He never actually touched it. Also note that when Harry 'defeated' Draco by taking Draco's wand, it was the Hawthorn wand he took. Harry also never touched the Elder Wand. Is simply capturing /any/ wand from a wizard enough to cause the shift in allegiance of the Elder Wand, which neither of the involved wizards has ever touched? Maybe...maybe not. The circumstances seem to indicate that the Elder Wand /did/ shift allegiance to Harry. But I don't think we can ever be completely sure. Further, was it necessary to have control of all three object to gain the benefit that Harry needed? In that moment, Harry had the assumed allegiance of the Elder Wand, and that was the critical factor. Would the Wand kill its assumed Master? Apparently not, but I don't think we can ever be 100% sure. Dumbledore seemed to say that Harry was the true Master of the Three Hallows because he was able to use them in an unselfish way. Being able to do so made Harry the true Master of Death, which is the characteristic that the Hallows were suppose to bestow. By extension, Dumbledore say that Harry is the true Master of the Hallows. That I will give you. But whether Harry was Master of all in that moment of confrontation with Voldemort, I can't say with certainty. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jul 29 19:57:14 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:57:14 -0000 Subject: Viva la revolucion Was:Re: "Today " interview In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173659 > Annemehr wrote: > She doesn't understand him. Or deserve him. Not only did she kill > him off in cold blood and a bad vampire joke (bitten in the neck, are > you kidding me?), but she burned up his book with nary a backward > glance. Potioncat: LOL. You sound like "the other woman" talking about the wife. > Annemehr > ...or maybe just put it on T-shirts; more personal, and less arrogant > rule-breaking. :P Potioncat: Count me in! Potioncat, the other, "other woman." From evangelina839 at yahoo.se Sun Jul 29 19:57:53 2007 From: evangelina839 at yahoo.se (Mika) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:57:53 -0000 Subject: The importance of wands Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173660 I haven't posted in years, and I just gulped down the entire book in about eighteen or something hours. This may not come out very insightful. And sorry if this has come up before. I, eh can't keep up. ;) One thing in the book disappointed me a little. When Harry's wand broke, I thought yey! This means Harry will beat Voldemort in battle on his own accord! But then, in the end it all appears to come down to another question of who has the stronger wand, and who the stronger wand really belongs to etc. I was hoping Harry would win because of other reasons than his wand. (And, of course, Hermione kept repeating that the wand is only as strong as the wizard.) I was pondering whether the significance of this was to show that the battle isn't lost just because your opponent seems infinitely superior, and that the importance isn't in Harry's strength, but his courage. But I would like to hear what the rest of you think. Eva P.S. If Harry is the real owner of the Elder wand, it's interesting how much really is at stake in the final duel. Had Voldemort killed Harry, not only would he have killed the only one able to conquer him, but he would have had the benefit of a fully functional death stick. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 20:05:35 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:05:35 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as evil stereotypes WAS: Re: Slytherins as Jews In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173661 Robert: > As an aside, the elves may delete this if they wish: > Look at almost any painting done of American Indians throughout the last of the 1800s and early 1900s, and look at any portrayal of American Indians in pre-1970s Hollywood films and you will notice that almost all of the NDNs fit that description, too. (I don't have one and no on in my family has one.) I believe the descriptions both come under the heading "stereotype." Ceridwen: Right. And that's all that's being said. No one that I've read has said the Slytherins are representative of Jews. That role, in the context of World War II, is obviously taken by the Muggle-borns who are outcast and ostracized for their ancestry. What people, including me, are saying is that Slytherins are characterized with stereotypical "Bad Guy" traits which were often used to characterize Jews. In the context of the HP series, with the obvious nods to World War II, the stereotypical portrayal of Jews comes to mind much sooner than the stereotypical portrayal of other groups. You are correct that the hooked nose is not restricted to a stereotypical portrayal of Jews. It is indeed used for Indians, Mexicans, Middle-Easterners, Eastern Europeans not necessarily Jewish, prudish librarians, evil schoolteachers, and others I don't recall off- hand. I'm wondering if this goes back to face reading and phrenology from the 1800s, where certain traits were seen as good, while others were seen as bad. Snape as a character is depicted with a large nose and sallow or pale skin, which to me would rule out most stereotypical depictions of Indians, Mexicans and Middle-Easterners, who are more often stereotypically depicted as swarthy, olive, or dark-skinned. This has nothing to do with actual people who are part of any group. Slytherins in general are given the stereotypical traits associated with undesireable groups. They have some tendency toward aristocracy in a world where there is no wizarding nobility. They are ambitious in a negative way. They are cunning, so may well cheat or embezel (sp?) you. They are big talkers who can't "walk the walk". They are betrayers, Judases, as Pansy Parkinson was when she pointed to Harry in the Great Hall. They prefer to save their own skin if given the opportunity. They are secretive and they plot against others. They oppress when given the chance. Every trait that is negative is heaped on the Slytherins. This has happened via stereotyping for millenia. One problem with this is, they didn't change and weren't redeemed. Not singly, not as a house. All of those stereotypical evil traits and physical markers were reliable signs that these guys would never be good. If you see these physical markers, or perceive any of these traits, you can be sure that the people who have them are bad. At least, for children who have not experienced as much of the world, this could reasonably be a conclusion. IMO, of course. Ceridwen. From random832 at fastmail.us Sun Jul 29 20:10:13 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:10:13 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid Flying In-Reply-To: <19BFB9BA-C440-49BB-85E1-3954D58CF728@acsalaska.net> References: <9723.52023.qm@web82909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <19BFB9BA-C440-49BB-85E1-3954D58CF728@acsalaska.net> Message-ID: <46ACF425.3030302@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 173662 Laura Lynn Walsh wrote: > Since I am now finished with the last book, I decided to > go back and re-read everything. And now I have a > question. In the first book, when Hagrid shows up at > Privet Drive, DD is surprised that he comes on Sirius' > motorbike. And 10 years later, when Harry asks him > how he got to the Hut on the Rock, he says he flew. > If he is too big to ride on broomsticks or thestrals (acc. > to DH p. 53 US ed.), how did Dumbledore expect him > to get Harry to Privet Drive? The only choice I can > think of is hippogriff, unless Hagrid, too, can fly without > means of support. Other ideas? > > Laura Well, there's the motorcycle, same then as now. Or... "How did you get here?" Harry asked, looking around for another boat. "Flew," said Hagrid. At this point, Harry does not know the word "Floo". There could be another building on the island itself that he Floo'd into, or perhaps this is how he got to the vicinity and he didn't consider his means of getting to the island itself important. -- Random832 From juli17 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 20:12:20 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:12:20 EDT Subject: THEY'RE CHILDREN!!! (pardon the scream) was The Houses Again Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173663 bboyminn: The question is, which came first the chicken or the egg? Do you really think Slytherins are sweet innocent kids who have been wrongly put upon by the other houses, or do you think Slytherin acted in a manner that made them deserving of all the scorn they received? Personally, I think Slytherin has created their own alienation from the other houses. It is their own actions repeated over time that has given them an unsavory reputation. If they want to change their reputation and the attitudes of others, they need to change their own actions. You reap what you sow. Slytherin has sown a lot of contempt and self-proclaimed superiority, and now they are reaping the scorn of the other Houses because of it. The blame falls squarely on their shoulders, not on the other Houses. Slytherin House caused the problem, and if they choose to, they can cause the solution. Simple as that. Magpie: Exactly. There's nothing the other houses should or could do. Their behavior regarding Slytherins has been completely right and they aren't responsible for any badness in Slytherin at all. The best they can do is be magnanimous to this group of people in their school. It's nice to hope that one day they'll change, but until they do they're the flaw in the school. Julie: I understand what you are saying. My problem is more with the Hogwarts headmaster/staff and WW society. Yes, Slytherin House has caused the problem and Slytherin house has become a cancer within Hogwarts. But I don't believe that only Slytherin House can bring about the solution, because Slytherin House is not a place full of mature adults who've made a choice (as with those who chose to join the Nazi party) but a place full of CHILDREN. Do these children deserved the scorn they receive from other children? Quite probably. What I'm really asking I guess is, where are the ADULTS? Why aren't THEY doing something to turn these children around? Why hasn't the Headmaster and why haven't the teachers, and why hasn't the society risen up and said, "This camp of simmering pureblood superiority is not acceptable, and we're not going to sit back and allow it to fester!" I really can't see why children should be expected to affect all this change, or if it is even possible for them to have the maturity and foresight to do so on their own, while the adults just stand on the sidelines "hoping" that this change will someday happen. Julie, who just can't get past the fact that we are dealing with children. ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 20:10:35 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Gryffindor's sword In-Reply-To: <283608.78026.qm@web55002.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <548586.74021.qm@web55008.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173664 poetryfreedom wrote: >In case someone has the answers... >How does the sword get back "into" the sorting hat if Griphook took it? >Who on earth is Fabian Prewett? (Harry's watch) Then, Christy(myself) responded: >I have an assumption about your first question ... >I simply assumed that Gryffindor's magic ensures that a worthly Gryffindor has >access to the sword in a moment of great need ... as Harry had accessed to it >in the Chamber of Secrets. (Yes, I know, Fawkes brought the hat and sword, >and Harry demonstrated loyalty to Dumbledore as well as great need and >worthiness -- but perhaps, it is loyalty to Hogwarts and the Wizarding World >that is paramount...' Within in moments of clicking the Send button, I was hit with a blinding flash of what might be the obvious. Since Harry had exhibited loyalty to Dumbledore and thus received the sword in COS, and since Dumbledore bequeathed the sword to Harry, perhaps the sword came to Neville because of his loyalty to Harry. He certainly displayed unwaivering loyalty to Harry and took very seriously Harry's direction to kill the snake. Furthermore, Neville still had the sword in the Great Hall, so perhaps it is now rightfully his as once it was rightfully Harry's. (Again, I do accept that that possession and passing from one wizard to another is an example of "magic happens" and the Goblins and their sense of ownership be damned.) Christy From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Jul 29 20:24:09 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:24:09 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant.... In-Reply-To: <49312c440707291158x72a87bf6kdd1bbb20327b556d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173666 >Potioncat: Welcome, Karen. I hope you won't give up on the list. Karen: > DEEP Deep analysis of the story line, making me feel inferior..... because I > LOVED the book..... read it and was transported along in tears and > laughter. Had I read a different book? or is it because I accepted that > this is JKRs story, and I am happy to read it and enjoy it without demanding > that she provide things that I wanted to happen, happy to be able to share > in her world. Potioncat: We get all kinds. We are all kinds. And we're pretty accepting. Your opinion is just as valid as anyone's. If we all agreed, we wouldn't have much to talk about. Some posts are Lit crit--written by folks who make their living at it, or at least, were trained in it. It's like Lit 101 at university. I enjoy those, even when I'm in over my head. Here's where the Point of View, genre, etc, type of posts might fall. Some posts are written as if we think the characters are real. For example, the ones where you know the middle aged woman who's writing the post expects Snape to come up behind her at any moment, place his hands tenderly on her shoulders and kiss the back of... Uh, where was I? You'll find the emotional ones here. The ones that argue that this character shouldn't have done such-and-such, or that character is a _________. And we get everything in between. I think I've taken part in just about all sorts of threads. > Karen: > I didnt even realise that such a thing as fanfic existed!!! > or that these people seem to expect JKR to pen the story as they wish, not > as she wanted to. Potioncat: Uh, how best to say this? I am one of "these" people. ;-) That is, I write and read fan-fic. Many of us write it to explore canon and to play with the un-seen parts of the story. Just like at this site, we have opinions about characters, plot, ideas. It's very thrilling (at least to me) when a fanfic falls neatly into a new JKR line. Yeah, it's disappointing when it doesn't. Many of us hurry to finish a story line before a new book, because we know our story is doomed. We take it in stride. (Well, most of the time.) I'd just like to say it isn't just fanfic writers nor is it all fanfic writers who "expect JKR to pen the story as they wish..." Karen: If anyone isnt happy with her style of writing or > storylines, why have so many books sold and been re read by so many people? > I have always told my children...'If you cannot say anything nice, then keep > your opinions to yourself!' so a balance would be good, some nice things > and then a tiny bit of a whinge, at the most! Potioncat: At a site like this, it is appropriate to discuss criticisms of the book. I have to admit, I hate the "This books stinks because..." sort of post. I jump right out of them, and avoid the thread. So please keep lurking, and keep posting. I'd like to hear more of what people liked as well as what people didn't like. From lawandmommyhood at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 20:29:49 2007 From: lawandmommyhood at yahoo.com (lawandmommyhood) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:29:49 -0000 Subject: The Watch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173667 In the epilogue, Harry has a watch. "He checked the battered old watch that had once been Fabian Prewett's." I remember Fabian mentioned in passing -- died like a hero in the first war against Voldy (according to MadEye said somewhere in OOTP). I already know he was kin to Molly Weasly (nee Pruitt) But where did *the watch* enter the story? How did Harry get it? What's its significance? Did I miss something? Any insight much appreciated. lawandmommyhood From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 20:45:15 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:45:15 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: "Myself am hell" (Was: That ugly baby thing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173668 Sandra Collins wrote: > > Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. From what I've read of the many many many enjoyable, varied and informative posts regarding a wide raft of subjects to do with the book, is how Voldermort was meant to be an ugly baby under a bench. I don't understand the symbolism or maybe the reality? Could anyone enlighten me as to what it all meant because it's all been lost on me. I go along with Geoff's line (always good to read your views, Mr Bannister!) on it being a brief near-death experience for Harry, that's how I read it in the first place, but the baby made it unpleasant reading and I still don't get it. > Cariad replied: > yes that scene disturbed me too Sandra. I don't get what the ugly baby was all about either. Like you and Geoff I subscribe to the near- death experience theory, a moment in earth-bound time and space but one in which Harry 'sees the light'. My take on the 'creature' was that it was symbolic of evil, DD said that it was beyond help. Despite that the 'creature' was pleading and seemed remorseful, it was whining and totally disturbed. Maybe it wasn't vocalising it well, but it made me feel very uncomfortable that it was being ignored. I don't know what it is, good or bad? Voldemorts soul? the Harry horcrux? it just leaves a bad taste. > > cariad. Carol responds: A lot of people are arguing that it's the bit of Voldemort's soul from Harry's scar, but I don't think so. Hermione, who has read about Horcruxes in "Secrets of the Darkest Art," tells Harry and Ron that a Horcrux is the complete opposite of a human being. Killing a person's body doesn't kill his soul, which will "survive untouched." But "the fragment of soul inside a Horcrux is dependent on its container, its enchanted body, for survival. It can't exist without it" (DH Am. ed. 104). IOW, the soul bits are utterly obliterated when the Horcrux containing them is destroyed. In the case of Harry's scar, it's an accidental Horcrux over which no encasing spell has been performed, so there's no enchanted body that needs to be destroyed. But Dumbledore tells Harry that the soul bit was destroyed when it was released from him. Like the others, it has no independent existence: "'So the part of his soul that was in me," asks Harry, 'has it gone?' "'Oh, yes,' said Dumbledore. Yes, he destroyed it. Your soul is whole, and completely your own, Harry" (70). So the "small, maimed creature" isn't the soul bit. DD won't tell Harry what it is, but he expects him to figure it out. Here's my interpretation (supply IMO as needed): When Harry is sent in spirit (his mind and soul being so intertwined as to be indistinguishable) to "King's Cross" (a near-death experience, as Geoff says, in which he could have chosen to "go on" to "the next great adventure" but didn't), Harry is glimpsing his own future if he dies, and he sees that death is nothing to fear. Dumbledore is restored to wholeness; Harry himself is whole and free of the soul bit. He can choose to remain and be with his loved ones, but obviously that's the wrong choice. He has to go back. And if he dies when he confronts Voldemort again, he knows now that death is nothing to fear--not for him or even for the manipulative Dumbledore, who has been restored to his benevolent self, his best self, even his dead hand restored to health and wholeness. (Later, we see Lupin healed of lycanthropy and Sirius free of the taint of Azkaban. Death, Rowling is telling us, holds no terror for the good or the repentant. Snape, I'm sure, will be healed of bitterness as a reward for his courage and loyalty, his sins expiated by his final act of atonement.) But Voldemort, too, is having a near-death experience. His troubled followers have gathered around his fallen form, not sure what has happened. His body lies on the ground, apparently still warm but unresponsive. His soul, like Harry's, has passed temporarily into the afterlife, where it lies in the form of a maimed fetus, helpless and corrupt and untouchable but not truly dead because he still has one remaining Horcrux. Voldemort, whom we glimpsed as a deformed fetus (symbolizing, perhaps, the loss of humanity and wholeness caused by the creation of the Horcruxes and the stunted condition of the soul that has never loved) before Wormtail dropped him into the cauldron to be restored to his old body. But this fetus is even more helpless. It can't speak or lift a wand. It is flayed and tortured and beyond help. Surely, this is the form that LV's soul will take if he dies unrepentant. Harry knows from Hermione that the one way Voldemort can put himself back together (or could have done before the Horcruxes were destroyed) is to feel remorse, the pain of which could destroy him (103). When Harry confronts Voldemort, he offers him that chance: "Think, and try for some remorse, Riddle," he says. "It's your last chance. It's all you've got. I've seen what you'll be otherwise" (741). What Harry has seen is "a small, naked child, curled on the ground, its skin raw and rough, flayed-looking," shuddering and struggling for breath (706-7), beyond the help of Harry or Dumbledore or anyone (708). Unless Voldemort suffers the excruciating pain of remorse for his unspeakably evil deeds, his maimed and fragmented and undeveloped soul, robbed of the destroyed soul bits, will spend eternity alone and tortured and helpless, its fetal state showing its incompleteness, beyond any hope of redemption because Voldemort dies without remorse. Carol, who thinks this vision of Voldemort's personal hell is as powerful and terrifying as anything in the book From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 20:45:55 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:45:55 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173669 Potioncat: > At a site like this, it is appropriate to discuss criticisms of the > book. I have to admit, I hate the "This books stinks because..." sort > of post. I jump right out of them, and avoid the thread. > > So please keep lurking, and keep posting. I'd like to hear more of > what people liked as well as what people didn't like. Ceridwen: Hi from me too, Karen! Don't leave, stick around! I've taken the tack that, if we're still here after the last book has been published, we like the series overall. I have my favorite moments from DH, to be mentioned below. Since I'm assuming that everyone here likes and enjoys the books even after The End, I don't mind criticisms. They come from people who care. My youngest is currently reading DH. Slowly. She has a social life. *sigh* But, the scene I thought was really great was in the chapter about the Doe Patronus. Ron tries to destroy the Locket with Gryffindor's sword, which he valliantly won from the frozen pond. A giant Harry and a giant Hermione erupt from the halves of the locket and start trying to feed Ron's insecurities. Ron's initial stunned reaction, and his overcoming his feelings about these fabrications, was, to me, a great success. Ceridwen. From hhbarmaid at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 20:50:31 2007 From: hhbarmaid at gmail.com (hogsheadbarmaid) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:50:31 -0000 Subject: The Watch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lawandmommyhood" wrote: > > In the epilogue, Harry has a watch. > > "He checked the battered old watch that had once been Fabian > Prewett's." > > I remember Fabian mentioned in passing -- died like a hero in the first > war against Voldy (according to MadEye said somewhere in OOTP). I > already know he was kin to Molly Weasly (nee Pruitt) > > But where did *the watch* enter the story? How did Harry get it? What's > its significance? Did I miss something? > > Any insight much appreciated. > > lawandmommyhood > The Barmaid says: Molly gave Harry the watch as a birthday gift from her and Arthur. It is the same sort of watch they gave to Ron for his 17th in HBP. She apologized for the fact that the one they give Harry was not new -- it is a bit battered. She explains that it was her brother Fabian's. You can find this in Chapter Seven (pg 114 US) --Barmaid (delurking only for the straightforward stuff at this point!) From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 29 20:51:50 2007 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:51:50 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173671 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dwalker696" wrote: > > Cariad wrote: > > yes that scene disturbed me too Sandra. I don't get what the ugly baby was all about either. Like you and Geoff I subscribe to the near-death experience theory. > > cariad. > > Donna replies: > ........So if we got to read about Tom Riddle's soul in heaven, we wouldn't see him the way we see Harry's parents, who are just like the way they were when they were alive, we would see the broken pieces of his soul. And the way JKR imagined that those broken soul pieces would look like, and what they would be like, is that poor, helpless creature under the bench, who can't walk around and talk and work the way it is supposed to, because it is a broken piece, and not a whole soul anymore. > > Hope this helps! > Donna > Yes it does Donna, thank you - and so do all of the posts about this which is much better than I'd hoped! Although the horrible baby part will always be a part I skip over when ever I next read the DH book, at least I have a better idea of why it's there! I don't mind so much any more. In a way, I'd love to have seen what would have happened if Harry had gone to it, but that would have been far too Hollywood Hero stuff and undermined the significance and gravitas of Dumbledore being there. It struck me that by NOT going to the baby, Harry was passively accepting Dumbledore's words that there's much more to life and death then he'd understood even up to the point where he had faced LV, and I suppose that's why he chose to defy his own instinctive feelings by not tending to it. Now let's all go round to Cariad's - she's got cakes!!!! Sandra (laughing) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 20:50:15 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:50:15 -0000 Subject: That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173672 --- "Sandra Collins" wrote: > > Having put down the book after reading the King's > Cross chapter again, I still don't get the whole ugly > baby thing. ... how Voldermort was meant to be an ugly > baby under a bench. I don't understand the symbolism > or maybe the reality? Could anyone enlighten me ... > > Sandra x. > bboyminn: I can't tell you what 'is', I can only tell you what I think. When Voldemort cast the Killing Curse against Harry using a Wand that considered Harry it's Master, I believed the curse rebounded and sent both Harry and Voldemort into "Limbo" or the 'Twilight' between life and death. So, in this 'twilight' we see Harry's soul and Voldemort's soul. In the discussion with Dumbledore, Dumbledore says that the soul bit that was in Harry has been destroyed. Because of this, I believe that the 'ugly baby' Harry sees is the totality of Voldemort's remaining soul. Keep in mind however, that Harry is creating his own experience in 'Twilight'. He needs clothes, so his mind creates clothes. He needs council, so his mind creates Dumbledore. When he needs to make physical sense of his location, he creates King's Cross Station. Note that rarely does Dumbledore actually give any information. Mostly, he simply tells Harry that he already knows the answer, and Harry works it out for himself. Even when Dumbledore is speaking, I believe it is really Harry's own subconscious speaking. This is key. Harry is creating his experience, but that means that Voldemort is also creating his own experience. Voldemort does not hear Harry and Dumbledore's conversation; that is Harry's experience. Voldemort wrestles with his own demons during that time, or simply remains lost in the white void. When Harry decides to come back, Voldemort comes back. But at the moment, I believe that if Harry had decided to go 'on'; Voldemort would have been faced with the same choice. Since he feared death and still had remaining Horcruxes, Voldemort would have come back to life and carried on. They both remained in limbo only as long as Harry had not made a decision. Once Harry decides, they go their separate ways. So, I don't think the Ugly Baby is the fragment of Voldemort soul that was trapped in Harry. Dumbledore says that was destroyed. I think it was Voldemort's spiritual self. Further, I think Voldemort had is own unique experience during the time both he and Harry were 'out'. This is a very murky area, and I have only reached this conclusion after much thought. Though, after much more thought, I could change my mind. But, I doubt it. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Jul 29 21:21:15 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:21:15 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant/the hardest part In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173673 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > Geoff: > What I am trying to get at is instead of trying to score points off > one another or run down what JKR has written, why don't we try looking > for things to agree on; things that we like about the books. Instead > of perpetual negativity, why don't we look for good things, > encouraging things, things to say "wow" about? Instead of counting > the dead, why don't we remember the numbers who came through the war > and will go on beyond the last page ? in the epilogue or not ? Harry, > Ron, Hermione, Luna, Neville, Bill, Charlie, Arthur and Molly, even > Draco and his parents(!) and the rest. I read Tolkien and Lewis and > Rowling first and foremost for pleasure. Perhaps I'm na?ve but I > don't want to analyse them down to the last full stop; I just want to > be an armchair hedonist for a couple of hours! > Magpie: > How much are planning to pay me for writing posts for your > entertainment instead of my own? Because I'm writing about what > interests me in the books and in list discussion and skipping the > stuff I'm not interested in.:-) > -m (who would probably have had little interest in Riddle's diary, > the Weasley family tree or the location of Hogwarts and pretty much > entered HP fandom because she thought something in the books was > whacked!) Geoff: I think you may have missed the point I am striving to make. I quite understand that you might not have had any interest in the topics I mentioned; they were just a couple off the top of my head to illustrate my point. You are writing about what interests you in the threads. So am I. Hence, you will find very few posts from me about Snape! As I said in my previous post, I have been a member since July 2003, joining just after OOTP hit the shelves. When I joined, there was almost a family atmosphere about the group. Other contributors were friendly and sociable (as far as you can be in cyberspace!!) and although there were disagreements over interpretations, they were seldom confrontational or unpleasant. In the current situation, my concern is not so much what the messages are ABOUT but HOW they are presented, There are two areas which disturb me, The first is the confrontational situation where a contributor takes the line "This is what I think. I am not going to change my view and anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot/pigheaded/unwilling to consider other views /inexperienced/etc." And when a couple of posters like this meet, we get these interminable exchanges where the same thing is repeated again and again and again. It reminds me of John Cleese's infamous Basil Fawlty who believed that if you spoke to foreign guests in his hotel slowly enough and often enough, they would understand English perfectly. I believe that these folk have a scientific classification: homo obstinatus or homo arrogans. :-) I realise that members can be constitutionally optimistic or can be Eeyore types (Winnie-the-Pooh if you don't recognise the reference). I'm usually a half-full glass type. There must be something within the books which pleases you or encourages you - surely? Something which go "at last" or "wow" and punch the air? I have to say that I find the continual complaints about certain events in DH annoying. After all, it has been pointed out that JKR wrote the books as she wanted to. If you cannot accept what she has written,why are you here like a house elf, agonising over to and banging your head on a wall? Reading HP books is not mandatory - yet. :-) I am merely asking - nay pleading -for a little more consideration for opposing views and perhaps a walk on the bright side. I know that good news does not sell newspapers and a good massacre or a rumour that Harry has been captured will triple the sales of the Prophet, I would still like to be reminded of the way in which those opposed to Voldemort and supporting Harry are doing their bit. I found the Pottercast transmission a great bit of propaganda. There are encouraging things in the book; let's give them an airing as well. I was very inrested in SSSuan's post 173546 in which she looked at possible developments involving Slytherin in the years leading up to the epilogue. I was thinking today that it is 18 years since that incredible summer of 1989 when the Communist bloc unravelled before our eyes. But the fact is that even after that length of time, there are some countries which are only hanging on to democracy by their fingernails. For those who have welcomed the freedoms and lessining of tension, there are still those who would favour a return to the old days. So it will be with Slytherin. If there are straws in the wind pointing to changes in DH, there will still be a core of traditional Slytherins in and out of Hogwarts - including ex-Death Eaters and sympathisers - who will oppose a liberalisation of the house. As somebody has remarked, there is a niche here for the fanfic writers to get their thinking caps on. I welcomed the acknowledgments between Harry and Draco as at least showing a tiny thaw in relations. From vachere at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 19:48:39 2007 From: vachere at gmail.com (Alycia Detvay) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:48:39 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] That ugly baby thing. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <26c3cef90707291248s67d7b633r787ec29b2e9e360d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173674 On 7/29/07, Sandra Collins wrote: > > Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter > again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. > I don't understand the symbolism or maybe the reality? Could > anyone enlighten me as to what it all meant because it's all been > lost on me. I saw it as almost like his soul. Harry was pure, whereas Voldemort was twisted and deformed. Maybe he was a baby because there was only a small portion of him in Harry. -- Cheers, Alycia "With devotion's visage and pious action we do sugar o'er the devil himself." Thomas Fuller "So what's your plan? You take the big dark one, I got the little girl and the Aussie'll run like a scared wombat if things turn rough." House Pass the Pigs http://www.fontface.com/games/pigs/ www.myspace.com/moveegurl http://PonyGal.flixster.com http://www.dittytalk.com/horsegal www.mybarn.com/snuffy My CafePress Store www.cafepress.com/itsthatweird http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=moveegurl From kitnkids at comcast.net Sun Jul 29 20:47:18 2007 From: kitnkids at comcast.net (faery_wisdom) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:47:18 -0000 Subject: The Watch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173675 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lawandmommyhood" wrote: > > In the epilogue, Harry has a watch. > > "He checked the battered old watch that had once been Fabian > Prewett's." > > But where did *the watch* enter the story? How did Harry get it? > What's its significance? In DH on Harry's 17th b'day, Molly Weasley tells Harry his present's on top. He opens it and it's the old beat up watch. Molly says it's tradition to give a wizard a watch on their 17th, when they become of age, and starts to apologize for it not being new like Ron's. It's actually a a very touching moment, between what she says, and the hug Harry gives her as thanks. In that moment they seem to acknowledge that he is as much a son as Molly's others, and she and Arthur Harry's adopted parents. faery_wisdom From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Sun Jul 29 20:42:02 2007 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:42:02 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Watch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46ACFB9A.8080705@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 173676 lawandmommyhood a ?crit : > But where did *the watch* enter the story? How did Harry get it? What's > its significance? Did I miss something? Molly gave it to Harry at his 17th birthday, stating clearly that for her, Harry is like another son, since she also gave Ron a watch for his 17th birthday. Vincent -- np: Tapes 'n Tapes - The Illiad http://www.nonewsweb.com http://www.last.fm/user/nonewsweb/ From Schlobin at aol.com Sun Jul 29 20:40:12 2007 From: Schlobin at aol.com (Schlobin at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:40:12 EDT Subject: How do DEs know it's the real Harry? Moody/Invisibility Cloak Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173677 I hope this question hasn't been already answered, but when Harry and Hagrid are escaping on the motorbike, how do the Death Eaters know it's the real Harry...? And if Harry's Invisibility Cloak is so special, why can Moody's mad eye see through it? Susan McGee ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Sun Jul 29 21:16:16 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:16:16 -0000 Subject: Slytherins/Krum are/are not Jews.../The Houses Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173678 > > Magpie: > > Basically that would make them cowards, which in this universe is one > > of the worst things you could be. Plenty of students in other houses > > also had reason to fear that kind of retribution, but they fought > > anyway. Being afraid wasn't really an excuse. Everybody's afraid. > > > Renee: > I wasn't talking about fear of retribution. What I was trying to say > was that their upbringing and their outlook on life did not predispose > them to truly see the evil in Voldemort, or to go against it. Not > because they were necessarily cowards, but because they just didn't > feel too strongly about the issue to fight. Magpie: Oh! Sorry, I thought you meant that they wanted to stay but didn't because they were afraid. But I think this is possible too, absolutely. I think it was clear that it wasn't important to them-- some Slytherins had things more important to them than Voldemort, usually people they cared about--they're not all Bellatrixes. And I think Slughorn clearly wanted to stay away from Voldemort enough that when push came to shove he would fight. Ceridwen: Slytherins in general are given the stereotypical traits associated with undesireable groups. They have some tendency toward aristocracy in a world where there is no wizarding nobility. They are ambitious in a negative way. They are cunning, so may well cheat or embezel (sp?) you. They are big talkers who can't "walk the walk". They are betrayers, Judases, as Pansy Parkinson was when she pointed to Harry in the Great Hall. They prefer to save their own skin if given the opportunity. They are secretive and they plot against others. They oppress when given the chance. Every trait that is negative is heaped on the Slytherins. This has happened via stereotyping for millenia. Magpie: Yes, that was my impression while reading. And I just don't find the solution that prejudice will always be there and there's nothing you can do about it a very good ending to a 7-book bildugsroman (one which started off with the same premise to begin with). Obviously in the real world prejudice exists and continues to do so, but I don't agree that there's nothing that can change. Specific beliefs can change, especially when somebody is forced to change their thinking. Often people simply aren't forced to change their thinking. Sometimes even being presented with clear proof that the persecuted group is worthy of total respect won't make people change. But these books aren't the real world, they take place in a school. I think there could have been more than there was, and more of an attempt than they're was. I don't think it would have been unrealistic. But this is JKR's book and she didn't have to do that if she didn't want to. Obviously that wasn't where her interest lay, and she didn't owe it to me to give it to me. But this was my reaction to the book and perhaps the books from now on. I didn't post it to make others feel badly or feel stupid--I didn't realize it was so upsetting to others to read stuff like this, since I'm generally not as bothered by hearing books I liked criticized (sometimes it makes me like the books less, sometimes not) and obviously it interests me. But maybe I understand it a bit in that I don't particularly enjoy posts about the negative effect on the group in general (or posts mocking this thread outside the group). Anyway, I don't mean to keep beating a dead horse--probably I wouldn't have posted quite as much except that there were certain misunderstandings that were a bit too horrible to let stand, like that Slytherins were supposed to be persecuted Jews in canon or that Shylock-type stereotypes were actually real. -m From dreadr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 21:16:22 2007 From: dreadr at yahoo.com (dreadr) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:16:22 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173679 > > Lisa: > > Well ... why were my dad's seven brothers killed in WWII? Why did > > my mother's brother lose an arm in Vietnam? Why did my husband's > > friend get shot and killed right next to him in the first Gulf War? > > > > Because it's war. People die during war -- there's rarely a purpose. > Lady Potions: > Hi Lisa, > > I don't think your argument is well founded unless you are trying to say that you think fictional stories and reality are the same thing. I do not think you can compare one with the other. I am sad that you have such a sad past but Rowling did not have to make a sad past for the last book and I do think a fictional writer is accountable for killing off loved characters in a fictional book such as Harry Potter is. Rowling changed her mind about killing Mr. Weasley and she was going to kill him in the 5th book. She could have easily changed her mind on all of these pointless killings in the 7th book. > > I am afraid that I have to agree with Lisa on this one and let's face it --she knows from wherein she speaks. Even in a fictional book for children (highly debatable or we wouldn't all be here discussing it), the author has an obligation to structure a believable world. Would you prefer that children have a sanitized version of war where no one "good" gets killed and EVERYONE lives happily ever after? I think it is important to stress even to young people or perhaps expecially to young people that bad things do happen to good people, that live is not always fair and that you have to do the very best you can in spite of this. Jo has done that through the whole series. Did I like all the deaths? Of course not! I cried over Hedwig, I bawled over Dobby and Fred, Tonks & Lupin left me totally appalled but I took them in the spirit that I believe they were meant. I have loved the series since I started it (after the third book). I am now rereading it again for the umpteenth time. I am grateful to Jo Rowling for allowing me to visit and inhabit this wonderful world that she created. I intend to continue doing so for a long time to come, but I am very aware that this is HER world and I am but a visitor! Thanks for sharing Jo. Debbie From erin.ridgeway at gmail.com Sun Jul 29 21:35:01 2007 From: erin.ridgeway at gmail.com (Erin Ridgeway) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:35:01 -0400 Subject: Gideon and Fabian Prewett Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173680 lawandmommyhood asked: <> Fabian and Gideon Prewett were Molly Weasley's brothers, killed by DEs in the first war. It was given to Harry as a 17th birthday gift, because it's customary, according to Molly, to give a wizard a watch when he comes of age. It's particularly nice that she chooses to give him a family heirloom, reminding him again that she considers him a son. I'll take this moment to reflect on how much I love one big happy Weasley family. Take that, epilogue haters! ;) I also suspect that Fred and George were given their names to honor Molly's fallen brothers, given their first initials. If Molly is as cutesy-poo as I am (and I think she probably is), their names are Fred Gideon and George Fabian. But I have no support for that whatsoever, I just like the idea. Hope that's helpful. Erin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bartl at sprynet.com Sun Jul 29 21:53:40 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:53:40 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Random Observations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AD0C64.7040301@sprynet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173681 rt11guru wrote: > Has any one noticed that Xenophilius translates to "Strange Love" Bart: More precisely, love of the strange. It's a play on "Xenophobia", which is an unreasoning fear of the unknown. Artist/writer Phil Foglio created an "adult" comic book series called "Xxxenophilia", which specialized in stories of humans and science fiction/fantasy creatures in generally humorous sexual situations. There was also a collectible card game based on the series, which was widely awaited until it was discovered that Foglio did not have much to do with the game. It was sufficiently well known that I would be greatly surprised in JKR was unfamiliar with it. Bart From ccairns2005 at yahoo.ie Sun Jul 29 21:12:44 2007 From: ccairns2005 at yahoo.ie (charlie cairns) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:12:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: In Laws Joke (?) Message-ID: <226189.75422.qm@web26308.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173682 Just a small detail, but on my second read I thought it funny. The Weasleys spend DAYS getting the house clean and tidy, then the gusts arrive. The future Mother in Law is an expert in household spells, and she then gets the oven clean. Where I have felt that sting of in-laws before. I'd loved to have heard Mollys response to this helpful gesture. charlie Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ccairns2005 at yahoo.ie Sun Jul 29 21:19:18 2007 From: ccairns2005 at yahoo.ie (charlie cairns) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:19:18 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Snapes punishments of the thieves Message-ID: <290547.39462.qm@web26312.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173683 When Luna, Neville and Ginny - a reflection of how interesting I find these people - are caught in the headmasters office, for theft of a valuable magical device, what does Snape do? He sends them as punishment to Hagrid to do something in the Forbidden Forest. Now, if these were 'standard' students that may, possibly., have been a punishment. If Snape knew ANYTHING about Luna, he'd know she'd enjoy that trip - and that neither Neville or Ginny would be really scared as they were linked to Hagrid via HRH already. [I'm not 100% on this, but I'd assume Ginny at least would have heard from Ron about his adventures in the Forest.] Again, a small detail, but I think its an indication that Snape was not league with the Toad, no writing painful lines on their hands, etc. My view, excellent book, no quibbles at all on the ending, think it lines us up for future productions. charlie Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dreadr at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 21:24:02 2007 From: dreadr at yahoo.com (dreadr) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:24:02 -0000 Subject: Draco..I'm new to list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173684 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nickismom1228 at ... wrote: > > I finished the book yesterday. I plan to go back over it again. I > think I missed some things. Does the book say at the end there if > Draco was alive and if his mother found him? > > Jeannie > Dear Jeannie, In the end, while Harry is spreading himself among the well-wishers, it says that Lucius, Narcissa and Draco were sitting off to themselves, not sure it they were supposed to be there. Also, Draco is mentioned in the epilogue. ( I wonder if he married Pansy?) Debbie From juli17 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 22:15:33 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:15:33 EDT Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173685 Annemehr: I wish I were competent to explore the issues of free will (or lack of it) involved among the personalities and situations people find themselves saddled with, but I wonder if anyone else feels any sense of inevitability in some of these situations? Our choices *show* who we are, but how much choice do we have in *being* who we are? How much is nature, how much nurture, and how much does that leave left over to be actually in our control? Julie: I've been thinking about this too. The nature vs nurture debate (which in turn affects how much choice we actually have in our lives) has gone on for decades, with no certain resolution in sight. Certainly we are each a product of both our nature and our environment, but nailing down how much each affects us, and also how the two interact with each other, may never been accomplished in any concrete manner (such as saying who a person is refects 60% nature/genes and 40% environmental influences). It does seem especially revelant when it comes to the three "orphan" boys who found a home at Hogwarts--Tom Riddle, Severus Snape, and Harry Potter. Given that they turned out so differently along the spectrum--Tom was irredeemably evil, Severus in the conflicted middle who managed to tip his scale just to the side of good, and Harry remaining solidly anchored on the side of good no matter what obstacles or temptations life threw his way. On the nature side, Tom was gifted with looks, social ease, and great intelligence. But it seems he was also a psychopathic personality, if not from the beginning then certainly from a very young age, and incapable of human empathy. Severus meanwhile was physically unattractive and socially inept, though he did possess great intelligence. He was capable of love, though it wasn't something he could give or receive easily. And in nature Harry was in the middle of the scale when it came to physical looks (average) and social skills (not the charmer that Tom was, but easily able to attract a number of close friends unlike socially retarded Severus). But he had a great capacity for love. On the nuture side, we are given to assume that Tom lost out completely. He was not neglected, as he was fed and clothed and even treated kindly, perhaps held on occasion, but with dozens of other children to care for it's not likely that he was singled out for any additional attention. In other words, as a baby and young child he never experienced love or devotion directed specifically at him. Severus, OTOH, we can assume experienced some love in the arms of his mother, at least as a baby and young child. His father apparently didn't want him. And we know his mother was at least in appearance a "severe" person. I can't imagine there was much open expression of affection in that household, and we know Severus was neglected by the ridiculous clothing he was forced to wear. But if Eileen did at least show genuine affection to Severus while she nursed him and rocked him as a baby, and perhaps when she healed his bumps and bruises as a toddler, this would have given him at least the capacity to give and receive love, even if in a stunted manner. Meanwhile we know that Harry was showered with love and affection until he was 15 months old. He was wanted, treasured, and deeply loved by both parents, and even as young as he was, this would have been internalized. Interalized strongly enough apparently that it saw him through the following nearly 10 years of neglect and complete absence of love and affection in his life. As I write this I still cannot get a full sense of which had the greater influence on the lives of these three lost boys. (In some ways it seems like Tom never had a real chance or choice, as his psychopathy prevented him from feeling or even comprehending true remorse.) But each boy by the time they reached Hogwarts already showed definite signs of their capacities for love, empathy, and remorse. I don't think most of us had any doubt Tom/Voldemort would die without redemption, or that Harry would never turn to evil no matter what the provocation or temptation. Severus was another matter, as he was visibly pulled both ways, which may be why he remained the most fascinating character of the three for many fans. I'm not sure where I'm going with all of this! Only that we don't seem to get any real answer in HP about how much the characters really control their destinies, despite Dumbledore's words about choice. And that is probably because there is no answer that fits everyone. The answer seems to be different for each person. Julie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 22:37:59 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:37:59 -0000 Subject: Slytherins in love Was: Wasted potential in Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173686 Carol earlier: > > I still don't see stalker Snape. He left her alone after she refused to forgive him and begged both Voldemort and DD to save her. I'm quite sure he would not have come near her, knowing that she would despise him as a Death Eater. He only wanted her alive, not understanding how terrible life would have been for her without her husband and son. His love was selfish at first, but I don't think it was ever sullied [by lust]. > > > > As for the Bloody Baron, surely he's meant to contrast with Snape. The Baron murdered the woman he loved; Snape tried and failed to save Lily, whose death was in large part his fault, and spent the rest of his life repenting that sin and the last seven years protecting her son and secretly fighting her murderer, at terrible cost to himself. Snape's love starts out selfish, but it's never as selfish as the Bloody Baron's. Nor will Snape spend eternity groaning and clanking on the Astronomy Tower. ;-) > Clio: > I agree with you Carol in almost everything you wrote about Snape (which I had to cut from your post). > Still, I am not so sure if you and I read and see Snape the way it is intended by the author. I am all for 'sweetly in love' Snape, but I have to admit his love for Lily has an obsessive quality. I'm not so sure if he would have left Lily alone had the Dark Lord spared her. As for the letter he takes in Sirius old bedroom, I wouldn't see that as sick stalking either, but as the very human act of a desperate and verly lonesome man. Has I been in his shoes, I would have done exactely the same. I have to disagree with you on the role of the Bloody Baron. He is not meant as a contrast to Snape. I think he and Snape have a lot in common. Snape may not be 'groaning and clanking on the Astronomy Tower' as you put it, but he is all through the HP series sulking in the dungeons, flaying himself for Lily's death and obviously hating everything happy and light around him, and especially dead!James Potter and his offspring. And had Ddore not shown him a new goal in life (help Harry survive), I am not sure if Snape had not killed himself just like the Bloody Baron. I think both examples are meant to show how love can turn from a good thing into something dangerous and destructive. Just in Snape's case the destruction is channeled by Ddore for a noble cause. > The point remains, Snape's love isn't something pure and shining, but obsessive, desperate and selfish. Just, I think this is realistic and human to the extreme, and therefore to me Snape is the best character JKR has written. Like it or not, Snape is not Saint Severus. Actually he is one of the few people in the series who don't act 'For the Greater Good' which we were told to fear in DH, but out of human feelings. > > Clio, > who thinks in her next post she should aim for 'Saint Severus, > protector of all wayward sons of desperate mothers' > Carol responds: I think you're seeing my position as more extreme than it is. I'm not arguing for St. Severus, only that Snape does not come across as a stalker to me. Nor am I denying that his reason for wanting Lily to live while not caring about her husband and son is in any way admirable. But Lily was Snape's only real friend, the only one who liked him from his childhood on despite his hooked nose and greasy hair and horrible clothes. His life with his parents was terrible. His friends in Slytherin accepted him despite his Half-Blood status, but would they have done so if he hadn't been a prodigiously talented, highly intelligent boy who came to school knowing more hexes than half the seventh years? Severus's love for Lily was (IMO) in part a longing for the days when they had no one but each other to talk to about being a witch and a wizard, when he could teach her about Dementors and Azkaban and Hogwarts and even hope, naively, that she, a Muggleborn, will be sorted into Slytherin, which he perceives as a House for brains, not brawn. Later, he has to choose between Lily and his Slytherin friends, who are making no secret of their DE ambitions. (Severus, meanwhile, is spending a lot of time stydying *Defense Against* the Dark Arts, judging from his OWL exam.) After the "mudblood" incident, he makes the wrong choice. He might have gotten over it, even her turning to James Potter, and just become a Death Eater (far more formidable than Yaxley or any others that we see) if Lily had not been targetted thanks to his eavesdroping. His first step toward repentance and redemption is small and in DD's view, contemptible. He begs DD to save Lily's life. He tells DD that he will do "anything" if DD will save her (which becomes "them" in response to DD's contempt) and true to his word, he spies for DD at great personal risk. *Unlike* the Bloody Baron, who kills the woman he loves, he begs for her life. (Whatever he may have told Voldemort, it's not because he desires her. He only wants her to live. Obviously, she would have wanted nothing to do with him and would have hated the sight of him. And surely he has no delusions that she could think otherwise.) When we see him next, he is, like the Bloody Baron, ready to commit suicide or at least to die. "I wish. . . . I wish *I* were dead." Dumbledore responds coldly, " And what good would that do anyone? If you loved Lily Evans, if you truly loved her, then your way forward is clear." Snape, peering "through a haze of pain," asks what he meand and DD responds, "Help me to protect Lily's son." Snape protests that the boy doesn't need protection and DD tells him that LV will return. And snape agrees, making DD promise that he will never tell anyone, especially Harry Potter, what snape has done. And DD interprets this promise as never revealing "the best" in him. *If you truly loved her.* And both his subsequent "immensely brave" actions as Dumbledore's man and the doe Patronus, which brings tears to Dumbledore's eyes, show that he truly did. Yes, his love is obsessive, especially after her death, but it's his unassuageable guilt that makes it so. There's all the difference in the world between the Bloody Baron, who kills the woman he loves and then kills himself, and Severus Snape, who wants to die to end the agony of unendurable remorse for his part in Lily's death but chooses instead to protect her son and never to receive credit or gratitude from that son. (The point of a foil, which I think the Baron is with regard to Snape, is to show two similar characters in a similar situation and contrast their responses. Snape may have started out like the Baron, but his choice took him in another direction, allowing him the redemption that the Bloody Baron will never have. Nor do I think that Snape will choose to spend eternity as a ghost, afraid to face what lies beyond.) On a side note, I can't think of any character besides Dumbledore who acts for "the greater good" (and he's a rather scary figure in DH). Hermione acts to some degree on principle, and perhaps Mad-Eye Moody does, but the characters we know best are all motivated, it seems to me, by some form of love. The Battle of Hogwarts is as personal to Molly Weasley or Kreacher or Tonks as the long struggle to protect Harry Potter and undermine Voldemort from within has been for Snape (who can't even declare openly where his loyalties lie). And for Ron, even though he's always hated the word "Mudblood" and the Weasleys have always been "blood traitors," his love of Hermione makes it personal. Love is the great motivator, far more than principle, in JKR's world, as far as I can see. Carol, who can think of no other reason to include the Baron's story except to contrast *his* obsessive love, which leads to two cowardly and contemptible acts and an eternity of pointless remorse, with Snape's, which leads to acts of exceptional courage and, I am certain, to his redemption in the afterlife From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 29 22:20:25 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:20:25 -0000 Subject: The Watch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173687 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "faery_wisdom" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lawandmommyhood" > wrote: > > > > In the epilogue, Harry has a watch. > > > > "He checked the battered old watch that had once been Fabian > > Prewett's." > > > > But where did *the watch* enter the story? How did Harry get it? > > What's its significance? > > > In DH on Harry's 17th b'day, Molly Weasley tells Harry his present's on top. He opens it and it's the old beat up watch. Molly says it's > tradition to give a wizard a watch on their 17th, when they become of > age, and starts to apologize for it not being new like Ron's. It's > actually a a very touching moment, between what she says, and the hug > Harry gives her as thanks. In that moment they seem to acknowledge that he is as much a son as Molly's others, and she and Arthur Harry's > adopted parents. > > faery_wisdom > AmanitaMuscaria now - I thought that scene was very touching. Did anyone else think it was highly significant that Molly gave her brother's watch to Harry - the one she presumably had been treasuring since he died? It's more than just acknowledging Harry as one of Molly and Arthur's sons, to me it reads like Molly's putting him in a favoured position. Cheers, AmanitaMuscaria From AllieS426 at aol.com Sun Jul 29 22:43:22 2007 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:43:22 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173688 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jkoney65" wrote: > > Jack-A-Roe: > No, I never thought she was raped. > > "When my sister was six years old, she was attacked, set upon by > three Muggle boys. They'd seen her doing magic, spying through the > back garden hedge: She was a kid, she couldn;t control it, no witch > or wizard can at that age. What they saw scared them, I expect. They > forced their way through the hedge, and when she couldn't show them > the trick, they got a bit carried away trying to stop the little > freak doing it." > > It sounds alot more like they beat her than they raped her. Why would > someone who is afraid of a child decide to rape them? Beating is so > much easier. Allie: What I wondered was why her undirected magic didn't put an end to it (whatever "it" was). Once when Harry was running away from Dudley's gang, he found himself on a roof. I would have expected Ariana to miraculously return to her home, or else the boys to have been stunned. From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 22:31:57 2007 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: The Ghost of Tom Riddle Message-ID: <492943.21773.qm@web55104.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173689 Yeah, yeah, I know Tom Riddle's not a ghost.... or is he? Well, of course I don't know for sure, but we have no reason to believe he is one. However, having been informed in OOP that, 'Wizards can leave an imprint of themselves upon the earth, to walk palely where their living selves once trod.... I was afraid of death,' said Nick softly. 'I chose to remain behind...in fact, I am neither here nor there...' He gave a small sad chuckle. 'I know nothing of the secrets of death Harry, for I chose my feeble imitation of life instead. I believe learned wizards study the matter in the Department of Mysteries-' (pp. 758-759, Bloomsbury) I began to wonder if someone as death-averse as Tom Riddle would choose to stick around any way he could. I brought this up with a friend, and she thinks he would see no value in it, because ghosts don't appear to have power, Moaning Myrtle's harrassment of Olive Hornsby notwithstanding. So, what thinkest ye, would Tom be so attached to Hogwarts that he'd want to stay? If he chose ghosthood, would it be as a fetus? Would a soul as fragmented as LV's fail to qualify for ghosthood? I'm imagining Tom Riddle popping up through the chicken wings at Slytherin table on the opening day feast. Hmm, that might explain why they haven't reached equal status yet... akh, who's been humming "Tom Riddle's dead/ Ol' Tommy Riddle's dead," to the tune of "Poor Judd is Dead" from "Oklahoma!" Anita K. Hillin Director of Development Roycemore School 640 Lincoln Street Evanston, IL 60201 847-866-6055 Fax: 847-866-6545 Mobile: 773-412-9236 Yahoo IM: anita_hillin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dougsamu at golden.net Sun Jul 29 23:36:47 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:36:47 -0400 Subject: "Today " interview Message-ID: <4B40B34B-C85D-4223-98C7-DA592D8D4DE2@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173690 > Lady Potions: > To me Rowling comes off like that princess that was told that the > peasants do not have bread - the princess not understanding that that > meant they had no food to eat, replied (knowing only of her own > lifestyle) "well then let them eat cake." > > doug: > That princess to whom you attribute the phrase, was Marie Antionette, > to whom the phrase, "Let them eat cake!" has been attributed. Cake is > the scrapings from the pan in which the bread was baked. doug; corrections, curiously on topic http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/16892 > Q: > > Did the French queen, Marie Antoinette, ever actually utter the > phrase, "Let them eat cake"? I have a friend who claims that Crazy > Marie actually said something in French that, in phonetic spelling, > merely sounded like "Let them eat cake." ... > > A: > > I have a dream that someday one of these alleged facts of history > is actually going to pan out. However, today is not the day. While > Marie Antoinette was certainly enough of a bubblehead to have said > the phrase in question, there is no evidence that she actually did > so, and in any case she did not originate it. The peasants-have-no- > bread story was in common currency at least since the 1760s as an > illustration of the decadence of the aristocracy. The political > philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau mentions it in his Confessions in > connection with an incident that occurred in 1740. (He stole wine > while working as a tutor in Lyons and then had problems trying to > scrounge up something to eat along with it.) He concludes thusly: > "Finally I remembered the way out suggested by a great princess > when told that the peasants had no bread: 'Well, let them eat cake.'" > > Now, J.-J. may have been embroidering this yarn with a line he had > really heard many years later. But even so, at the time he was > writing--early 1766--Marie Antoinette was only ten years old and > still four years away from her marriage to the future Louis XVI. > Writer Alphonse Karr in 1843 claimed that the line originated with > a certain Duchess of Tuscany in 1760 or earlier, and that it was > attributed to Marie Antoinette in 1789 by radical agitators who > were trying to turn the populace against her. > > As for your friend's suggestion, I suppose it's possible that one > day, while under the influence of powerful hallucinogens, Marie > said Le theme est quete ("The theme is quest"), and was overheard > by an English-speaking tourist--thus giving rise, as your friend > suggests, to the "Let them eat cake" legend. But frankly I doubt it. I suggested that 'cake' was scrapings. I heard the reference from a baker of bread. I can find nothing to back it up anyway. "I suppose it's possible that one day, while under the influence of powerful hallucinogens, Marie said Le theme est quete ("The theme is quest"), and was overheard by an English-speaking tourist" Isn't The Quest what Potter is about? The story that Marie Antoinette said such a thing can be investigated also and shown to be apocryphal and sourced, earlier, in one instance, to Rousseau when Marie Antoinette was merely ten years old, and yet from any other sources. Rather like Christianity. There is Alchemy, Shamanism and much magical thinking in Potter. A reminder that we all see things from our own cultural, religious and philosophical biases, and many ideas may have sources in cultures other than our own. Resurrection, the second rising of the loaf from the dead, may be such a thing. from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?l=c&p=1 > cake ---------- > > c.1230, from O.N. kaka "cake," from W.Gmc. *kokon-, from PIE base > *gag-, *gog- "something round, lump of something." Not related to > L. coquere "to cook," as formerly supposed. Replaced its O.E. > cognate, coecel. Originally (until c.1420) "a flat, round loaf of > bread." Caked "thickly encrusted" (with) is from 1922. Let them eat > cake is from Rousseau's "Confessions," in reference to an incident > c.1740, when it was already proverbial, long before Marie > Antoinette. The "cake" in question was not a confection, but a poor > man's food. > "What man, I trow ye raue, Wolde ye bothe eate your cake and haue > your cake?" ["The Proverbs & Epigrams of John Heywood," 1562] Not a confection, but a poor man's food. I don't believe in any case that, no matter what shortcomings the book may have, that it was intended by Rowling as a sop to the poor. ___ __ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From muellem at bc.edu Sun Jul 29 23:40:50 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:40:50 -0000 Subject: L.O.O.N.'s Unite - let's play the obsessive nitpicking game!! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173691 colebiancardi: It is time to start the light-hearted L.O.O.N. debates (LOON stands for League Of Obsessive Nitpickers) Come on in with your nitpickin' issues and post here!! I'll start: >Christy wrote: >I find it interesting that Snape apparently communicated with Black and Lupin in >OOTP via Patronuses using a form that represented their best friend's wife and >they didn't know it. Wouldn't they be curious that this dark wizard had a doe >-- a rather meek creature and the mate of a stag -- for a Patronus? How many of >us assumed his Patronus would be a bat, or vulture, or spider, or some other >unappealing creature? colebiancardi: yes, this is a bit puzzling to me as well. Another thing that puzzles me is the whole Half-Blood Prince story and that no one knew who he was in HBP. When Harry tells Lupin about the Potions book & the Half-Blood Prince, Lupin states he has no idea who that could be. Then Harry uses Sectumsempra on Draco later on - McGonagall must know what had happened in the bathroom, because "she supported wholeheartely Snape's punishment" (HBP US hardcover, p 529) A cutting curse, in which Snape heals and then admits Draco up to Poppy for further treatment to prevent scarring. Dark Magic, Snape calls it. Yet, in DH, Lupin states after George's ear is cut off: "He lost an ear," said Lupin "Lost an -- ?" repeated Hermione in a high voice. "Snape's work," said Lupin "Snape?" shouted Harry. "You didn't say --" "He lost his hood during the chase. Sectumsempra was always a speciality of Snape's" DH US ed, p. 73 If McGonagall was part of the Order way back when, she would have known that Sectumsempra was Snape's speciality as well. And perhaps Lupin didn't hear about Harry's mishap in the bathroom; but I would think, as being a member of the Order, why wouldn't he? I know JKR couldn't reveal all in HBP before its time, but the Sectumsemptra scene & the doe Patronus as means of communication all just don't add up. You'd think that someone would have put two and two together and gotten DDM!Snape a lot sooner. And that the HBP's identity would have been figured out a lot sooner as well. >Charlie wrote: >When Luna, Neville and Ginny - a reflection of how interesting I find these >people - are caught in the headmasters office, for theft of a valuable magical >device, what does Snape do? He sends them as punishment to Hagrid to do >something in the Forbidden Forest. colebiancardi: yes, another LOON. Like detention with Hagrid should be a *dead giveaway* that Snape is not evil and not the same as the Carrows. The students are pretty dense, as well as the faculty at this point and the Carrows. Really, if Snape was truly evil, he should have at least given them to Filch. From kitnkids at comcast.net Sun Jul 29 22:11:26 2007 From: kitnkids at comcast.net (faery_wisdom) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:11:26 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173692 Joe > Me, at it again: It's the Grindelwald "mastery" of the wand that > threw me. Stealing it wouldn't bestow mastery, so perhaps something > else happened...but then how was DD able to defeat the wizard with > the unbeatable wand IF he really was its master? Unless he wasn't, > and DD had already bested whoever THAT was. Kit, returning abashedly, You caught the false logic of my reasoning! Were stealing a means to mastery, LV would have become master upon entering DD's tomb. Now I find myself puzzling this further. But, as I'm sharing the book with my 19year old, and reading the book to my son when it's in my posession, it'll be awhile before I get to that point again. I should thank you, I was missing having some mental puzzles to ponder. > Me: The general consensus, albeit monumentally unsatisfying to me, > is that it was Merope. Yawn. K: Really?!? I missed that and am almost glad. I rather go back to thining it a throw away!! > I believe these books CAN be interpreted through a Christian prism, > just as easily as through a non-Christian prism. While there are > allusions to Christianity, I didn't think of those as particularly > clumsy or obvious or obnoxious. We didn't see Harry trying to > baptize a dying Dobby or demanding that LV accept Christ, just like > we didn't see Dumbledore sacrificing rats to Baal or Hagrid > summoning the minions of Satan to make his pumpkins grow. > > Mind you, I derive enormous (and, admittedly, perverse) pleasure in > seeing both ends of the spectrum getting their dander up over this. > That one side thinks the books are now awful because of all > that "Christ stuff," while the other thinks they are awful because > of all that "occult stuff" gives me no end of glee. Not >particularly charming of me, but like DD & Snape, I'm complex and >difficult to categorize. K: I am glad someone pointed out the parallel between the two ends of the spectrum. When asked what she'd like readers to learn from the series JKR said "Tolerance." Life events have led to my perception that the different religious and spiritual teachings share more common ground with respect to their teachings than differences. To attempt to paint that out here would be laughable in the least, but it brings me back to what JKR's answer and the idea of tolerance. 'Nuff said. > I am even more delighted by the readers who are utterly unable to > see Snape proudly standing in that no-man's land between Noble Hero > and Craven Villain. In being unable to see him as he is, they shoot > off into impressive contortions that'd give a yoga master fits of > envy. Why they insist of pigeonholing Snape into their pre-chosen > cubbyhole of hero or villain, I have no idea. But it's interesting > to observe. K: Beautifully stated. Snape's bravery, for me, rested in his acceptance of his actions and the consequences of such. I did not so much perceive "Look at Me" as one last request to see Lily's eyes (honestly never occurred to me) or that he had no control over the thoughts he spilled out for Harry to collect. Rather, I saw all this as a man who finally accepted that his lot in life was of his own making, and though he dies lonely and without friends, he ultimately accepts who he was and his path as the means to a 'right end'. He was certainly NOT heroic to me, but decidedly brave. (As is anyone who can truly look at themselves and honestly accept what they see, mistakes, flaws and the altruistic traits). That was why I loved DD in DH - he was truly human, though genius in his intelligence. On a personal note, my apologies for the 'do you have children analogy'. That was clearly formed on my own experience with, to be nice, my children's father. I certainly did not mean to imply all expecting father's become unhinged, just that enough do that it's become clich?. It would have been better to phrase my thoughts differently. Kit (who is slowly growing ever fonder of Deathly Hallows.) From marthaforhp at yahoo.com Sun Jul 29 22:33:04 2007 From: marthaforhp at yahoo.com (marthaforhp) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:33:04 -0000 Subject: Why did Voldemort have to kill Harry *himself*? reply In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173693 I *certainly* can see the point about Voldemort's wanting to kill Harry himself because of narcissism and power issues. I just thought there would be something else. Lisa pointed out about the other part of the prophecy: "For either must die at the hand of the other ... " The only problem with that being the solution is that Snape didn't know it, because he got thrown from the building before he heard that part. And therefore neither did Voldemort. And so we're back to square one. Any further ideas? Martha From terrianking at aol.com Sun Jul 29 21:27:55 2007 From: terrianking at aol.com (terrianking at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:27:55 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherins as evil stereotypes WAS: Re: Slytherins as Jews Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173694 In a message dated 7/29/2007 3:09:28 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ceridwennight at hotmail.com writes: Slytherins in general are given the stereotypical traits associated with undesireable groups. They have some tendency toward aristocracy in a world where there is no wizarding nobility. They are ambitious in a negative way. They are cunning, so may well cheat or embezel (sp?) you. They are big talkers who can't "walk the walk". They are betrayers, Judases, as Pansy Parkinson was when she pointed to Harry in the Great Hall. They prefer to save their own skin if given the opportunity. They are secretive and they plot against others. They oppress when given the chance. Every trait that is negative is heaped on the Slytherins. This has happened via stereotyping for millenia. One problem with this is, they didn't change and weren't redeemed. Not singly, not as a house. All of those stereotypical evil traits and physical markers were reliable signs that these guys would never be good. If you see these physical markers, or perceive any of these traits, you can be sure that the people who have them are bad. At least, for children who have not experienced as much of the world, this could reasonably be a conclusion. IMO, of course. Robert: Possibly, if the child is getting it's look at the world only through the Harry Potter books. My daughter isn't. She knows this is a story and just pretend. She has also seen intolerance in the real world and knows that even a magic wand won't make it go away. She knows that the only way to deal with it is to stand up to it and not let it stop you from doing what you want to do. She also knows that not all people are intolerant, only a small minority and they have been around for a long time and will be for a long time to come. (She was shocked to learn the bombing of a church in Alabama that killed four little girls happened when her grandmother was a teenager. Waaaay back then!) Like it or not, the pureblood belief is not going to go away anymore than the prejudices of the real world will. There are always going to be people who will teach the message to their children and the children will either believe it or reject it as they grow up. It would be wonderful if the WW overcame evil and became an enlightened society, but JKR, a supporter of Amnesty International, understands it might die down for a while, but it will come back eventually. Maybe all four houses didn't stand together, but as others are stressing, these are children still under the influence of their parents. Staying behind and fighting against the Dark Lord, whom many of their parents support, would be condemning their families to retribution. No one was absolutely certain Harry would win. Besides, I like to think a few of the Slytherins came back in with the villagers, among the "friends" of the students from other houses who stayed to fight. Snape and Lily were friends for a long time. There might have been others during Harry's time who stayed friends despite being questioned or challenged about it. For all we know, Zacharias Smith might have come back, too. Robert, going back to lurking before he gets kicked out of lurkdom. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Jul 29 23:58:49 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:58:49 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173695 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- "mandorino222" wrote: > > > > Am I simply late to the discussion? Has someone else > > brought up the fact that Harry has control of all > > three Deathly Hallows when Voldemort hits him with AK > > in the forest? Dumbledore can talk all he wants about > > blood; the Deathly Hallows are why Harry survives. > > > > Nick > > > > bboyminn: > > In theory, yes, Harry has the allegiance of the three > Hallows, but does he? > > He has the Cloak, but he has abandon the Ring/Stone > in the forest. Since he abandon it, does he really > have control of it? > > Note, Harry was able to use the Ring/Stone in an > unselfish way. He did call back the dead, but not with > the intent of keeping them in the realm of the living. > He simply needed a moments company to bolster his > courage. He full intended to let them return to > resting in peace. > > It is possible that that unselfish act solidified the > Ring/Stones allegiance to him, but because he abandon > it, we can't be sure. > > As to the wand, we have a similarly convoluted path of > allegiance. Draco disarmed Dumbledore, but he never > really took possession of the wand. He never actually > touched it. > > Also note that when Harry 'defeated' Draco by taking > Draco's wand, it was the Hawthorn wand he took. Harry > also never touched the Elder Wand. Is simply capturing > /any/ wand from a wizard enough to cause the shift in > allegiance of the Elder Wand, which neither of the > involved wizards has ever touched? Maybe...maybe not. I've given this some thought too, Steve. In regards to the stone I think Harry claimed it all the more when he dropped it in the forest, he wasn't simply dropping it, he was hiding it and its temptation, from everyone, including himself. I'm okay with the idea that Harry commanded mastery of all three Hallows in the end, albeit only in a symbolic way, but then that does seem to be the case with JKR's ancient magic in the WW, like the magic invoked by Lily's willing sacrifice 'take me, *not Harry*', it's the indirect victory that makes it the more masterful. With the Elder wand vs the Hawthorn wand I think we are given the concept in pieces, which we can put together after a little thought. Earlier in the book, as the Kings Cross Station "Dumbledore" explains, Harry's Holly wand acts of it's own accord against Voldemort's magic. The wand has an internal memory of LV's magical trace and recognises it in battle. The Holly Phoenix wand then uses it's superior understanding of Voldemorts magic against the instrument it recognises as an inferior channel for said magic. The Holly wand has experienced LV's magic at it's finest through it's brother wand, so the borrowed wand having no real allegiance to Voldemort, is an easy target for the Holly one. This same wand memory concept extends to the final battle. The Elder wand was last defeated at Hogwarts tower in HBP, by the Hawthorn wand. LV has snatched it from Dumbledore's body and used it to kill a wizard whose magic it doesn't recognise as an enemy or a Master. To the Elder wand, Snape's death was all but a random event, the only memory of it's former master that was with Snape was in Snape's wand, which it never really made contact with. To the Elder wand, Snape's death is meaningless. On the other hand, Harry holds the Hawthorn wand that once defeated the Elder's great master in a surprise attack. That attack is all the memory the Elder wand has of Dumbledore's end, by the time it is reunited with DD he is gone, along with his magical trace, for all the elder wand knows the Hawthorn wand is its new champion, it has no way of knowing any more. When Harry uses the Hawthorn wand against the Elder wand, The Elder wand recognises the magical instrument that had subdued it before, and moreover it recognises that the wizard using it was the self same the wizard that it had **killed** in a recent battle. This is an opportunity that the wand could not resist. Not only had this wizard taken control of the last wand to defeat the Elder, but he had also overcome the Elder wand's power by surviving it's lethal spell in a direct hit. If a wand's desire is to learn from the Wizard, then no wand in the position of the Elder wand could resist the Magical carrot Harry was dangling under it's nose. As for Voldemort, the wand had seen him rob it from a grave and then struggle to understand it, and it had seen Voldemort use it to destroy himself when he killed Harry in the forest. In the view of the Elder wand, Voldemort was a most unworthy master. In wandlore terms, Harry's confidence was well justified, Voldemort had just shamed himself to the deathstick repeatedly to the point where if the wand felt it was in the hands of a sub-par stupid wizard, it was well and truly justified in leaving him. I have another curiosity about the Hallows. I thought about wether they had all been united in HBP at any time, and they were. In the beginning chapters when Harry and Dumbledore are travelling together to Sluggy's house, and to the Burrow. I haven't got my copy of HBP owing to having lent it out, so I am just wondering, does anything strange happen in those chapters when the Hallows are united by team Harry/DD? Valky From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 00:00:24 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:00:24 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction and a thought or two In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173696 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ameliagoldfeesh" wrote: > One of my favorite lines in this book is from pure nostalgia. It is > when the Trio are at the Whomping Willow and Hermione says, "Are you > a wizard, or what?" to Ron. Took me back to the first book ... I'm so glad you wrote this! I thought these words sounded familiar, but I was so anxious to go on reading that I couldn't stop and think about it. Of course, in PS/SS Ron said to Hermione "Are you a witch or not?" when they were struggling to get free of Devil's Snare. A full circle, isn't it? zanooda From muellem at bc.edu Mon Jul 30 00:05:58 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:05:58 -0000 Subject: L.O.O.N.'s Unite - let's play the obsessive nitpicking game!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173697 another LOON for me: what is up with the US ed hardcover HBP passage of: Dumbledore: "I can help you, Draco" "No, you can't," said Malfoy, his want hand shaking very badly indeed. "Nobody can. He told me to do it or he'll kill me. I've got no choice." "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 to hide her likewise. Nobody would be surprised that you had died in your attempt to kill me -- forgive me, but Lord Voldemort probably expects it. Nor would the Death Eaters be surprised that we had captured and killed your mother -- it is what they would do themselves, after all. Your father is safe at the moment in Azkaban....When the time comes, we can protect him too. Come over to the right side, Draco...you are not a killer..." pgs 591-592 The UK version & the paperback versions of HBP have this same passage as: Dumbledore: "I can help you, Draco" "No, you can't," said Malfoy, his want hand shaking very badly indeed. "Nobody can. He told me to do it or he'll kill me. I've got no choice." "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 to hide her likewise. Your father is safe at the moment in Azkaban....When the time comes, we can protect him too. Come over to the right side, Draco...you are not a killer..." UK ed hardcover pg 552-553 So, my LOON is why was the passage included in the first place in the US hardcover, yet not in the UK version nor the release of the US paperback? I had thought that the removal of those lines of: "He cannot kill you if you are already dead." and "What is more, I can send members of the Order to your mother to hide her likewise. Nobody would be surprised that you had died in your attempt to kill me -- forgive me, but Lord Voldemort probably expects it. Nor would the Death Eaters be surprised that we had captured and killed your mother -- it is what they would do themselves, after all." would be telling in DH - that *someone* that we thought was dead, like Regulus (heeee, my favorite theory shot down in flames) was alive and well. Yet, as far as we know, nothing about a person who was thought to be dead, but is really alive and being hidden by the Order. Sigh. This passage held such high hopes for me :) The second passage really shows that the Order would kill non-DE's - Narcissa, as far as we know is not a DE, she is just married to one - or at least the DE's *believe* that the Order is that ruthless. With the release of DH, we know now that Unforgivable Curses are thrown about by the Order with no second thought. With OotP, I had thought that although the MoM had authorized the use of Unforgivables, it was something that the Order *did* frown upon and with the HBP's "The Flight of the Prince", Snape's advice to Harry about "no Unforgivable Curses for you" seemed to be pointing in the direction that the Unforgivables would not be used by Harry (at the very least). That the *goodies* would not stoop to the level of the baddies. Nitpicky? You bet I am ;) I am a Virgo, afterall - LOL. colebiancardi From ccampboyle at comcast.net Sun Jul 29 22:25:04 2007 From: ccampboyle at comcast.net (ccampboyle) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:25:04 -0000 Subject: THEY'RE CHILDREN!!! (pardon the scream) was The Houses Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173698 > Julie: > What I'm really asking I guess is, where are the ADULTS? > Why aren't THEY doing something to turn these children around? > Why hasn't the Headmaster and why haven't the teachers, and why > hasn't the society risen up and said, "This camp of simmering > pureblood superiority is not acceptable, and we're not going > to sit back and allow it to fester!" After 25 years of watching the machinations of alumni, trustees, etc. of my college, the answer to your question is that I'm willing to bet there are plenty of adult Slytherin alumni out there who don't want things to change, and who are undoubtedly well represented among the trustees. Remember the trouble Dumbledore faced in Chamber of Secrets? Throughout the first five books, Dumbledore has to deal with the fact that Lucius Malfoy is both a trustee and influential at the Ministry. Even after the series is over, I'm willing to bet there are enough alumni of all the Houses (both non-Slytherins and non-DE Slytherins) who don't want to get rid of the Houses. They have warm, fuzzy memories of their own experience in the Houses, and would, I'm sure, threaten to not pay for new Quidditch uniforms or a new score board if there were any talk of discontinuing the Houses. Cathy B. From dossett at lds.net Mon Jul 30 00:10:13 2007 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:10:13 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <789950.79966.qm@web62403.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173699 - > On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of Ariana as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted as possible? > > Erin > Pat: Sorry - way behind on posts, but I just read that as a serious head injury with brain damage. She was too young! Pat From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 00:32:46 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:32:46 -0000 Subject: Slytherins as jews WAS: Re: DH as Christian Allegory/I am... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173701 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sydney" wrote: > > > > > Alla: > > > > > The funniest argument fot Slytherin as persecuted jews symbolism > > > to me is of course Snape's hooked nose. Um, why? > ... > > > Am I suppose to think of Jew the moment I read about Snape's > > hooked nose? Well, I really do not. > > > > > > Paula: > > I'm Jewish with all of my grandparents/relatives and those before > > them from Eastern Europe - I never thought of Snape of Jewish as I do > > not think of "hook noses" of being exclusively Jewish. > > Sydney: > > Guh... I said I wouldn't continue with this but obviously I don't have > to clear up again what I meant in my initial post. What was making me > uncomfortable with the Slytherin's portrayal-- the hooked noses and > greasy hair and oiliness and monkey-like founder and inbreeding and > cunning and greediness and having too much money and Eastern > Europeaness and mesmeric powers and puppet governments Neri: Lets interject a bit of canon into this discussion. Hooked noses are certainly not a Slytherin characteristic. There is only one Slytherin with a hooked nose in the series - Snape - and he got his hooked nose from his father who was a *muggle*. Therefore, if Snape's hooked nose points to any unconscious biased characterization by JKR, then it is not a bias about Slytherins but the reverse - it represents Snape "non-purity" of blood, the very thing that makes him an *outsider* in Slytherin house. The other characters in the series who are described with hooked noses are Madam Pince, who AFAIK is never identified as a Slytherin, and Krum and his father, who are admittedly portrayed as East European stereotypes (though not Jewish stereotypes, it seems to me), but they aren't Slytherins and aren't even Voldemort's supporters. The Malfoy family, the archetype Slytherin House family in the series, is actually described with Aryan characteristics. So, if I see any connection between Slytherins and Jews, I think it is a very roundabout one. I certainly agree that many Slytherins are portrayed in the series as villains (in Snape's case a redeemed villain, but still originally a villain by his literary characterization). I certainly agree that Jews were traditionally portrayed as villains in many works of European literature. And I agree that in all kinds of literature (including the HP series) villain stereotypes are frequently portrayed with physical characteristics that can be considered unpleasant (monkey-like face, hooked noses, dirty hair, cold eyes) and of course as being greedy, oily, cunning and other character qualities that are almost synonymous with being a literary villain. But other than JKR using some standard literary villain conventions that some other people have also employed against Jews (and against many other minorities), I think it would be very difficult to nail her with any subconscious bias here. If anything, it seems more plausible to blame JKR's subconscious for a certain anti-French bias (Voldemort, Malfoy and Lestrange). Neri, another Jew with East European origins, who wishes his nose could be described as hooked because in realty it's even worse than that. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 00:36:43 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:36:43 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173702 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > > bboymin: > > Also note that when Harry 'defeated' Draco by taking > > Draco's wand, it was the Hawthorn wand he took. Harry > > also never touched the Elder Wand. Is simply capturing > > /any/ wand from a wizard enough to cause the shift in > > allegiance of the Elder Wand, which neither of the > > involved wizards has ever touched? Maybe...maybe not. Valky: > Not only had this wizard > taken control of the last wand to defeat the Elder, but he had also > overcome the Elder wand's power by surviving it's lethal spell in a > direct hit. I just had a brainstorm as I posted this. The media-that-must-not-be-named version of Goblet of Fire fails to explain what happened between the brother wands in the graveyard battle. I personally thought that this was a really big mistake in the screenplay, until now, where I think it might actually still focus on the most important factor in the wandlore after all. Voldemort's Yew wand and the Elder wand had something in common in their battle scenes with Harry, both were confronted by a wizard that survived a direct AK from them. if we are to say that the Elder wand's memory of Harry Potter was a major factor in the final battle, then it would be the same case with the Yew wand in the graveyard. Of course the Yew wand was properly allied with LV at the time so it did not abandon him like the Elder one did. But OTOH it did not do it's masters bidding and kill Harry, either. The priori incantatem effect seems, still, to be unique in this instance, but apart from that, could there have been a recognition by the Yew wand that the wizard it had killed, direct hit, had inexplicably returned to battle it? Valky just making the HP finale overly complex with random thoughts now.. From pair_0_docks at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 00:18:26 2007 From: pair_0_docks at yahoo.com (pair_0_docks) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:18:26 -0000 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173703 > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > >> This has also just been echoed by the JKR commentary on > the Today Show: > > >> "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?" "Is he a hero? I don't see Snape as a hero... he's very brave, but..." "Would he have protected Harry if he hadn't loved Lily?" "No, not at all." << > > > >>Marika: > >> Wow! I'm a bit surprised - and curious. It seems that Rowling and I have a different take on what a hero is. > >> > >> A person can be a hero (the way I see it) on many different levels. Snape is not one on a personal level, because he's not a good role model, but to me he is one on a national level.<< > >> > pair_0_docks: On Dateline Sunday the same interview that aired on the Today show was, interestingly enough re-editted, (leaving out this earlier comment) and Rowling stated this: "do I think he's a hero? To a point I do, but he's not an unequivocally good character. Snape is a complicated man..." This should help with some of the bad feelings that were stirred up among the snape fans and the reactions (me included) that have been expressing over this earlier comment. It certainly made me feel better about it, although I'm still unhappy with some of the other issues in the book, however I will not rehash them here. pair_0_docks From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 00:48:08 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:48:08 -0000 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173704 > pair_0_docks: On Dateline Sunday the same interview that aired on > the Today show was, interestingly enough re-editted, (leaving out this > earlier comment) and Rowling stated this: "do I think he's a hero? To > a point I do, but he's not an unequivocally good character. Snape is a > complicated man..." > > This should help with some of the bad feelings that were stirred up > among the snape fans and the reactions (me included) that have been > expressing over this earlier comment. It certainly made me feel better > about it, although I'm still unhappy with some of the other issues in > the book, however I will not rehash them here. > Alla: What? You mean JKR herself edited the interview and did a voice over it? I find it **hilarious** and can only say poor JKR if she felt a need to do that. Did she leave in he is "spiteful and a bully" remark or did she cut that out as well? So does author's intent counts now or is it still irrelevant? I am asking this question in general, not just to you. My view of Snape does not change ? I see spiteful, bully and not a hero, while brave in the text, but oy. Was she afraid of leaving it as is? At least we know what she meant to say in the first place before she changed it, LOL. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 00:52:26 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:52:26 -0000 Subject: Snape, again...(was Re: Come on folks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173705 Betsy wrote: It's not accidental that Snape in DH suddenly seemed considerably slower on the uptake than in any previous book, or that his voice was so silenced. It wasn't even anything that Snape actually DID that broke the character; it was the author's need to 'explain' him. > > Julie: > Regarding Snape's voice being silenced, I felt stunned at first > myself that Snape was so...subdued. Especially in the scene with > Voldemort where he put up no fight whatsoever. Later, after > thinking about it for awhile, I came away feeling it was in > fact in character. For the first time Snape sees Nagini being > kept close to Voldemort (what Dumbledore warned him about) and > he realizes that the end has come. (Harry watching from under > the Invisibility Cloak had an immediate sense that Snape was > in mortal danger, and I think Snape may have felt it too.) > > Could Snape have run, or pulled out his wand and duelled? I > suppose he could have tried something. He's not going to win, > because no one except Harry Potter has a chance to beat > Voldemort one-on-one, but he could have gone down fighting. > Except it wasn't about what he wanted to do, but the job he > still had to finish, and the possibility that he would be > able to get it done was in serious jeopardy. He had to get > those memories to Harry, it was what he'd sacrifice his > life for (figuratively as well as soon to be literally). Carol responds: I admit that my initial response to the final confrontation between Snape and Voldemort resembled Betsy's: What's happened to Severus Snape, who has always put two and two together so quickly, clever, cunning survivor Severus Snape, who "hoodwinked" the Dark Lord before our eyes in chapter 1? (Of course, I didn't understand the wand thing, either, and my emotions were tangled in knots when I first read the chapter where Snape dies.) But it seems clear to me on a reread that Snape (who, of course, knew nothing about the Elder Wand) had only two things on his mind: The hands of his clock were at mortal peril and neither cleverness nor Occlumency could save him, and he had to deliver his message to Harry Potter. Instead of brilliant Snape banter resembling his exchange with Bellatrix in "Spinner's End," we get a Snape who keeps repeating his request with greater and greater desperation and who fears, as Voldemort and Nagini slither out together, that all is lost. It isn't fear of death, it's fear that everything he and Dumbledore have struggled for will be over. Yes, his voice is silenced (except for that surprising and IMO supremely meaning ful last request), but he's dying. And the loss of his voice is almost compensated for by his last amazing feat of magic, sending memories out from his own head. (That on top of being able to assume a batlike form and fly, and using impressive defensive magic against McGonagall, who thinks that he's a murderer, in contrast to Harry, who has just stooped to using a Crucio. I'll blame the soul bit in his scar. It's the only explanation I find palateable.) I've already explained why I don't think a last Harry-Snape confrontation would have worked. I'll add that Harry is no longer the "arrogant," rule-breaking Potter boy whom he's promised to protect. Snape knows at last that he's the WW's only chance. It's his epiphany as well as Harry's, and his one chance for Potter to understand what he has done. Even if we don't like Lily/Snape, a final confrontation between sarcastic Snape and hostile Harry would never have served the purpose with regard to plot or theme (recognition scene), would never have had the emotional impact (catharsis) appropriate to Snape as tragic hero (not in JKR's sense but in Aristotle's). I can't think of any other way in which he could have been redeemed in Harry's eyes, in JKR's, in most readers'. The time for snarky Snape is over (though he makes a cameo with the line about waiting for DD to compose his will). Harry doesn't need to see that Snape. Nor does he need to see Snape as seemingly loyal DE "hoodwinking" the Dark Lord with Occlumency and providing him with all but the key piece of information on DD's orders. Snape asks Draco in HBP where Draco thinks he would be if he couldn't act, and we see Snape as consummate actor in that first chapter, where he can calmly allow Voldemort to look into his eyes and Voldemort, thoroughly fooled by his own hubris and Snape's superb Occlumency, views him as literally his right-hand man. And hardest of all, he has to feign indifference to the plight of a woman he cannot save. This is DE Snape, cool, unaffected by Yaxley's jealousy, concealing or suppressing whatever sympathetic impulse he must feel for the Malfoys, who must fend for themselves this time without his help. We get glimpses of Snape as headmaster (giving out detentions with Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest in contrast to the Carrows' torture, keeping on old staff members like McGonagall who can openly oppose the Carrows, putting up Umbridge-style decrees knowing full well what the consequences would be). We see that his relationship with DD wasn't all that we hoped it was, but we do see Snape furiously berating Dumbledore for putting on a cursed ring and DD telling him, "I am fortunate, extremely fortunate, that I have you, Severus" (681). I wouldn't exchange all the Snape banter in the world for that last sentence. Another thing: People have asked about the nonverbal spells that Snape worked so hard to teach Harry (and Harry resisted learning so obstinately because he hated Snape). I think they show what Snape (and many readers) expected from Harry, a gifted wizard with powers to match Snape's own. He has been trying since the first book to get Harry to focus, to pay attention, to follow directions. He knows perfectly well whose potions Harry is getting credit for in Slughorn's class. He has tried to teach Harry Occlumency and nonverbal spells. he sees Harry as hopelessly mediocre and cannot understand why Dumbledore has faith in him. To the last, as he trounces Harry by parrying every spell Harry casts, he wants him to close his mind and shut his mouth (use Occlumency and nonverbal spells, which he himself excels at). But we see in DH that, with the exception of flying and casting a powerful Patronus and speaking Parseltongue as a result of the scar Horcrux, Harry (unlike Snape) isn't an exceptionally gifted and powerful wizard. He doesn't even have his own wand for half the book, a way of emphasizing that magical power will not defeat Voldemort). I don't think that Snape's lessons are wasted (Expelliarmus, which Snape taught the duelling club in CoS, may be second only to Expecto Patronum in importance tp Harry, and the Trio quietly "forget" that Muffliato is the HBP's spell because it's so useful). Hermione has aborbed Snape's Potions lessons (and did Harry tell her about Snape advising Draco to take dittany for scarring?) and can cast nonverbal spells. It seems likely that other students learned from him, too. Eight students in Harry's class managed O's in Potions through his teaching. His lessons in DADA seemed to be geared to what students about to face Voldemort ought to know. I doubt very much whether those who learned nonverbal spells regret that they did so. At any rate, it's clear that Snape doesn't understand Harry and judges him on his "mediocrity" (and Harry's performance in most of his classes merits that description). He fears that Harry will be inadequately prepared. And if Harry had not had Hermione to protect him with spells that she may well have learned from Snape and had not shared that drop of blood with Voldemort, anchored by Voldemort's Horcruxes while Voldemort lived (survived), Snape would have been right. Duel Yaxley without nonverbal spells and Occlumency and an arsenal of defensive spells, and you're probably dead. But But even Snape, for all his brilliance and power and proficiency, is no match for Voldemort in the end, killed by his most horrible Horcrux, Nagini. Because it isn't power that can defeat Voldemort. It's love, and forgiveness, and compassion, and, above all, the willingness to sacrifice yourself for the WW. It helps, of course, to be a Horcrux and share blood with Voldemort and be the master of the Elder Wand. Harry and Snape reach an understanding in the end that snarky Snape could never have reached, however much we miss him. And, BTW, suave Snape from "Spinner's End" resurfaces briefly with McGonagall, as does, erm, kick-ass Snape from "Flight of the Prince" (Carol grins wickedly at the stunned fellow listies who can't believe she said that). Carol, who has no idea where this post came from as it was supposed to be about Snape not being "slow on the uptake" or "broken," just revealing new sides of his character outside the classroom From lmkos at earthlink.net Mon Jul 30 00:57:24 2007 From: lmkos at earthlink.net (Lenore) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:57:24 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Slytherins/Krum are/are not Jews.../The Houses Again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173706 Magpie: >But these books aren't the real world, they take place in a school. I >think there could have been more than there was, and more of an >attempt than they're was. I don't think it would have been >unrealistic. > >But this is JKR's book and she didn't have to do that if she didn't >want to. Obviously that wasn't where her interest lay, and she didn't >owe it to me to give it to me. But this was my reaction to the book >and perhaps the books from now on. I didn't post it to make others >feel badly or feel stupid--I didn't realize it was so upsetting to >others to read stuff like this, since I'm generally not as bothered >by hearing books I liked criticized (sometimes it makes me like the >books less, sometimes not) and obviously it interests me. But maybe I >understand it a bit in that I don't particularly enjoy posts about >the negative effect on the group in general (or posts mocking this >thread outside the group). > >Anyway, I don't mean to keep beating a dead horse--probably I >wouldn't have posted quite as much except that there were certain >misunderstandings that were a bit too horrible to let stand, like >that Slytherins were supposed to be persecuted Jews in canon or that >Shylock-type stereotypes were actually real. >-m Lenore: I'd like you to know that I appreciate your efforts to clarify this issue, as well as all of the other posters who have contributed. For me, it has been helpful, because I saw and felt all that you have expressed, but found it daunting to find my own way of expressing it. I've been amazed at your stamina in hanging in there until the issue was fully covered. I have been thinking and wondering if there were some deliberate purpose in the book's leaving these issues so baldly unresolved. IF they had been resolved in ways that were more or less satisfactory to most of us, we would not be so roused by the fact that they are still there in the WW. Is it possible that our awareness has been raised to a keener edge of problems in our world because the series didn't give us a "happy ever after"? I don't know. For me, I want more than ever to do my part, the part that is mine to do to heal our world.... Lenore (perennially idealistic in my belief that such a thing IS possible) From erikog at one.net Mon Jul 30 00:57:01 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:57:01 -0000 Subject: What I liked about DH (a positive post) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173707 In light of recent posts asking for positive commentary on the book, I thought I'd share my list: *I really liked the surprisingly nuanced vision of human "evil" here, with people able to move--if gradually-- from the constraints of prejudice, family, and social environment. We see someone from a horrible family, absolutely lonely, a social pariah, in a racist environment--who rises above all that to grasp the meaning of love, regardless of the risk to himself. We see Draco's family and their own slow dawning awareness that the Voldemort choice is not for them. And this I think was especially well-done and realistic. Like Snape, the change is slow coming--but it *does* come, to the point that Draco is acknowledging the trio--not mocking them, sneering at them, etc.--at the station at the end. You get the sense that Draco and Harry's kids could believably become friends, unlike James and Snape, or Harry and Draco. *Neville. What can one say? When all hope seemed lost, who charged Voldemort personally, despite having been told for years that he was incompetent, pathetic, etc.? Neville's courage outweighed Harry's, to me, because Neville never had the mental comfort (or torture) of believing himself "chosen" to do anything, and he certainly never had the one-one-ones with Dumbledore to give him any confidence. Neville had every reason to believe he would die rushing Voldemort, but Neville *still* did it. Fantastic! *Molly Weasley and Narcissa Malfoy. If Lily is in the book just as a distant figure of worship, Molly and Narcissa show off the amazing strength of mothers and their love. Molly--with presumably little recent practice of "ninja wandage" (to quote Jason Isaacs in the A&E special)--took on Bellatrix, possibly the nastiest killer in Voldemort's entourage. Narcissa dared to look him in the face and lie. (Never mind the guts of going to Snape for her son, or asking Harry about Draco--when Harry could've given her away, just to use her as a distraction.) Moms rock here, and not just as saintly cookie-baking figures. *Neville's grandma. Need I say more? *The fact Harry gave Voldemort a choice to repent. That said a great deal of Harry's character. (Just as his first impulse, when seeing "the ugly baby thing," was to go help.) *The fact Harry "killed" Voldemort with Expelliarmus--that, as ever, it was really Voldemort doing himself in. *That despite the flawed Dumbledore we got to know through the book, we were reunited with the AD we know and love in the final scenes. Krista From AllieS426 at aol.com Mon Jul 30 01:21:45 2007 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 01:21:45 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173708 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "If I know him [Harry] he will have arranged matters so that when he > does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of > Voldemort." And if Harry had managed to kill that snake as Dumbledore > expected before he so bravely walked into the Forbidden Forest to meet > oblivion then both Harry and Voldemort would indeed have died at that > instant. This is what Dumbledore wanted this is what he expected. Allie: No - King's Cross Dumbledore told Harry that he expected Harry to survive. The piece of Voldemort's soul inside Harry was all that he expected to be killed. But in theory you're right, if Harry was the last Horcrux Voldemort would have died so how would Harry have survived then? (More unanswered questions, sigh.) From whealthinc at ozemail.com.au Mon Jul 30 00:42:52 2007 From: whealthinc at ozemail.com.au (Barry) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:42:52 -0000 Subject: So I waz write Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173709 I've just finished HP & DH and so haven't read any messages here for a while. But I did say here that HP was a horcrux and I was right. I also think the afterlives of the characters in the frames is extremely unclear. Great plot twists. Damn, I have to let my wife read it before I can read it again. She's so selfish! Barry From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jul 30 01:30:24 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 01:30:24 -0000 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173710 > Alla: > What? You mean JKR herself edited the interview and did a voice over > it? > > I find it **hilarious** and can only say poor JKR if she felt a need > to do that. > > > Did she leave in he is "spiteful and a bully" remark or did she cut > that out as well? > > So does author's intent counts now or is it still irrelevant? I am > asking this question in general, not just to you. > > My view of Snape does not change ? I see spiteful, bully and not a > hero, while brave in the text, but oy. Was she afraid of leaving it > as is? > > At least we know what she meant to say in the first place before she > changed it, LOL. Jen: I don't think JKR had anything to do with it but could be wrong. I'm pretty sure it was filmed all at once and she made a longer statement that was edited one way the other day and a different part was heard tonight, because there were still some of the same words. That was my impression hearing her. The word spiteful was in there but bully was cut, I'm pretty sure. There was also additional information such as her mentioning that Harry saw good in Snape even though he loathed him until the end (paraphrasing, all this is paraphrasing - I'm sure someone has the full transcript). Re: the hero part, she said, 'heroic to a point' (I do remember that phrase) and summed up at the end by saying he was flawed. Ah, the magic of editing! If she made one long statement about Snape, I'd like to hear the *whole* unedited cut myself. Don't they know what we fans are like by now?? These little sound bytes won't do. ;) Jen From pair_0_docks at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 01:10:40 2007 From: pair_0_docks at yahoo.com (pair_0_docks) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 01:10:40 -0000 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173711 > Alla: > Did she leave in he is "spiteful and a bully" remark or did she cut > that out as well? > > So does author's intent counts now or is it still irrelevant? I am > asking this question in general, not just to you. > > My view of Snape does not change ? I see spiteful, bully and not a > hero, while brave in the text, but oy. Was she afraid of leaving it > as is? > > At least we know what she meant to say in the first place before > she changed it, LOL. > pair_0_docks: Yes I probably could have just put the more of the quote in there but she continues after stating: "He's a complicated man...he's bitter, he's spiteful, he's a bully, all of these things are still true of Snape. Was he brave yes immensely, was he capable of love very definitely...Harry forgives him. Harry sees the good in Snape." Curious to know how you would define hero? I guess it does seem possible, to me at least, that a person (Snape) can still act heroically and yet still have some other negative qualities...this would seem to fit better with the philosophy that Sirius (movie) and/or DD (book)and therefore Rowling herself believe: "the world not just split into good people and death eaters we all got both light and dark inside us what matters is the part we choose to act on." It might be that each interpretation is finding some of the contradictions that do seem somewhat apparent, but I think some are trying to work through them...maybe though certain things cannot be reconciled within the text so each of us readers needs to do that for her/himself. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 01:48:03 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 01:48:03 -0000 Subject: Snape, again...(was Re: Come on folks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173712 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Because it isn't power that can defeat Voldemort. It's love, and > forgiveness, and compassion, and, above all, the willingness to > sacrifice yourself for the WW. It helps, of course, to be a Horcrux > and share blood with Voldemort and be the master of the Elder Wand. I just wanted to comment on the last point you made here, Carol. Over the term of Harry's schooling we saw, from him, average to mediocre magical talent coupled with extraordinary bravery and selflessness. The extraordinary courage of Harry was not the least of his weapons against Voldemort by any means. But beyond his valour and love there was another very notable exception in Harry's mediocre arsenal. He mastered a complex magic spell that was beyond his years, Expecto Patronum; I don't think this can be rightfully played down, it's made clear by JKR, kids are not supposed to be so adept at this complex branch of magic, it takes a very important something inside the wizard to produce a corporeal Patronus, we aren't give explicit detail on how that complexity works, but it is repeatedly hinted at just how complex the patronus can be with side events like Dumbledore choosing it for secure OOTP communication, Hermione having trouble conjuring it, Snape having different ideas to Harry on the theory behind the Patronus, etc. All up I don't think we would be right to diminish the importance of Harry mastering the Patronus Spell. It is, yes, merely an exception to his otherwise not-so-inspiring talent, however, still an exception of notable degree. It is this exception of notable degree that foreshadows Harry's ultimately victory over Voldemort. With little exposure to the ancient and complex wandlore of the WW Harry outstrips his mentor magical theoreticians in the art and seizes control of the Deathstick in the heat of a deadly battle. Like the Patronus, this cannot be understated, Ollivander, Gregorovitch, Voldemort even Snape who is nothing short of prodigious himself doesn't even know the first thing about it, none of the wizarding genuises, even those studying hard to understand, have a working theory for the Deathstick. Dumbledore commanded it for some 50 years, to his credit, and won it from Grindelwald in spectacular battle, an amazing feat, but Dumbledore was an adult with greater intellect and vaster knowledge under his belt than 17 year old Harry. And so a complex old wizarding lore, which we only know of having been conquered before by Dumbledore in his prime as an adult adept wizard, was mastered both theoretically and then practically by a 17 year old with barely a license to practice under his belt. No mean feat by any measure. As with the Patronus, JKR leaves it to our imaginations to nut out the complexities of this exception to Harry's wizarding skills, but it just doesn't do to understate it. In essence Harry has done the same as Snape ever did in his potions text, the same as Dumbledore did in his remarkable defeat of Grindelwald, he has delved into a complex magical theory and mastered its power, he went beyond known magic and become a founder of lore (his signature 'expelliarmus'), an Elder wand legend. Valky From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jul 30 02:04:46 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:04:46 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors In-Reply-To: <875527.101.qm@web55013.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173713 Christy: > I find it interesting that Snape apparently communicated with Black and Lupin in OOTP via Patronuses using a form that represented their best friend's wife and they didn't know it. Wouldn't they be curious that this dark wizard had a doe -- a rather meek creature and the mate of a stag -- for a Patronus? How many of us assumed his Patronus would be a bat, or vulture, or spider, or some other unappealing creature? > Potioncat: I expected a bumblebee or phoenix because I thought his spirit guardian would reflect Dumbledore. Many expected a unicorn for Lily. So the moment I saw the doe Patronus,I knew it was Snape's and LOLLIPOPS had won. I'm having to believe that in JKR's mind, not everyone in the WW picks up on the Patronus's symbolism as quickly as DD, Snape or readers of HP books. If they did, perhaps McGoangal, Lupin and the other Order Members would have had a better understanding of Snape's loyalties. From severussnape at shaw.ca Mon Jul 30 02:09:00 2007 From: severussnape at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:09:00 -0000 Subject: Camping and Despair - loving the trio Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173714 Rowling finally gave us the ecstatic, but made us travel through despair to get there. I had been hoping for a downward arc, I felt the series required it, and I had not yet come to love the trio truly. It was in their weakest moments, when nothing was left to them but what they could not give up, having given up everything else, that I finally came to not only identify with Ron, Hermione and Harry, but to love them. Yes, I admired Hermione for being prepared and being brilliant, but I loved her for being human, and for accepting that that was all that finally was left to her, and when Ron left, I loved her for continuing on when heartbroken. I loved Harry then for understanding this all, for his diplomacy, and for not going into reactionary mode. He has incorporated the leadership qualities he developed in OotP into his personal life. And I loved Ron for leaving, confirming his humanity and reminding us of just what he was giving up, and for returning, wholly, and for facing his fears and overcoming them and being stronger than ever, while yet more human. I've heard many talk about the camping trip as boring, as pointless, but I don't understand this at all. The camping trip was the most fun, and the most despairing, the novels have ever gotten. We hear about the world going to hell, the impression is that the saved, or the outcast, are wandering in the wild, with little hope, and imprisonments, and it looks bleak. Then, with the silver doe and the sword and the horcrux of hopelessness finally destroyed, the story begins its slow upward journey, now in the deepest authentic sense, toward light. dan From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Mon Jul 30 02:18:36 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:18:36 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173715 > Allie: > > No - King's Cross Dumbledore told Harry that he expected Harry to > survive. The piece of Voldemort's soul inside Harry was all that he > expected to be killed. But in theory you're right, if Harry was the > last Horcrux Voldemort would have died so how would Harry have > survived then? (More unanswered questions, sigh.) > Anne Squires: Remember, when Neville destroyed Nagini, one of the Horcruxes, LV was still alive. He didn't die until the duel with Harry. It turns out there were eight Horcruxes instead of seven. Horcruxes in order of destruction: 1. diary 2. ring 3. locket 4. cup 5. diadem 6. ugly soul bit in Harry 7. Nagini 8. LV himself The Horcruxes were like anchors to this world; but just because LV's anchors were being destroyed that didn't mean LV himself automatically had to die. He doesn't even have to die when seven Horcruxes are gone. That eighth bit inside him was the last Horcrux, not Nagini. He would have still been alive if he hadn't dueled Harry. The destruction of Nagini made LV mortal; but it didn't kill him. Thus it follows that if Harry were the penultimate Horcrux instead of Nagini it would have still worked the same way. I truly think DD expected Harry to survive regardless of whether he were the last Horcrux or the third. No matter when Harry sacrificed himself that eighth bit would have had Harry's blood thus ensuring Harry's survival. Um, I do hope this makes sense and clarifies matters. I find it all rather confusing. Having said all of that, I still have a problem with DD. The thing that bothers me the most about DD is that up until the end of year four he had to have thought Harry would indeed have to die. He was raising him like "a pig for the slaughter." I think DD arranged it so that Harry would develop his "saving people thing." It's something he was inculcating in him from the beginning. And I have a problem with it. The only thing that redeems DD in my mind is that Harry forgave him for this betrayal and went on to name one of his children for him. If Harry can forgive DD, then I can; but I still think DD was very cold hearted and evil in his intentions toward Harry. Rita Skeeter described his intentions as "sinister." Was she ever right about that! Anne Squires From djmitt at pa.net Mon Jul 30 02:31:57 2007 From: djmitt at pa.net (Donna) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:31:57 -0000 Subject: Lilly's eyes another let down Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173716 So what was the big deal about Harry having his mother's eyes??? I thought we would find out that the Evan's were descendents of Slytherin because of the "greenness" of their eyes?? The only reference that came close to that was in Snape's memory when her eyes were described as green "slits" but we don't know for sure and I thought we would find out. I did notice that in the final show down their eye color were reversed and JK made reference to that .. Voldy has red eyes (griffindor color) while Harry has bright green color (Slytherin color) It might mean something or nothing we never found out BUMMER Donna From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 02:27:42 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:27:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] What I liked about DH (a positive post) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <391448.41406.qm@web55002.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173717 >krista7 wrote: >In light of recent posts asking for positive >commentary on the book... Thank you for your positive post!!! I loved the book. My husband (who is not a fan) kindly made himself absent last weekend and I ended up reading it in one all-day marathon on the 21st. Since then, I've read it a second time and am about halfway through the audio book. (Hearing Jim Dale read Harry's story is a delight.) DH made me laugh out loud at times (got to love Keacher saying, Perhaps just one more, Master Harry, for luck) and it made me cry (Dobby's death and burial, and all of chapter 34, The Forest Again). I was touched by simple poignant acts (Harry burying Mad Eye's eye by a tree that was as much the "consummate survivor" as the man himself). I was utterly surprised by some things and not by others. (How many of us thought the Deathly Hallows of the title was a reference to the Horcruxes? In hindsight, we should not be surprised to be proven wrong -- all of the books' titles refer to something or someone revealed by the book itself, not a book before it. We fell victim to our own cleverness and I loved it.) I was appalled by intolerance, persecution, and what amounted to "ethnic cleansing." Some of what I thought would happen did happen and some didn't and some happened in ways I would never have guessed -- and that's OK. I don't want to read a book that I can totally predict. I worried about characters I love as they struggled and grew and faced their enemies and stood up for what's right, and I mourned their sorrows and celebrated their victories. And, as in life, some things are left unsaid and some questions are unanswered. I'm OK with that too. I consider any book that can make me experience and feel so much a good book. Christy From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Mon Jul 30 02:45:12 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:45:12 -0000 Subject: Lilly's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173718 "Donna" wrote: > > So what was the big deal about Harry having his mother's eyes??? I > thought we would find out that the Evan's were descendents of > Slytherin because of the "greenness" of their eyes?? The only > reference that came close to that was in Snape's memory when her eyes > were described as green "slits" but we don't know for sure and I > thought we would find out. I did notice that in the final show down > their eye color were reversed and JK made reference to that .. Voldy > has red eyes (griffindor color) while Harry has bright green color > (Slytherin color) > > It might mean something or nothing we never found out > > BUMMER > > Donna > Anne Squires: To me the eyes were important. In HBP, the fact that Harry has his mother's eyes is an important factor getting Slughorn's memory. The memory, of course is key because we see a young Tom Riddle asking for information about Horcruxes. Harry, imho, probably would not have been able to get this memory from 'ole Sluggy if he had not had his mother's eyes. In DH it was very poignant to me when DD tells a Snape who is grieving for Lily that her surviving son has his mother's eyes. Then, when Snape wanted to look into Lily's eyes as he died almost brought me to tears. Literally. So, to me the eyes were very important and not a let down at all. Of course you were expecting a major plot twist, it looks like. I am sorry you were disappointed; but I wasn't. Anne Squires From AllieS426 at aol.com Mon Jul 30 02:49:54 2007 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:49:54 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows: Central Theme or Distraction? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173719 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > On the other hand, Harry holds the Hawthorn wand that > once defeated the Elder's great master in a surprise attack. That > attack is all the memory the Elder wand has of Dumbledore's end, by > the time it is reunited with DD he is gone, along with his magical > trace, for all the elder wand knows the Hawthorn wand is its new > champion, it has no way of knowing any more. > > When Harry uses the Hawthorn wand against the Elder wand, The Elder > wand recognises the magical instrument that had subdued it before, and > moreover it recognises that the wizard using it was the self same the > wizard that it had **killed** in a recent battle. This is an > opportunity that the wand could not resist. Not only had this wizard > taken control of the last wand to defeat the Elder, but he had also > overcome the Elder wand's power by surviving it's lethal spell in a > direct hit. If a wand's desire is to learn from the Wizard, then no > wand in the position of the Elder wand could resist the Magical carrot > Harry was dangling under it's nose. > Allie: I like your explanation much better than Harry's explanation. It's the WAND it recognizes, not the fact that Harry disarmed Draco. How would the elder wand know that Harry, unseen, defeated its "true" master, Draco, when the wand was possessed by a third party at the time? Bravo! From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 02:43:10 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:43:10 -0000 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173720 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pair_0_docks" wrote: > > > > > pair_0_docks: > > Yes I probably could have just put the more of the quote in there but > she continues after stating: > > "He's a complicated man...he's bitter, he's spiteful, he's a bully, > all of these things are still true of Snape. > > Was he brave yes immensely, was he capable of love very > definitely...Harry forgives him. Harry sees the good in Snape." Well, that certainly seems a fair assessment. It's hard to see Snape as anything but a complicated man, a man full of evil and darkness who nevertheless did good things because of a love that itself was far from unproblematic -- at least in its obsessive aspects. Harry certainly does forgive him, but that is what Christ-figures, or Christ-like figures if you prefer, are supposed to do. > > Curious to know how you would define hero? I guess it does seem > possible, to me at least, that a person (Snape) can still act > heroically and yet still have some other negative qualities...this > would seem to fit better with the philosophy that Sirius (movie) > and/or DD (book)and therefore Rowling herself believe: "the world not > just split into good people and death eaters we all got both light and > dark inside us what matters is the part we choose to act on." > Hmmm. I can't speak for Alla but I would say that the problem with many of the arguments about Snape as a hero is that they try to say that somehow his brave acts completely redeem him from his abuse of Harry. I would say that they most certainly do NOT. He remains the same bitter, spiteful, cramped little man that he was in the beginning. He is a man whom Dumbledore, the epitome of goodness (if he remains such, which I know is problematic) plainly disapproves of in some respects, and certainly we never have any argument that his abuse of Harry was worthwhile or justified for reasons of teaching or anything else. He never had any feeling for Harry as a person, which is what could have granted him true redemption. Instead, he is driven by his emotional burden to protect a boy that he hates and whom he never would have helped, otherwise. Thus Snape is, as JKR puts it, a hero to an extent, in that he does very brave things for the good side. But he is not a hero in the sense of being fully redeemed. Unlike Harry or Ron or Hermione, or for that matter unlike Percy, he is unable to find his way to rejecting the full darkness within himself. Percy turns his back on his embrace of the Ministry and his spurning of his family. Snape cannot turn his back on his bitterness and cruelty. Dumbledore asks him "Have you come to care for the boy after all, Severus?" In that moment the door is open for Snape's full redemption. It is the tragedy of Snape's bitterness and cruelty that he slams it shut again immediately. It is fitting that a Christ-figure should forgive Snape, if only for the good he has done. But it is also fitting that at his end the dark side of himself, the side he is never able to totally overcome, brings his doom. Lupinlore, who is quite amused at continuing efforts to deny Snape's cruelty and sins, and the appropriate end he receives for them From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 02:37:17 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:37:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <321053.57279.qm@web55013.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173721 anne_t_squires wrote: >The thing that bothers me the most about DD is that up until the end of year >four he had to have thought Harry would indeed have to die. He was >raising him like "a pig for the slaughter." I think DD arranged it so >that Harry would develop his "saving people thing." It's something he >was inculcating in him from the beginning. And I have a problem with >it. The only thing that redeems DD in my mind is that Harry forgave >him for this betrayal and went on to name one of his children for him. >If Harry can forgive Dumbledore, then I can; but I still think DD was very >cold hearted and evil in his intentions toward Harry. Rita Skeeter >described his intentions as "sinister." Was she ever right about that! I agree and like you feel that if Harry can forgive Dumbledore so can I. However, after a bit more reflection (I was really angry with Dumbledore for a while), I've come to see Dumbledore more as a general who considered Harry a soldier with a unique and specific mission. Doesn't lessen the emotional blow, but puts it more in the context of fighting evil and helps me forgive him. Christy --------------------------------- Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware protection. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 02:52:29 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:52:29 -0000 Subject: What I liked about DH (a positive post) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173722 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "krista7" wrote: > > In light of recent posts asking for positive > commentary on the book, I thought I'd share my list: > >> *The fact Harry "killed" Voldemort with Expelliarmus--that, > as ever, it was really Voldemort doing himself in. > > *That despite the flawed Dumbledore we got to know > through the book, we were reunited with the AD we know > and love in the final scenes. > Alla: Awww, I want to play too. I snipped most of your list which I loved as well. I am going to add more on those two and give some of mine. I loved loved loved that JKR made a point that Harry did not want to kill if he could since the beginning of the book during their first encounter with DE and ending with fight with Voldie. I **loved** Dumbledore with dark past and so IMO full of remorse. Trust me, I did not expect to love such Dumbledore, I thought that if I will learn that Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him, I would hate him. I felt DD remorse as real, when he is looking to Harry as little boy seeking reassurance, I felt sooo much for him. Moving on. Loved Ron **making a choice to come back** and save Harry's life. Loved Ron destroying horcrux and how his doubts materialised in Riddle Harry and Riddle Hermione. That was a cool writing in my view and Ron triumphed. I love Ron, did I mention that I love Ron? Oy, so loved Trio on camping trip - what dan said earlier. I loved how Dobby's death was described - SO moving, so tear jerker for me. I absolutely adored the radio show in support of Harry, one of the few funny and heroic moments for me in the book. LOVED Trio saving Muggleborns from that awful registration room. What else? Loved, loved, loved Harry walking to his death, everything about that scene. So well done if you ask me. I could literally feel how much he did not want to do that ( counting heart beats) and he still kept walking. Was so very proud of Harry. What else? Oh yeah, you said it but I loved Molly and what Narcissa did as well. I actually thought that Narcissa Malfoy made a choice bigger than her son did. I loved Minerva in this book. Her directing preparations to the battle of Hogwarts was awesome. Loved Aberforth. Alla From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 03:01:56 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:01:56 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173723 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Alice Franceschini" wrote: > > I don't think your argument is well founded unless you are trying to say that you think fictional stories and reality are the same thing. I do not think you can compare one with the other. I am sad that you have such a sad past but Rowling did not have to make a sad past for the last book and I do think a fictional writer is accountable for killing off loved characters in a fictional book such as Harry Potter is. Rowling changed her mind about killing Mr. Weasley and she was going to kill him in the 5th book. She could have easily changed her mind on all of these pointless killings in the 7th book. Lisa: So you're saying that a fictional war should be sanitized with a fairy-tale ending? Everyone lives, the bad guys go to jail, the good guys all live happily ever after? JKR is trying (and succeeding, IMO) to make her fictional world feel as real as possible -- which is why we're all so drawn into the books, I think. I don't think I'd be interested in reading something like you suggest. BTW, I think it's hilarious that whenever anyone successfully makes a point about JKR's world corresponding with the real world, people squeal about not being able to use real-world situations in fiction. Absolutely hilarious. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 03:06:40 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:06:40 -0000 Subject: Snape, again...(was Re: Come on folks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173724 Carol earlier: > > Because it isn't power that can defeat Voldemort. It's love, and forgiveness, and compassion, and, above all, the willingness to sacrifice yourself for the WW. It helps, of course, to be a Horcrux and share blood with Voldemort and be the master of the Elder Wand. > Valky responded: > I just wanted to comment on the last point you made here, Carol. Over the term of Harry's schooling we saw, from him, average to mediocre magical talent coupled with extraordinary bravery and selflessness. The extraordinary courage of Harry was not the least of his weapons against Voldemort by any means. But beyond his valour and love there was another very notable exception in Harry's mediocre arsenal. He mastered a complex magic spell that was beyond his years, Expecto Patronum; I don't think this can be rightfully played down, > As with the Patronus, JKR leaves it to our imaginations to nut out the complexities of this exception to Harry's wizarding skills, but it just doesn't do to understate it. In essence Harry has done the same as Snape ever did in his potions text, the same as Dumbledore did in his remarkable defeat of Grindelwald, he has delved into a complex magical theory and mastered its power, he went beyond known magic and become a founder of lore (his signature 'expelliarmus'), an Elder wand legend. > Carol again: Now, Valky, you're spoiling my eloquent sig line! :-) Seriously, I don't think Harry's powerful Patronus has anything to do with mastering the theory. Hermione, the theory expert, has trouble with that spell, and hers pops like a balloon at the first sign of confrontation. I didn't mean to downplay Harry's Patronus, which certainly comes into play in the MoM, but it's an exception that proves the rule. Powerful as his Patronus is, it isn't a reflection of his overall power and talent (which are probably rather less than most readers expected them to be). It's a reflection (IMO) of his love for his friends (remember how he conjures it in HBP?), and in the MoM scene in DH, a reflection of his compassion for Mrs. Cattermole and the other Muggle-borns. Nor did I mean to overlook Harry's courage, which I took as a given. He's the ultimate Gryffindor, after all. I was focusing on what I perceive as *Snape's* expectation or assumption (shared by a lot of readers, I think), that Harry needed to be a superwizard to defeat LV and that harry wasn't (in Snape's view) up to the job. But after the first few chapters, Harry isn't spending his time battling Death Eaters, nor does he ever defeat them through skill or power. For most of the book, he's hunting Horcruxes or trying to figure out what to do, and even destroying Horcruxes doesn't require extraordinary skill or power (except the need for Parseltongue in a few cases. So much for my expectation that Harry would need either Bill Weasley or Snape to act as curse breaker!) But my point is that Snape was trying to help prepare Harry by teaching him skills (Occlumency, nonverbal spells) expecting that he would fight a duel with him. Voldemort has the same expectation: "We duel on skill alone" (DH Am. ed. 743), and knowing that he has far more power and skill than Harry (classic David and Goliath), he's sure he'll win, regardles of who is master of the Elder Wand. (I'm not touching on that topic, except to say that I don't think that Harry's mastery of the Elder Wand has anything to do with mastery of the theory, if that's what you're saying. That would be wholly OoC.) To return to the point. Power can't defeat LV or Dumbledore would have taken him down long before (Horcruxes and all). In fact, power turns out, paradoxically, to be Dumbledore's weakness and his desire for it the reason he can't defeat LV. (Dumbledore would have succumbed to the lure of the One Ring, IMO.) Only love can defeat Voldemort. And I think Harry's powerful Patronus also boils down to love. That's why his is so powerful, even in PoA (though he has the advantage then of being at a distance from the Dementors). Hermione, the thinker, can't cast one nearly as strong. Nor can evil Umbridge, whose "happiness" is based on suffering. BTW, JKR hates cats. Does anyone think that's why Umbridge's Patronus is a cat? But then how do we explain McGonagall's Animagus form and Patronus, unless she started out as a stereotypical Halloween witch and grew in the telling? Carol, noting that while it was Snape who taught Harry to cast Expelliarmus, his signature move, it was Lupin who taught him Expecto Patronum, so the Marauders made their contribution, too From moosiemlo at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 03:02:44 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:02:44 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The watch? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2795713f0707292002i4951aff7i647f0c0e07c73ef0@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173725 lawandmommyhood: In the epilogue, Harry has a watch. "He checked the battered old watch that had once been Fabian Prewett's." Lynda: Its the watch the Weasleys gave him for his seventeenth birthday. Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 03:35:05 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:35:05 -0000 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173726 > > pair_0_docks: > > > > Yes I probably could have just put the more of the quote in there > but > > she continues after stating: > > > > "He's a complicated man...he's bitter, he's spiteful, he's a bully, > > all of these things are still true of Snape. > > > > Was he brave yes immensely, was he capable of love very > > definitely...Harry forgives him. Harry sees the good in Snape." Alla: Thanks. I just read the complete transcript. At least I think it was a complete transcript and I am quite happy with it :), but I am still wondering how it is possible that in the first one she said she does not see him as hero and now she is saying she is a hero to the extent. I was told offlist that the first one was a teaser ( thank you), but am wondering how can she be saying different things. Oh well, does not really matter. pair_0_docks: >> > Curious to know how you would define hero? I guess it does seem > > possible, to me at least, that a person (Snape) can still act > > heroically and yet still have some other negative qualities... Lupinlore: > Hmmm. I can't speak for Alla but I would say that the problem with > many of the arguments about Snape as a hero is that they try to say > that somehow his brave acts completely redeem him from his abuse of > Harry. I would say that they most certainly do NOT. He remains the > same bitter, spiteful, cramped little man that he was in the > beginning. He never had any feeling for Harry as a person, which > is what could have granted him true redemption. Instead, he is > driven by his emotional burden to protect a boy that he hates and > whom he never would have helped, otherwise. > > Thus Snape is, as JKR puts it, a hero to an extent, in that he does > very brave things for the good side. But he is not a hero in the > sense of being fully redeemed. Unlike Harry or Ron or Hermione, or > for that matter unlike Percy, he is unable to find his way to > rejecting the full darkness within himself. Percy turns his back on > his embrace of the Ministry and his spurning of his family. Snape > cannot turn his back on his bitterness and cruelty. Dumbledore asks > him "Have you come to care for the boy after all, Severus?" In that > moment the door is open for Snape's full redemption. It is the > tragedy of Snape's bitterness and cruelty that he slams it shut again > immediately. Alla: Hmmm, how would I define hero. Funnily of course I know that mythology defines heroes as people with immense bravery and self sacrifice, so theoretically Snape certainly should be called a hero. Maybe that does make sense that JKR calls him a hero to the extent, I do not know. But I would not call him a hero, no. Because yeah, to me hero is a good person, NOT perfect person, no, but person who tries to do good for the sake of doing good. Which is not to say that personal motivation cannot be thrown into the mix, but personal motivation to me at least should not be the only one in order to call a character a hero. That is why I can call plenty of people on good sides heroes - Weasleys, who fight not only for the happiness of their family, but for the better world, do they not? Arthur who gets bitten patrolling the prophecy that has nothing to do with his family, Bill who fights to save students in HBP, etc, etc. Percy, who comes back and turns his back on ministry. Is Dumbledore a hero? Well, yeah, to me he is. Is Harry a hero to me? Most definitely. Yeah, Voldemort killed his mum and dad, but he also wants to save people from Vodlemort, other people, who had nothing to do with him. Kingsley, Tonks, Moody who turn their backs on their employer and fight for what's right. Sure, Tonks looks for Lupin a lot in this book, but she joined the Order in OOP, does she not? When presumably she had nothing to do with Lupin yet. Is Sirius a hero to me? Oh, sure of course here I am incredibly biased, but no matter how many personal flaws he has, he rejects his dark family and fights for light side. Sure he loves Harry very much, but again he makes a choice when Harry was not even born yet, and he choses the right side. Snape? Well, I do agree with LL, I think, heheh. I also remember arguing long time ago with somebody who was saying that personal affection for Harry does not make person good, in relation to totally different character. Well, surely not - in general it does not. But I believe that in regards to Snape LL is correct. Dumbledore's question was opening a door to Snape's redemption. It is not because Snape is obligated to love Harry, it is because he did so much bad to him, it is because he so despicably fails to see that those green eyes are Lily's eyes for so long, I do not think that he is a complete hero at least, or maybe not a hero at all, if under hero you include being a good person, and Snape certainly does not fall under my definition of good person. JMO, Alla From carylcb at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 03:34:07 2007 From: carylcb at hotmail.com (clcb58) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:34:07 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173727 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > In light of a request for topics we can agree on - can we agree that > there was a heck of a lot of innuendo in this book? > clcb58 here: In the epilogue, James is explaining how he interrupted Teddy and Victoire and Ginny says, "You interrupted them? You are *so* like Ron--" Can't you just see it? Once Harry and Ginny start dating again, every time they try to have a private moment, Ron barges in like he did on Harry's birthday? Of course, this is ostensibly to protect his little sister's virtue, but more likely to be sure Harry doesn't "get there" before he does. :) Also, has anyone else realized that nineteen years after the end of the story is 2007? From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Mon Jul 30 04:02:27 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 04:02:27 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173728 > > > > clcb58 here: > > Also, has anyone else realized that nineteen years after the end of > the story is 2007? > Anne Squires: I'm afraid you're off by ten years. At least that's the way I calculate things. Somebody correct if you think I'm wrong. In CoS NHN celebrates his 500th deathday in October of that school year. NHN died in 1492. 1492 + 500 = 1992. Therefore book seven ends in 1998. 1998 + 19 = 2017 That's my calculation at any rate. I admit I could be mistaken; but that's the way a see the time line. Anne Squires From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 04:12:18 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 04:12:18 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173729 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "faery_wisdom" wrote: > You caught the false logic of my reasoning! Were stealing a means > to mastery, LV would have become master upon entering DD's tomb. > Now I find myself puzzling this further. I don't think your logic is false, Kit. LV didn't become the master of the wand not because he stole it, but because he stole it from the wrong person. When he opened DD's tomb, Draco was the master, not DD, that's why it didn't work. As for Gregorovich, G-wald not only took the wand, he also stunned the wandmaker. Maybe the stunning of the master is enough for the wand to consider him "defeated", or maybe just taking the wand against his master's will is enough. I agree that all this is rather vague :-). Joe also asked why Neville didn't get burned. I hope he already found the answer, because many posters wrote about it, but just in case, in short: LV couldn't hurt Hogwarts' defenders anymore, because Harry sacrificed himself for them and they were "protected". Harry says to LV that "none of the spells you put on them are binding"(p.738). Hope it helps, zanooda From alcuin74 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 04:25:33 2007 From: alcuin74 at yahoo.com (alcuin74) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 04:25:33 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173730 > > Erin: > > On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of > > Ariana as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted > > as possible? Alcuin: That's how I read it. I wonder if, just maybe, JKR had Ursula LeGuin's _Tehanu_ in mind when she was writing about Ariana. From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 04:41:07 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:41:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <269924.43071.qm@web55012.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173731 anne_t_squires wrote: > > > > clcb58 here: > > Also, has anyone else realized that nineteen years after the end of > the story is 2007? Anne Squires: >I'm afraid you're off by ten years. At least that's the way I >calculate things. Somebody correct if you think I'm wrong. >In CoS NHN celebrates his 500th deathday in October of that school >year. NHN died in 1492. 1492 + 500 = 1992. Therefore book seven ends >in 1998. 1998 + 19 = 2017 That's my calculation at any rate. I >admit I could be mistaken; but that's the way a see the time line. I calculated from a different angle but also got 2017. So, for anyone who wants to look at it differently: Their tombstones tell us that James and Lily died October 31, 1981; Harry would have been 15 months old. So, Harry was born July 31, 1980. Therefore, Harry's 11th birthday would have been July 31, 1991 and he started Hogwarts that year. So, his seventh year, had he returned, would have begun September 1997. So, the Battle at the end of DH takes place in 1998. Nineteen years later would be 2017. Specifically, the epilogue took place on September 1 (the day students traditionally board the Hogwarts Express for school), 2017. Christy From marycosola at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 04:12:43 2007 From: marycosola at yahoo.com (seriousschwartz) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 04:12:43 -0000 Subject: Lilly's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173732 > Anne Squires: > > > > In DH it was very poignant to me when DD tells a Snape who is grieving > for Lily that her surviving son has his mother's eyes. Then, when > Snape wanted to look into Lily's eyes as he died almost brought me to > tears. Literally. So, to me the eyes were very important and not a > let down at all. seriousschwartz: Well, there's also the old saw that the windows are the eyes to one's soul. Dumbledore reminds Snape in DH that Harry has Lily's inner qualities (caring about others, wanting to do what is right, etc.). So, I always thought the eyes were an indication of the type of person he was: A good, brave, loyal, courageous one, like his mom. From va32h at comcast.net Mon Jul 30 05:49:17 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 05:49:17 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173733 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: > As for Gregorovich, G-wald not only took the wand, he also stunned > the wandmaker. Maybe the stunning of the master is enough for the > wand to consider him "defeated", or maybe just taking the wand > against his master's will is enough. I agree that all this is rather vague :-). va32h: My take on the Elder Wand transference is that at least one aspect of it is that the previous master *acknowledges* defeat. Dumbledore congratulates Draco on his accomplishment of disarming DD and sneaking Death Eaters into the school. Perhaps it was a ruse to keep Draco talking, but Dumbledore did, in his way, accept defeat. When Harry takes Draco's wand by force, Draco does not pursue Harry - he has accepted defeat. I expect that if Draco had managed to get his own wand back in the RoR, Draco would still be the Master of the Elder Wand since Harry does not become master until he has the duel with Voldemort. va32h From Meliss9900 at aol.com Mon Jul 30 05:49:48 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 01:49:48 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Watch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173734 In a message dated 7/29/2007 4:48:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time, vincent.maston.ml at free.fr writes: Molly gave it to Harry at his 17th birthday, stating clearly that for her, Harry is like another son, since she also gave Ron a watch for his 17th birthday. Vincent Its also a nice touch because, according to JKR's web site Fabian (and Gideon) Prewett, are Molly's brothers. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 05:55:04 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 05:55:04 -0000 Subject: Camping and Despair - loving the trio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173735 --- "dan" wrote: > > Rowling finally gave us the ecstatic, but made us > travel through despair to get there. I had been hoping > for a downward arc, I felt the series required it, and > I had not yet come to love the trio truly. It was in > their weakest moments, when nothing was left to them > but what they could not give up, having given up > everything else, that I finally came to not only > identify with Ron, Hermione and Harry, but to love > them. ...edited several good observations... > > I've heard many talk about the camping trip as boring, > as pointless, but I don't understand this at all. The > camping trip was the most fun, and the most despairing, > the novels have ever gotten.... > > Then, with the silver doe and the sword and the > horcrux of hopelessness finally destroyed, the story > begins its slow upward journey, now in the deepest > authentic sense, toward light. > > dan > bboyminn: I'm inclined to agree, Dan. I never really understood what people's problem with the 'Camping' section of the story was. First, they claim it was 'endless', but upon reading these comments and then reading the book a second time, I realize the 'camping' section was actually pretty short. True in the book, it spans months, but in terms of pages and story time, I really didn't think it was that long. They claim it was boring, yet it contains some very action-packed, as well as some thematically significant, sections of the book. As far as Ron leaving, he simply said what they were all, including Harry, thinking. Further Ron only reacted that way under the influence of the Horcrux, and regretted it the instant it happened. That actually sounds pretty normal to me. Personally, I found this section of the book to be thoroughly captivating and engrossing. Steve/bboyminn From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 03:46:21 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:46:21 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173736 > Leslie41: > Well, there I would have to disagree. Names are incredibly > important, most especially the names we give ourselves. They are > often a profound statement of not only our interests, but what we > admire, and with whom we identify. Lupinlore has and continues to > make a statement with his name, and any perusal of his posts will > show that his choice is apt in terms of what he admires. LL: My goodness, how terribly, terribly, completely, utterly, fantastically out of order! And, as with most psychologizing, whether in English or History (which is where my Ph.D. and 14 years of experience is, as well as my publications), how completely and utterly manufactured of garbage. The name Lupinlore was actually picked because I had about two minutes before my ride left and I was reading a fanfic about Lupin at the time that had to do with werewolf lore. Which is, in any case, totally irrelevant. As both Nora and Alla have pointed out, what on Earth does Lupin's character have to do with Snape's? The failings or perception of them in one man have nothing whatsoever to do with the failings or perception of them in another. > Leslie41: > To admire Remus Lupin and excoriate and loathe Severus Snape seems > to me to reveal a basic refusal to come to terms with the characters > of both men, and anyone guilty of that to me demonstrates that their > opinions on Severus Snape are suspect. LL: Why? Because you admire Severus Snape and excoriate Remus Lupin? Because somehow a Ph. D. conveys great insight? It doesn't, in either my case or yours or anyone else's. The doctorate line at any graduate school commencement contains as large a percentage of dolts, dimwits, and fools as you'll find in any random sample. The same goes for any assemblage of senior faculty. It would seem that anyone who admires Sirius Black and dislikes Snape is in the same boat, as is anyone who admires James Potter and dislikes Snape, as is anyone who admires Dumbledore and dislikes Snape, as is anyone who ... well, anyone who dislikes Snape, period. Including the person who invented him -- who, by the way, has expressed great liking and admiration for Remus Lupin ... I dislike Snape because he is petty, cruel, abusive, idiotically blind to the truth, and contemptible. The fact of what he did to help Harry (which he did not do for noble reasons, but because of his own intense emotional burden) in no way excuses his sins. True, Harry forgives him, even sees the good in him, but that's what Resurrected Saviors do. Not being a Resurrected Savior, I don't have to worry about being so divinely forgiving -- I leave that to my priest in the confessional. Lupinlore, who really IS getting to like JKR more with each passing revelation From Mhochberg at aol.com Mon Jul 30 06:19:36 2007 From: Mhochberg at aol.com (Mhochberg at aol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:19:36 EDT Subject: The Malfoys Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173737 Lenore: Yes. She saw a chance and took it. That episode seems to show her as a soft, gentle woman, and I began to realize that I had never seen her characterized in any other way. I suppose she too was in Slytherin but, as far as Draco was concerned, she was the epitome of devotion. `````` Mary: The importance of love within the Malfoy's was shown as far back as GOF and possibly earlier. My first inkling that it might be important is on the train in GOF when Draco says that his father considered sending him to Durmstrang but his mother didn't want him so far away. Until then, I wondered whether Draco was important simply as a foil for Harry. I also wondered if Draco's importance to his family was simply as heir. This was my first clue that there might be something more. Obviously, Narcissa's love for Draco is vital to HBP. Without her, there would not have been an Unbreakable Vow and much of the tension of HBP would be gone. Love within the family is important to Malfoys. That fierce love for family (and by extension, other pure-bloods) is a defining characteristic. They not only love but defend their love. Narcissa loves Lucius and defends him at from Bellatrix throughout out the series. Note too that Bellatrix does not share her sister's ability to love. Bellatrix never once mentions Rodolphus. From the Daily Prophet that we even know that he is still alive as he also escaped from Azkaban in OP but Bellatrix's only interest is in Voldemort. ---Mary ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lwalsh at acsalaska.net Mon Jul 30 06:27:02 2007 From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:27:02 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid Flying In-Reply-To: <46ACF425.3030302@fastmail.us> References: <9723.52023.qm@web82909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <19BFB9BA-C440-49BB-85E1-3954D58CF728@acsalaska.net> <46ACF425.3030302@fastmail.us> Message-ID: <7C3A9287-71E0-48FC-917A-73F357192253@acsalaska.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173738 On 2007, Jul 29, , at 12:10, Random832 wrote: > Laura Lynn Walsh wrote: >> Since I am now finished with the last book, I decided to >> go back and re-read everything. And now I have a >> question. In the first book, when Hagrid shows up at >> Privet Drive, DD is surprised that he comes on Sirius' >> motorbike. And 10 years later, when Harry asks him >> how he got to the Hut on the Rock, he says he flew. >> If he is too big to ride on broomsticks or thestrals (acc. >> to DH p. 53 US ed.), how did Dumbledore expect him >> to get Harry to Privet Drive? The only choice I can >> think of is hippogriff, unless Hagrid, too, can fly without >> means of support. Other ideas? >> >> Laura > > Well, there's the motorcycle, same then as now. Or... But DD didn't expect him to bring Harry on the motorcycle. What did DD expect? > "How did you get here?" Harry asked, looking around for another boat. > "Flew," said Hagrid. > At this point, Harry does not know the word "Floo". I don't think Hagrid would characterize a journey by Floo Network as "not an easy journey" - although if Harry was bumping into things, then Hagrid would surely do so. But I still wouldn't expect him to be tired and thirsty - traveling by Floo Network isn't arduous. > There could be another building on the island itself that he Floo'd > into, or perhaps this is how he got to the vicinity and he didn't > consider his means of getting to the island itself important. And, in the case of bringing Harry, there were no readily available fireplaces - unless Mrs. Figg was already in place. It just seems odd, now that we know Hagrid can't ride a broom or a thestral. Laura And whatever became of the canary yellow circus tent? :-) -- Laura Lynn Walsh lwalsh at acsalaska.net http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From shagufta_naazpk2000 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 07:27:13 2007 From: shagufta_naazpk2000 at yahoo.com (shagufta_naazpk2000) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:27:13 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173739 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > > > JKR apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I know > > > in my heart that a quarter of the people out there are evil, half > > > of them are okay, and there's one quarter that's just > > unquestionably good." > > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it cumlminates> > > in a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. > > > >>Shagufta: > > > So you think the world is made up of good people and only good > > > people? This world of ours where murder and torture and terrorism > > > are a sad reality - this world is made up of good people? > > > Hi Actually i was responding to the fact that you contrasted JK's (alleged) world view with Anne Frank's. I thought you were saying that unlike Anne Frank, who went through hell and still retained the optimistic view of 'people are basically good' JK had a very cynical view of the world and the people in it. And my point is that, if that is her philosophy, i think it is more realistic than saying 'everyone is good' > Betsy Hp: > I think it's impossible to decide someone is going to be a terroist > and a murderer at age eleven. <<< I think - and i'm venturing into murky warters here - that JK's house systme is more of a symbolic representation of the world as she sees it. Most people are good (all the Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw took up for Harry in the end) but there are some who are bad and you have to deal with it. > > However, that's not how JKR sees it. Some (few) people are good, > some are bad, and that can easily be determined by a magical hat at>>> age eleven.<< I think what everyone keeps missing when talking about the Hat is that it does not force any kid into any house. It allows for Choice. And Choice is a big word in JK's world. And i don't think Harry was the only one to get to choose. We know for a fact that the Hat suggested Ravenclaw to Hermione but she chose Gryffindor. Here's my take on some of the conversations the Hat had with some characters: Sirius Black Hat: Hmm...of good Slytherin stock i see... Sirius: Oh no, please, not Slytherin Hat:No? But you could do well there, you have all it takes... Sirius: No please - let me be in Gryffindor. Hat: Hmm..well, if that's what you want Nevill Longbottom Hat: Hmm..lots of potential but no self confidence, maybe i should put you in Hufflepuff, they'll be kind to you Nevill: My parents were in Gryfindor. if I'm not there my Gran will kill me Hat: Gryffindor...you might have a tough time there.. Nevill: Oh please put me in Gryfindor..\ Hat..well if you insist... So, what i'm saying, the Hat is an opportunity for children to choose, not an absolute decree. But ofcourse, 11 is too young to choose for some, and that's exactly what Dumbledore implied. > Betsy Hp: > Harry's son James didn't learn his "Slytherin is bad" attitude in a >>> vacuum though. So there's commentary on the commentary. "Slytherin > is okay ::wink, wink, nudge, nudge:: except for how it totally isn't." He could have learnt that at school, no? He's spent a year in the Gryffindor common room after all. just my confused thoughts cheers Shagufta From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jul 30 07:56:29 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:56:29 -0000 Subject: Slytherin at different times & Great Hall moment (Re: DH as Christian Allegory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173740 > Renee: > That's an interesting take on the burning of the Sorting Hat; I > hadn't thought of this. Not an unlikely scenario. OTOH, it sounds a > little like blaming Hitler for what he did to Germany, while it's > obvious that Hitler would never have gained power without the > support of the (or at least many) Germans. If no Slytherins, or > only a few, had ever rallied to Voldemorts banners, his plans would > have failed. Voldemort didn't create Slytherin House; it was > already there and the mindset we see in Harry's days does not > result from his influence. You could even argue that had he been in > a different House, Tom Riddle wouldn't have turned out quite so > bad. That is, unless it's true that the books attest to Rowlings > belief in predestination... Jen: I was probably guilty of exaggerating Voldemort's influence on Slytherin house in my first post; I tend to start in a more extreme position and work my way to the middle as I read other comments, lol. You're right that some tenets of Slytherin house have been around since the beginning, including the pureblood ideaology. However, I found it interesting that even in the Marauder's time the talk about Slytherin in the train compartment was different from what Harry heard. They sneered at each other about brains and brawn, talked about following in their parent's footsteps and the like. Even Sirius, while glum about coming from a family of Slytherins, didn't accuse Snape of loving dark arts and pureblood ideaology if he wanted to be in Slytherin. Severus and Lily maintain a Slytherin/Gryffindor friendship until the point at which, presumably, Voldemort started the first war and there was talk among students about DEs, dark magic and which side to choose. Harry heard different things in his time, about how every witch/wizard who'd followed Voldemort came from Slytherin, and Draco told him his whole family was in Slytherin followed by comments about 'our kind' and the pureblood business. Looking at those differences, while children/families of Slytherin house were already predisposed to find Voldemort's agenda more appealing, he also exacerbated the problems in the house by choosing his first followers from there (and then their children and friends following in successive generations) and in my view, corrupting whatever good there was for those who might have seen Slytherin house as valuing history, family connections and the like instead of *supremacy* of purebloods (although still elitism either way). I don't have a lot of canon to back me up without seeing different generations, but I'm wondering if the the problem has been cyclical rather than constant, starting with Godric, Salazar, Rowena and Helga coexisting for a long period until Salazar became more and more extreme in his agenda, wanting only children from all-magical familes at Hogwarts. > Renee: > Quite a few, I suppose, but having primarily their own interest in > mind and/or agreeing with the prejudices of their House, they would > have lacked the incentive to go against him until something happened > that shook them to the core. They weren't raised/predisposed do do > so in principle - and that had nothing to do with Voldemorts > influence on Slytherin House. Jen: Yes, we see it's true that most who've opposed him are pushed into a corner to do so, not seeing the extent of Voldemort's agenda until it's too late to get out or options are limited at the very least. Before ending, I wanted to say a little more about members of Slytherin house and courage on the night of the battle at Hogwarts. I mentioned in my last post wondering if there were members who wanted to step forward but feared reprisal too much to do so. Somewhere in one of the many posts since then (!) there was mention that fear wasn't a good enough reason, that everyone feared and it didn't keep members of other houses from stepping forward; that lack of courage was considered the worst possible offense in Potterverse. I've been considering this idea, thinking about what makes Slytherin house unique at that moment in the Great Hall. For one thing, choosing to fight would mean battling their own parents, extended family or friend's relatives. That's got to be a very weird choice to make, one few of the children in other houses would face. Another factor is those who have left their families or homes, who take a stand against the pureblood supremacy idea, aren't held up as role models - they're blasted off family trees and cast off to find their own way. So unlike a Neville, who hears praise and validation for standing up to his enemies and friends, many Slytherins are likely to face scorn and abandonment, if not worse (not that all care, i.e., Sirius and Andromeda). I'm not sure if fear *is* a good enough reason in a world where you're supposed to choose between what is right and what is easy, but I do understand why those Slytherins who chose to oppose Voldemort did so in furtive ways rather than something public like standing up in the Great Hall. Hopefully future generations of Slytherins will have more role models who act in public, like Slughorn battling openly and the Malfoys remaining in the Great Hall after the battle. Jen, who was cheered to hear JKR say tonight that the MOM at least was reformed by the time of the Epilogue. From claire_elise2003 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 07:25:46 2007 From: claire_elise2003 at yahoo.com (claire_elise2003) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:25:46 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters at graveyard - GOF Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173741 A longtime lurker, I am delurking to ask about Voldemort's comment in the graveyard scence in GOF in the light of what we now know about Snape. Voldemort says, "And here we have six missing Death Eaters ... three dead in my service. One, too cowardly to return... he will pay. One, who I believe has left me for ever ... he will be killed, of course ... and one, who remains my most faithful servant, and who has already re-entered my service. ...He is at Hogwarts, that faithful servant, and it was through his efforts that our young friend arrived tonight." At the time, I recall much speculation about whether the "most faithful servant" was Crouch Jr or Snape. But in the light of what we now know, it seems to me that Crouch was the "faithful servant" and Karkaroff the "one too cowardly to return". Which leaves Snape as the one who has left forever and who would have to be killed. Do we have any canon to suggest how Snape subsequently convinced Voldemort that he was indeed still a Death Eater and so avoided being killed off (at least until the end, when he was killed no because of any treachery but simply to give Voldemort power over the Elder Wand). And where does Regulus fall in this? Given that he dies by drinking the poison because of his disgust with the Dark Lord, did he really die in his service? Sorry if this has been discussed recently. I have tried looking to see if anything was said post DH, but there is so much there to digest!! Claire From mhmilligan1977 at inbox.com Mon Jul 30 07:29:03 2007 From: mhmilligan1977 at inbox.com (Martina) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:29:03 -0000 Subject: I'm New and I finished reading the DH Book(spoilers) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173742 Hi everyone, My name is Martina and I just finished the Deathly Hallows book, it was a very good book, but I don't understand some of the parts like the chapter that was in the Forbidden Forest and when Harry was talking to Dumbledore. So I am going to re-read the book again. I am so sad that Lupin, Tonks, Fred, Madeye, Hedwig died, but really happy that Voldemort Dead. Martina From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 08:12:35 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 08:12:35 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173743 > > > Erin: > > > did anyone else read the Muggle torture of Ariana as rape? > > > Or do I just like my backstories as twisted as possible? Goddlefrood: I'll not answer the latter rhetorical question. The answer to the first is no, it read as what it was, an attack that made poor Ariana fail to adjust to her newly found magical moments. The fear of the unknown expressed in the attack by the three muggle boys on her is about all I took from it. That Percival would take his revenge on them for what was done, thus leading Albus himself on his road, a road that took him a long time to recover from travelling down, was understandable. Any parent would wish to seek a measure of retribution against those who had damaged a child of his. That could be put down to human nature. Perhaps the attack on his sister may be why Dumbledore stated the opinion that there are some fates worse than death. Whether that referred also to what happened to the muggle boys is not something I would exclude either. To think of whatever happened as rape, as I have seen here and on other boards is just simply wrong and somewhat nausea inducing. It's certainly not something that my children will ever be encouraged to think happened when they are one day read that sequence, always assuming they even question it. Rape is one of very few crimes that I, as a some time criminal defence lawyer, will not defend, however much an accused person might plead their innocence. In my book it is worse than any other crime, but did not spring to mind at all when reading of Ariana. From estelwyn at yahoo.co.nz Mon Jul 30 08:20:38 2007 From: estelwyn at yahoo.co.nz (Susan) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 08:20:38 -0000 Subject: Camping and Despair - loving the trio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173744 "dan" wrote: > Rowling finally gave us the ecstatic, but made us travel through > despair to get there. I had been hoping for a downward arc, I felt > the series required it, and I had not yet come to love the trio > truly. It was in their weakest moments, when nothing was left to > them but what they could not give up, having given up everything > else, that I finally came to not only identify with Ron, Hermione > and Harry, but to love them. > Then, with the silver doe and the sword and the horcrux of > hopelessness finally destroyed, the story begins its slow upward > journey, now in the deepest authentic sense, toward light. Stel: Wow dan, what a helpful reframe! I found the camping trip dragged a little, but there were many Moments in there that I loved, and you are so right, they're all moments where the characters of HRH deepen and their true, best selves begin to shine. Thanks for articulating that so eloquently. I especially love the phrase "the horcrux of hopelessness." BTW, Hi everyone. I'm new to this list and very pleased to have found it. I've been yearning for some intelligent, adult discussion about this book and stumbled across HPfGU a couple days ago (thanks Google!) This is my first post. From theincredibles13 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jul 30 09:26:16 2007 From: theincredibles13 at yahoo.co.uk (christina cooper-wallis) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:26:16 +0100 (BST) Subject: DH loved it! Message-ID: <784916.74997.qm@web26709.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173745 Hello, I'm new to this group and have finally managed to finish the book last night. I have to say that I absolutely loved the book in some parts my heart was hammering so hard (Malfoys Manor) and in others I was in floods of tears (The Forest Again). I was surprised to read how many people were disappointed with the book, I do think there are still lots of questions unanswered and things I want to know that weren't explained but as someone else said this is the way JK wanted it to be (maybe to make it easier to write another one, maybe a Weasley spin off!!!) I sobbed through the Final Forest scene, (even with my husband making the terrible comment that its 'just a book' even though he has now got so engrossed in his copy he can't put it down) I thought there would be more deaths in the book and was quite shocked and delighted that Harry, Ron Hermione, Ginny, Luna and Neville all made it. The end to a degree was exactly what I had hoped that Harry would defeat LV but there were definitely times I thought they wouldn't make it. I have to say I loved it and found none of it boring I think people should just take it for what it is (and not look for inner meanings) and that is that it's a fantastic book. I shall now have to start all over again. Christina From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 10:26:19 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:26:19 -0000 Subject: Red Herrings and Reconciliation In-Reply-To: <021d01c7d1ff$b6b4b3f0$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173746 K12listmomma quoted me, Jim Ferer: "You speak of the frustration of the many, many threads JKR left hanging out of the tapestry. There are endless stories left to tell in this universe, and we're going to tell them, which leads to a prediction: Within a year or two, there will be officially sanctioned volumes of fiction written by us, the fans, published by Bloomsbury / Scholastic et. al., perhaps selected and even introduced by JKR. There's plenty of precedent for it." And she answered: "...but I am not so sure that Rowling would "endorse" such a book or story. I think, and this is my prediction, that she will see the fanfiction and rather than to be able to "pass that torch" mentally to the fans, that it will instead inspire her to "take back control" over her world to continue the story." Now me again: Your prediction is very possible and well might come to pass. Here's why I went the other way: JKR, at least for now, is weary of the pressure of turning out the series. She'd be slow to come back to it. If she does maintain control, we'll be waiting much longer for more of Harry's world. OTOH, she's always been generous towards fan fiction (not all authors are) and admits to reading it, which most authors won't for fear of being accused of stealing ideas. Also, if she were to select, comment on, and perhaps even edit stories to be published then she still has a lot of control over Harry's universe. There's long been a custody battle with the fans over Harry and his friends: obviously the stories that got official sanction would be the most influential. I'm very curious about JKR's future. Somehow I just can't imagine much more major work from her - I blame the "you can't go back to Woodstock" effect for that, and everything she ever did again would be unfairly compared to Harry and found wanting by too many people. I expect she will devote her life to her family, to philanthropy, and to being the ultimate Harry Potter resource. Jim Ferer From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jul 30 10:43:33 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:43:33 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters at graveyard - GOF In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173747 "claire_elise2003" wrote: > snip > At the time, I recall much speculation about whether the "most faithful servant" was Crouch Jr or Snape. But in the light of what we now know, it seems to me that Crouch was the "faithful servant" and Karkaroff the "one too cowardly to return". Which leaves Snape as the one who has left forever and who would have to be killed. Do we have any canon to suggest how Snape subsequently convinced Voldemort that he was indeed still a Death Eater and so avoided being killed off (at least until the end, when he was killed no because of any treachery but simply to give Voldemort power over the Elder Wand). Potioncat: I think there's a quote from JKR that confirms Snape as the 'one who left' but I may be wrong. Most list members have worked it out this way. The best canon for it is in HBP. Snape explains it all in Spinners End. >Claire > And where does Regulus fall in this? Given that he dies by drinking the poison because of his disgust with the Dark Lord, did he really die in his service? Potioncat; Regulus has become very interesting, and in my mind, is one of the unresolved stories. Here's another example of Sirius getting it wrong. Sirius said something along the line that when Regulus got cold feet and tried to back out, LV had him killed. Well, we know that isn't true. So, what did LV think happened to him? Did he think Regulus had been killed by Aurors? LV didn't know the locket had been replaced, so he may not have known Regulus had turned. And, what was it that made RAB turn? Oh, this is the other thing I got right. I knew RAB was in Lake Inferius. From tareprachi at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 10:34:21 2007 From: tareprachi at yahoo.com (pforparvati) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:34:21 -0000 Subject: What happened to Dursleys? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173748 Hey..does anyone wonder what happened to Dursley family? There is no mention of them after they went into hiding....any guesses? pforParvati From ekrdg at verizon.net Mon Jul 30 11:13:02 2007 From: ekrdg at verizon.net (Kimberly) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:13:02 -0400 Subject: Theories...a load of waffle ? Message-ID: <001801c7d29a$99a19ad0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> No: HPFGUIDX 173749 I'm re-reading DH and came across this, which I personally had to chuckle at. Scholastic ed., pg. 17. It's the Memoriam write up about Dumbledore, naming some of the famous people he had correspondence with when he was either in school or seemingly just out of school. "....and Adalbert Waffling, the magical theoretician..." I didn't notice it the first time around but this time I did. I've often heard the expression, "a load of waffle" indicating something that was rubbish or pure speculation. I looked up "Waffling" and one definition is: "to talk foolishly or without purpose; idle away time talking". I love that she named the highly noted magical theoretician that. I think it's funny ! What is she saying about "theories" ? I think she used this name light-heartedly, that it's just one of those word plays that she does. Did anyone pick up on any other new word plays from the book ? Kimberly "Don't bother me, I'm reading..." 7/21/07 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From johana at lge.ibi.unicamp.br Mon Jul 30 11:37:10 2007 From: johana at lge.ibi.unicamp.br (johanarincones) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:37:10 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173750 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Goddlefrood" wrote: > > > > > Erin: > > > > > did anyone else read the Muggle torture of Ariana as rape? > > > > Or do I just like my backstories as twisted as possible? > > Goddlefrood: > > The answer to the first is no, it read as what it was, an attack > that made poor Ariana fail to adjust to her newly found magical > moments. The fear of the unknown expressed in the attack by the > three muggle boys on her is about all I took from it. > Finally! I was getting scared at the amount of people that read that scene as rape. It was creeping me out! The girl was only 6 years old, at that age a bad beating/humiliation associated to her ability to do magic would be more than enough to create a block, or at least a huge feeling of guilt from being able to perform magic. Weren't any of you bullied at a young age? Just a push and a few laughs can get you down for a while. No rape necessary to make a lasting impression! I imagine JKR being extremely worried at people thinking she got a six-years old gang raped! On the whole I liked the book a lot. I loved it that she was able to get horcrux Harry without killing Harry. I thought it would have been better without the epilogue, though. If she'd just made clear that Harry found happiness, that was good enough for me. My best to you all, Johana From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jul 30 12:33:39 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:33:39 -0000 Subject: The Watch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173751 > The Barmaid says: > > Molly gave Harry the watch as a birthday gift from her and Arthur. It > is the same sort of watch they gave to Ron for his 17th in HBP. She > apologized for the fact that the one they give Harry was not new -- it > is a bit battered. She explains that it was her brother Fabian's. > You can find this in Chapter Seven (pg 114 US) Potioncat: I thought it was horrible that she gave Fabian's watch to Harry rather than to Ron. Then I realized--Ron hates hand-me-downs; Harry desires a family. So giving Ron a new watch and Harry one that had been in the family was the perfect thing to do. Besides it will eventually go to a Weasley grandchild. I was so convinced that DD's ownership of unusual timepieces, and the Weasley's many different watches and clocks was a hint that they were related. I was certain this scene would be setting something up. Alas! From csh at stanfordalumni.org Mon Jul 30 12:25:21 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:25:21 -0000 Subject: What Petunia knows (Re: The Dursleys:) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173752 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > ... > Petunia knows enough about the WW to correspond with DD prior to > his 'last', the letter on the doorstep. I'm intrigued how these previous > letters fit in. Petunia was chosen because of the blood connection so > I don't see how Dumbledore would have corresponded with her about > the possibility of baby Harry living with them until the blood tie became > a necessity. And yet DD appears certain the Dursleys will accept Harry > with just one letter of explanation; even McGonagall is surprised that > Dumbledore believes a letter will be enough. I'm thinking the previous > letters would fill in this particular gap because they need to be relevant > to the missing parts of the story revealed in DH. > ... Bravo, Jen, very prescient. I was looking through HBP looking for DH connections and the passage concerning Dumbledore mentioning that he had corresponded with Petunia caught my eye: "'We have corresponded, of course.' Harry thought this an odd way of reminding Aunt Petunia that (Dumbledore) had once sent her an exploding letter, but Aunt Petunia did not challenge the term..." JKR has, again, slightly pulled back the curtain on events that would be revealed in DH. The correspondence, of course, does not refer to the Howler, as Harry thinks, but to Dumbledore's and Petunia's back-and-forth in which Petunia pleads with him to allow her to go to Hogwarts after Lily gets the letter... Chuck From bearhug at tpg.com.au Mon Jul 30 12:40:14 2007 From: bearhug at tpg.com.au (The Cuthills) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:40:14 +1000 Subject: Theories...a load of waffle ? References: <001801c7d29a$99a19ad0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: <001001c7d2a6$c7777f90$0301a8c0@userb26c5552b3> No: HPFGUIDX 173753 Kimberley said: Did anyone pick up on any other new word plays from the book ? Anne: Yes!! Crabbe...he called the diadem a "die-dum" and then he did! Die dumb that is, but he lived dumb so I suppose it was fitting ;) Not to mention Grimmauld Place, which was indeed a grim, auld(Scottish for old) place From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 13:38:48 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:38:48 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?The_caf=E9_scene_?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173754 I really liked the caf? scene because it shows that even a clearly Muggle environment is not immune from a Wizard war. As much as I liked it I'm glad the entire Harry Potter series didn't just stop at page 165; for some reason I kept imagining an old jukebox in the corner of that caf? playing Journey's "Don't Stop Believing". By the way that scene contains the only error I've caught JKR at, Hermione says she had never performed a memory charm before but she had, on her parents. Eggplant From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 14:02:08 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:02:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Jo's OWN Words about Political and Religious Overtones in the Books Message-ID: <725381.44275.qm@web52710.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173755 An excerpt from Jo's interview with meredith viera: Young voice: Voldemort's killing of Muggle-borns, it sounds a lot like ethnic cleansing. How much of the series is a political metaphor? J.K. Rowling: Well, it is a political metaphor. But I didn't sit down and think, "I want to recreate Nazi Germany," in the-- in the wizarding world. Because-- although there are-- quite consciously overtones of Nazi Germany, there are also associations with other political situations. So I can't really single one out. Young voice: Harry's also referred to as the chosen one. So are there religious-- J.K. Rowling: Well, there-- there clearly is a religious-- undertone. And-- it's always been difficult to talk about that because until we reached Book Seven, views of what happens after death and so on, it would give away a lot of what was coming. So yes, my belief and my struggling with religious belief and so on I think is quite apparent in this book. Meredith Vieira: And what is the struggle? J.K. Rowling: Well my struggle really is to keep believing. Meredith Vieira: To keep believing? J.K. Rowling: Yes. ****** SOOOOO.....I can totally live with this. She didn't keep her spiritual stuff secret because Harry was a symbol for Jesus - she kept it quiet because she didn't want to give away that people live on after death, as in Heaven. For me, a story about spiritual struggle and questions of faith is a lot more interesting than a book about how great the Bible story is! I knew Jo wasn't that traditional. I appreciate the struggle to keep believing, and that makes for a complex book. A simplistic allegory to the Biblical story isn't it. She also talks about the politics of the books, an element which has always jumped out at me, because I am much more political than I am religious. I think the Slytherins as Jews argument can be put (somewhat) to rest, as she clearly says that Muggles (IF ANYONE) in the books would be the persucuted people. She also says there are other political situations reflected...hmmm, Bush and Blair, anyone? Katie, who knows she said she would start lurking and stop posting, but who is obviously physically incapable of keeping her fat trap shut. : ) --------------------------------- Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 14:02:47 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:02:47 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173756 I'm sure the transcript is available from the Bloomsbury site, but here are the key points I gleaned rom JKR's live chat: Rosi: What does in essence divided mean? J.K. Rowling: Dumbledore suspected that the snake's essence was divided - that it contained part of Voldemort's soul, and that was why it was so very adept at doing his bidding. J.K. Rowling: This also explained why Harry, the last and unintended Horcrux, could see so clearly through the snake's eyes, just as he regularly sees through Voldemort's. J.K. Rowling: Dumbledore is thinking aloud here, edging towards the truth with the help of the Pensieve. Superhans: What was duldeys worst memory? J.K. Rowling: I think that when Dudley was attacked by the Dementors he saw himself, for the first time, as he really was. This was an extremely painful, but ultimately salutory lesson, and began the transformation in him. Laura Trego: Was the absence of snapes portrait in the headmasters office in the last scene innocent or deliberate J.K. Rowling: It was deliberate. Snape had effectively abandoned his post before dying, so he had not merited inclusion in these august circles. J.K. Rowling: However, I like to think that Harry would be instrumental in ensuring that Snape's portrait would appear there in due course. Tineke: What happened to percy did he return to his job at the ministry? J.K. Rowling: Yes, the new improved Percy ended up as a high-ranking official under Kingsley. Camille: How is george getting along without his twin J.K. Rowling: Well, I don't think that George would ever get over losing Fred, which makes me feel so sad. However, he names his first child and son Fred, and he goes on to have a very successful career, helped by good old Ron. (Lisa's note: She originally said that Ron and Harry were aurors, but now she's saying that Ron went into business with George) Snapedinhalf: You promised that someone will do magic late in life in book 7. I've now read it three times but cant work out who it might have been! Please help!! J.K. Rowling: I'm sorry about this, but I changed my mind! J.K. Rowling: My very earliest plan for the story involved somebody managing to get to Hogwarts when they had never done magic before, but I had changed my mind by the time I'd written the third book. Christiana: How did voldemort get his wand back after he was in was exile J.K. Rowling: Wormtail, desperate to curry favour, salvaged it from the place it had fallen and carried it to him. I admit that would have been a bit of a feat for a rat, but they are highly intelligent creatures! Lechicaneuronline: Do you think snape is a hero J.K. Rowling: Yes, I do; though a very flawed hero. An anti-hero, perhaps. He is not a particularly likeable man in many ways. He remains rather cruel, a bully, riddled with bitterness and insecurity - and yet he loved, and showed loyalty to that love J.K. Rowling: and, ultimately, laid down his life because of it. That's pretty heroic! Jaclyn: Did lily ever have feelings back for snape J.K. Rowling: Yes. She might even have grown to love him romantically (she certainly loved him as a friend) if he had not loved Dark Magic so much, and been drawn to such loathesome people and acts. Michael: Why didnt fawkes come back to help harry I would have thought that since harry was so loyal to dumbledore, fawkes would have been harrys new pet J.K. Rowling: Something had to leave the school for good when Dumbledore died, and I decided that would be Fawkes. Dumbledore was a very great and irreplacable man, and the loss of Fawkes (and the fact that he was 'non-transferable'!) expresses this symbolically Delailah: How does dumbledore understand parseltongue? J.K. Rowling: Dumbledore understood Mermish, Gobbledegook and Parseltongue. The man was brilliant. Annie: Does the wizarding world now know that snape was dumbledores man, or do they still think he did a bunk J.K. Rowling: Harry would ensure that Snape's heroism was known. Lady Bella: Whose murders did voldemor use to create each of the horcruxes J.K. Rowling: The diary - Moaning Myrtle. The cup - Hepzibah Smith, the previous owner. The locket - a Muggle tramp. Nagini - Bertha Jorkins (Voldemort could use a wand once he regained a rudimentary body, as long as the victim was subdued). J.K. Rowling: The diadem - an Albanian peasant. The ring - Tom Riddle snr. Sampotterish: Why did dumbledore want ron to keep his deluminator J.K. Rowling: Because he knew that Ron might need a little more guidance than the other two. J.K. Rowling: Dumbledore understood Ron's importance in the trio. He wasn't the most skilled, or the most intelligent, but he held them together; his humour and his good heart were essential. Natalie: Are house divisions as prevalaent in harry's children's hogwarts as in the previous generations J.K. Rowling: Slytherin has become diluted. It is no longer the pureblood bastion it once was. Nevertheless, its dark reputation lingers, hence Albus Potter's fears. Nithya: Lily detested mulciber,averyif snape really loved her,why didnt he sacrifice their company for her sake J.K. Rowling: Well, that is Snape's tragedy. Given his time over again he would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive. J.K. Rowling: He wanted Lily and he wanted Mulciber too. He never really understood Lily's aversion; he was so blinded by his attraction to the dark side he thought she would find him impressive if he became a real Death Eater. Barbara: I was very disappointed to see harry use crucio and seem to enjoy it his failure to perform that kind of curse in the past has been a credit to his character why the change, and did harry later regret having enjoyed deliberately causing .K. Rowling: Harry is not, and never has been, a saint. Like Snape, he is flawed and mortal. J.K. Rowling: Harry's faults are primarily anger and occasional arrogance. J.K. Rowling: On this occasion, he is very angry and acts accordingly. He is also in an extreme situation, and attempting to defend somebody very good against a violent and murderous opponent. Courtney: What child did harry give the marauders map to if any J.K. Rowling: I've got a feeling he didn't give it to any of them, but that James sneaked it out of his father's desk one day. Karin: What did petunia wanted to say to hary at the end of the dursleys departing J.K. Rowling: I think that for one moment she trembled on the verge of wishing Harry luck; that she almost acknowledged that her loathing of his world, and of him, was born out of jealousy. J.K. Rowling: But she couldn't do it; years of pretending that 'normal' was best had hardened her too much. Leaky Cauldron: Please pose and answer the question you'd most like to address about the series! (a ha, turned it back on you.) J.K. Rowling: Oooo, you're tough. J.K. Rowling: I must admit, I always wondered why nobody ever asked me what Dumbledore's wand was made of! J.K. Rowling: And I couldn't say that, even when asked 'what do you wish you'd been asked...' because it would have sign-posted just how significant that wand would become! Nigel: Can harry speak parseltongue when he is no longer a horcrux? J.K. Rowling: No, he loses the ability, and is very glad to do so. Lucy: What is dumbledores boggart? J.K. Rowling: The corpse of his sister. Pablo: What is toadface umbridge doing now J.K. Rowling: Glad to see you like her as much as I do! J.K. Rowling: She was arrested, interrogated and imprisoned for crimes against Muggleborns. Maggie Keir: Was hermione able to find her parents and undo the memory damage J.K. Rowling: Yes, she brought them home straight away. Lola Victorpujebet: Was minerva in love with albus J.K. Rowling: No! Not everybody falls in love with everybody else... Rachel Nell: Jkr, thank you for such amazing books! I would like to know how come noone seemed to know that lily and snape were friends in school they were obviously meeting for chats, etc didnt james know their past J.K. Rowling: Thank you for your thank you! J.K. Rowling: Yes, it was known that they were friendly and then stopped being friends. Nothing more than that would be widely known. And now I need to attend a PTA meeting, so if someone could post a link to the transcript, I'd be grateful! ;0) From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 14:04:59 2007 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:04:59 -0000 Subject: LONG collection of DH related thoughts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173757 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "faery_wisdom" wrote: > K: I am glad someone pointed out the parallel between the two ends of > the spectrum. When asked what she'd like readers to learn from the > series JKR said "Tolerance." Life events have led to my perception > that the different religious and spiritual teachings share more > common ground with respect to their teachings than differences. To > attempt to paint that out here would be laughable in the least, but > it brings me back to what JKR's answer and the idea of > tolerance. 'Nuff said. Me: It's an intriguing sort of thing that these books are intended to foster, without watering down the author's own belief system. That people residing in the fringes of the spectrum get worked up is proof of the validity of the message. > K: > Beautifully stated. Snape's bravery, for me, rested in his acceptance > of his actions and the consequences of such. I did not so much > perceive "Look at Me" as one last request to see Lily's eyes > (honestly never occurred to me) or that he had no control over the > thoughts he spilled out for Harry to collect. Rather, I saw all this > as a man who finally accepted that his lot in life was of his own > making, and though he dies lonely and without friends, he ultimately > accepts who he was and his path as the means to a 'right end'. He was > certainly NOT heroic to me, but decidedly brave. (As is anyone who > can truly look at themselves and honestly accept what they see, > mistakes, flaws and the altruistic traits). That was why I loved DD > in DH - he was truly human, though genius in his intelligence. Me, still: Yep. This is part of what makes Snape a compelling character. A character whose formative years seem to have made him unable to have a conversion along the lines of a total reorientation of moral principles and made him unable to experience a more normative sort of love, does the best he can based on his circumstances. His sense of love is flawed, and arguably so is his sense of guilt, but there is something within him that drives him to acts of bravery. > On a personal note, my apologies for the 'do you have children > analogy'. That was clearly formed on my own experience with, to be > nice, my children's father. I certainly did not mean to imply all > expecting father's become unhinged, just that enough do that it's > become clich?. It would have been better to phrase my thoughts > differently. All is forgiven. In my sphere of influence that's something read about in books, not experienced first- or second-hand. Or even third- hand. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: > As for Gregorovich, G-wald not only took the wand, he also stunned > the wandmaker. Maybe the stunning of the master is enough for the > wand to consider him "defeated", or maybe just taking the wand > against his master's will is enough. I agree that all this is rather vague :-). Me, yet again: I like the "stunned" hypothesis. I'll go with that. > Joe also asked why Neville didn't get burned. I hope he already found > the answer, because many posters wrote about it, but just in case, in > short: LV couldn't hurt Hogwarts' defenders anymore, because Harry > sacrificed himself for them and they were "protected". Harry says to > LV that "none of the spells you put on them are binding"(p.738). Me, still: That works for me too. (My guess was because Neville was a true Gryffindor, but this works for me as well.) -Joe From prep0strus at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 14:12:01 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:12:01 -0000 Subject: Multigeneration Familes in the WW Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173758 I've noticed that there rarely appears to be more than two generations in any family alive at any point in JKR's books. The Tonks family is an exception - for a very short time, until that anomoly is corrected. I think we can also expect and hope for the generation we meet in the epilogue to be able to meet their Gran and Gramps Weasely. But in the actual books, I have a hard time recalling grandparent interactions - barring Neville, raised by his grandmother, after being effectively orphaned. Have there been theories as to why this is? Does it simply expand the world too much? I understand that Harry needs to be alone, which is why somehow all 4 of his grandparents need to be dead before he is born (which seems very unusual, seeing as how Lily & James were not exceptionally old when they had him), but it might've been fun to meet Arthur Weasely's crazy father or some such thing. Adults appear to be adults, with no one more venerable to turn to within their familes. I hope it's a tradition that breaks with the newest generation. ~Prep0strus (Adam) From Grosskopf5 at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 13:39:10 2007 From: Grosskopf5 at gmail.com (Debbie Grosskopf) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 08:39:10 -0500 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather Message-ID: <89d7a880707300639l13cfec93md2b3ee18bfd7271d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173759 On the one hand, Dumbledore does seem cold and calculating. However, he knew the prophesy. He knew that Voldemort would be out to get Harry from the time Harry was a baby. He knew that Harry would have to face Voldemort. Would you rather DD allow Harry to face Voldemort without any defenses? Would you rather Harry not have known the prophesy? That he be treated like any other kid at Hogwarts and, when this really mean Voldy tried to smote him, be caught off guard? It wasn't DD that chose Harry to be in this terrible place of having to face Voldy. Harry was prophesied and Voldy marked him. At that point, DD did what he could to protect him, instill values, help grow him and helped him discover his courage. He did think Harry would have to die to protect the WW. That doesn't negate the fact that DD helped prepare Harry for what he would face. Debbie From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Mon Jul 30 14:35:25 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:35:25 -0000 Subject: Jo's OWN Words about Political and Religious Overtones in the Books In-Reply-To: <725381.44275.qm@web52710.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173760 Kathryn: > She also talks about the politics of the books, an element which has always jumped out at me, because I am much more political than I am religious. I think the Slytherins as Jews argument can be put (somewhat) to rest, as she clearly says that Muggles (IF ANYONE) in the books would be the persucuted people. Magpie: The Slytherins as Jews argument doesn't have to be put to rest because it was never made. It was a misunderstanding of an entirely different point, one that acknowledged that obviously Muggle-borns are the persecuted people. Could we please stop repeating it as if it were ever advanced by anyone? -m From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jul 30 14:40:07 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:40:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors Message-ID: <15965589.1185806407430.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173761 Potioncat: >I expected a bumblebee or phoenix because I thought his spirit guardian >would reflect Dumbledore. Many expected a unicorn for Lily. So the >moment I saw the doe Patronus,I knew it was Snape's and LOLLIPOPS had >won. Bart: Can you tell me why? The reason why I ask is because the same thing happened to me, and I asked myself, why do I KNOW that this is Snape's Patronus? I even went online to look for "doe" in the group archives (which were open even when the group was closed); unfortunately, Yahoo's search engine insisted on looking up "does", making far too many hits (unlike eBay's, which allows you to limit a term to a single form by putting it in quotes). Was there any prior discussion in the group about Snape's Patronus being a doe, which triggered off a subconscious recollection? Was there anything in the canon that might have pointed to it? >I'm having to believe that in JKR's mind, not everyone in the WW picks >up on the Patronus's symbolism as quickly as DD, Snape or readers of HP >books. If they did, perhaps McGoangal, Lupin and the other Order >Members would have had a better understanding of Snape's loyalties. I don't believe that Snape used the PPN (Phoenix Patronus Network). I don't have DH in front of me, but I believe that the scene where Snape shows his Patronus to Dumbledore comes well after the PPN was in place (btw, the spelling above shows why I refer to the Transfiguration teacher as "Minnie the Cat"; it's MUCH easier to spell). Here are the nicknames I'm sticking with: Voldemort: Morty. I tried a bunch, but turning it into a prosaic Muggle name (not unlike Martin & Lewis's use of "Melvin") just seems to work for me. Harry, Hermione, and Ron: "Ninny" would be a cute takeoff on Krum's pronunciation, but I seem not to have a real problem with these names, and people seem to accept the "Hermoine" typo. Dumbledore: DD. Virtually everybody uses it, and for good reason. Prof. Flitwick: Flitty or Flit. Simple shortening, everybody understands it. Umbridge: Dolly the Pink. I was thinking Pink Dolly (for pink doily), but it makes a nice pun on the song "Lilly the Pink" (it, in itself, a pun on Lydia Pinkham), about a patent medicine which works, but in such a way as to make things worse. Prof. McGonagall: It took a while, but "Minnie the Cat" is both accurate and evocative of a character very unlike the proper professor at the same time. Snape, Hagrid, Neville, Draco, Luna, and Sirius: All simple enough on their own. Lucius Malfoy: The Golden Ass. Nice description, and pun on Lucius Apuleius (wtiter of the Roman novel, THE GOLDEN ASS). Fleur and Bill Weasley. Fleur is easy enough. Bill, I call "Beel", from what Fleur calls him. Bill is easy to spell, but Beel is funnier. Bellatrix and Narcissa: Cissy and Trixie. I know a lot of people call Bellatrix "Bella", but "Trixie" is the kind of name that if you used it to her face, it would turn all sorts of pretty colors. Bart From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 14:46:02 2007 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:46:02 -0000 Subject: Theories...a load of waffle ? In-Reply-To: <001001c7d2a6$c7777f90$0301a8c0@userb26c5552b3> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173762 Anne: > > Yes!! Crabbe...he called the diadem a "die-dum" and then he did! Die dumb that is, but he lived dumb so I suppose it was fitting ;) > > Not to mention Grimmauld Place, which was indeed a grim, auld (Scottish for old) place Inge: And then of course there's the connection between Trelawney seeing the Grim and Sirius' childhood home actually named Grimmauld Place - so maybe once again Trelawney actually had it somewhat right :) From montavilla47 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 14:51:29 2007 From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:51:29 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173763 Picking this quote for no particular reason, except it encapsulates the "Slytherin Problem." > Magpie: > Again, Slytherin played a part. Narcissa made a better choice, but > it's not like she was choosing between right and wrong and chose > right. They weren't part of the celebration, but nobody killed them > either. After the storyline for Slytherin in the books I just don't > see how this problem was supposed to be solved by it explicitly *not* > being solved. Montavilla47: In the Bloomsbury Chat (which I haven't read but I've seen bits of), JKR was asked if the absence of Snape's portrait in the Headmaster's office was deliberate. Her reply was that it was, because Snape had abandonned his post and therefore did not merit inclusion. She added that she hoped Harry would have seen to it that Snape was later included. Which gives me the impression that all the miniscule steps towards Slytherin integration are made by Harry and Harry alone. He's the one ...er... not brawling with Malfoy like schoolkids. He's the one telling his kid it's "okay" to be in Slytherin. He's the one who might, just might, allow Snape into the office by grace of Harry. So, is Harry Snape's personal savior? He saved the WW when he died for it (although, as the story reads, it seems to me that his bravest act was coming back to life). However, while the Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs, and Ravenclaws enter the Hallowed Halls of Hogwarts en masse, the Slytherins may trickle in one by one, always a little suspect? I agree, by the way, that having total unity would have been completely unrealistic. It would have been okay, as this is a fantasy, but I'm not unhappy that it wasn't total. What makes me very unhappy with the story, though, is that it wasn't there at all. That may be because of my view of the world, which is that every person has unique talents and that all people have merit. Or it may be simply that this Unity question was set up--set up very strongly--and it didn't pay off. And it's more painful than it would be if this were a single book, because I've spent a lot of time loving these books (which won't change), thinking about them, discussing them, and it seems like such a glaring omission. And I think Sistermagpie is right about the WW's strongest Slytherin image of the Battle of Hogwarts will be Pansy Parkinson's words. Montavilla47 From Jenanydot at aol.com Mon Jul 30 14:49:23 2007 From: Jenanydot at aol.com (jenanydot) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:49:23 -0000 Subject: Multigeneration Familes in the WW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173764 "prep0strus" wrote: > > I've noticed that there rarely appears to be more than two generations in any family alive at any point in JKR's books. The Tonks family is an exception - for a very short time, until that anomoly is corrected. > I think we can also expect and hope for the generation we meet in the epilogue to be able to meet their Gran and Gramps Weasely. But in the actual books, I have a hard time recalling grandparent interactions - barring Neville, raised by his grandmother, after being effectively orphaned. > > Have there been theories as to why this is? Does it simply expand the world too much? I understand that Harry needs to be alone, which is why somehow all 4 of his grandparents need to be dead before he is > born (which seems very unusual, seeing as how Lily & James were not > exceptionally old when they had him), but it might've been fun to meet Arthur Weasely's crazy father or some such thing. > > Adults appear to be adults, with no one more venerable to turn to > within their familes. I hope it's a tradition that breaks with the > newest generation. I think I've always been under the assumption that a great many of the older generation perished in the first war. Of course, we do know that Ron at least remembers one of his grandfathers (the one who gave him the wizarding chess set). I suppose there's a chance that more older relatives are still alive, and we just never see them. There's also the chance that some of those older relatives were involved in the dark side...we know that the Weasleys are related to the Blacks, and the Prewetts married into them. While I find it hard to imagine anyone in Arthur's immediate family being against Muggleborns, we really don't know anything about Molly's family except that her brothers were in the Order. Anyone before that seems as though they could be fair game. There is at least one case of a "three generation" interaction in the Weasleys; Aunt Muriel is pretty clearly Molly's aunt, which would make her part of Molly and Arthur's parents' generation. ~Mandy From Jenanydot at aol.com Mon Jul 30 14:41:53 2007 From: Jenanydot at aol.com (jenanydot) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:41:53 -0000 Subject: In Laws Joke (?) In-Reply-To: <226189.75422.qm@web26308.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173765 charlie cairns wrote: > > Just a small detail, but on my second read I thought it funny. > > The Weasleys spend DAYS getting the house clean and tidy, then the gusts arrive. The future Mother in Law is an expert in household spells, and she then gets the oven clean. Where I have felt that sting of in-laws before. I'd loved to have heard Mollys response to this helpful gesture. I caught that, as well, on my second read...I would really love to have seen more of the kind of response Molly might have had to Mrs. Delacour in general, actually. I mean, a half-Veela walks into her home, makes her husband act like a fool...I'm sure Molly was expecting to at least have the satisfaction of being better at household spells. She probably figured Mrs. Delacour was nothing but beauty, not capable of half the practical things Molly was used to doing, and then the woman turns out to be a whiz-bang cleaner. Of course, we do know that Ron is the one who cleaned the oven in the first place...but it still must have been a pretty embarassing thing for Molly! ~Mandy From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 14:59:54 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Lambert) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:59:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Jo's OWN Words about Political and Religious Overtones in the Books Message-ID: <123228.46662.qm@web52706.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173766 colebiancardi wrote: Katie no one, again, no one on the boards are stating that the Slytherins are Jews. Historically, Jews have had nasty stereotypes given to them, pre WWII. Many posters have given historically correct facts about the biases towards Jews and being painted as villians, untrustworthy, etc. Just take a look at a famous work - The Merchant of Venice - and tell me if I am wrong here. colebiancardi (and I don't think those comparisons of stereotypes will ever be put to rest - JKR wrote them in her books and it is canon) Katie wrote- I think the Slytherins as Jews argument can be put (somewhat) to rest, as she clearly says that Muggles (IF ANYONE) in the books would be the persucuted people. She also says there are other political situations reflected...hmmm, Bush and Blair, anyone? > > ****Katie Replies: Apologies for any misunderstanding. I admit I wasn't reading every post with fervor, but I didn't necessarily mean that anyone at HPfGU was arguing that, more that it was an interpretation that was out there. And in post 173556, a few websites are mentioned where this theory is expounded. And in 175379, someone, Geoff maybe, mentions that people do hold this theory. I was more interested with her mentioning political situations other than Nazi Germany, actually. I always saw parallels with the American poltical situation post 9-11, where people just wanted to believe the government, even when what the government said was blatently wrong, just to feel safe. Fudge and Umbridge really exemplified this for me. I was not in Britain at the time, so I don't know what the precise political situation was there, but there are probably similarities. Anyway, sorry for any misunderstanding. : ) KATIE --------------------------------- --------------------------------- Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 14:59:53 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:59:53 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173767 "allies426" wrote: > King's Cross Dumbledore told Harry > that he expected Harry to survive. I don't see where Dumbledore told Harry that at Kings Cross he expected Harry to live. He told Harry that he didn't die because Voldemort had his blood and he was still alive, and Voldemort was still alive because the snake was still alive. Dumbledore told Snape that he expected Harry to destroy the snake before he confronted Voldemort for the last time and he expected Harry to die. Seems to me a flesh and blood Dumbledore would have more incentive to tell the truth to Snape than a ethereal Dumbledore would have to tell the truth to Harry; we have already seen examples of ghosts that are ashamed of themselves and want Harry to think well of them. I can't think of any reason Dumbledore would lie to Snape about that, I can think of a reason Dumbledore, even at the very end, would be let us say, economical with the truth. After 7 books we have learned that even when Dumbledore tells the truth to Harry it is never the whole truth. And did you notice how many times when Harry asked a question Dumbledore would tell him that he already knew, and sure enough he did! Much of the information in that chapter came from Harry not Dumbledore, and perhaps all of it did. I think JKR is giving us permission (if we want to) to interpret it to mean Harry (and Voldemort) were just knocked out and Harry's subconscious was putting the last peaces of the puzzle together. Eggplant From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Mon Jul 30 15:06:04 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:06:04 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173768 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > I'm sure the transcript is available from the Bloomsbury site, but > here are the key points I gleaned rom JKR's live chat: > snip > Camille: How is george getting along without his twin > J.K. Rowling: Well, I don't think that George would ever get over > losing Fred, which makes me feel so sad. However, he names his first > child and son Fred, and he goes on to have a very successful career, > helped by good old Ron. > > (Lisa's note: She originally said that Ron and Harry were aurors, > but now she's saying that Ron went into business with George) > I don't see how that is contradictory...Ron has a job with the Ministry. That probably won't preclude him from owning shares in George's business or even helping out with the business on weekends or vacations. Heaven knows I've helped friends and family members with their businesses in my spare time.... > Natalie: Are house divisions as prevalaent in harry's children's > hogwarts as in the previous generations > J.K. Rowling: Slytherin has become diluted. It is no longer the > pureblood bastion it once was. Nevertheless, its dark reputation > lingers, hence Albus Potter's fears. > Interesting, but still doesn't give me a good reason for continuing this caste sytem-like separation between the students. Oh well, it's Rowling's world, she can do with it what she wants, lol! That was insightful. Thanks for posting it! :-) Milz From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Mon Jul 30 15:17:37 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:17:37 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: <12086145.1185395718161.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173769 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > From: Erin Ridgeway > >On another note: did anyone else read the Muggle torture of > >Ariana as rape? Or do I just like my backstories as twisted > >as possible? > > Bart: > A better question: did anybody NOT read it that way? > > As adults (note the name of the group), we are much more knowledgeable about what sort of attack some adults are capable of on children. And we know, from news accounts and otherwise, how children react to certain kinds of attacks. > I read it that way. If she wasn't raped, then she was physically abused in some way by those boys. I've worked with child victims of sexual or physical abuse, so I've seen many Ariana's before. Milz From lyraofjordan at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 15:16:15 2007 From: lyraofjordan at yahoo.com (lyraofjordan) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:16:15 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_caf=E9_scene,_memory_charm_question?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173770 Eggplant wrote: > By the way that scene contains the only error I've caught JKR at, > Hermione says she had never performed a memory charm before but she > had, on her parents. > Lyra: Jo just explained this on her live chat. The charm she performed on her parents modified their memories (making them think they were someone else). The one she does in the cafe is Obliviate, erasing the memories of the DEs, and that's a different spell that Hermione *had* never performed before. (Which is how I had interpreted it when I read it, but glad for authorial reassurance.) From jnferr at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 15:25:51 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:25:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Jo's OWN Words about Political and Religious Overtones in the Books In-Reply-To: <725381.44275.qm@web52710.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <725381.44275.qm@web52710.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707300825t486c39ache9623ee03ba3f6d7@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173771 Kathryn Lambert wrote: > > > SOOOOO.....I can totally live with this. She didn't keep her spiritual > stuff secret because Harry was a symbol for Jesus - she kept it quiet > because she didn't want to give away that people live on after death, as in > Heaven. For me, a story about spiritual struggle and questions of faith is a > lot more interesting than a book about how great the Bible story is! I knew > Jo wasn't that traditional. I appreciate the struggle to keep believing, and > that makes for a complex book. A simplistic allegory to the Biblical story > isn't it. montims: taking slight issue with the phrase above: "she didn't want to give away that people live on after death, as in Heaven" - I'm not convinced that JKR is referencing a heaven at all. I suppose one is entitled to ask where she feels dead people go (or not, if they are scared, like Sir Nick), but as I see it they are gone until they are called back under special circumstances. Where they are gone is not made clear to me. I am a pagan, so I could picture them in Summerland. I can also envisage them being reincarnated, when they are ready to use the lessons lerarned in their earlier life/lives. But Heaven specifically? I don't see that she has said that. If someone could reference detailed canon, I would be grateful. Speaking of canon, I read somewhere, long ago, that JKR's main heroine is Jessica Mitford, and I see a huge amount of Unity Mitford/Hitler in the Bella story. Diana is very Narcissa-ish... Farve would definitely have been a Slytherin, and proud of it... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 30 15:35:49 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:35:49 -0400 Subject: How do DEs know it's the real Harry? Moody/Invisibility Cloak Message-ID: <002201c7d2bf$4ee893c0$86fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173772 Susan McGee asked: "I hope this question hasn't been already answered, but when Harry and Hagrid are escaping on the motorbike, how do the Death Eaters know it's the real Harry...?" Because, when Harry saw that Stan Shunpike was one of those following he and Hagrid, instead of trying to Stun or Kill him, he attempted to disarm him. Expelliarmus was Harry's 'signature' spell. All the DE's knew that he had used it, to great effect, against LV in the Graveyard scene of GoF. Besides which, Harry, being Harry, would attempt to 'save' Stan intead of finish him off. Susan again: "And if Harry's Invisibility Cloak is so special, why can Moody's mad eye see through it?" I'm not entirely certain he can see through it. I think Dumbledore probably told Fake!Moody of Harry's cloak in GoF. I think that, unlike the naked muggle/wizard eye which can't see the cloak, something about Moody's magical eye can. And since he saw the cloak between Ron and Hermione (in the Pub), he concluded that Harry was the one under it. However, his magical eye may be so magical that it can see through the cloak. CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jul 30 15:42:13 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:42:13 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors In-Reply-To: <15965589.1185806407430.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173773 > > Bart: > Can you tell me why? The reason why I ask is because the same thing happened to me, and I asked myself, why do I KNOW that this is Snape's Patronus? I even went online to look for "doe" in the group archives... Potioncat: A lot of information about Patronuses came out around HBP. One of the threads that came up was whether we'd see Snape's Patronus and what it would tell us about him. Some of us imagined that a new Patronus would appear that somehow proved to the Order that Snape was loyal. (But wouldn't at first reveal it to us or to Harry.) So I was on the look-out for a Patronus that reflected DD or Lily. Although we had guessed any number of animals, I knew that JKR is very good at surprising us. I suspected the doe was Snape's Patronus, was sure of it when Harry stated clearly that it was a Patronus. The fact that it didn't speak made it certain for me. We had already seen that a Patronus speaks with the voice of the caster. >Bart: > I don't believe that Snape used the PPN (Phoenix Patronus Network). I don't have DH in front of me, but I believe that the scene where Snape shows his Patronus to Dumbledore comes well after the PPN was in place Potioncat: No, I think he did. DD first comments on the Patronus system, without naming it, when he says Snape contacted the Order during OoP. Snape never taught it at Hogwarts, partly I'm sure to keep it secret. JKR also said that it was not taught at Hogwarts in general. Bart: (btw, the spelling above shows why I refer to the Transfiguration teacher as "Minnie the Cat"; it's MUCH easier to spell). Here are the nicknames I'm sticking with: Potioncat: I'm very intolerant of spelling errors and typoes...only I make so many that I have to keep it to myself. It's what kept me on moderated status in the beginning. From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 15:41:06 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:41:06 -0000 Subject: Jo's OWN Words about Political and Religious Overtones in the Books In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707300825t486c39ache9623ee03ba3f6d7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173774 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Janette wrote: > > Kathryn Lambert wrote: > > > > > > SOOOOO.....I can totally live with this. She didn't keep her spiritual > > stuff secret because Harry was a symbol for Jesus - she kept it quiet > > because she didn't want to give away that people live on after death, as in > > Heaven. For me, a story about spiritual struggle and questions of faith is a > > lot more interesting than a book about how great the Bible story is! I knew > > Jo wasn't that traditional. I appreciate the struggle to keep believing, and > > that makes for a complex book. A simplistic allegory to the Biblical story > > isn't it. > > > montims: > taking slight issue with the phrase above: "she didn't want to give away > that people live on after death, as in Heaven" - I'm not convinced that JKR > is referencing a heaven at all. I suppose one is entitled to ask where she > feels dead people go (or not, if they are scared, like Sir Nick), but as I > see it they are gone until they are called back under special > circumstances. Where they are gone is not made clear to me. > > I am a pagan, so I could picture them in Summerland. I can also envisage > them being reincarnated, when they are ready to use the lessons lerarned in > their earlier life/lives. But Heaven specifically? I don't see that she > has said that. If someone could reference detailed canon, I would be > grateful. <<<>>> *****Katie replies: Being more pagan than Christian, though I have history with both (raised Catholic, turned pagan, married a Buddhist), I certainly have no ideas personally about a "heaven" specifically, and as my previous posts on the subject clearly state, I have rejected ANY ideas about these being religious books, per se. That being said, we know Jo is a member of the Church of Scotland, we know she has stated, here and previously, that she didn't want to talk too much about religion in the books until after DH was published, and we know (now) that she struggles with her faith. Many people at HPfGU had been interpreting her silence about religion as a clear indication that the end of DH was an event-for-event recreation of the Bible (40 days in the wilderness, and all kinds of other stuff). Sufficed to say, I had a HUGE problem seeing the book that way. And now, I feel strongly that Jo's interpretation of life after death was very Christian, and she simply didn't want to give that away. It made me feel better, knowing that she wasn't making an allegory to the Christ story. I see her religion in the books, particularly in the end of DH, as more of a personal religion and struggle to have faith in oneself and one's destiny, which Harry is eventually able to do. If anything, Harry is having a crisis of faith in himself, especially after Ron leaves, and then again after the revelations about DD. He feels like he isn't as capable and in-the-know as he once did. Ok, I'm veering off track... My original point was that I feel better knowing that Jo just didn't want to reveal her ideas about death, not that she didn't want to reveal Harry as some kind of Christ figure. Cheers, Katie From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Mon Jul 30 15:47:01 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:47:01 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173775 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > In light of a request for topics we can agree on - can we agree that > there was a heck of a lot of innuendo in this book? > > "Ooh Harry, you look a lot tastier than Crabbe and Goyle." > > "Twelve Fail Safe Ways to Charm Witches." > > Endless jokes about wands, wand lengths, and how men feel about the > size of their wands. > > "Come here Ron, so I can do you." > > Bella and Voldemort talking of highest pleasures. > > I found most of it amusing (Voldie and Bella the disgusting exception). > It all went right over my daughter's head, but I can imagine her re- > reading in 6 or 7 years and saying "Mother! Did you read that!" > > va32h > You forgot to mention Harry's birthday present from Ginny--the one that she planned to give him in her bedroom... Milz (who has probably upset the sensibilities of many with that observation.) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 30 15:45:51 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:45:51 -0400 Subject: Death Eaters at graveyard - GOF Message-ID: <003501c7d2c0$b6808be0$86fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173776 Claire asked: "Which leaves Snape as the one who has left forever and who would have to be killed. Do we have any canon to suggest how Snape subsequently convinced Voldemort that he was indeed still a Death Eater and so avoided being killed off (at least until the end, when he was killed no because of any treachery but simply to give Voldemort power over the Elder Wand)." I think so, in Spinner's End: "The Dark Lord's initial displeasure at my lateness vanished entirely, I assure you, when I explained that I remained faithful, although Dumbledore thought I was his man. Yes, the Dark Lord thought that I had left him for ever, but he was wrong." (HBP Can Ed pg 34) CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pair_0_docks at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 15:06:25 2007 From: pair_0_docks at yahoo.com (pair_0_docks) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:06:25 -0000 Subject: Hero Status Redeemed was Dateline Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173777 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > So does author's intent counts now or is it still irrelevant? I am > > asking this question in general, not just to you. > > > > My view of Snape does not change ? I see spiteful, bully and not a > > hero, > > > > At least we know what she meant to say in the first place before > > she changed it, LOL. > > > > pair_0_docks: I think my authorial intent was originally misinterpreted ;) I only entitled the message "Dateline Redemption" as a play on the fact that Rowling's statement about Snape being a hero has changed. That was really the only point I was making there. As for questioning the importance of authorial intentionality I found the comments posted regarding that issue to be interesting and informative. Also I agree with them to the extent that sometimes an author might not be able to step back and appreciate a greater depth to the character or perhaps other connections that a person brings to them due to her past experiences that can limit one's view of who the character might be (just like certain people we might meet in life). (Side note: I have thoroughly enjoyed reading justcarol67's views into Snape's character as well. Very insightful IMO.) I mentioned it initially just to raise the issue and wondered what other people thought in general. Some critics apparently still think it is irrelevant, I'm not sure for myself so I did not comment and just asked the question. However, I do think that I struggled with Rowling's comment because yes I disagreed with the characterization that Snape could NOT be a hero...yes he's still mean and cruel I am not trying to whitewash him (not just because of my own views on the character) but also in viewing her as a writer I couldn't comprehend how she could say that about a character that she created in such a way to embody these values that are generally viewed/interpreted as heroic. IMO it would only serve to limit the interpretations that people can make and be somewhat problematic with other things the character did. Again, it seems that some of the comments here are trying to fit Snape into one category or another (death eater vs good person)...that is not my intention. He is both; he's a very complicated character. This is obvious from the strong opinions being expressed on either side about him. > Lupinlore: > > Hmmm. I can't speak for Alla but I would say that the problem > with > > many of the arguments about Snape as a hero is that they try to > say > > that somehow his brave acts completely redeem him from his abuse > of > > Harry. pair_0_docks: I think that whether Snape is redeemed (in your eyes or the author's eyes or in other character's eyes in the story) is a totally different from the question of whether he is a kind of hero. Lupinlore: He never had any feeling for Harry as a person, which > > is what could have granted him true redemption. > > Thus Snape is, as JKR puts it, a hero to an extent, in that he > does very brave things for the good side. But he is not a hero in the sense of being fully redeemed. pair_0_docks: Does the concept of hero require redemption? Lupinlore: > Dumbledore asks him "Have you come to care for the boy after all, > Severus?" In that moment the door is open for Snape's full >redemption. pair_0_docks: Funny, I interpreted Snape's response to DD as being somewhat snarky Snape again. He does not answer yes or no...he just conjures up his doe Patronus thereby avoiding the question. Also, his earlier reaction to hearing Harry must die and emotion expressed there seems to suggest some amount of caring, but I also can see an argument for arriving at the opposite conclusion. Snape also goes well beyond what is needed to help Harry when he gives him all of his memories that allow Harry and the reader to come to understand Snape's motivations better, and not all of it is positive. The only thing he really needed to tell Harry was that he was in fact a horcrux so Harry has this information as DD asked Snape to do for Harry. > Alla: > of course I know that mythology defines heroes as people with immense bravery and self sacrifice, so theoretically Snape certainly should be called a hero. > > Maybe that does make sense that JKR calls him a hero to the extent, > I do not know. > > But I would not call him a hero, no. Because yeah, to me hero is a > good person, NOT perfect person, no, but person who tries to do good > for the sake of doing good. pair_0_docks: If your point is that Snape's hero status is very different from Harry's, then we are in total agreement there. Harry meets the classic understanding of hero while Snape more accurately fits into the anti-hero category. pair_0_docks From red-siren at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 15:07:32 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:07:32 -0000 Subject: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173778 Johana: > I was getting scared at the amount of people that read that scene > as rape. It was creeping me out! The girl was only 6 years old, at > that age a bad beating/humiliation associated to her ability to do > magic would be more than enough to create a block, or at least a huge > feeling of guilt from being able to perform magic. Weren't any of you > bullied at a young age? I imagine JKR being extremely worried > at people thinking she got a six-years old gang raped! Sue says: I agree that JKR would be horrified to learn even one person thought that she'd meant Ariana had been raped by those muggle boys. I didn't see even a hint to suggest that she'd (Ariana) had received anything other than an EXTREME beating that left her with a severe brain injury. We must remember, even though the series has gotten darker, it is still eccentially a children's (to YOUNG adult) book. Sue From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 15:10:22 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:10:22 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173779 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "montavilla47" wrote: > > Montavilla47: > In the Bloomsbury Chat (which I haven't read but I've seen bits of), JKR > was asked if the absence of Snape's portrait in the Headmaster's office > was deliberate. Her reply was that it was, because Snape had > abandonned his post and therefore did not merit inclusion. > > She added that she hoped Harry would have seen to it that Snape was > later included. > He's the one telling > his kid it's "okay" to be in Slytherin. He's the one who might, just > might, allow Snape into the office by grace of Harry. > > So, is Harry Snape's personal savior? > I think this is a very good question, but the issue it gets at is terrifically complicated. I'll approach it here by breaking it down into two aspects: Harry and Snape after Snape's death, Snape and Harry before Snape's death. It seems clear to me that what JKR is getting at with her comments is that Harry, as appropriate for a Christ-like figure, has transcended much of what went before -- particularly he has transcended and become superior to certain personalities. He has moved beyond both Snape and Dumbledore. Dumbledore says that he has long known that Harry is a better man than he. Harry is becoming the true figure of forgiveness and light and compassion that Dumbledore appeared to be but never really was. If Harry were to be confronted with a living Snape, he would probably view him with pity and compassion. It is the tragedy of Snape, however, that he would find Harry's pity and compassion infuriating and worthless. Before Snape's death, I think Harry represents something very important for him -- a way out. If he could come to terms with Harry, he could in many ways come to terms with his own past and the anger and hatred and bitterness that have warped him and twisted him into a stunted image of what he could/should have been. So, in that sense, Harry could be a savior to Snape in that he offers an opportunity for salvation. But, as shown in the scene where Snape reveals his patronus, the damage and bitterness and hate and cruelty run too deep for salvation. Snape cannot find it within himself to embrace the salvation Harry represents, and thus it remains a door never opened. So, before Snape's death Harry is for him a salvation unrealized. After Snape's death Snape is for Harry an object of compassion and transcendence. It was never the fate of Harry and Severus to meet as equals. Harry was always meant to move beyond Severus and to be greater than him, even as he moved beyond and was greater than Dumbledore. Lupinlore, who thinks that compassion is an ironic thing, in that it tends to scald those to whom it is extended like concentrated acid From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jul 30 16:13:39 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:13:39 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped? Message-ID: <16440236.1185812019660.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173780 From: johanarincones >Finally! >I was getting scared at the amount of people that read that scene as >rape. It was creeping me out! >The girl was only 6 years old, at that age a bad beating/humiliation >associated to her ability to do magic would be more than enough to >create a block, or at least a huge feeling of guilt from being able >to perform magic. Weren't any of you bullied at a young age? Just a >push and a few laughs can get you down for a while. No rape necessary >to make a lasting impression! Bart: It was more than a mental block; it was an extremely deep psychological wounding. Now, my opinion may be colored having spent a number of years working with abused children, but I can tell you that a simple beating, even a bad one, would not have this effect, unless there was brain injury involved (with most of the children with whom I worked, brain injury WAS involved). However, one factor I had not considered until now was that this took place in the mid-19th century; in another group, we were discussing the case of Bridget Cleary, whose husband and a number of his friends burned her as a changeling in 1895 (and she is referred to as the last witch burned in Ireland; the perpetrators were convicted, with her husband serving 15 years in jail for manslaughter). Therefore, especially since this was a more rural area, the boys MIGHT have thought that they were dealing with a witch, and overpowered her and tried to burn her at the stake. The point is that a simple beating should not have had the level of consequence that were shown/hinted at; there really had to be some level of torture as well. Now, having my experiences in urban 20th century America, I thought rape; it IS, psychologically speaking, a much deeper violation than a simple beating (or even a stabbing), and, due to the speed with which it takes place, I still make a high likelihood. However, I would not discount some other form of torture, especially if it were the type of torture typically done on accused witches. However, I think JKR described it exactly right, as our imaginations could come up with far worse than she could write about in a PG level book. Now, speaking of PG level, how many people think that if Ron hadn't interrupted Harry and Ginny, Ginny would have become a woman a year early? Bart From erikog at one.net Mon Jul 30 16:14:35 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:14:35 -0000 Subject: JKR Bloomsbury online chat: Late in life magic person, Snape a hero, and more Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173781 At the gossip site Oh No They Didn't, hosted by Livejournal, there is a lengthy transcript of JKR's online chat and it is *loaded* with detail. George's 1st kid is Fred, Lily might have romantically loved Snape (!), the person who was to do magic unexpectedly was an idea that was killed by book 3, and more. http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/14261248.html#cutid1 From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 16:29:29 2007 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:29:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: JKR confirms again: Snape is a hero Message-ID: <713421.55776.qm@web80505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173782 at Bloomsbury live chat: Lechicaneuronline: Do you think snape is a hero J.K. Rowling: Yes, I do; though a very flawed hero. An anti-hero, perhaps. He is not a particularly likeable man in many ways. He remains rather cruel, a bully, riddled with bitterness and insecurity - and yet he loved, and showed loyalty to that love and, ultimately, laid down his life because of it. That's pretty heroic! THANK YOU JKR!:D other Snape-related questions: Laura Trego: Was the absence of snapes portrait in the headmasters office in the last scene innocent or deliberate J.K. Rowling: It was deliberate. Snape had effectively abandoned his post before dying, so he had not merited inclusion in these august circles. However, I like to think that Harry would be instrumental in ensuring that Snape's portrait would appear there in due course. Jaclyn: Did lily ever have feelings back for snape J.K. Rowling: Yes. She might even have grown to love him romantically (she certainly loved him as a friend) if he had not loved Dark Magic so much, and been drawn to such loathesome people and acts. Annie: Does the wizarding world now know that snape was dumbledores man, or do they still think he did a bunk J.K. Rowling: Harry would ensure that Snape's heroism was known.Of course, that would not stop Rita Skeeter writing 'Snape: Scoundrel or Saint?' Nithya: Lily detested mulciber,averyif snape really loved her,why didnt he sacrifice their company for her sake J.K. Rowling: Well, that is Snape's tragedy. Given his time over again he would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.He wanted Lily and he wanted Mulciber too. He never really understood Lily's aversion; he was so blinded by his attraction to the dark side he thought she would find him impressive if he became a real Death Eater. on Harry's crucio: Barbara: I was very disappointed to see harry use crucio and seem to enjoy it his failure to perform that kind of curse in the past has been a credit to his character why the change, and did harry later regret having enjoyed deliberately causing pain J.K. Rowling: Harry is not, and never has been, a saint. Like Snape, he is flawed and mortal.Harry's faults are primarily anger and occasional arrogance.On this occasion, he is very angry and acts accordingly. He is also in an extreme situation, and attempting to defend somebody very good against a violent and murderous opponent. Rachel Nell: Jkr, thank you for such amazing books! I would like to know how come noone seemed to know that lily and snape were friends in school they were obviously meeting for chats, etc didnt james know their past J.K. Rowling: Thank you for your thank you!Yes, it was known that they were friendly and then stopped being friends. Nothing more than that would be widely known.James always suspected Snape harboured deeper feelings for Lily, which was a factor in James' behaviour to Snape. Hannah: Why was snape so badly groomed J.K. Rowling: Hmm. Good question. Poor eyesight? Did he look in the mirror and believe he was gorgeous as he was?I think it more likely that he valued other qualities in himself! Samantha: Was snape the only death eater who could produce a full patronus J.K. Rowling: Yes, because a Patronus is used against things that the Death Eaters generally generate, or fight alongside. They would not need Patronuses. jenny: How did snape keep his patronus secret from the rest of the order? J.K. Rowling: He was careful not to use the talking Patronus means of communication with them. This was not difficult, as his particular job within the Order, ie, as spy, meant that sending a Patronus to any of them might have given away his true allegiance. Lou: How did snape get into grimmauld place to get the second half of the letter, if there were protection spells on the house stopping snape getting in J.K. Rowling: Snape entered the house immediately after Dumbledore's death, before Moody put up the spells against him. You can read the entire transcript here: http://community.livejournal.com/spoil_me_dh/479109.html?style=mine#cutid1 Jo From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 16:32:18 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:32:18 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173783 "Milz" wrote: > "Twelve Fail Safe Ways to Charm Witches." But not all of it involves wand work. > can we agree that there was a heck of > a lot of innuendo in this book? Yes, but the same was true for book 6: There was no need to stick the wand in that hard,' he said gruffly, clambering to his feet. 'It hurt.' (p 64) A hole opened in the middle of all the tentacle like branches; Hermione plunged her arm bravely into this hole, which closed like a trap around her elbow; Harry and Ron tugged and wrenched at the vines, forcing the hole to open again... (p 281) Lupin burst out laughing. 'Sometimes you remind me a lot of James. He called it my 'furry little problem'... (p 335) 'I dunno,' said Harry. 'Maybe it's better when you do it yourself, I didn't enjoy it much when Dumbledore took me along for the ride.' (p 355) 'You see?' Dumbledore said quietly, holding his wand a little higher. Harry saw a fissure in the cliff into which dark water was swirling. 'You will not object to getting a little wet?' 'No,' said Harry. 'Then take off your Invisibility Cloak... and let us take the plunge.' (p 556) It was also interesting that everybody at school took it as a given that Ginny would know if Harry had a tattoo of a dragon on his body and where it was. I mean, those long "walks" with Ginny did seem to make Harry VERY happy. Eggplant From muellem at bc.edu Mon Jul 30 16:36:39 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:36:39 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173784 > Montavilla47: > In the Bloomsbury Chat (which I haven't read but I've seen bits of), JKR > was asked if the absence of Snape's portrait in the Headmaster's office > was deliberate. Her reply was that it was, because Snape had > abandonned his post and therefore did not merit inclusion. > > She added that she hoped Harry would have seen to it that Snape was > later included. colebiancardi: I do wonder about that quote. It wasn't that Snape "abandoned" his post - he was run off. If he had stayed, he would have been killed or he would have killed. Not exactly a *win-win* situation. Not to *question* JKR's answer, but that reply doesn't connect with The Sacking of Severus Snape chapter. What was he supposed to do? I do not agree that he abandoned his post. but that is just *my take* on it. From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Mon Jul 30 16:50:49 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:50:49 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173785 Lupinlore > I think this is a very good question, but the issue it gets at is > terrifically complicated. I'll approach it here by breaking it down > into two aspects: Harry and Snape after Snape's death, Snape and > Harry before Snape's death. > > It seems clear to me that what JKR is getting at with her comments is > that Harry, as appropriate for a Christ-like figure, has transcended > much of what went before -- particularly he has transcended and > become superior to certain personalities. He has moved beyond both > Snape and Dumbledore. Dumbledore says that he has long known that > Harry is a better man than he. Harry is becoming the true figure of > forgiveness and light and compassion that Dumbledore appeared to be > but never really was. If Harry were to be confronted with a living > Snape, he would probably view him with pity and compassion. Magpie: What's scary (to me) is I think you're right, though the last thing I'd ever call Harry is compassionate. What I think Harry is is compassionate by the definition this universe (which has little use for that particular virtue in any deep way) seems to use for the word (the same one that gets HBP!Ginny described as compassionate). He, as you say, is "above" people and is "superior" to other personalities. He has a very developed sense of justice, and when he sees people being picked on who are innocent he sticks up for them. Of course he can also torture people who deserve it and that's no big deal, because that kind of compassion would make him a plaster saint. Forgiving Snape is an action of Christ-like power, as opposed to something that would be expected of an ordinary person. > Lupinlore, who thinks that compassion is an ironic thing, in that it > tends to scald those to whom it is extended like concentrated acid Magpie: A universe in which compassion is a more important virtue, I think, it comes out quite differently, however. Sometimes the compassion might scald a person, yes, but usually it's based on true empathy and more importantly *humility* which is something Harry never ever has to learn, because he's superior. That, I think, goes back to that article about his development as well. The story is not about Harry looking at his enemies and seeing himself in them, seeing himself as no better than them, which is at the heart of compassion, imo. It's Harry the Christ figure granting absolution to inferiors, which for me keeps him from ever really being a figure of any exceptional compassion at all. I think he's far more about justice. Snape *earned* the way Harry feels about him by spending a life protecting him and by loving his mother. Harry didn't look at Snape and see himself in him and forgive him from that position. To me, the courage-based system vs. compassion-based system is just very clear throughout the books and is very consistent, especially in the way many of the villains are viewed and forgiven. Even in death Snape owes his honor to Harry. Sorry, that was negative again. I don't mean to put anybody down who sees Harry as compassionate. I just don't think he is at all. He's got other virtues, but compassion's not something I've really seen him have to much develop. -m From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 16:58:29 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:58:29 -0000 Subject: Snapes punishments of the thieves In-Reply-To: <290547.39462.qm@web26312.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173786 Charlie wrote: > > When Luna, Neville and Ginny are caught in the headmasters office, for theft of a valuable magical device, what does Snape do? He sends them as punishment to Hagrid to do something in the Forbidden Forest. > >If Snape knew ANYTHING about Luna, he'd know she'd enjoy that >trip - and that neither Neville or Ginny would be really scared as >they were linked to Hagrid via HRH already. [I'm not 100% on this, >but I'd assume Ginny at least would have heard from Ron about his >adventures in the Forest.] > > Again, a small detail, but I think its an indication that Snape was > not league with the Toad, no writing painful lines on their hands, > etc. Agreed. I believe that this was the moment that I (finally!) felt 100% confidant that Snape was on the right side. (However I might be confusing the timeline for when we learned this information.) From canon we know that HRH's punishments of visiting the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid were hardly a punishment at all. In fact, Harry learned useful information, and it's a safe way of exploring a highly magical place. For Ginny, Neville, and Luna, this trip is not only a way to safely converse with Hagrid and safely visit the Forbidden Forest, but it's also a time when they get to escape their seemingly constant persecution and punishment inside the castle. A nice break amid the torture and reign of DE's ruling Hogworts. Lastly, I wouldn't be surprised if it was difficult (and penalized) to visit Hagrid at all, so Snape may have actually been giving the substitute trio (Ginny, Neville, and Luna) a gift: getting to visit Hagrid. When Draco was punished this way, it was horrible for him and perhaps too large for the crime itself. Draco represents the ultimate Slytherin in his generation, and you just know that he recounted his Forbidden Forest journey in a way that reflected him in a wonderful light, spoke poorly of an "inept" Hagrid, and exaggerated the dangers in the Forbidden Forest. Headmaster Snape is cunning. He is observant. He is smart. (And, yes, he is brave. *tears*) Punishing the substitute trio with the Forbidden Forest is certainly no punishment for them at all. It's also a punishment that the Slytherins would consider horrible and cruel. Once again, Snape shows his cunning ability to play both sides -- and make decisions that favor Dumbledorian ethics without showing his cards to Slytherin and actually further proving to Slytherin and DEs his appearance of loyalty to the dark side. Brilliant, eh? Joan of Anarchy, who'd love to know what GLN talked to Hagrid about in the Forbidden Forest From juli17 at aol.com Mon Jul 30 17:05:04 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:05:04 -0400 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: <1185785176.5779.26523.m43@yahoogroups.com> References: <1185785176.5779.26523.m43@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C9A0E2E898E983-178-2B7@webmail-mf15.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173787 Shagufta wrote: I think what everyone keeps missing when talking about the Hat is that it does not force any kid into any house. It allows for Choice. And Choice is a big word in JK's world. Julie: Actually I think most of us do understand that the hat does not force any kid into a particular house. Choice is a big word in JKR's world, but once again, choices aren't made in a vacuum. As Jen pointed out, these kids come to Hogwarts at age 11, having been heavily influenced by their parents and family, naturally wanting to honor them, and IMO being too young and inexperienced to see all the ramifications of their choice. To choose the against your parents and upbringing is a huge thing for a child. The kids whose parents raised them to already feel allegiance to the other houses values are making the right *and* the easy choice, it's only for the kids who were raised to feel allegiance to Slytherin (and by this point in time, Voldemort) are faced with making a choice between what's right and what's hard. Oh, and yes, Sirius made that choice, but as a child he had already rejected Slytherin and his family's values for whatever reason. I suppose he may have had an unusually strong moral center, or he simply was very rebellious in nature, and his mother's particularly strident brand of allegiance to Purebloods only exacerbated that rebelliousness. I suspect it was a combination of both, given that on smaller moral issues (tormenting Snape because he was bored) he wasn't quite so noble. But he did see the larger picture. Shagufta wrote: And i don't think Harry was the only one to get to choose. We know for a fact that the Hat suggested Ravenclaw to Hermione but she chose Gryffindor. So, what i'm saying, the Hat is an opportunity for children to choose, not an absolute decree. But ofcourse, 11 is too young to choose for some, and that's exactly what Dumbledore implied. Julie: I think it's too young for anyone, which is really my main objection to the House system. That and the fact that the adults around them make no attempt to assert any influence whatsoever on them, to give them any incentive to see other options as viable, or to change their choices. Dumbledore, with all his experience and wisdom, just leaves these children whose souls he values so much to sink or swim. I do see that this is the way the WW works. Each person is on their own, child or adult. There's no sense of "it takes a village to raise a child." Which is one way to do it, just not one I like very much. Julie ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 17:12:56 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:12:56 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173788 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > > > Ken: > I think it is pretty much true that as Harry goes, so goes the WW. > > Magpie: > Which way do you mean this? That people are watching Harry and when > they see him staring at Malfoy some ways away and not attacking him > they change their thinking on Slytherin? Or just that Harry as our > pov character is showing us the trend of the WW? Harry's own views > have often been at odds with the WW. > Neither really though the latter is a bit closer. Harry's views have often been at odd with those of the WW at large, or perhaps more accurately those of the Ministry and the pureblood factions. What I was saying is that this is likely no longer true. Harry has become if not the WW's Abraham Lincoln then certainly its Hiram (his real first name) Ulysses Grant. He has to be one of the most influential of living wizards. I think it quite reasonable to read his attitudes as expressed in the epilogue as being representative of the larger WW. Surely not everyone would be as generous and he is far from best mates with Draco. Nevertheless it seems like a real change and one that is broader than just Harry and his friends/family. > Though for me, that's not even the point. You create a big division > and a problem like Slytherin, and then you avoid solving it, it's not > solved. I agree that we don't see this problem being explicitly solved. I guess we disagree over what the canon evidence means about the depth and scope of the solution. I don't think it is the central conflict of the books, but the author did make quite a stink about it in canon and I can see why you might feel it deserved a fuller treatment in the pages of the final book. Since I last checked in here Rowling has given an interview in which she is more explicit. I don't know if you found that satisfying or not. Now that we have it I suppose there is no more need to continue this discussion. Ken, whose own comparison now has him wondering: William Tecumseh Sherman == Ron or Hermione? Rather more Hermione I think.... From random832 at fastmail.us Mon Jul 30 17:13:43 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (random832 at fastmail.us) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:13:43 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors In-Reply-To: <15965589.1185806407430.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <15965589.1185806407430.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1185815623.14134.1202829937@webmail.messagingengine.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173789 > Bart: > Can you tell me why? The reason why I ask is because the same thing > happened to me, and I asked myself, why do I KNOW that this is Snape's > Patronus? I knew right away that it was Snape's and here's why. Because Snape's patronus was a big secret. JKR went out of her way in previous books to avoid showing us his patronus, even refused to answer when asked, because it was a big surprise for book 7. So, hmm, here's a mysterious patronus that's important to the plot somehow - whose patronus was it, again, that we couldn't be told what it was because it'd be a spoiler? -- Random832 From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 17:26:55 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:26:55 -0000 Subject: More Funny Lines In-Reply-To: <000a01c7d215$81a2e130$4dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173790 Cathy D wrote (about these funny lines): > "How -- how're we going to get in?" panted Ron. > "I can -- see the place -- if we just had -- > Crookshanks again --" > "Crookshanks?" wheezed Hermione, bent double, > clutching her chest. "Are you a wizard, or > what?" (DH Can Ed pg 523) As compared to PS/SS's > "So light a fire!" Harry choked. > "Yes -- of couse -- but there's no wood!" > Hermione cried, wringing her hands. > "HAVE YOU GONE MAD?" Ron bellowed. "ARE > YOU A WITCH OR NOT!" Hee. I liked this, too. For me, this paralleled my favorite lines from Empire Strikes back and Return of the Jedi, when Han Solo and Princess Leia, respectfully, exchanged these lines: "I love you" "I know" Joan of Anarchy From sneeboy2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 17:40:33 2007 From: sneeboy2 at yahoo.com (sneeboy2) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:40:33 -0000 Subject: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173791 > > Kit jumps in: Everyone views / perceives things > differently yes, but there is aculturation that gives us a bias or > filter - and that filter or stereotype hat grew from the sorting led > to many of the problems that created the possibility of a Voldy. But > is it the hat that is flawed, and the sorting that occurs, or is the > stereotypes that humans ascribe to as part of culture the real root > of the problem? Sneeboy2 replies: The magic hat is parallel to a scientific "sorting" -- say, a personality test, or a genetic one. It offers support for stereotypes that may have their origin in other things. Yes, we're offered a couple of exceptions to the stereotypes, but all but the most hardcore prejudices will allow for exceptions while still clinging to the stereotype. I was dismayed, too, that the only character who suggested getting rid of the hat was the incarnation of evil. It's the old fallacy that the only alternative to limited choice is no choice at all. > Kit here: I think we have grown to > believe what we've heard and learned through Harry's perception of > things - that Gryffindor is obviously the end all be of the houses, > which simply isn't true. Starting with GOF we begin to learn more of > the differences between the houses. Hufflepuff produced the house > champion for Hogwarts, not Gryffindor. The songs the hat sings > proclaim both unity AND the attributes of each of the houses, AND the > need to recognize those in one another. I loved the riddle answer > method of entry into Ravenclaw, but even more, I loved Harry's > astonished response to it - something along the lines of Isn't there > just a password? > > My biggest complaint about DH is that everything felt so rushed and > wasn't fleshed out as much as I've grown to expect from JKR - she > just had so many story lines to tie up, and not enough time I think. > Still, it's there although subtly. The sorting may be too early, but > the stereotypes attributed are not a product of the sorting but the > student's and family's perceptions of what the houses stand for. Sneeboy2: The issue isn't really about Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw; it's about Slytherin, the bad house, the one it's OK to hate. The Slytherins are presented in a uniformly unfavorable light; different degrees of "badness" exist among them, but they are all bad on some level. I had hoped the hat would be destroyed in the battle somehow, so that the school would be faced with the question of how to sort, now that the easy, reliable method is gone. My complaint is not so much that stereotypes and predjudices exist in the books, but that the author makes us feel confident in believing them. It's a great comfort to think that 99 percent of the selfish bastards in the world all walk around clearly identified as such. That aspect of the fantasy world has a much greater impact on the imagination of young readers than a few conciliatory words in the epilogue. Perhaps if you're not inclined to believe in stereotypes, you can search out support for your feelings here and there in the books. But if you are prone to trust stereotypes, the support for your feelings are writ large in every volume. Kit: It's > hard to catch in the pell mell madness of the battle, but some > Slytherins do return with reinforcements, Narcissa does spare HP and > gives up on LV in order to rescue her son. At battles end, the > Malfoys are sitting with everyone in the Great Hall, not sure if it's > okay to stay, yet no one tells them to leave. Malfoy and Harry don't > become good buds and chat it up at the train station (that would be > too trite), but they acknowledge each other - politely... Sneeboy2: I missed the arrival of the Syltherin cavalry myself. The possibilities for Harry and Malfoy nineteen years later are not limited to either good buds or respectful nods. The former is trite, but the latter is predictable and not evidence that anything much has changed since the final scene where the Malfoys are allowed to stay but not embraced. > > Carol responds: > >I think the epilogue shows a gradual eradication of prejudice in the > >making. Draco and Harry are not at each other's throats like Lucius > >Malfoy and Mr. Weasley. Draco has probably not indoctrinated his son > >with the pure-blood superiority ethic that caused so much grief in DH > >and it's unlikely that the Sorting Hat, which has always advocated > >unity and its own abolition, will sort by that criterion. Sneeboy2: I wish she had shown us some of this. IIf Harry can offer only one exception to the rule about evil Slytherins, I kind of doubt that Draco is preaching to his kids that muggle-borns are all OK. I don't see any reason to assume that the sorting process has changed. Kit: I am surprised at the resentment and feelings towards the > sorting system. No, it isn't perfect, but it's real - there is so > much in life that this serves as an analogy for. Our to true measure > of maturation is realizing how we define and manipulate the divisions > we experience in life to either serve our better good or harm us, > color our views of others, etc. Sneeboy2: I agree it's an allegory for the real world, but the whole point of fictional allegory is to cause us to go back and look at the real world a little differently. I could see a young reader, at book's end, questioning whether a bully or mean teacher at school is really all bad. But I don't see much -- certainly not enough for my taste -- in the books that encourages us to look again at the group identities we use to define ourselves and ask whether there is a real basis for them, or whether they are mere cultural habit. Part of me suspects that in Britain the division into groups is more deeply ingrained, and that mounting a serious challenge to it would be considered foolhardy. Judging by JKR's statements in interviews about the characters' adult careers, she believes in political reform, but perhaps cultural reform seems like too much to hope for. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 17:28:51 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:28:51 -0000 Subject: Lilly's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173792 --- "Donna" wrote: > > So what was the big deal about Harry having his > mother's eyes??? ... > > Donna > bboyminn: Perhaps a better question to ask is, who made Harry's Eyes a 'Big Deal'? Was it J.K.Rowling, or was it obsessive fans who will take any scrap of information and turn it into a complex elaborate collection of theories? Harry eyes did have /some/ significants in the story, and JKR said as much, but she never elaborated on /how/ significant it was. That was all done in the overactive imagination of fans. Still, it was fun. Steve/bboyminn From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 18:15:56 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:15:56 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173793 Montavilla47: > > In the Bloomsbury Chat (which I haven't read but I've seen bits > > of), JKR was asked if the absence of Snape's portrait in the > > Headmaster's office was deliberate. Her reply was that it was, > > because Snape had abandonned his post and therefore did not merit > > inclusion. > > > > She added that she hoped Harry would have seen to it that Snape > > was later included. colebiancardi: > I do wonder about that quote. It wasn't that Snape "abandoned" his > post - he was run off. If he had stayed, he would have been killed > or he would have killed. Not exactly a *win-win* situation. Not to > *question* JKR's answer, but that reply doesn't connect with The > Sacking of Severus Snape chapter. What was he supposed to do? I do > not agree that he abandoned his post. SSSusan: Just weighing in to say my eyes bugged out a bit when I read that response, too. Does *anybody* here have a real inkling of what JKR was thinking of when she chose the words 'abandoned his post'? If so, please pipe up! Granted, I've just now started my re-read, but nothing is springing to my mind that seems like abandoning! I *was* pleased to see the second bit from JKR: >>However, I like to think that Harry would be instrumental in ensuring that Snape's portrait would appear there in due course.<< At least she's implying there that Snape's portrait deserves to be there (as do I). But what the heck *did* she mean about abandoning...?? Siriusly Curious Snapey Susan From random832 at fastmail.us Mon Jul 30 18:16:20 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (random832 at fastmail.us) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:16:20 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lilly's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1185819380.26454.1202839745@webmail.messagingengine.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173794 On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:28:51 -0000, "Steve" said: > --- "Donna" wrote: > > > > So what was the big deal about Harry having his > > mother's eyes??? ... > > > > Donna > > > > bboyminn: > > Perhaps a better question to ask is, who made Harry's > Eyes a 'Big Deal'? I think one of the first things pointing in that direction was NOT about his mother's eyes, but something that's always bugged me (and that didn't get addressed in any of the books as far as I can tell) She's [...] outraged that an Italian dust jacket shows Harry minus his glasses. "Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?" http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1200-readersdigest-boquet.htm Yet, five years later, we have JK Rowling: Because I had glasses all through my childhood and I was sick and tired of the person in the books who wore the glasses was always the brainy one and it really irritated me and I wanted to read about a hero wearing glasses. http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-edinburgh-ITVcubreporters.htm (As for specifically the thing about Lily's eyes... AQ has a listing claiming "The fact that Harry has his mother?s eyes is very important to a future book." but the actual quote that seems to refer to is simply "you'll find out something incredibly important about her in book seven." - nothing to do with eyes. However, that summary at QQQ/AQ - which to my recollection has always said that, _may_ have contributed to some of the "big deal".) http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/1099-connectiontransc2.htm - the apparently false claim itself is in the 'quotes by character' section under Harry. -- Random832 From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 18:19:21 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:19:21 -0000 Subject: JKR Bloomsbury online chat: King's Cross In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173795 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "krista7" wrote: <<>> > http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/14261248.html#cutid1 Katie: Quote from Live Chat: Why was Kings Cross the place Harry went to when he died? JKR: For many reasons. The name works rather well, and it has been established in the books as the gateway between two worlds, and Harry would associate it with moving on between two worlds (don't forget that it is Harry's image we see, not necessarily what is really there.) ****** I find this very interesting. Is she saying that it was all Harry's imagination, or that the area between life and death is whatever we make it to be? Thoughts? Katie From padfoot.rules at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 16:43:22 2007 From: padfoot.rules at yahoo.com (BKinney) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Lily's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <669533.38258.qm@web34504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173796 Donna wrote: So what was the big deal about Harry having his mother's eyes??? I thought we would find out that the Evan's were descendents of Slytherin because of the "greenness" of their eyes?? The only reference that came close to that was in Snape's memory when her eyes were described as green "slits" but we don't know for sure and I thought we would find out. I did notice that in the final show down their eye color were reversed and JK made reference to that .. Voldy has red eyes (griffindor color) while Harry has bright green color (Slytherin color) It might mean something or nothing we never found out BUMMER Brianna: I never paid much attention to that remark...it was like saying to someone you look just like your father or mother. Generally, what is meant is that there's a keen resemblance in appearance between offspring and parent. But here we discover that Harry's eyes are literally the same color and shape as his mother's, and for all of Snape's unpleasantness throughout Harry's time at Hogwarts, he had to take notice of Lily?s eyes from the moment Harry arrived. Everyone else did, and Lily's eyes had more significance to Snape than anyone with the possible exception of James. So, finally discovering that Harry indeed had his mother's eyes--and that these very same eyes reminded Snape of the woman who had been lost and the promise he made to DD every day--was a wonderful revelation in my opinion. I loved the simplicity and elegance of it. Brianna From jnferr at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 18:00:38 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:00:38 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sorting and House System In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40707301100u9fda491h9fa0946de0ad83c1@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173797 > > Sneeboy2: > The issue isn't really about Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw; it's about > Slytherin, the bad house, the one it's OK to hate. The Slytherins are > presented in a uniformly unfavorable light; different degrees of > "badness" exist among them, but they are all bad on some level. I had > hoped the hat would be destroyed in the battle somehow, so that the > school would be faced with the question of how to sort, montims: but the Slytherins don't hate each other, and I don't imagine the Hufflepuffs hate them all that much. It's just the old jock/geek, mod/rocker, hippy/preppy, cowboy/indian, French/English, left wing/right wing, etc etc, divide all over again. Slytherins are the aristocrats who like to hang together - they are proud of themselves and their traditions. Gryffindors are proud of other aspects. Yes, Slytherin has taken a huge image fall due to LV, just as Germany did after Hitler, but it will recover because it has equally good points (even while not recognised as such by Gryffindors) and valuable WW citizens. Sneeboy2: > I agree it's an allegory for the real world, but the whole point of > fictional allegory is to cause us to go back and look at the real > world a little differently. I could see a young reader, at book's end, > questioning whether a bully or mean teacher at school is really all > bad. But I don't see much -- certainly not enough for my taste -- in > the books that encourages us to look again at the group identities we > use to define ourselves and ask whether there is a real basis for > them, or whether they are mere cultural habit. Part of me suspects > that in Britain the division into groups is more deeply ingrained, and > that mounting a serious challenge to it would be considered foolhardy. > Judging by JKR's statements in interviews about the characters' adult > careers, she believes in political reform, but perhaps cultural reform > seems like too much to hope for. montims: "the division into groups is more deeply ingrained" than what? where? I have lived in England (in various places), Italy and America, in 2 states. In each place certain people believed they were better than X (insert relevant group) because of Y (insert relevant reason). People (getting biblical here): do please check out your own planks before commenting on others' motes... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From padfoot.rules at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 17:13:15 2007 From: padfoot.rules at yahoo.com (BKinney) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <320161.7058.qm@web34503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173798 anne_t_squires wrote: Having said all of that, I still have a problem with DD. The thing that bothers me the most about DD is that up until the end of year four he had to have thought Harry would indeed have to die. He was raising him like "a pig for the slaughter." I think DD arranged it so that Harry would develop his "saving people thing." It's something he was inculcating in him from the beginning. And I have a problem with it. The only thing that redeems DD in my mind is that Harry forgave him for this betrayal and went on to name one of his children for him. If Harry can forgive DD, then I can; but I still think DD was very cold hearted and evil in his intentions toward Harry. Rita Skeeter described his intentions as "sinister." Was she ever right about that! Brianna: I remember when DD and company left Harry on the doorstep of the Dursley?s home. I remember him saying something to the effect that Harry would have a difficult time ahead of him, and he wasn?t just whistling Dixie was he? I?ve always liked DD, and I don?t see him as being sinister or a manipulator. He always knew that LV hadn?t been destroyed and that Harry was in danger. I think he loved the boy and did the best he could by him, all while orchestrating and coordinating a rag-tag underground army. Everyone has regrets in their lives and I?m sure there are few people who don?t wish that they had done something differently at some point in their lives. The point is what you learn from those mistakes and how you handle yourself going forward is what counts. Dumbledore after all was human. And if there was anyone in the book I wanted to choke with his/her own wand it was Rita Skeeter. She was such a vicious weasel who cared nothing about the truth or facts. She was only interested in sensationalism, scandal and lining her pockets. Brianna From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Mon Jul 30 18:25:52 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:25:52 -0000 Subject: The Genetics of Magical People Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173799 >From the Bloomsbury chat: "How exactly do muggleborns receive magical ability? JKR: Muggle-borns will have a witch or wizard somewhere on their family tree, in some cases many, many generations back. The gene re-surfaces in some unexpected places." So on the surface, the magical gene appears to be a recessive gene. Milz From jnferr at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 18:30:25 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:30:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40707301130rca8d06fwb4e2ad8d2c407479@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173800 > > Magpie: > Sometimes the compassion > might scald a person, yes, but usually it's based on true empathy > and more importantly *humility* which is something Harry never ever > has to learn, because he's superior. montims: you see, I don't believe Harry is "superior" - he has been selected by the prophecy, and has to react to many different challenges because of it. But as he continually tries to explain, and Ron finally gets, most of it comes about by luck, the help of friends, and DD's guidance. He is a good person because he has suffered as a child and consequently has empathy for others who suffer. But he's not superior, and I think at the end would never claim to be superior. To what/whom? Slytherins? Muggles? House elfs? Goblins? LV? - well, maybe. But he sees too often how his initial judgements are incorrect, and that people are not black and white as they might first appear. If he is superior, who is his inferior? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 18:24:59 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:24:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: <15965589.1185806407430.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <134868.42183.qm@web55008.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173801 Potioncat: >I expected a bumblebee or phoenix because I thought his spirit guardian >would reflect Dumbledore. Many expected a unicorn for Lily. So the >moment I saw the doe Patronus,I knew it was Snape's and LOLLIPOPS had >won. Bart: >Can you tell me why? The reason why I ask is because the same thing >happened to me, and I asked myself, why do I KNOW that this is Snape's >Patronus? ... Was there anything in the canon that might have pointed to it? >I don't believe that Snape used the PPN (Phoenix Patronus Network). I don't >have DH in front of me, but I believe that the scene where Snape shows his >Patronus to Dumbledore comes well after the PPN was in place. As soon as I saw the chapter title for chapter 19 in the Table of Contents, I suspected that "The Silver Doe" was a reference to Snape's patronus. Why? Because I believed the widely held theory that Snape loved Lily. Be it romantic love, or platonic love, or both, I suspected she was dear to him (pun perhaps intentional). Why even go there in the first place? Snape hated James and never missed an opportunity to insult him, but he never said a word about Lily. And, the whole "mudblood" episode in OOTP was conspicuous in its subtlety (typical JKR foreshadowing -- just enough to titillate; maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong; maybe its important, maybe its not). So, since James's animagus form is a stag and Harry's patronus represents his father, and since a doe is a stag's mate, I assumed the doe represented Lily and, if it represents Lily, it has to belong to someone who loved her -- Snape. As for the PPN (and I love that BTW), we first see it (I think) in GOF when Dumbledore signals Hagrid to come to him after Harry led him to Barty Crouch Sr's body. Then, in OOTP, Dumbledore tells Harry (after they return from the Ministry) that Snape alerted the order and that the Order has its own way of communicating. Then, in HBP, we see Tonks use her patronus to alert someone to open the gates for Harry and her. So, with that information, and information on JKR's website, I assumed that Snape used his patronus to alert the Order in OOTP. (Of course, we don't see the PPN fully in action until DH). What makes me curious, and I mentioned it before, is assuming Snape did use his Patronus to alert the Order in OOTP, didn't anyone wonder why this dark wizard known for his cruelty had such a mild and meek creature as his Patronus? (Did the other Patronuses laugh at him?) Not that anyone would have neccessarily made the connection to Lily -- that is not important to me -- its the irony that intrigues me. I can see Sirius saying, "hey, did you guys know that Snape's Patronus is a doe?" Or, maybe my assumption is wrong; maybe he had another way to talk to the Order, but with Umbridge monitoring all conventional channels of communication I can't see how. As for the use of Snape's patronus in DH, as another poster pointed out, it doesn't speak (which would give himself away by its voice) but it is used to communicate nonetheless so Snape does use the PPN. We see him showing his Patronus to Dumbledore in his memories as Harry watches them. The memory is from Harry's sixth year on the same day that Hagrid overheard Dumbledore and Snape arguing on the grounds (the conversation Hagrid related to Harry in HBP). Christy From Jenanydot at aol.com Mon Jul 30 17:58:22 2007 From: Jenanydot at aol.com (jenanydot) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:58:22 -0000 Subject: James's age / Molly's Age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173802 > bboyminn: > > Molly's apparent age is established in GoF. She is > likely slightly older than Hagrid and likely slightly > younger than McGonagall. That makes he at or near 70 > through most of the series. The Marauders through most > of the books are in their 30's. > > Molly was at school before Hagrid started working there, > which was over 50 years ago. She remembers the previous > Game Keeper. > > Molly and Arthur likely started having kids later in > life relative to most muggles considering that they > are in their 70's and their oldest son seems to be > 30's at most. > > Just passing it along. > > Steve/bboyminn > I've read this theory before, and it's something I've just never bought into. The only evidence that we have that Molly and Arthur are that much older than the Marauders is one comment that Molly makes when she says she remembers the previous gamekeeper at Hogwarts, Ogg. However, we've seen several times throughout the novels that Rowling slips up with her timelines on more than one occasion (the ages of the Weasley kids are good evidence of this). Also (and correct me if I'm wrong, here), wasn't Hagrid originally an assistant to the gamekeeper? If so, it's very likely that Hagrid AND Ogg were working at Hogwarts. Even if this wasn't the case...well, like I said, Rowling isn't known for being consistent with her timelines. I just don't think it's really likely that Molly and Arthur are in their 70's. We see absolutely no evidence of this anywhere else in the books. I've always been of the belief that Molly and Arthur aren't too much older than Lucius Malfoy, and we know that he's 41 in....Order of the Phoenix, I think? Or Half-Blood Prince? I know it was in a Daily Prophet article at some point. I would look it up, but I should actually stop reading Harry Potter discussions and get back to work. ;-) ~Mandy From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Mon Jul 30 18:38:22 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:38:22 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173803 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > > It was also interesting that everybody at school took it as a given > that Ginny would know if Harry had a tattoo of a dragon on his body > and where it was. I mean, those long "walks" with Ginny did seem to > make Harry VERY happy. > Ginny and Harry in her bedroom is pretty obvious to more "mature" readers, imo, lol. But the sexual lives of the older Hogswarts students have been alluded to in past books--Percy snogging his girlfriend is an example. And let's not forget the greatest unanswered question of the series: Who did Bertha Jorkins see kissing Florence behind the greenhouse? The other vaguely sexual reference is Lily's objection to what Mulciber tried to do to her friend, Mary. For all we know, Mulciber tried to use the Diffindo curse on Mary's robes or use the Imperious Curse like GHB (the date rape drug). At least, that's how I read the passage. As Harry grew older in the series, so did the maturity level of the books. So, it wouldn't surprise me if whatever Mulciber tried to Mary was sexual in nature. Milz From nitalynx at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 17:28:02 2007 From: nitalynx at yahoo.com (nitalynx) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:28:02 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: <89d7a880707300639l13cfec93md2b3ee18bfd7271d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173804 Debbie wrote: > > On the one hand, Dumbledore does seem cold and calculating. However, he > knew the prophesy. He knew that Voldemort would be out to get Harry from > the time Harry was a baby. He knew that Harry would have to face > Voldemort. Would you rather DD allow Harry to face Voldemort without any > defenses? Would you rather Harry not have known the prophesy? That he be > treated like any other kid at Hogwarts and, when this really mean Voldy > tried to smote him, be caught off guard? > Nita: I don't think this is a question of whether DD should have treated Harry like any other kid. Of course if was right to prepare Harry in *some* way, but the way DD went about it casts an interesting light on his personality and methods. Perhaps the reason why I find him scarier and less likeable than the Godfather is because DD believes and insists that he's doing the Right Thing, in the typical Gryffindor fashion. Actually, aren't the Families of Italian mafia in "The Godfather" very similar to Slytherins? They keep to themselves, take care of their own, are passionate in a non-heroic way, adhere to their own moral code and don't care much about the laws of the outside world. And yet, they are very human and don't seem to be predisposed to genocide (unless it's a side-effect of a grand vendetta). I prefer ruthless manipulative leaders to be concerned with actual people, not abstract ideals, I suppose. They're less dangerous that way :) What would have happened if DD's sister wasn't killed during that argument? Would Harry be born into a world where wizards treat Muggles like cattle "for their own good"? Nita, now perfectly understanding the people who liked Snape "as a character, but NOT as a person" pre-DH, and feeling that way about Dumbledore From djmitt at pa.net Mon Jul 30 17:30:39 2007 From: djmitt at pa.net (Donna) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:30:39 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173805 va32h wrote: > In light of a request for topics we can agree on - can we agree > that there was a heck of a lot of innuendo in this book? > I found most of it amusing (Voldie and Bella the disgusting > exception). It all went right over my daughter's head, but I can > imagine her re-reading in 6 or 7 years and saying "Mother! Did > you read that!" Donna replies: She also used the word "effing" twice in the DH As an ex-teacher that word just jumped out at me. I don't think those idioms should be in "childrens'" books just my opinion Donna From bartl at sprynet.com Mon Jul 30 18:48:01 2007 From: bartl at sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:48:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's live chat -- excerpts Message-ID: <12764219.1185821281717.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173806 From: Milz >I don't see how that is contradictory...Ron has a job with the >Ministry. That probably won't preclude him from owning shares in >George's business or even helping out with the business on weekends >or vacations. Heaven knows I've helped friends and family members >with their businesses in my spare time.... Or, how about this. Neither Harry nor Ron have full-time jobs at the Ministry; they are consultants. Finally, after years of giving advice, they are given administrative positions, so as to better implement their suggestions. And, with Harry now one of the more wealthy people in the WW (combining the Black and Potter monies), who better to bankroll George & Ron's business as a silent partner (well, George will listen to every suggestion Harry makes with his prosthetic ear). Hmmmmm... Actually George should make a custom Extendable Ear, permanently grafted to his head. "Mad Ear" Weasley. Sounds good. Bart From coriandra2002 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 17:32:39 2007 From: coriandra2002 at yahoo.com (coriandra2002) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:32:39 -0000 Subject: What happened to Dursleys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173807 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pforparvati" wrote: > > Hey..does anyone wonder what happened to Dursley family? There is > no mention of them after they went into hiding....any guesses? > > pforParvati > They probably moved back to Privet Drive after Voldemort and the Death Eaters were finished off and pretty much forgot about Harry, told the neighbours he died or was put away for good. coriandra2002 From juli17 at aol.com Mon Jul 30 18:49:26 2007 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:49:26 -0400 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: <1185785176.5779.26523.m43@yahoogroups.com> References: <1185785176.5779.26523.m43@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C9A0F17CE3B740-178-9CF@webmail-mf15.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173808 Snape? Well, I do agree with LL, I think, heheh. I also remember arguing long time ago with somebody who was saying that personal affection for Harry does not make person good, in relation to totally different character. Well, surely not - in general it does not. But I believe that in regards to Snape LL is correct. Dumbledore's question was opening a door to Snape's redemption. It is not because Snape is obligated to love Harry, it is because he did so much bad to him, it is because he so despicably fails to see that those green eyes are Lily's eyes for so long, I do not think that he is a complete hero at least, or maybe not a hero at all, if under hero you include being a good person, and Snape certainly does not fall under my definition of good person. JMO, Alla Julie: I'm glad JKR did call Snape a hero if a flawed one, or maybe antihero is an even better term for him. Someone else said that there is a difference between a "national" hero and the type of hero one completely looks up to and emulates. I think that is true. There are many types of heroes, and Snape is a WW hero because what he did (for love, even if a limited type of love) did greatly contribute to the victory of Voldemort. But he's a hero like Achilles, or General MacArthur, or dozens of others real and fictional, one who is deeply flawed in many ways. Harry OTOH is the complete hero you are talking about, not only heroic for his deeds, but for the way he lives his life. He's the kind of hero you want your children to emulate. I think it was Lupinlore who said Harry represented a resurrected Christ figure, but I think he represents more than that (or maybe exactly that in what is supposed to be the actual point of Christianity). I don't feel I'm supposed to dismiss his being better than the average human as relieving me of any responsibility?to emulate his brand of love and forgiveness (in this case, toward Snape), but that I should strive to be more *like* Harry.? So even though I do see Snape's faults, and feel sad that he couldn't ovecome?many of them, I do forgive him ;-) And I do think he was? fully redeemed, BTW, by his actions, even if he?never did stop hating Harry (redeemed meaning his soul was saved, not?that he became a completely good person). Julie, happy to read JKR's various comments about Snape, and about? George (who did?find love?despite his personal losses, and named his first son Fred, yay!!)?? ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 18:58:13 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:58:13 -0000 Subject: How did the one who has left me forever survive? Was: Death Eaters at graveyard In-Reply-To: <003501c7d2c0$b6808be0$86fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173809 Claire asked: > "Which leaves Snape as the one who has left forever and who would have to be killed. Do we have any canon to suggest how Snape subsequently convinced Voldemort that he was indeed still a Death Eater and so avoided being killed off (at least until the end, when he was killed no because of any treachery but simply to give Voldemort power over the Elder Wand)." Cathy D responded: > I think so, in Spinner's End: "The Dark Lord's initial displeasure at my lateness vanished entirely, I assure you, when I explained that I remained faithful, although Dumbledore thought I was his man. Yes, the Dark Lord thought that I had left him for ever, but he was wrong." (HBP Can Ed pg 34) Carol adds: I agree. (Obviously, the statement about not being Dumbledore's man is a lie, but it's the same lie he told Voldemort.) However, that's by no means our only canon. As Dumbledore sends Snape to face Voldemort near the end of GoF, Dumbledore says, "If you are ready, if you are prepared." Snape answers, "I am" (GoF Am. ed. 713). I have always taken his response to mean that he has prepared his cover story, a combination of truth, half truth, and undetectable lies. We have the whole chapter of "Spinner's End," in which he tells Bellatrix that same cover story. Snape says to Bellatrix, "Do you really think that the Dark Lord has not asked me each and every one of these questions? And do you really think that, had I not been able to give satisfactory answers, that I would be sitting her talking to you?" Bellatrix responds, "I know he believes you, but . . . " and Snape answers, "You think he is mistaken? Or that I have somehow hoodwinked him/ Fooled the Dark Lord, the greatest wizard, the most accomplished Legilimens the world has ever seen?" (HBP Am. ed. 26). Bellatrix, of course, still doesn't trust him, but she doesn't dare to admit that Snape can lie to the Dark Lord undetected. Snape hoodwinking the Dark Lord? The Dark Lord mistaken? Impossible. But that, it turns out, is exactly the case. Snape is doing exactly what he described to Harry in OoP, lying to the Dark Lord without detection by "shut[ting] down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in his presence without detection" (531). IOW, Snape is not just throwing up an easily detectable mental block like Draco in HBP. Had he done so, he would be dead. We have only to read Snape's answers to Bellatrix's questions to know how Snape responded when Voldemort asked the exact same questions and we have Snape's description of Occlumency as practiced by someone skilled in it (actually, Occlumency as a "superb Occlumens" like Snape practices it to see how he got away with his lies and half truths. This is exactly what Snape has been doing since he first became a double agent. (Exactly when he mastered Occlumency is unclear; obviously, it predates GoF.) His ability to lie convincingly, coupled with undetectable Occlumency, is the only reason he's still alive. (Occlumency can't save him in DH because there's no lie to conceal.) Dumbledore tells Snape, "Do not think that I underestimate the constant danger in which you place yourself, Severus. To give Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding the essentials is a job I would entrust to nobody but you" (DH Am. ed. 684). And we see Snape doing exactly this in "The Dark Lord Ascending," where he demonstrates his undetectable Occlumency. "[Voldemort's] red eyes fastened upon Snape's black ones with such intensity that some of the watchers looked away, apparently fearful that they themselves would be scorched by the ferocity of the gaze. Snape, however, looked calmly back into Voldemort's face and, after a moment or two, Voldemort's mouth curled into something like a smile" (DH 4). Superb Occlumens indeed, lying (by omission) to the Dark Lord with impunity, "hoodwinking" the Dark Lord. Had Snape not known how to lie, how to act (cf. his words to Draco in "the Unbreakable Vow" in HBP), how to conceal the feelings and memories that disproved the lie, he certainly would have been dead long before he returned to Voldemort at the end of GoF. He could never have spied for Dumbledore "at great personal risk" or survived to become Potions master. But Voldemort had too high an opinion of himself and his skill as a Legilimens to suspect that Snape, however clever and cunning and talented he might be, could outsmart him or that Snape's skill as an Occlumens (which he may not even have known about, since Snape's Occlumency, unlike Draco's, is undetectable) could possibly be superior to his skill as a Legilimens. The coward Karkaroff runs away and is killed by the DEs he betrayed. Snape, who chooses to stay at Hogwarts and return to LV only on Dumbledore's orders, faces his, tells his half-truths, and survives. Carol, wondering if her answers to questions about DH are also hidden in the text, waiting to be discovered From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 19:03:11 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:03:11 -0000 Subject: The Genetics of Magical People In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173810 --- "Milz" wrote: > > From the Bloomsbury chat: > > "How exactly do muggleborns receive magical ability? > JKR: Muggle-borns will have a witch or wizard > somewhere on their family tree, in some cases many, > many generations back. The gene re-surfaces in some > unexpected places." > > So on the surface, the magical gene appears to be a > recessive gene. > > Milz > bboyminn: I think it is best to look at magic as a form of Genius. Why do musical or mathematical genius's occur is some families and not in others? Well, to some extent it is inherited. Very smart people /usually/ have very smart kids. Yet, sometimes genius is unexpected. Sometimes it occurs in the most unlikely places. Yet, even when genius is very unlikely, you can probably find a similar level of intelligence somewhere in the distant family tree. Sometimes, things just happen, sometimes genius, and magic, are just random luck of the draw ever so slightly tempered by genetics. But my point is, in trying to find a figurative model for magic, I think Genius fits very nicely. Steve/bboyminn From graynavarre at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 17:45:17 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:45:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <573297.64679.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173811 --- Ken Hutchinson wrote: > Ken, whose own comparison now has him wondering: > William Tecumseh > Sherman == Ron or Hermione? Rather more Hermione I > think.... > Sorry, I started choking there for a minute. Being from Georgia, I really can't see Herimone as a person that, well, let's say that very few schools or streets, etc. are named after Sherman in Georgia. Barbara From graynavarre at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 17:50:28 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <72621.2123.qm@web30107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173812 > colebiancardi: > I do wonder about that quote. It wasn't that Snape > "abandoned" his > post - he was run off. If he had stayed, he would > have been killed or > he would have killed. Not exactly a *win-win* > situation. Not to > *question* JKR's answer, but that reply doesn't > connect with The > Sacking of Severus Snape chapter. What was he > supposed to do? I do > not agree that he abandoned his post. > > but that is just *my take* on it. I don't see him as abandoning Hogwarts either. He was a soldier in the big war and his part to protect the students was over. He needed to get back to LV to fight there. If he had lived, he might have been headmaster but I doubt if he would really have wanted the job. I don't think that Snape really liked to teach (just an impression I get.) Barbara From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 19:08:49 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:08:49 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: <12764219.1185821281717.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173813 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Or, how about this. Neither Harry nor Ron have full-time jobs at > the Ministry; they are consultants. Finally, after years of giving > advice, they are given administrative positions, so as to better >implement their suggestions. > Bart Well, the only thing about that is that it contradicts what JKR said to one of the kids in the Today Show interview who asked what Harry and Ron and Hermione did for a living. She said clearly that both of them were aurors and that Harry was the head of the department. She also said that Harry, Ron, and Hermione were the nucleus of a major movement of reform that eventually transformed the entire Ministry. If they manage to be aurors, transform the Ministry, and rise (in Harry's case) to becoming Chief Auror and occasional lecturer at Hogwarts (another thing she said Harry did) while only working part- time, they are past heroic, they are workers of out and out miracles, :-). Lupinlore From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 19:21:54 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:21:54 -0000 Subject: James's age / Molly's Age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173814 --- "jenanydot" wrote: > > > > bboyminn: > > > > Molly's apparent age is established in GoF. She is > > likely slightly older than Hagrid and likely > > slightly younger than McGonagall. That makes he at > > or near 70 through most of the series. The Marauders > > through most of the books are in their 30's. > > > > Molly was at school before Hagrid started working > > there, which was over 50 years ago. She remembers > > the previous Game Keeper. > > > > Molly and Arthur likely started having kids later > > in life relative to most muggles considering that > > they are in their 70's and their oldest son seems > > to be 30's at most. > > > > Just passing it along. > > > > Steve/bboyminn > > > > ~Mandy: > > I've read this theory before, and it's something I've > just never bought into. The only evidence that we have > that Molly and Arthur are that much older than the > Marauders is one comment that Molly makes when she > says she remembers the previous gamekeeper at Hogwarts, > Ogg. > > ... Also ..., wasn't Hagrid originally an assistant > to the gamekeeper? If so, it's very likely that Hagrid > AND Ogg were working at Hogwarts. > bboyminn: On the first point you are wrong. Molly mentions, the previous Game Keeper, the previous Caretaker, and mentions the Whomping Willow was planted after she was in school. Filch, the Caretaker, has been on the job 25 years. The Whomping Willow was planted when Lupin came to school, that means Molly was there before Lupin, Snape, the Marauders, and most likely Malfoy. The Marauders were there more than 20 years ago. As to Hagrid and Ogg, what difference does it make if Hagrid was Gamekeeper or Assistant Gamekeeper, it still happened 50 years ago. Hagird is not exactly a pixie; he is a little hard to miss whether he is stumping around the grounds as Gamekeeper or Assistant Gamekeeper. And how long do you imagine Hagrid would be Assistant? ...5 years? ...10 years? He seems to have a natural affinity for animals, I imagine he took to the job very quickly. Since Molly makes no mention of Hagrid, who is very hard to miss, it seems reasonable that Hagrid wasn't there. Even if Hagrid was there, Molly would be a few years older and about to graduate. Perhaps, someone will ask JKR this question and we can get it straightened out. But ALL indications are that Molly is roughly the same age as Hagrid and McGonagall, and definitely older than the Marauders. steve/bboyminn From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 19:31:59 2007 From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:31:59 -0000 Subject: The Genetics of Magical People In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173815 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Milz" wrote: > > From the Bloomsbury chat: > > "How exactly do muggleborns receive magical ability? > JKR: Muggle-borns will have a witch or wizard somewhere on their family > tree, in some cases many, many generations back. The gene re-surfaces > in some unexpected places." > > So on the surface, the magical gene appears to be a recessive gene. > > Milz > **** Katie: Hmmm...I don't love this explanation. So, basically, that means that magic does have to do with blood and genetics. That's fine, and obviously now it is canon, but I always liked to think of magical ability as being bestowed upon those who could see the world differently. Not necessarily always good people (obviously!), but on people who were not so mundane...I guess I got that because Muggles always are referred to as sort of clueless and unable to see the magical things in the world. I am sort of bummed out that it's all just a quirk in a chromosome. Katie From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Jul 30 19:37:13 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:37:13 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173816 > colebiancardi: > > I do wonder about that quote. It wasn't that Snape "abandoned" his > > post - he was run off. If he had stayed, he would have been killed > > or he would have killed. Not exactly a *win-win* situation. > SSSusan: > Just weighing in to say my eyes bugged out a bit when I read that > response, too. Does *anybody* here have a real inkling of what JKR > was thinking of when she chose the words 'abandoned his post'? If > so, please pipe up! Jen: I thought Snape chose to abandon his post? He could probably take on both McGonagall and Flitwick but would blow his cover if he did defensive magic and not offensive (which could hurt them or take them out of the fight he knew/suspected was coming). I also took it to mean the magical powers-that-be, whatever instantly places a portrait on the wall of a dead or retired headmaster, determined the post was abandoned. Whatever the magic is that creates a portrait, it's sentient to a certain degree: It understood Dumbledore's time as headmaster wasn't over when he was ousted by the MOM because no portrait appeared then and the office sealed itself against Umbridge (assuming the same magic is at work for both the portrait and the office). Apparently Snape's time as headmaster was determined to be legitimate (the office opened), completed (never coming back) and job abandoment determined as cause for departure because that was Snape's intent. Jen From claire_elise2003 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 19:06:53 2007 From: claire_elise2003 at yahoo.com (claire_elise2003) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:06:53 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: <134868.42183.qm@web55008.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173817 Christy said: <> << What makes me curious, and I mentioned it before, is assuming Snape did use his Patronus to alert the Order in OOTP, didn't anyone wonder why this dark wizard known for his cruelty had such a mild and meek creature as his Patronus?>> <> Claire adds: JK has resolved this question in the Bloomsbury webchat (isn't post-latest HP book easier, although perhaps less fun, when JKR is happy to answer any question without worrying about spoiling any future books?): "jenny: How did snape keep his patronus secret from the rest of the order? J.K. Rowling: He was careful not to use the talking Patronus means of communication with them. This was not difficult, as his particular job within the Order, ie, as spy, meant that sending a Patronus to any of them might have given away his true allegiance." From ken.fruit at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 19:43:38 2007 From: ken.fruit at gmail.com (rt11guru) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:43:38 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173818 A major question resolved here: Snapedinhalf: You promised that someone will do magic late in life in book 7. I've now read it three times but cant work out who it might have been! Please help!! J.K. Rowling: I'm sorry about this, but I changed my mind! J.K. Rowling: My very earliest plan for the story involved somebody managing to get to Hogwarts when they had never done magic before, but I had changed my mind by the time I'd written the third book. As I had suspected, the character was "hyped in the trailer" but ended up "on the cutting room floor". From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Jul 30 19:49:03 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:49:03 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173819 > Claire adds: > > JK has resolved this question in the Bloomsbury webchat (isn't > post-latest HP book easier, although perhaps less fun, when JKR > is happy to answer any question without worrying about spoiling > any future books?): > > "jenny: How did snape keep his patronus secret from the rest of > the order? > > J.K. Rowling: He was careful not to use the talking Patronus means > of communication with them. This was not difficult, as his > particular job within the Order, ie, as spy, meant that sending > a Patronus to any of them might have given away his true > allegiance." Potioncat: That makes it canon, I guess. But I wonder if JKR meant that Snape didn't use the Patronus to communicate with the Order *after* he killed DD, or he had never used it? I also wonder if she intended this all along, or made it up afterwards. From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 19:51:57 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:51:57 -0000 Subject: Petunia/Snape parallel & forgiving Petunia (Re: 'crushing the magic out of him') In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173820 I have realized that I cannot hate Petunia. All of the HP characters (or, at least, the well developed ones) have tragic flaws and redeeming qualities. Even Dumbledore, perhaps the most saintly of all the HP characters, is revealed to have a major flaw that tempts him as late in his life as HBP. We forgive them time and time again. And then there's Petunia. I think Petunia's major flaw is her inability to forgive Lily's seeming betrayal and abandonment (manifested in her hatred of magic), which fuels her treatment of Harry. Petunia's redeeming quality? She took Harry in, which was instrumental in protecting him for the first eleven years of his life. After that, Snape took over her role; her protection only applied during the summer months when Snape was unable to protect Harry (especially while maintaining his double agent status). We seem to somewhat unanimously forgive Snape for his despicable treatment of Harry in the classroom and in one-on-one interactions. (1) Snape continued to protect and save Harry, at grave danger to himself. (2) Snape being extra tough on Harry during lessons set a higher standard for Harry's magical education (which was necessary, no? Harry was destined to face Voldemort in a final battle, which no other student was predicted to do.) He even continued to teach Harry valuable magic lessons when he was fleeing with Draco and blocking curses from Harry himself. (3) Snape loved Lily (4) Snape was treated horribly by James, and Harry's appearance was a constant reminder of James's abuse. (5) It seems understandable and human for Snape to identify Harry as James Jr. in every possible negative way due to Harry's resemblance of his father (5) Some have gone as far as to say Snape was abusive to Harry (6) We forgive ALL of the negative things above because of how instrumental Snape was in saving Harry from doom again and again. Well, the same goes for Petunia. But, back to the post at hand... The Barking Iguana wrote: > I think the Dursleys locking Harry up in the house and > believing that by being awful to him--by crushing his > soul--they can stamp 'that nonsense' out of him, we are > meant to see the treatment many young homosexuals receive > in homophobic families. As a high school teacher, there > are students I've thought would especially benefit from > reading Harry Potter for that reason. I think that interpretation is really interesting, especially since the Dursleys literally force him to live in the closet. (I'm also of the school of literary criticism that believes that author's intent for interp is only one of many legitimate interpretations.) I saw the Dursleys (specifically Petunia's) despicable parenting in another light, as I began to outline above. Petunia treated Harry with such horrible contempt because he physically reminded her of Lily. (And I love the delicious irony and parallel with Snape's reasons for treating Harry horribly.) (To better tie this to The Barking Iguana's post, perhaps this could be seen as that brand of homophobia wherein the homophobic person persecutes the homosexual due to denial of their own homosexual tendencies and related emotional trauma.) Harry has Lily's eyes. As a baby, it would be impossible for Petunia to see his similarity to James (if she ever even saw James). But she knew her sister's eyes -- her sister who was her best friend; her sister who betrayed her, left her, and chose Hogwarts, magic, and witch-dom over her; her sister who filled in the best-friend void with "that awful boy" who also was a wizard and the first person to teach her about the magic world she would eventually join completely (thus turning her back on the muggle world); her sister who was never able to convince Dumbledore to let her attend Hogwarts (if Lily even tried at all)... Her sister, who she loved so deeply that betrayal transformed that powerful emotion of love into a hatred for the ultimate thing that Lily represented (magic) and the ultimate thing that pulled Lily away from her (magic and the magical world). On top of that, the wizard who provided Lily with the ultimate means to betray Petunia and abandon her (Dumbledore) then forces Petunia to care for another magical person -- and not just ANY magical person, but the savior of the magical world! Who on earth would want to help He Who Saved the World who took your sister away from you?? And, as if that weren't enough, this person has her sister's eyes -- a daily reminder of all of those painful emotions that she has tried so desperately to smash into her mental closet, the only method she could muster to deal with the painful loss of her sister. After all, not only did her sister abandon her, but if Lily had chosen the muggle world over the magical world, she would still be alive. In Petunia's eyes, it's not only magic that killed her sister, but Lily, indeed, was responsible for getting herself killed, since she CHOSE to remain in that magical world. "She got herself killed"? Yep, says Petunia. Who wants to relive those tumultuous emotions again, this time not only with a male Lily Jr., but with a baby who she could care for and come to love as her own child (only to be betrayed once again when he chooses the magic world over his muggle family.) It would be too hard to continue smashing her grief over Lily's betrayal into her deepest emotional closet while fully caring for Harry. We have evidence that Petunia has a warped view of how to show love. I do not think that it's a stretch that this stems from her early childhood trauma of, in essence, losing her sister. I doubt anyone would argue that she truly loved Dudley with the purest of motherly love and did not intend to do him any harm. As Dumbledore noted, she abused him in as extreme a manner (although in direct oppositition) as she did Harry. Her warped understanding of love, and her deeply ingrained abandonment issues led her to spoil Dudley, nearly beyond a redemptive (for Dudley) point. Her relationship with Lily (pre-magic, pre-Snape) does not depict a child who demonstrates love through spoiling behavior (or, much more likely for a child, sycophantic behavior). From that we must conclude that the psychology which brought out her treatment of both Harry and Dudley evolved AFTER Lily left her. It's natural for Petunia to feel hatred and betrayal when looking at Harry, similar to how Snape reacts to Harry based on his physical resemblance to James. Snape even avowed to protect Harry (sorta) because Harry had Lily's eyes. *Of course* Petunia saw her sister in Harry. She's only human, and it's not surprising that she reacted to Harry/Lily in such a similar way as Snape's reaction to Harry/James. And Petunia was NOT going to be betrayed again. The heart can only handle so much. She was not willing -- nor able -- to give that baby the emotional care that he deserved; she was not emotionally strong enough to make herself vulnerable, create a bond with him, and then have him ripped away as he, inevitably (in her eyes), chooses the wizarding world over her. Petunia doesn't hate magic; she hates what magic did to her relationship with her sister. So why on earth would she make herself relive this experience again with her sister's child? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... The tragic irony is that, if Petunia had embraced Harry and loved him, he might not have abandoned her. He would have gone away to school and only returned in the summer, but that's the same as her relationship with Dudley. He most likely would move out of the house, marry, and start a life of his own, but he would certainly visit. So would Dudley (well, maybe...). If she had been strong enough, she would have had two children (one a living "immortalization" of Lily, as Sirius chose to bond with Harry as an immortilization of James), twice the love, and a way to have closure for her feelings towards Lily, not to mention a way to love and bond with Lily beyond (Lily's) grave. Yes, she hates Harry. Yes, he has a physical trait that is a continual reminder of deep, emotional scars. Yes, she is unable to overcome her intense feelings for Lily, and yes, this affects her treatment of Harry. And, finally, yes, she chooses to obey Dumbledore's wishes and provides Harry with protection for a significant portion of his life when he was incredibly vulnerable. Replace "Petunia" with "Snape" in the above paragraph, and it still rings true. So what's the difference? Snape chose to obey Dumbledore out of love for Lily, while we are led to believe Petunia obeys him out of fear. Who's to say that she didn't obey him out of love for Lily as well? Snape protected Harry and also became a double agent at great personal risk. The Dursleys also landed in a place of great personal risk when Harry became of age. And although the Dursleys were less of a target than Snape, they were also far less equipped to defend themselves against even the most inept wizard or witch. Petunia tried to crush the magic out of Harry, which (deliberate or not) from her perspective would prevent Harry from entering the magic world and getting himself killed. Second-to-lastly, Snape died for Harry. But did he? -- only indirectly. Let's start at the end and backtrack. Voldemort killed him in an attempt to gain ownership of the Elder Wand. Snape presumed ownership of the wand was due to him killing Dumbledore. Snape killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's orders -- but not to save Harry, rather to help the Order's cause and save *Draco*! Snape's ultimate sacrifice cannot be used as a reason to forgive Snape but not Petunia. Lastly, Petunia's abusive behavior led Harry to become a boy who craved love and kindnes; a boy and man who time and time again chose kindness, compassion, and mercy; a boy and man who capacity to love (which, after all, is the weapon the Dark Lord knows not) was so great and so much larger than the average witch or wizard, because he had never before experienced this magical force. Harry arrived at Hogwarts craving love and filled with kindness -- and much different than his arrogant and bullying father. We cannot know for certain, but it is easy to assume that had he been raised in the magical world, as the Chosen One, as the Boy Who Lived, that his arrogance and celebrity would have tainted his overwhelming capacity and craving for love, friendship, and acceptance. Similarly, Snape's abusive behavior set that higher standard and continued to keep him modest in at least one aspect of his magical world experience. My only other point to address is that, in the HP world, it is our *choices* that prove our evil/goodness. Let's look at Harry (and his behavior towards the Dursleys) from Petunia's perspective. He unleashed a dangerous snake on her son. He blew up (like a balloon) a family member. His magical friends gave her son a pig tail and destroyed their living room. His mere existence in their life put them in so much danger that a protective spell was put over their house, and they were forced to flee from home. He either cast a spell on Dudley that put him in a deathly state of shock, or, if she can bring herself to believe Harry, due to Harry's risky relationship with the magical world, Dudley was put in a situation where a magical being attacked him. Harry is dangerous. Being around Harry is dangerous. But she continues to let Harry into her home, summer after summer. She chooses to keep Harry protected. Harry, who consorts with wizards dangerous to be imprisoned in Azkaban and who puts her family in danger time and time again, is kept safe by Petunia's choice to allow him to live in her home and call it his own home. I conclude, at the end of this two-scrolls length post (that, admittedly, has little to do with the original post to which it replies), that if you completely forgive Snape (especially if it's to the amount that you set him on a martyr pedestal), then you must also grant Petunia that same complete and high level of forgiveness. Joan of Anarchy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 19:52:30 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:52:30 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173821 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rt11guru" wrote: > > A major question resolved here: > > > Snapedinhalf: You promised that someone will do magic late in life in > book 7. I've now read it three times but cant work out who it might > have been! Please help!! > > J.K. Rowling: I'm sorry about this, but I changed my mind! > J.K. Rowling: My very earliest plan for the story involved somebody > managing to get to Hogwarts when they had never done magic before, > but I had changed my mind by the time I'd written the third book. > > As I had suspected, the character was "hyped in the trailer" but ended > up "on the cutting room floor". > Alla: Hmmmm, I did not suspect that. I thought it was Merope. Oh well. Among many other things I loved was this one : "Louie: Did mariettas pimply formation ever fade J.K. Rowling: Eventually, but it left a few scars. I loathe a traitor!" Alla. From chaomath at hitthenail.com Mon Jul 30 20:01:03 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:01:03 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: I am about to rant/the hardest part In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <88843CAC-6D6A-4E57-B406-B12FE78BD6E4@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173822 Geoff Bannister wrote: > I realise that members can be constitutionally optimistic or can be > Eeyore > types (Winnie-the-Pooh if you don't recognise the reference). I'm > usually a > half-full glass type. There must be something within the books which > pleases you or encourages you - surely? Something which go "at > last" or > "wow" and punch the air? I have to say that I find the continual > complaints > about certain events in DH annoying. After all, it has been pointed > out that > JKR wrote the books as she wanted to. If you cannot accept what > she has > written,why are you here like a house elf, agonising over to and > banging > your head on a wall? If you find "continual complaints" annoying because you don't agree with them, am I allowed to find continual praise of DH equally annoying if I don't agree it? It sounds like you think I'm not allowed to be annoyed. In other words, I'm to tolerate what I don't like, but you're free to ban everything you don't like. I don't think that's in the best interest of this list. As for what pleases me in DH, yes, there were some things. I'm not really interested in discussing them, though you may be. Again, why do I have to conform to you way of thinking? Is it really better if we only talk about sweetness and light? Certainly, some think so. I do not; in fact, I think it is dangerously banal. I accept that JKR has written the books the way she wanted to; DH is now canon. I really don't like it, and I really don't like the twisted, fatalistic message that the entire series now appears to be about. I keep posting to this list, hoping someone will be able to explain where I went wrong. I really loved this series passionately until DH, and I'm in mouring about losing faith with it. It's only been a little over a week since the book came out -- can't I have a little more time to work out whether or not to abandon it? > I am merely asking - nay pleading -for a little more consideration for > opposing views and perhaps a walk on the bright side. I haven't seen anyone being terribly inconsiderate of people who found things to like in the book. If the majority of posts seem to be negative, then your only real recourse is for you to post positive things. If others argee with you and want to discuss it, they will. If they don't, then they won't. Pleading and badgering probably won't get you anywhere. Certainly, you've annoyed the heck out of me and made me only want to keep talking about the problems I have with DH. Maeg, channeling Alice Roosevelt Longworth ("If you don't have anything nice to say, come and sit with me.") From cottell at dublin.ie Mon Jul 30 19:58:48 2007 From: cottell at dublin.ie (muscatel1988) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:58:48 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173823 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rt11guru" wrote: > > A major question resolved here: > > > Snapedinhalf: You promised that someone will do magic late in life in > book 7. I've now read it three times but cant work out who it might > have been! Please help!! > > J.K. Rowling: I'm sorry about this, but I changed my mind! > J.K. Rowling: My very earliest plan for the story involved somebody > managing to get to Hogwarts when they had never done magic before, > but I had changed my mind by the time I'd written the third book. Mus responds: That was what I'd assumed must have happened. Mind you, when she volunteered that information back in 1999, she'd already finished PoA and had embarked on GoF (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/0399- barnesandnoble.html). Oh dear. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 20:06:58 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:06:58 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173824 Lupinlore: > Well, the only thing about that is that it contradicts what JKR said > to one of the kids in the Today Show interview who asked what Harry > and Ron and Hermione did for a living. She said clearly that both of > them were aurors and that Harry was the head of the department. She > also said that Harry, Ron, and Hermione were the nucleus of a major > movement of reform that eventually transformed the entire Ministry. > If they manage to be aurors, transform the Ministry, and rise (in > Harry's case) to becoming Chief Auror and occasional lecturer at > Hogwarts (another thing she said Harry did) while only working part- > time, they are past heroic, they are workers of out and out > miracles, :-). > Juli now: I read somewhere (probably at Leaky Cauldron) an interview where Jo says that Ron didn'r return to Hogwarts for his 7th year, he went to work with George, later on, he joined the MoM. Hermione started at the Magical Creatures office (forgot what it's called) then moved to the Magical Inforcement office Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 20:18:28 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:18:28 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173825 Claire > > "jenny: How did snape keep his patronus secret from the rest of > > the order? > > > > J.K. Rowling: He was careful not to use the talking Patronus means > > of communication with them. This was not difficult, as his > > particular job within the Order, ie, as spy, meant that sending > > a Patronus to any of them might have given away his true > > allegiance." > > > Potioncat: > That makes it canon, I guess. But I wonder if JKR meant that Snape > didn't use the Patronus to communicate with the Order *after* he > killed DD, or he had never used it? I also wonder if she intended > this all along, or made it up afterwards. Juli: The thing is, I remember in OoP, right after Sirius was killed, when Dumbledore and Harry are talking in his office, and Harry is trying to blame Sirius' death on Snape and Dumbledore says "After professor Snape realized you hadn't returned from the forbidden forest with Umbridge, he contacted the OoP, and may I say they have much better means of communication that Umbridge's fire place" (paraphrasing). I always asumed he was talking about the patronuses. It's weird... So how did Snape contacted Sirius and the others? I'm sure it was a patronus. I'm sure Remus and Sirius would have made the connection between Lily's and Snape's patronuses, then they would have known he was in love with Lily after all this time. What difference would it have made anyway? It's all so confusing... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 20:19:28 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:19:28 -0000 Subject: The Watch and Molly's clock In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173826 Potioncat wrote: > I thought it was horrible that she gave Fabian's watch to Harry rather > than to Ron. Then I realized--Ron hates hand-me-downs; Harry desires a > family. So giving Ron a new watch and Harry one that had been in the > family was the perfect thing to do. Besides it will eventually go to a > Weasley grandchild. > > I was so convinced that DD's ownership of unusual timepieces, and the > Weasley's many different watches and clocks was a hint that they were > related. I was certain this scene would be setting something up. Alas! > Carol responds: Very insightful, Potioncat! I loved the moment, personally. I think Harry understood a great deal more than Ron would have (partly for the reason you expressed) about the significance of the watch. Ron hadn't seen the photograph of the original Order. I don't think he knew how much the loss of Molly's brothers meant to her, and to give Harry Fabian's watch, knowing that Harry knew that he had died a hero defending the WW from the Death Eaters, meant a lot to me, as did Harry's wordless hug that expressed what he could not say in words. (I hope that some day, he also gets a memento from Fabian's brother, Gideon, who also died a hero. Or maybe that will go to George. Yes, I like that idea better. Don't disillusion me, JKR!) As for timepieces, I had great expectations (well, at least I thought it would be put to interesting use) for the Weasley clock, which transforms from an interesting and useful grandfather clock in OoP (I haven't checked to see if it's a grandfather clock in the earlier books) which presumably informs Molly that Arthur is in mortal peril (and later, "in hospital," as the Brits would say) to a mantel clock she can carry around with *all* the hands pointing to mortal peril. What use is that? She can't tell whether they're at work or school or battling Death Eaters. Is she waiting for an hand to fall off? And then the clock disappears from the story altogether in DH. No huge loss, but I liked the clock and wanted it to serve a purpose in the plot. (I used to imagine Percy's hand moving to mortal peril and Molly watching with pounding heart, unable to save him herself, to see what would happen.) Percy, BTW, was another disappointment. I mean, I knew that he would come around, and might have done so sooner if his brothers hadn't flung parsnips at him, but the only glimpse we get of him before his turnaround is his turning radish red in the lift when he sees his father. I guess that's enough to hint that he'll come around, but it wasn't very dramatic. I had expected him to save Ron (foreshadowed by his reaction to the Second Task in GoF). I always suspected that beneath the layers of gitiocy and pratness, Percy loved his family. Then, again, having him call himself a fool and an idiot and a pompous prat and better still, admit the justice of Fred's charges that he was "a Ministry-loving, family-disowning, power-hungry moron" (DH 606) is priceless. I just changed my mind about that scene, whose impact I missed the first time around. And I can't even talk about his reaction to Fred's death, which I'm not yet ready to reread. You know, some things are better the second time around. In the first rush to find out what happens to our favorite characters and the unbearable aching grief of certain scenes (or disappointment that *our* perfect DH didn't coincide with what JKR gave us), I think we're blinded to little gems like this one. Or I was, anyway. Carol, now shedding a tear for Fred, whom I didn't even like, and almost ready to understand and forgive Dumbledore, without whom LV could not have been defeated From aslitumerkan at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 19:26:50 2007 From: aslitumerkan at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-9?Q?Asl=FD_T=FCmerkan?=) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:26:50 +0300 Subject: Mourning Fred Message-ID: <6467e1f0707301226l576816c8jfaa2de36aa43a2d6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173827 Did anyone else think that Fred's death was not really influencing? When you receive very bad news, it takes couple of days to sink in and to feel sad. I felt like we only saw that stage, although Jo tried to write the mourning. And also, we didn't see how George reacted. I think it was a very big hole in the book, we should have seen and felt grief over Fred with George. Also did anyone else think that killing Fred was somewhat worse than killing George? Asli From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Mon Jul 30 20:58:50 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:58:50 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707301130rca8d06fwb4e2ad8d2c407479@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173828 > > Magpie: > > Sometimes the compassion > > might scald a person, yes, but usually it's based on true empathy > > and more importantly *humility* which is something Harry never ever > > has to learn, because he's superior. > > > montims: > you see, I don't believe Harry is "superior" - he has been selected by the > prophecy, and has to react to many different challenges because of it. But > as he continually tries to explain, and Ron finally gets, most of it comes > about by luck, the help of friends, and DD's guidance. He is a good person > because he has suffered as a child and consequently has empathy for others > who suffer. But he's not superior, and I think at the end would never claim > to be superior. To what/whom? Slytherins? Muggles? House elfs? > Goblins? LV? - well, maybe. But he sees too often how his initial > judgements are incorrect, and that people are not black and white as they > might first appear. If he is superior, who is his inferior? Magpie: I think taking it out of context changes the meaning a little bit. I was responding to Lupinlore's thoughts about Harry's forgiving Snape because he's a Christ figure, not whether Harry himself would claim to be superior. (Though I think the text presents him as superior to lots of people, and that although he's been wrong in the past, it's usually a case of not having information that changes the person he is judging.) Lupinlore was describing Harry as compassionate by saying: "It seems clear to me that what JKR is getting at with her comments is that Harry, as appropriate for a Christ-like figure, has transcended much of what went before -- particularly he has transcended and become superior to certain personalities. He has moved beyond both Snape and Dumbledore. Dumbledore says that he has long known that Harry is a better man than he. Harry is becoming the true figure of forgiveness and light and compassion that Dumbledore appeared to be but never really was. If Harry were to be confronted with a living Snape, he would probably view him with pity and compassion." In other words, the kind of compassion that would lead Harry to forgive Snape and view him with compassion is removed from normal human feeling. Harry does it because he is now a superior being (which is where that term came from--not my saying that Harry has named himself such), he is Christ-like, and that's what Christs do. It's like a super power, not something that is just right for him to do and would be wrong not to do--though real humans forgive people for less than Harry has to forgive Snape for and with less reason. I don't think Harry approaches anything anything like a Christ figure in that sense, and don't think you'd need to be to forgive Snape. It's like, I don't know, saying Snape acheives the level of Buddha when he actually chooses to stop being a DE and stop murdering people. So I was just saying that it was not part of Harry's development to be humbled and see a real connection between himself and the uglier parts of his enemies, which I consider a bare minimum of a character who's a model of compassion. Sure there's times when he shows compassion, but never in ways that I imagine any reader of the book wouldn't easily show as well. There's times, actually, where Harry- and maybe not just Harry--seem to be singled out as impressive for doing stuff that seems pretty ordinary to me--by which I don't mean the reader has necessarily been in the same situation, but if they were put in that situation, they probably would. In many ways I'd actually consider Harry the opposite of a role model for this particular virtue. I don't mean that as a total slam on Harry in general, he just doesn't really seem to be about that particular virtue. It's not that Harry is walking around saying he's better than others, it's that I think Lupinlore might be somewhat right about how Harry's presented that way. And this kind of plugs into my general disappointment with the end of the book, why it felt like it fell short of possibilities and seemed a bit artificially stagnant about its own story--which maybe translates into my having personal expectations that just weren't the same as what the author was interested in. That's what I think it really was, actually. It's not a mistake on her part. It just makes for a story that, you know, isn't a favorite for me. -m From penhaligon at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 20:54:29 2007 From: penhaligon at gmail.com (Jane "Panhandle" Penhaligon) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:54:29 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <855C024284F847ECA0E02A197EC981D2@Home> No: HPFGUIDX 173829 Rt11guru posted: > Snapedinhalf: You promised that someone will do magic late in life in > book 7. I've now read it three times but cant work out who it might > have been! Please help!! > > J.K. Rowling: I'm sorry about this, but I changed my mind! > J.K. Rowling: My very earliest plan for the story involved somebody > managing to get to Hogwarts when they had never done magic before, > but I had changed my mind by the time I'd written the third book. > I think Dudley came pretty close ... he showed some real emotion, well real for Dudley anyway, and some real caring for Harry in DH. That in itself is close to magic for Big D. I really loved that scene. Panhandle -- Jane Penhaligon penhaligon at gmail.com From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 21:11:44 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:11:44 -0000 Subject: Rebounding curses (WAS Re:replies to 1000 posts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173830 Someone wrote (Sorry! This discussion has been tracked in a way that has confused me): > So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time > and not the second? Why was the house at Godric's > Hollow destroyed but nothing in the Forbidden Forest? Catlady answered: > Because he had 6 Horcruxes the first time, and only > the accidental Horcrux in Harry the second time. Doug aptly noted: > That doesn't explain anything. You're right, Doug. Hee. The AK did not rebound in the Forbidden Forest, because Lily did not sacrifice herself that time. She only sacrificed herself in Godric's Hollow, and then, since she was dead, she could not sacrifice herself again. The sacrifice protected Harry for that instance in Godric's Hollow. If Lily's sacrifice had protected Harry forever and ever, he would be invincible against Voldemort, no? That would set up a much different story. In addition, the number of Horcruxes does not change the owner's/creator's mortality, other than it is more difficult to find and destroy multiple horcruxes. Joan of Anarchy, who should stop reading and posting -- and get back to work! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 21:20:36 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:20:36 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173831 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > So I was just saying that it was not part of Harry's development to > be humbled and see a real connection between himself and the uglier > parts of his enemies, which I consider a bare minimum of a character > who's a model of compassion. Sure there's times when he shows > compassion, but never in ways that I imagine any reader of the book > wouldn't easily show as well. There's times, actually, where Harry- > and maybe not just Harry--seem to be singled out as impressive for > doing stuff that seems pretty ordinary to me--by which I don't mean > the reader has necessarily been in the same situation, but if they > were put in that situation, they probably would. In many ways I'd > actually consider Harry the opposite of a role model for this > particular virtue. I don't mean that as a total slam on Harry in > general, he just doesn't really seem to be about that particular > virtue. > Alla: Oh. I think you are a better person than me then, I am not joking. I do think that those two examples in book 6 when Harry shows compassion to Tom and Draco Malfoy are pretty extraordinary to me. I would deeply respect anybody who would be able to show compassion, no matter how short lived to the killer of one's parents AND the would be killer of one's mentor. I am really really doubting that I would be able to do that, if I were in such situation. So, yeah, the fact that Harry was able to do that IS pretty extraordinary to me. And the fact that it was short lived showed to me that Harry is not perfect, but the fact that it was **there**, I found amasing. JMO, Alla From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 21:23:22 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:23:22 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173832 Debbie wrote: > Would you rather DD allow Harry to face Voldemort > without any defenses? Would you rather Harry not > have known the prophesy? That he be treated like > any other kid at Hogwarts and, when this really > mean Voldy tried to smote him, be caught off guard? Not at all! As I said before I didn't want anybody to interpret my remarks as a criticism of Dumbledore, far far from it! Dumbledore did what had to be done, if he had not done it the world would have been a poorer place. Dumbledore acted for the greater good! Sometimes you need to act like a cold hard logical engine. I just didn't think kindly grandfatherly benign Dumbledore had that ability; it turns out I was wrong. Boy was I wrong! When he needed to Dumbledore had the ability to turn his soul into a mafia hit man, and that is to his credit. As the scientist said when examining the monster from the movie Alien, a monster so extraordinarily, so spectacularly, so astronomically hideous that it was almost beautiful: I admire its purity. And now I sign this post with my full name for the first time: Eggplant Gellert Grindelwald From marion11111 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 20:25:50 2007 From: marion11111 at yahoo.com (marion11111) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:25:50 -0000 Subject: Dateline Redemption was Re: Victory for TEWWW EWWW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173833 > > pair_0_docks: On Dateline Sunday the same interview that aired on > > the Today show was, interestingly enough re-editted, (leaving out > this > > earlier comment) and Rowling stated this: "do I think he's a hero? > To > > a point I do, but he's not an unequivocally good character. Snape > is a > > complicated man..." > > > > > Alla: > What? You mean JKR herself edited the interview and did a voice over > it? > > I find it **hilarious** and can only say poor JKR if she felt a need > to do that. > Hilarious!!! Edited ala Slughorn. The Dateline interview contained more conversation on this topic and while she said all the same words, they were spread around differently. NBC also inserted a view of Meredith Whatsis looking incredulous during the Today show exchange. It wasn't in the Dateline section on Snape, but I think it showed up during the Teddy Lupin discussion. When JKR said something about really wanting people to know Teddy was OK, Meredith seemed surprised. marion11111 From tonia_b_90806 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 20:58:50 2007 From: tonia_b_90806 at yahoo.com (Tonia B.) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:58:50 -0000 Subject: Who died that originally wasn't suppose to die. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173834 Hi there LONG TIME FAN, new member to this site. This has already been addressed but I could not find it. Jo said that she reprived the death of one person - we know know that was Arthur Weasley but who do you think were the two that weren't originally suppose to die but did. I think they were Tonks and Lupin - does anyone know for sure from any interview. Tonia B From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Mon Jul 30 21:30:01 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:30:01 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173835 > Eggplant wrote: > I don't see where Dumbledore told Harry that at Kings Cross he > expected Harry to live. He told Harry that he didn't die because > Voldemort had his blood and he was still alive, and Voldemort was > still alive because the snake was still alive. Anne Squires: Voldemort became mortal or rather vulnerable to death when Nagini was killed. However, the destruction of Nagini did not kill Voldemort. It merely meant he could be killed. Let's suppose the snake had been destroyed before Harry entered the woods. If Harry had entered the woods after Nagini's destruction and faced Voldemort unarmed the exact same result would have taken place. Harry would not have died because LV would not have been dead. Destroying the seven Horcruxes did not kill LV because there was still another bit of soul left in LV. LV's soul had been divided into eighths, not sevenths. Harry would be alive until somebody killed LV; but, as I said, killing/destroying the seventh Horcrux in and of itself does not accomplish LV's death. Eggplant: Dumbledore told Snape > that he expected Harry to destroy the snake before he confronted > Voldemort for the last time and he expected Harry to die. Anne Squires: I don't think he wanted Snape (or Harry for that matter) to know that Harry would not have to die. If Harry didn't believe that he was going to his death then LV would have smelled a rat and would not have acted as he needed to. DD misled Snape so that Harry, in turn, would be misled, imho, of course. Eggplant: Seems to me > a flesh and blood Dumbledore would have more incentive to tell the > truth to Snape than a ethereal Dumbledore would have to tell the truth > to Harry; we have already seen examples of ghosts that are ashamed of > themselves and want Harry to think well of them. I can't think of any > reason Dumbledore would lie to Snape about that, I can think of a > reason Dumbledore, even at the very end, would be let us say, > economical with the truth. After 7 books we have learned that even > when Dumbledore tells the truth to Harry it is never the whole truth. > > And did you notice how many times when Harry asked a question > Dumbledore would tell him that he already knew, and sure enough he > did! Much of the information in that chapter came from Harry not > Dumbledore, and perhaps all of it did. I think JKR is giving us > permission (if we want to) to interpret it to mean Harry (and > Voldemort) were just knocked out and Harry's subconscious was putting > the last peaces of the puzzle together. Anne Squires: That's an interesting reading of the King's Cross chapter. However, as I said, I think DD lied to Snape and in the KC experience DD was not lying. Also, I didn't see any indication that LV had been knocked out. He AKed Harry. In that act he destroyed the soul bit in Harry (or at least he split if off from Harry). LV wasn't knocked out as well. Remember, when Neville destroyed the seventh Horcrux that didn't destroy LV. LV could have survived with one eighth of his soul. Destroying the Horcruxes only made LV mortal, destroying the Horcruxes did not kill off LV. If he and Harry had not dueled he could have escaped to make even more Horcruxes. Anne Squires > From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 21:32:56 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:32:56 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic (wasRe: Deathly Hallows Reactio...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173836 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > JKR apparently looks at the world around her and thinks, "I > > know in my heart that a quarter of the people out there are > > evil, half of them are okay, and there's one quarter that's > > just unquestionably good." > > It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. And it > > cumlminates in a rather ugly book with a rather ugly message. > >>Shagufta: > > So you think the world is made up of good people and only good > > people? This world of ours where murder and torture and > > terrorism are a sad reality - this world is made up of good > > people? > > > >>Shagufta: > Hi > Actually i was responding to the fact that you contrasted JK's > (alleged) world view with Anne Frank's. I thought you were saying > that unlike Anne Frank, who went through hell and still retained > the optimistic view of 'people are basically good' JK had a very > cynical view of the world and the people in it. Betsy Hp: That's what I was saying, yes. I'm obviously guessing as to JKR's actual world view, but that's the message DH is giving, IMO. > >>Shagufta: > And my point is that, if that is her philosophy, i think it is more > realistic than saying 'everyone is good' Betsy Hp: I disagree. I'll admit to being a bit of an optimist, but I really prefer to think that on the whole, most people are basically good. That there's a fixable reason societies descend into madness, and that a prime function of civilization is limiting or fixing those reasons. And that's something DH does not do. Sydney brought this up in another thread, and I think her main point got missed by quite a few. But I do think there's a tendency, especially among people under enormous pressure to designate a group as their scapegoat, their "other". And I think it's something to *fight* against, not accept as just a reality of life. Throughout history we've seen what happens when scapegoating is accepted if not out and out codified. And we've also seen that it's possible to fight the urge to scapegoat, to not designate a convenient "other" to bare the weight of a people's burdens. The vast difference between how Germany was treated at the end of WWI and the end of WWII is I think a good example. The difference between how the US treated Japanese-Americans during WWII, how they treated a defeated Japan, and even how they're treating Muslim-Americans today is another. What I saw JKR setting up throughout the series was a people under enormous pressure, forced into such deep hiding they brought *all* of their animals including their insects with them, designating a scapegoat: Slytherin. Slytherin, like Germans post-WWI, designated their own scapegoats: Muggle-borns. It appeared to me to be an obvious and vicious cycle. So I'll admit, I expected JKR to see this as a problem to be solved. But then again, I studied the Holocaust quite a bit back in the day, with a particular interest in why it occurred. The treatment of Germany after WWI practically begged for a Hitler figure to arise. So it surprised me, rather unpleasantly, to see the Potter series end on an end of WWI note, rather than an end of WWII note. Especially in our world today, where I think it'd be a mistake to, for example, lump all Muslims together with Muslim terrorists if we have a hope of defeating those terrorists, it's very odd IMO for a children's book to come out and sort of encourage just that sort of stereotyping. ie, If some of a certain sort are bad, then they all are bad. Oh, and it's a badness *we* (as opposed to *them*) can never fall into. Honestly though, I've come to the conclusion that JKR didn't *mean* for this message to permeate her books. I suspect she didn't mean to make the Slytherins (as exemplified by Snape and Draco) quite so human. Which is probably part of the reason both characters shrank, rather than grew, in DH. I think she meant to write a Roald Dahl type story where the villains are cardboard and cartoony (no one feels sorry for Veruca Salt, and no one relates to her either). But JKR's gift is breathing life into what could be a very flat character. I think her gift came back to bite her in the end. (Though I'd also say seven books filled with cartoony villains *and* our infuriatingly perfect hero would have been a bit much. I got into the series *because* of the depth of the characters.) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173756 > >>Lisa (providing live-chat transcript): > > Jaclyn: Did lily ever have feelings back for snape > J.K. Rowling: Yes. She might even have grown to love him > romantically (she certainly loved him as a friend) if he had not > loved Dark Magic so much, and been drawn to such loathesome people > and acts. > Betsy Hp: ::sigh:: So are supposed to think there's such a thing as "bad" magic now? It'd help if JKR would settle on one thing or another. Because first we have Harry feeling like the dark magic loving, half- blood Prince is his bestest friend. Then we have him despising Draco for his love of the dark arts (never demonstrated on page, IIRC). Neither of the two are ever addressed again. Then we have Harry being an absolute natural at casting the Imperius and being all sorts of triumphant when he successfully casts a Crucio. Oh, and of course there's Dumbledore encouraging, nay, *browbeating* Snape into casting an AK. And there's no discussion of those things either. Oh consistency, how I miss thee. Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 21:38:34 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:38:34 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173837 Eggplant wrote: > I don't see where Dumbledore told Harry that at Kings Cross he expected Harry to live. He told Harry that he didn't die because Voldemort had his blood and he was still alive, and Voldemort was still alive because the snake was still alive. Dumbledore told Snape that he expected Harry to destroy the snake before he confronted Voldemort for the last time and he expected Harry to die. Seems to me a flesh and blood Dumbledore would have more incentive to tell the truth to Snape than a ethereal Dumbledore would have to tell the truth to Harry; we have already seen examples of ghosts that are ashamed of themselves and want Harry to think well of them. I can't think of any reason Dumbledore would lie to Snape about that, I can think of a reason Dumbledore, even at the very end, would be let us say, economical with the truth. After 7 books we have learned that even when Dumbledore tells the truth to Harry it is never the whole truth. > Carol responds: It does seem that before DD learned that Voldemort had used Harry's blood to resurrect him, DD feared that Harry would have to die. After that, he tried to find a way to make the AK rebound on Voldemort as it did at Godric's Hollow, but only after the Horcruxes were destroyed. At any rate, certainly by "King's Cross," Dumbledore knew that Harry had a good chance of surviving--and if he failed, he would know that death is not so terrible after all (unless you're Voldemort). I think that flesh-and-blood Dumbledore could not tell Snape the whole truth because he didn't want Snape to tell Harry the whole truth. As I see it, the whole point of Snape's message to Harry, the whole urgency of it, was that Harry had to face Voldemort believing that he was going to die, willingly sacrificing himself like his mother before him, only his sacrifice was for the WW, not just for one person. Love, sacricial love, is Harry's ultimate weapon. And had he faced Voldemort knowing that the drop of blood and the Elder wand/Hallows could save him, his willing sacrifice could never have happened. He had to go into the arena bravely facing death, and he could not fight back or his sacrifice would not be a sacrifice. (Think of the difference between James's death and Lily's.) What Harry had to know, what Snape had to tell him at the last possible moment, was that his scar contained a soul bit and that Harry must die by Voldemort's hand. No wonder Snape is horrified. But Harry, hearing the message, would know that he was the last Horcrux and can only destroy it by, in DD's words, "setting out to meet his own death." Neither Snape nor Harry can know that Harry has some chance of surviving the encounter that will make Voldemort mortal. Thank goodness JKR found a way to kill the soul bit in the scar without killing Harry and found a way for him to go back to destroy Voldemort permanently and to see that death is not so terrible after all, so that he was no longer afraid. (That was always my biggest objection to Horcrux!Harry. If Harry died, how could he destroy Voldemort. And how could he destroy Voldemort if the last accidental Horcrux still remained in his scar? The Hallows subplot, confusing as it is, makes that possible.) Eggplant: > And did you notice how many times when Harry asked a question Dumbledore would tell him that he already knew, and sure enough he did! Much of the information in that chapter came from Harry not Dumbledore, and perhaps all of it did. I think JKR is giving us permission (if we want to) to interpret it to mean Harry (and Voldemort) were just knocked out and Harry's subconscious was putting the last peaces of the puzzle together. Carol: The near-death experience interpretation, which Geoff and I and perhaps others have presented, seems to be fairly close to JKR's own interpretation. She talks about King's Cross as "the gateway between two worlds" in the chat transcript if you're interested. (Sort of explains how ghosts can choose not to "go on," as well.) http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/7/30/j-k-rowling-web-chat-transcript Carol, who sees the Dead!Dumbledore of the King's Cross scene as the redeemed Dumbledore, imparting wisdom to Harry and trusting him to make the choice that will save both himself and the WW From joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 21:54:07 2007 From: joanofanarchy at sbcglobal.net (joan of anarchy) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:54:07 -0000 Subject: Who died that originally wasn't suppose to die. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173838 Tonia B asked: > she reprived the death of one person - we know know that was Arthur > Weasley but who do you think were the two that weren't originally > suppose to die but did. I think they were Tonks and Lupin - does > anyone know for sure from any interview. I believe on the Dateline interview last night she said they were Tonks and Lupin. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 21:57:15 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:57:15 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic (wasRe: Deathly Hallows Reactio...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173839 > > > >>Shagufta: > > Hi > > Actually i was responding to the fact that you contrasted JK's > > (alleged) world view with Anne Frank's. I thought you were saying > > that unlike Anne Frank, who went through hell and still retained > > the optimistic view of 'people are basically good' JK had a very > > cynical view of the world and the people in it. > > Betsy Hp: > That's what I was saying, yes. I'm obviously guessing as to JKR's > actual world view, but that's the message DH is giving, IMO. > > > >>Shagufta: > > And my point is that, if that is her philosophy, i think it is more > > realistic than saying 'everyone is good' > > Betsy Hp: > I disagree. I'll admit to being a bit of an optimist, but I really > prefer to think that on the whole, most people are basically good. > That there's a fixable reason societies descend into madness, and > that a prime function of civilization is limiting or fixing those > reasons. And that's something DH does not do. Alla: I don't know. I snipped out the most of your message, because the mention of Anne Frank just made me realise how much I respect JKR's world view. I mean, yeah, she remained optimistic and where did it get her? Woudn't that be better if she was fully aware that just as there people in the world who will save jews, there are people who will betray them in the blink of an eye? I mean, whether it would save her, probably not, but one would never know. I am reminded of half of my grandmother's family who was killed by Natzis in Belorussia because they did not want to **run**, they were thinking that Natsi are really **good** people who would do them no harm. Thank goodness that at least couple of her brothers and sisters and my grandmother were nervous enough to leave. I deeply deeply respect JKR's world view and message that not all people are redeemable, because well, maybe I am growing more and more cynical, but that is what I observe and Dumbledore's " this is something that is beyond our help" about Voldemort's soul ( paraphrased) resonated very deeply with me. I am not writing from **any** religious POV by the way, I was raised an atheist and now my only belief is that there is some sort of higher power up there, nothing more concrete. I love stories about redemption as much as any other people, but no matter how much I love "crime and punishment" for example, from what I observe in RL ( from the newspapers and TV of course) people who kill once, often enough go back to kill again, again, again instead of showing remorse for what they did. I am sure there are some people who do show remorse, but my point is that not **ALL** do. I for once take my hat off to JKR for recognising that not everybody is redeemable ( IMO of course) and yes, putting it in children's book ( is it a children's book now, I am not sure) - or this is how I think of it in any event. Maybe the message is indeed that eradication of evil is possible only in baby steps? I do not know, Alla. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 21:57:19 2007 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:57:19 -0000 Subject: Who died that originally wasn't suppose to die. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173840 Tonia: Hi there LONG TIME FAN, new member to this site. This has already been addressed but I could not find it. Jo said that she reprived the death of one person - we know know that was Arthur Weasley but who do you think were the two that weren't originally suppose to die but did. I think they were Tonks and Lupin - does anyone know for sure from any interview. Juli: You are right. Here're the quotes from the Dateline interview ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20026225/ ) Remus (and Tonks) were exchanged for Mr Weasley. "If there's one character I couldn't bear to part with, it's Arthur Weasley," Rowling admitted for the first time publicly in an interview with TODAY's Meredith Vieira. Hence, in "Phoenix," Mr. Weasley survives a snakebite just barely. "I think part of the reason for that is there were very few good fathers in the book," said Rowling. "In fact, you could make a very good case for Arthur Weasley being the only good father in the whole series." The theme resonates throughout the books with the deaths of Sirius Black and Albus Dumbledore, Harry's flawed father figures. And that's why, in the Battle of Hogwarts, Remus Lupin, Harry's only remaining father figure, and Nymphadora Tonks die, in the process creating another orphan in their son, Teddy. "I think one of the most devastating things about war is the children left behind," Rowling said. "As happened in the first war when Harry's left behind, I wanted us to see another child left behind. And it made it very poignant that it was their newborn son." Juli From kaleeyj at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 21:58:21 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:58:21 -0000 Subject: Rebounding curses (WAS Re:replies to 1000 posts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173841 Doug: > > So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time > > and not the second? Why was the house at Godric's > > Hollow destroyed but nothing in the Forbidden Forest? > Joan: > The AK did not rebound in the Forbidden Forest, because Lily did not > sacrifice herself that time. She only sacrificed herself in Godric's > Hollow, and then, since she was dead, she could not sacrifice herself > again. The sacrifice protected Harry for that instance in Godric's > Hollow. > Bex now: And of course, the reason that LV didn't die either time was the Horcruxes still intact. I'm still giddy about Harry Potter not only being the only person known to have *survived* an AK, but also the only person known to have *recovered* from one. Reminds me so much of Monty Python ("Well... I got better!") I'll be giggling about that all evening. ~Bex From dvdavins at pobox.com Mon Jul 30 22:05:41 2007 From: dvdavins at pobox.com (barkingiguana) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:05:41 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173842 Lisa: > So you're saying that a fictional war should be sanitized with a > fairy-tale ending? Everyone lives, the bad guys go to jail, the > good guys all live happily ever after? JKR is trying (and > succeeding, IMO) to make her fictional world feel as real as > possible... Iguana: Actually, I was disappointed (and immensely releaved) that she didn't go far enough in showing the loss of war. I'm sure there some people who identified with or liked Dobby and/or Tonks enough for the point to be driven home. But I think the story would have been more real if there was a death that really hurt. Someone like Hagrid, Molly, or even Ron. For having been in the middle of a war, the Order should consider themselves lucky for having gotten of as easily as they did. -- Dvd Avins (The Barking Iguana) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jmwcfo at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 22:03:16 2007 From: jmwcfo at yahoo.com (jmwcfo) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:03:16 -0000 Subject: Hegwig In-Reply-To: <658617.97514.qm@web54106.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173843 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Denise Leblanc wrote: > > Hedwig in my mind had to die. This showed they had the right Potter. With there being 7 the owl dying was the only way the rest were fake. > Denise JW: I believe the reason Hedwig had to die was to increase HRH's isolation later on in the book. With Hedwig dead, there is one fewer way for them to communicate with their friends and allies. Of course, it also increases the overall sense of loss and danger related to the war. However, I do not believe it had anything to do with the DEs ability to select the correct HP. Hedwig was well-hidden; it was only an accident the she was killed. Under the conditions of the battle, it is not obvious how the DEs would have determined that she was a real owl (the other 6 HPs had stuffed animals) and had been killed. Further, it was later surmised that it was HP's treatment of Stan Shunpike that revealed the real HP. Three days ago, I was determined to catch up on the 500 messages that had accummulated in my inbox. After three days of doggedly reading these posts, I am now a mere 1400 behind. Would you all mind stopping your onslaught until I catch up? From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Jul 30 22:09:49 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:09:49 -0000 Subject: JKR's live chat -- excerpts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173844 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > I'm sure the transcript is available from the Bloomsbury site, but > here are the key points I gleaned rom JKR's live chat: > Hickengruendler: I snipped everything, and just wanted to add, that she also said, that the diary Horcrux was created with Moaning Myrtle's murder. And may I just say, how glad I am about this statement. I have no idea, if she made this up on the spot, but nonetheless, at the very leas she seems to agree that *Riddle murdered Myrtle* and that it was not technically done by the Basilisk, so that his soul wouldn't split because of this. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Jul 30 22:17:57 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:17:57 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173845 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > So I was just saying that it was not part of Harry's development to > be humbled and see a real connection between himself and the uglier > parts of his enemies, which I consider a bare minimum of a character > who's a model of compassion. Pippin: But surely you don't have to be an evildoer yourself to have compassion for evildoers? In fact, that sort of compassion might read as self-serving. I think Harry does understands that he, Snape and Riddle were all damaged through abandonment, and that it was luck more than virtue that he, having received more love than they did, took less damage than they. Surely baby Riddle and baby Snape haddonenothing to make their families reject them. Harry, at any rate, has no trouble at all understanding why they were so bitter and angry once he has learned their history. I haven't read all the posts, and what's more, my copy of DH is somewhere in lost luggage limbo (grrrr!) but I'm concerned that it's rapidly becoming fanon that there's been absolutely no change in the sorting process. IIRC, that's not so. The Sorting process was a mystery and a Big Secret to Muggleborn and pureblood alike in Harry's year; Ron thought he might have to wrestle a troll. That isn't the case any more, to judge by Harry's conversation with Al. So parents have relinquished some control and they're doing what's right, helping the kids make their own choices rather taking the easy path of puppetmastering them into the House the parents think is best. Naturally Harry hopes that Al would be chosen for Gryffindor, and has some concerns about Slytherin still, but I think it's clear that it's better by far in Harry's eyes to be a brave Slytherin than a cowardly Gryffindor. If you can only be brave for selfish reasons, that's still better than being an altruistic coward. As we've learned, the Slytherins do *not* always save their own skins first, and can fight fiercely for their beliefs, right or wrong. I doubt any attempt to abolish the House would succeed unless the Slytherins themselves wanted it abolished, which they clearly don't, and why should they? Pippin From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Jul 30 22:18:14 2007 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:18:14 -0000 Subject: Alternate book ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173846 > Iguana: > Actually, I was disappointed (and immensely releaved) that she didn't go > far enough in showing the loss of war. I'm sure there some people who > identified with or liked Dobby and/or Tonks enough for the point to be > driven home. But I think the story would have been more real if there > was a death that really hurt. Someone like Hagrid, Molly, or even Ron. > For having been in the middle of a war, the Order should consider > themselves lucky for having gotten of as easily as they did. Hickengruendler: I think this actually depends on who are your favourite characters. She killed Sirius, Dumbledore, Snape, Lupin and Fred, who were favourite characters of many fans, and I am sure for these fans it hurt a lot. My favourites actually all survived (except Snape, but I was sure he would be a goner ever since finishing book 6, therefore I was prepared for it.), therefore I'm rather relieved. Not that I wanted any of these characters to die, I'm particularly feeling sorry for George and felt sorry for Harry after finishing OotP, but it could have been much worse for me, and as it seems, for you as well. But nonetheless, some of those she killed were pretty beloved characters. Given the reactions I see in fandom, even though I know it is hard to generalize of to draw conclusion to HP-Fans outside of internet fandom, I think that all of the deads I mentioned above were more beloved characters than for example Hagrid or Molly. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 22:18:23 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:18:23 -0000 Subject: Authorial intention vs. interpretation (Was: Hero Status Redeemed ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173847 pair_0_docks: > > As for questioning the importance of authorial intentionality I > found the comments posted regarding that issue to be interesting and > informative. Also I agree with them to the extent that sometimes an > author might not be able to step back and appreciate a greater depth > to the character or perhaps other connections that a person brings to them due to her past experiences that can limit one's view of who the character might be (just like certain people we might meet in life). > > (Side note: I have thoroughly enjoyed reading justcarol67's views > into Snape's character as well. Very insightful IMO.) Carol: Thank you very much. And BTW, I think that JKR is still considering her view of Snape (and other aspects of the story). If authors' views of their own works were definitive, literary critics would be out of business! (Als, IMO, much of what an author writes comes from the unconscious mind. Just because she didn't intentionally put a symbol into the books doesn't mean that it's not legitimate to interpret it as one if that fits the text. Also, she may not be consciously aware of the mythological and Christian influences that permeate the text because they're so much a part of her worldview. At any rate, while JKR's comments cast light on her intentions, it's clear that even she hasn't fully grasped a character as complex as Snape, and as for Dumbledore, I think the dumbledore who exists in her mind and the Dumbledore we see on the page are rather far apart. IOW, all of us bring something to the discussion that others may not see. If an interpretation fits with the text, even if it doesn't fit with her her stated intentions or her view of a character, it's still legitimate. OTOH, if she's explaining a plot complication that the reader doesn't understand, I think we can take her word for it. But we're going to see Flints and inconsistencies and plot holes that she just doesn't see. (Hagrid's predecessor Ogg, anyone? That would make the Weasleys older than Hagrid instead of just a bit older than Lucius Malfoy.) Some questions should, IMO, remain unanswered. If she's asked what's beyond the Veil, what Harry would have seen if he'd "gone on," I hope that she's brave enough to say "I don't know" or "That's up to the reader." It's enough to know that there is an afterlife (hinted by all the references to the soul in earlier books and by the Veil in OoP). Death is the last great adventure. Dumbledore's hand is healed. Lupin is younger and healthier. Sirius is as he was before Azkaban. That's all we need to know. As for what happened to Ariana (or even Umbridge in the forest), I think we should leave that up to the imagination as well, especially bearing in mind that the primary readers of these books are supposed to be children. Carol, glad to know that someone loved George despite his missing ear and hoping that JKR will confine her future comments to similar "factual" tidbits, understanding that the printed word is open to interpretation beyond the author's conscious intention and that it's not up to her to tell us what it means From kaleeyj at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 22:25:36 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:25:36 -0000 Subject: Mourning Fred In-Reply-To: <6467e1f0707301226l576816c8jfaa2de36aa43a2d6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173848 > Asli > Did anyone else think that Fred's death was not really influencing? > When you receive very bad news, it takes couple of days to sink in and > to feel sad. I felt like we only saw that stage, although Jo tried to > write the mourning. And also, we didn't see how George reacted. I > think it was a very big hole in the book, we should have seen and felt > grief over Fred with George. > Also did anyone else think that killing Fred was somewhat worse than > killing George? > Bex now: I cried over Fred. I expected one of the twins was a goner, and I had a sneaking suspicion that it would be Fred (he's the ringleader - he gets the better lines - etc.), but I was completely unprepared for it, especially right on the heels of him extending the hand of forgiveness to Percy - I cheered for both of them then. (I expected the twins to be the last ones to welcome Percy back - certainly not the first.) I think that since Fred got the better lines and he was the ringleader, that the reader felt a little more pain than if it had been George. Naturally, the Weasleys would mourn a brother, a twin, and son, no matter which one it would have been. Part of the lack of mourning was timing. By that point the denouement was set in motion - Harry has the most motivation at that point to find the snake and finish the job. They were in the middle of a battle, and I think that the most they could do for Fred was what Harry and Percy did - they pulled his body out of harm's way - no time for memorials. Once the final battle was over, we are treated only to Harry's thoughts - we don't see the Weasleys at all reacting to Fred's death, and I think that Harry would have felt like an intruder into that particular scene anyway. (I don't think we would have seen a large outburst of emotion from George - he'd have saved that for when he was alone.) I felt at that point that Harry needed to finish his mission, and apparently JKR did, too - I wanted him to report to Dumbledore that all was completed and LV was defeated, and then just have a quiet moment as the reader to reflect on Dora (a much preferred name over Tonks, in my book), Lupin, Colin, and Fred, before continuing on to the Epilogue. Showing us the grief on Molly and Arthur's faces would not have really had a place in the story, and it would have not been a proper memorial to Fred anyway, IMO. I think it would have been nice to see a mention in the Epilogue about the Weasley Wizarding Wheezes best-selling product became Fred's Firebombs, or a mention that George named his oldest son Fred, but I honestly feel that that's all that was missing from the story. ~Bex From phnurseerin at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 20:59:55 2007 From: phnurseerin at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:59:55 -0000 Subject: DH loved it! In-Reply-To: <784916.74997.qm@web26709.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173849 > Christina: > I have to say I loved it and found none of it boring I think people should just take it for what it is (and not look for inner meanings) and that is that it's a fantastic book. I shall now have to start all over again. > > I am sooooo glad to see that someone else out there feels the same way I do!!!!! I also am new to the group and have been lurking for a while now, and I have to say that there are so few people in this group that really seem to be able to enjoy this book without scrutinizing every single word in it. I am a Southern Baptist in the Heart of Dixie (Alabama of course) and I have caught quite a lot of heck for even reading these novels. My counter arguement has always been that this was simply a childrens book and should be entertaining and not seen as some sort of manual for witchcraft or blasphemous antichristian material. How can I make that argument with people continually making it so much more! I realize that even JKR has recognized the political and religious undertones in the book, however I dont think at any point she intended that to be the soul purpose of the book. I have never written a novel myself but I can imagine that if I did it wouldn't contain parts that would reflect my values and opinions in it. I do not however think that I would want the main topic of discussion around my novel to be my what I hidden message I was trying to hide in it. For instance, the death of Lupin. I see that this is a story about a war and that some of the characters must perish, so why can't it be just that instead of somehow related to his standings in society as a werewolf? That being said, I hope I have not offended anyone, i am only expressing my opinion. Don't mean to step on any toes. I do loce reading posts concerning plot lines, favorite lines, etc.(Speaking of great lines how great was Molly Weasley's "NOT MY DAUGHTER BITCH!" I loved that! So not the typically Molly, but made her very enduring to me I can relate to her as the ole mother hen!) Erin From dvdavins at pobox.com Mon Jul 30 22:21:04 2007 From: dvdavins at pobox.com (barkingiguana) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:21:04 -0000 Subject: Camping and Despair - loving the trio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173850 Stel: > I found the camping trip dragged a little, but there were many > Moments in there that I loved, and you are so right, they're all > moments where the characters of HRH deepen and their true, best > selves begin to shine. Iguana: One such moment was when Ron showed discretion by not revealing to Harry (or to us) the details of whatever travail his future wife went through destroying a horcrux. -- Dvd Avins (The Barking Iguana) From kaleeyj at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 22:31:19 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:31:19 -0000 Subject: DH: Short - A continuity error? or some other explanation? (chapt 9 spoiler) In-Reply-To: <97346.32465.qm@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173851 gary: > > This kind of jumped out at me on my first read. > > > > Early on, Hermione reveals that she altered her > > parents' memory and > > sent them packing to Australia. Later, in chapter > > nine, (around page > > 190-200 or so, I don't have the book at hand here at > > work) they were > > going to do a memory charm on the two death eaters > > that went after > > them in the cafe, and when Ron said he'd never done > > a memory charm, > > Hermione claimed that she had also never done a > > memory charm. So how > > did she alter her parents' memory without a memory > > charm? bamf: > I believe mugglenet.com sorted that out. What Hermy > did to her parents was not the same as the memory > charm "Obliviate". It would seem to be a much > trickier working as she would have to give her parents > fake memories (new names and all), and not just make > them forget something. It's like the difference > between being in the witness protection and having > amnesia. Bex now: Good comparison bamf! That's how I wrote that detail off: modifying a memory is much different that deleting one. And JK confirmed this in the online chat - Hermione had modified her parents memories, not Obliviated them. ~Bex From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 30 22:32:38 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:32:38 -0000 Subject: Lilly's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: <1185819380.26454.1202839745@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173852 Ok maybe I'm just a little bit dim but I just don't understand this thread, this "Lilly's eyes another let down" thread. As a charter (and recently resigned) member or the "I hate Snape club" I find it difficult to imagine a more poignant scene. Snape is seconds away from death and he looks at a boy that he still hates and his last words are "look at me". Snape is a complete basted without a doubt, and that a indisputable fact. Snape is a complete basted, and there are no if and or not about it. I hate Snape with a passion, I really do; so why the hell were tears rolling down my checks when I read the line "look at me"? What is going on? what the hell is wrong with me?! Eggplant Gellert Grindelwald From erikog at one.net Mon Jul 30 22:42:49 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:42:49 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173853 > colebiancardi: > > I do wonder about that quote. It wasn't that Snape "abandoned" his > > post - he was run off. If he had stayed, he would have been killed > > or he would have killed. Not exactly a *win-win* situation. Not to > > *question* JKR's answer, but that reply doesn't connect with The > > Sacking of Severus Snape chapter. What was he supposed to do? I do > > not agree that he abandoned his post. > > > SSSusan: > Just weighing in to say my eyes bugged out a bit when I read that > response, too. Does *anybody* here have a real inkling of what JKR > was thinking of when she chose the words 'abandoned his post'? If > so, please pipe up! This is my theory: Snape had 2 jobs at Hogwarts: 1.) to continue to protect Harry/forward Dumbledore's plan; 2.) to take care of the students of Hogwarts. When Snape was engaged in battle with McG, he had to make a choice: 1.) die or be disarmed by McG, either way being removed from the real action (including protecting Harry); 2.) kill or incapicate McG, effectively taking one of Hogwarts' greatest defenders out of action; 3.) confess he's a good guy, to make McG back off, and ruin his cover; 4.) run, to keep his cover, and to allow Hogwarts to have within it someone solely devoted to the good of the students. He chose #4--to depart, and give the job of governing Hogwarts to McG. Since the main reason he leaves is to continue his job of protecting Harry, he's really given up his post as Headmaster of Hogwarts to McG. So, he abandoned post--for good reasons, but he still left his job at Hogwarts. I thought about how this fit with Dumbledore's example, since he too fled Hogwarts at one point (from Umbridge and the aurors), but he's reinstated after the Umbridge reign. Thus, when he dies, he's still serving officially, and he gets a portrait. Snape doesn't get the chance to be reinstated and to die in office, like AD, so he doesn't automatically get a portrait. Krista (who would love to hear Snape snarking away in the portrait!) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 30 22:42:34 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:42:34 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Tone on the List Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173854 Greetings from Hexquarters! The list elves have noticed that fuses seem just a tiny bit short these days at HPfGU. (What? You all didn't notice that? ) Having reached the end of the series, it is unsurprising that emotions are running deep and reactions to the various outcomes are strong. We would like to remind everyone that, in spite of this -- no, really, especially *because* of this -- we all need to be attentive to how our words are likely to come across to others. At this time, we would greatly appreciate everyone stopping to make another careful reading of what our posting rules have to say: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do not flame, send obscenities or spam, engage in other discourteous, disrespectful or illegal behavior or discuss list policy onlist (send comments to HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com instead). We welcome debate, but do not attack or insult other list members. If you disagree with someone's message, no matter how strongly, please respect the other person's right to his or her own opinion. Cite canon to support your arguments and give chapter references; when expressing an opinion (as opposed to citing canon) or other beliefs (e.g., religious) be sure to make this clear ("I believe..." or "In my opinion..."). If you do wish to argue against the post, do so by building up your own case, rather than just knocking down the other person's. Your post should advance the discussion and not merely repeat arguments you've already made. There is no need to have the last word in a discussion. Difficult as it is, when faced with irreconcilable differences, list etiquette means it is better to walk away. Also consider how other members of our diverse international community might react to your post and remember that sarcasm can be difficult to convey in written form. When in doubt, save your message overnight and reread it in the light of dawn. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ We want to reiterate that HPfGU is a place where everyone's right to express his or her opinion needs to be upheld. That being the case, we ask that members *take care* in expressing those opinions, try to be understanding of the differences which exist in our reactions and interpretations, and not try to convince others of what they should or should not feel. Thanks, The List Elves From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 22:55:54 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:55:54 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173856 > Lupinlore: > It is the tragedy of Snape, however, that he would find Harry's pity > and compassion infuriating and worthless. Before Snape's death, I > think Harry represents something very important for him -- a way > out. If he could come to terms with Harry, he could in many ways > come to terms with his own past and the anger and hatred and > bitterness that have warped him and twisted him into a stunted image > of what he could/should have been. So, in that sense, Harry could be > a savior to Snape in that he offers an opportunity for salvation. > But, as shown in the scene where Snape reveals his patronus, the > damage and bitterness and hate and cruelty run too deep for > salvation. Snape cannot find it within himself to embrace the zgirnius: It seems to me that by your analysis, Snape undergoes a deathbed conversion. By the time he and Harry come face to face, Snape is moments from death and not capable (physically) of extended speech. But his decision to provide Harry with such a variety of memories that trace his life from his first meeting with Lily through that final year is surely the acceptance you are looking for on Snape's part, and a far more meaningful gesture than a simple 'yes' said to Albus Dumbledore in an earlier scene could be. Albus is not the guy Snape wronged, after all. From muellem at bc.edu Mon Jul 30 22:56:06 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:56:06 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173857 > > SSSusan: > > Just weighing in to say my eyes bugged out a bit when I read that > > response, too. Does *anybody* here have a real inkling of what JKR > > was thinking of when she chose the words 'abandoned his post'? If > > so, please pipe up! >krista7 wrote: > He chose #4--to depart, and give the job of governing Hogwarts to > McG. Since the main reason he leaves is to continue his job > of protecting Harry, he's really given up his post as Headmaster > of Hogwarts to McG. So, he abandoned post--for good reasons, but > he still left his job at Hogwarts. > > I thought about how this fit with Dumbledore's example, since > he too fled Hogwarts at one point (from Umbridge and the aurors), > but he's reinstated after the Umbridge reign. Thus, when he dies, > he's still serving officially, and he gets a portrait. Snape doesn't > get the chance to be reinstated and to die in office, like AD, so > he doesn't automatically get a portrait. > colebiancardi: ahh, the nitpicker in me asks - did Dumbledore *abandon his post* when he chose to have Snape kill him? In a way, DD got to flee Hogwarts by using Snape to kill him in the manner of the type of death & the time that DD wanted. So, in a way, DD also abandoned his post at Hogwarts because he defied the normal course of fate and got Severus to kill him on command, as DD wanted to go out peacefully and not violently. I see no difference between the choice DD made at the end of HBP and what Snape did in DH - they were both forced to leave Hogwarts. I don't think Snape *chose* to leave - he was forced to. He was trying to find Harry, as his conversation with McGonagall shows us. I believe that he wanted to give Harry the information at that point at time. But then he was attacked upon and he could not be killed - he needed to give Harry the information. And he obviously didn't want to harm any of the staff or students, so he was forced to run. colebiancardi From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jul 30 23:13:09 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:13:09 -0000 Subject: Theories...a load of waffle ? In-Reply-To: <001801c7d29a$99a19ad0$2e01a8c0@MainComputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly" wrote: > > I'm re-reading DH and came across this, which I personally had to chuckle at. > > Scholastic ed., pg. 17. It's the Memoriam write up about Dumbledore, naming some of the famous people he had correspondence with when he was either in school or seemingly just out of school. > "....and Adalbert Waffling, the magical theoretician..." > > I didn't notice it the first time around but this time I did. I've often heard the expression, "a load of waffle" indicating something that was rubbish or pure speculation. I looked up "Waffling" and one definition is: > "to talk foolishly or without purpose; idle away time talking". > > I love that she named the highly noted magical theoretician that. I think it's funny ! What is she saying about "theories" ? I think she used this name light-heartedly, that it's just one of those word plays that she does. Geoff: Adalbert Waffling first appeared on the list of set books which Harry had for his First Year - (PS "Diagon Alley" p.52 UK edition). There are one or two other amusing names when you look at the subject of the books. Our froiend Bathilda Bagshot also appears on that list. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 23:13:12 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:13:12 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173859 > colebiancardi: > I do wonder about that quote. It wasn't that Snape "abandoned" his > post - he was run off. If he had stayed, he would have been killed or > he would have killed. Not exactly a *win-win* situation. Not to > *question* JKR's answer, but that reply doesn't connect with The > Sacking of Severus Snape chapter. What was he supposed to do? I do > not agree that he abandoned his post. zgirnius: Rowling was, in my view, giving an account of how the school saw it, as it is apparently the school's magic that (usually) causes the portrait to appear. In the wider war against Voldemort, Snape's job was to stay close to Voldemort at least until it was time to give Harry Dumbledore's message, and Snape chose (correctly!) to stay at *that* post, which meant leaving Hogwarts when he did. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 23:20:05 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:20:05 -0000 Subject: JKR confirms again: Snape is a hero In-Reply-To: <713421.55776.qm@web80505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173860 JKR's discussion of Snape in her Leaky interview was extremely heartening to me. I understand completely that authorial intent in "meaningless," because I believe that myself. But it is wonderful to see that Rowling is so astute about her own work, when so many other authors are not. And for those that believe authorial intent is the be-all and end-all (as they are very entitled to do), her words give them something to think about. I am glad to see that I am on the same side with her about Snape, that she has supported him as heroic, that she sees Snape as indeed "attractive" enough for Lily to have appreciated him romantically (if only it weren't for his attraction to the Dark Arts). I didn't see the "stalker Snape" in the text, and I'm glad to see Rowling doesn't either. And as for his appearance! "I think it more likely that he valued other qualities in himself!" As do we, Ms. Rowling. As do we. From dougsamu at golden.net Mon Jul 30 23:21:25 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:21:25 -0400 Subject: Rebounding curses (WAS Re:replies to 1000 posts) Message-ID: <98C35356-DAF7-4E1C-AE05-F3A6B4D58BF7@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173861 doug: > So why was Voldy blasted from his body the first time > and not the second? Why was the house at Godric's > Hollow destroyed but nothing in the Forbidden Forest? Catlady answered: > Because he had 6 Horcruxes the first time, and only > the accidental Horcrux in Harry the second time. Doug aptly noted: > That doesn't explain anything. Joan of Anarchy: You're right, Doug. Hee. The AK did not rebound in the Forbidden Forest, because Lily did not sacrifice herself that time. She only sacrificed herself in Godric's Hollow doug: I am resigning myself to "It's Magic" as the only explanation. The AK rebounded in Godric's Hollow because Lily's protection was in Harry after her death. And the rebounding AK destroyed Voldemort's body and blasted the house apart for no necessary reason, except for emotional excess. However the AK in the forest wasn't rebounded upon Voldy, yet he suffered the effects of something... ___ __ From kaleeyj at gmail.com Mon Jul 30 23:30:05 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:30:05 -0000 Subject: Rebounding curses (WAS Re:replies to 1000 posts) In-Reply-To: <98C35356-DAF7-4E1C-AE05-F3A6B4D58BF7@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173862 doug: > I am resigning myself to "It's Magic" as the only explanation. > > The AK rebounded in Godric's Hollow because Lily's protection was in > Harry after her death. > > And the rebounding AK destroyed Voldemort's body and blasted the > house apart for no necessary reason, except for emotional excess. > > However the AK in the forest wasn't rebounded upon Voldy, yet he > suffered the effects of something... > Bex: I believe that Moldy Shorts felt that Horcrux being destroyed (Harry's piece of Voldy soul) - I think the reason he felt it is that he did it to himself. As opposed to the others, his soul was so damaged that he couldn't determine when any of the others were destroyed, including the last one. But LV himself destroyed his own Horcrux when he AK'd Harry, which I expect has a far greater impact on the Horcrux owner that when someone else does it. Oddly enough, I had wondered after the end of HBP if something wild would happen if someone destroyed their own Horcrux... ~Bex From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Jul 30 23:34:51 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:34:51 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Harry=92s_attitudes_to_dying?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173863 Geoff: I have just started my second read of DH but before I did, I re-read chapter 34 (The Forest Again). I am of the opinion that this is one of the best chapters JKR has written. Despite being the possessor of a Brit stiff upper lip, I was brought close to tears. By chance, I am also working through the film DVDs and am currently watching "Philosopher's Stone" and am approaching the confrontation with Quirrell at the end. (I find that I watch them in dribs and drabs because o other activities). This started me thinking about the number of times Harry has come close to being killed and his attitude and approach to the event. Harry's brushes with death have been varied; some have been unexpected, sometimes out of the blue while some have appeared inescapable to him and I wanted to just work through them to see what other group members can contribute to the findings. The earliest references to Harry feeling that he is going to die are in PS. It starts when Harry decides that, in Dumbledore's absence, he needs to take action: `"I'm going out of here tonight and I'm going to try to get to the Stone first." "You're mad!" said Ron. "You can't" said Hermione. "After what McGonagall and Snape have said? You'll be expelled!" "SO WHAT?" Harry shouted. "Don't you understand? Is Snape gets hold of the Stone, Voldemort's coming back! Haven't you heard what it was like when he was trying to take over? There won't be any Hogwarts to get expelled from! He'll flatten it or turn it into a school for the Dark Arts!! Losing points doesn't matter any more, can't you see? D`you think he'll leave you and your families alone if Gryffindor wins the House Cup? If I get caught before I can get to the Stone, well, I'll have to go back to the Dursleys and wait for Voldemort to find me there. It's only dying a bit later than I would have done, because I'm never going over to the Dark Side!..."' (PS "Through the Trapdoor" pp197/98 UK edition) Harry realises the likelihood of being killed at least intellectually. I wonder whether the full emotional meaning has dawned because of his age. It is also interesting that Hermione really hasn't taken on board the relative importance of House Points versus death! When the face off with Quirrell comes, Harry instinctively goes into self-preservation mode: `"Master, I cannot hold him ? my hands ? my hands!" And Quirrell, though pinning Harry to the ground with his knees, le go of his neck and stared, bewildered, at his own palms ? Harry could see they looked burnt, raw, red and shiny. "Then kill him, fool, and be done!" screeched Voldemort. Quirrell raised his hand to perform a deadly curse, but Harry, by instinct, reached up and grabbed Quirrell's face ?` (PS "The Man with Two Faces" pp.213/14 UK edition) Apart from Voldemort's repeated attempts to succeed with an Avada Kedavra curse, possibly one of Harry's closest brushes with death is in COS: `But as warm blood drenched Harry's arms, he felt a searing pain just above his elbow. One long, poisonous fang was sinking deeper and deeper into his arm and it splintered as the Basilisk keeled over sideways and fell, twitching to the floor. Harry slid down the wall. He gripped the fang that was spreading poison through his body and wrenched it out of his arm. But he knew it was too late. White-hot pain was spreading slowly and steadily from the wound. Even as he dropped the fang and watched his own blood soaking his robes, his vision went foggy . "You're dead, Harry Potter," said Riddle's voice above him . Harry felt drowsy. Everything around him seemed to be spinning . If this is dying, thought Harry, it's not so bad. Even the pain was leaving him ' (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.236 UK edition) Harry seems very philosophical here. He does not seem to be panicking despite the fact that he believes that he is "a goner'. Fortunately, there was a Phoenix to hand to assist. :-) Perhaps the first time we see the stiffening of resolve to face death as a deliberate likely outcome is in GOF: `"We are not playing hide-and-seek, Harry" said Voldemort's soft cold voice, drawing nearer as the Death Eaters laughed. "You cannot hide from me. Does this mean you are tired of our duel? Does this mean you would prefer me to finish it now, Harry? Come out, Harry come out and play then it will be quick It might even be painless I would not know I have never died " Harry crouched behind the headstone and knew the end had come. There was no hope no help to be had. And as he heard Voldemort draw nearer still, he knew one thing only a nd it was beyond fear or reason ? he was not going to die crouching here like a child playing hide-and-seek; he was going to die upright like his father and he was going to die trying to defend himself even if no defence was possible ' (GOF "Priori Incantatem" p.575 UK edition) This again, like the chapter I mentioned before if, for me, one of those superb moments in the books. Harry could be grovelling and crying for mercy but his pride demands that he keep his fear and despair from Voldemort ? not unlike the way he refuses to give in to Umbridge in the detentions in OOTP. Perhaps this is an echo of the sort of courage shown by troops in the WW1 trenches, knowing they were going over the top to almost certain death Mark you, only a few minutes after his remarkable escape, he finds himself in another apparently fatal corner when Crouch!Moody comes close to killing him. He seems to specialise in moments when it seems that death is going to overtake him and not allow him time to contemplate his immediate demise, one example being in OOTP when Voldemort decides to have yet another attempt to kill Harry: `'I have nothing more to say to you, Potter," he (Voldemort) said quietly. "You have irked me too often, for too long. AVADA KEDAVRA!" Harry had not even opened his mouth to resist; his mind was blank, his wand pointing uselessly at the floor. But the headless golden statue of the wizard in the fountain had sprung alive, leaping from its plinth to land with a crash on the floor between Harry and Voldemort.' (OOTP "The Only One He ever Feared" p.717 UK edition) Again, our poor hero is subjected to another crisis just after the near-miss above, when Voldemort briefly possesses him: `Then Harry's scar burst open and he knew he was dead: it was pain beyond imagining, pain past endurance ? He was gone from the hall, he was locked in the coils of a creature with red eyes, so tightly bound that Harry did not know where his body ended and the creature's began: they were fused together, bound by pain and there was no escape ? And when the creature spoke, it used Harry's mouth so that in his agony he felt his jaw move "Kill me now, Dumbledore " Blinded and dying, every part of him screaming for release, Harry felt the creature use him again "If death is nothing, Dumbledore, kill the boy " Let the pain stop, thought Harry let him kill us.. end it, Dumbledore death is nothing to this And I'll see Sirius again (OOTP "The Only One He ever Feared" p.719/20 UK edition) Which brings us full circle to the Deathly Hallows chapter with which I began. I have not listed absolutely every occasion when Harry has faced a threat on his life. Voldemort seems to have been particularly inept; maybe using a copper saucepan might have been more effective than the series of Killing Curses which, for one reason or another, haven't worked. We have seen how Harry started out accepting intellectually that he was liable to be killed but maybe this hadn't clicked at the emotional level. We have seen the out-of-the-blue occasions and we have seen how he has matured to a character who can, as Shakespeare puts it "screw your courage to the sticking-place" and resolutely handle a situation which seems to have no other resolution other than death. I have often said that Harry is an everyman ? usually in a Christian context, but here, we can see that he reveals the sort of courage and firmness of resolve which has been shown by so many others from the young troops of the First World War to those brave but doomed souls who elected to bring down the fourth hijacked American plane on 11th September to their timing rather than allowing the terrorists to complete their own plans, which in effect is what Harry chooses to do. He may be rash, quick-tempered and not industrious but he has a will of iron at those moments when the fate of the Wizarding world rests on what happens to Harry Potter. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Jul 31 00:00:28 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:00:28 -0000 Subject: A Sense of Betrayal / Unforgiveables In-Reply-To: <46AB952E.7050600@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173864 Thanks for the thoughtful reply, CJ. I think some of our difference boils down to differing readings of the term "unforgivable" as applied to those three curses. So, for instance, you reject my analogy to self-defense as a justification for intentional homicide -- > Since no one has ever described killing as "unforgivable" > (I think we all recognize it is not), I think the better > analogy would be murder, rather than killing. -- but I still think the analogy was apt. All we were originally told about the unforgivable curses was that "[t]he use of any one of them on a fellow human being is enough to earn a life sentence in Azkaban." In other words, the descriptor "unforgivable" was a legal term, treating the curses as quasi-capital offenses, not a moral one. And law, like morality, recognizes exceptions even to the rules that seem the clearest. Murder can be justified (self-defense) or excused (necessity). For that reason, I don't think it's fair to say, as you do, that > There ARE a few absolutes. Not all killing is wrong; > but all murder is.... The act of murder (i.e., intentional homicide), if done in self-defense, is viewed as justifiable and therefore not a crime (nor, in many people's view, immoral). More generally, to try to make a rule absolute by including within its statement all of the "exceptions" is an artificial exercise that ignores the moral content of the exceptions. The point of a defense by way of justification is to assert that the circumstances rendered the proscribed act morally or legally acceptable. If there were any absolute principle, exceptions would not depend on circumstances. In that spirit, I agree with you that > [E]ven wars have rules, and it IS possible for soldiers > to commit murder during the performance of their duties. > Just because war necessitates killing does not mean all > killing in wartime is justified. But by the same dint, the circumstances that make killing a war crime are not defined in terms of absolutes, but in terms of competing principles and surrounding circumstances. Is there any weapon of war in the real world that is viewed as immoral because of its efficiency in killing a single enemy combatant? And while you say that torture is never excusable, that is not true at least in a legal sense (necessity would be a defense), and some would admit of exceptions in the moral sphere as well. I think you are admitting something of the same when you treat Harry's attempted use of the Avada Kedavra curse, in his heat-of-the-moment assault on Snape at the end of book 6, on different terms than Snape's "[c]old, calculated, premeditated" use of the curse on Dumbledore. Whether we call what Harry did "understandable" (your words) or "excusable" (my mischaracterization), I understand you to be putting his action on a different moral plane from Snape's. In doing so, you must agree that circumstances and intention make a moral difference. And my point was that Rowling was recognizing the same sort of difference in her rehabilitation of Snape. (That is, whether or not one views euthanasia as acceptable, the sort of distinction being made is similar.) And here is where you get to the part that I really do not understand: > You are correct in your assumption that there is no room > for euthanasia in my moral system. However, even making > allowance for that, there was any number of ways Snape > could have finished Dumbledore off. But he chose the AK. > Even assuming your moral code permits euthanasia, euthanasia > hardly justifies an Unforgivable Curse. Why should the means of death make any moral difference? I don't think Rowling ever meant to be saying that one way of murdering someone is more or less acceptable than another, so why should the form of mercy killing matter? (I am not trying to address, here, the distinction between active and passive euthanasia, because what I understand you to be saying is that it was worse for Snape to use the killing curse than it would have been to have actively killed Dumbledore in some other way.) I think that in distinguishing based on the form of curse used you are putting more weight on the term "unforgivable" than Rowling ever did. And in doing so you are doing exactly what you originally accused Rowling of doing, namely, losing sight of the underlying moral reasons for treating the curses as unforgivable. Is there some reason that the use of Avada Kedavra is unforgivable above and beyond the immorality of ending another person's life? If so, I can't divine it from the books. Aside from the different types of moral distinctions we are making, I don't think we disagree terribly much. I concede that the use of the unforgivable curses in the Ravenclaw common room scene cannot be explained other than as a way of showing how war desensitizes people to brutality. And I am troubled, as you are, by the characters' (esp. Harry's) failure to reflect upon and agonize over their use of such methods. When I pointed out that the books were about war, it was not only to hint that the circumstances of war might justify, e.g., killing, but also in recognition that people frequently do terrible and unjustified things in the name of war. Rowling clearly has one authorial eye on that fact throughout this book -- I think, for instance that the fiendfyre is intended to allude among other things to the use of incendiaries in Vietnam -- and just because one of the good characters does something does *not* mean that it is intended to be OK. -- Matt From dougsamu at golden.net Tue Jul 31 00:07:23 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:07:23 -0400 Subject: A Buddhist reading of Harry Pottter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173865 I never though there was much, overtly, of Buddhism in the series. My insistent theory that Magic is Mind is influenced by my Buddhism... anyway. here is an interesting article as a review of the movie OOtP: http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=12,4459,0,0,1,0 that some might want to consider in light of the Christian readings of the themes in the books > The greatest magic is nothing without the direction of a well- > mastered mind. In this sense, the greatest magic is a fully > mastered mind, with which psychic abilities are natural by- > products. This is emphasised by the oft-repeated admonishment for > Harry to develop sharper concentration. In this sense, "magic" is > only limited by one's will. Harry faced the challenge of training > his mind to be so strong that Voldermort (or "Mara") has no way of > seizing control of it. Voldermort's mind was his strongest weapon, > while Harry's mind was his own best defence. > > There is hope in Buddhist thought though. There is a way out - > Nirvana. Harry, like all of us, will die - unless he becomes > enlightened in time, thereby transcending the cycle of life and > death! By the end of the movie, it is still unclear as to the > significance of the phoenix in the order, but the phoenix is a > symbol of rebirth. Thus, my calculated guess is that Harry will > die, but not really die! > ___ __ From melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 22:45:13 2007 From: melrosedarjeeling at yahoo.com (melrosedarjeeling) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:45:13 -0000 Subject: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173866 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "guzuguzu" wrote: > Among my disappointments in DH, one of my top ones was Peter Pettigrew. > Here I thought Rowling had created an interesting and unusual character > with incredible potential for a good storyline. > Given all that, I was fairly sure Rowling was going to give a big finish > to this character. > Reading DH to me was like having that plane door open in the wrong > country. Now, I really don't care about things like what the Potters' > jobs were (they died when they were 21-- probably nothing exciting) or > who came late to magic. But I wondered why I had spent so much time in > previous books reading about things which were ultimately irrelevant. Yes! I couldn't agree more. You have expressed this dilemma perfectly. I think it's one of JKR's greatest strengths that she creates such intriguing characters and drops them into situations that are so fraught with possibility. It sets your head spinning with all the delicious potential directions that the story could take -- no wonder it has spawned a million fanfics. But the flip side of this strength (dare I call it a weakness?) is that after creating breathless expectation for the reader, half of the possibilities are just dropped with no further development, no sense that the story arc has come to its best possible conclusion. And she doesn't just drop the character/story line because there's no room, she drops them in order to introduce further characters (eg. Xenophilius, Grindelwald, Narcissa, Aberforth, Ted Tonks, Griphook as some examples of people who had barely appeared previously but had a big role in the finale) and further story lines (hallows, camping). Of course, "it's JKR's story, she can tell it how she wants to," this is true! But she is responsible for the expectations she generates in the way that she tells the story. (I'm not saying that I think that she has to fulfill everyone's fantasy ending -- I'm just saying that a satisfying story is one which fulfills the expectations it has created.) When I read the ending to Pettigrew's character I laughed out loud because I couldn't believe that was what all the buildup had been about -- it just seemed so weak. And to name a few other intriguing storylines with unsatisfying or no follow through: Sirius behind the veil; Ginny the powerful hex caster; Longbottoms and Lockhart sitting in St. Mungo's just waiting for some action; Petunia bursting with information about Lily; the unexplored doors at the Dept. of Mysteries; Tonks & Lupin dying off-page; and the horcruxes basically abandoned as a plot line, as they are hurriedly found and off-handedly destroyed (one off-page). I'm sure everyone has their own list. That said, most book series have similar problems, so perhaps the miracle is that JKR was able to end so many of the story lines as satisfyingly as she did. -MelroseDarjeeling From Igrainna at webtv.net Mon Jul 30 23:17:35 2007 From: Igrainna at webtv.net (Igrainna at webtv.net) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:17:35 -0700 Subject: Ron and Hermione's children Message-ID: <786-46AE718F-4340@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173867 Hello! New here and loving it... I haven't seen this mentioned but I was wondering if anyone knew the origins of the names of Ron and Hermione's children: Rose and Hugo? I could understand the Potter kids (Albus, James and Lily) but I have yet to find any reference in the Granger or Weasley family lines to "Rose" and "Hugo". Any thoughts? Thanks, Grainne From dvdavins at pobox.com Mon Jul 30 23:06:33 2007 From: dvdavins at pobox.com (barkingiguana) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:06:33 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173868 Eggplant: > Dumbledore told Snape that he expected Harry to destroy the snake > before he confronted Voldemort for the last time and he expected > Harry to die ... I can't think of any reason Dumbledore would lie > to Snape about that... Iguana: Because at some point, Snape would tell Harry, and Harry needed to believe that he was sacrificing himself, or the whole plan would not have worked. Unlike Snape, Dumbledore *did* hear the whole prophecy and had good reason to believe that one of Harry and Voldemort would live. -- Dvd Avins (The Barking Iguana) From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 23:42:34 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:42:34 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173869 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Zara" wrote: > > > zgirnius: > It seems to me that by your analysis, Snape undergoes a deathbed > conversion. By the time he and Harry come face to face, Snape is > moments from death and not capable (physically) of extended speech. > But his decision to provide Harry with such a variety of memories > that trace his life from his first meeting with Lily through that > final year is surely the acceptance you are looking for on Snape's > part, and a far more meaningful gesture than a simple 'yes' said to > Albus Dumbledore in an earlier scene could be. Albus is not the guy > Snape wronged, after all. > Except, of course, that JKR has told us (if you believe that authorial intent means anything, which of course is a point of argument) that no such deathbed conversion happened. That is (paraphrasing) "he is still a cruel, bitter, insecure man, all of this is still true of Snape." As his cruelty and bitterness and insecurity are the very things that constitute the dark within himself from which he needs to be redeemed, he has by definition not had a deathbed conversion, and thus has not embraced the possibility represented by Harry. Why did he provide the memories? An interesting question. Frankly, my answer would be he provides them because JKR wants to fill in the backstory and this is the convenient way to do it. As far as your point about a "meaningful gesture," a "yes" and an explanation to Albus would have the virtue of being clear, whereas Snape's memories contain no sense of regret over his treatment of Harry or an acceptance of Harry -- at least none I can find in any way. His anger at being told that Harry must sacrifice himself seems to be anger at being used and lied to, as he in fact indicates when he specifically denies caring for Harry. If one wants a more plot-consistent reason for supplying the memories, maybe he had little control over what memories leaked out -- he was, as you say, dieing after all. Or even more likely he chose them out of anger at Dumbledore -- a way of saying "look what a cruel, manipulative liar the old man was!" An interesting question, nonetheless. Lupinlore From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 00:20:29 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:20:29 -0000 Subject: No progress for Slytherin? (Was: Slytherins: selfish, not evil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173870 Montavilla47 > And I think Sistermagpie is right about the WW's strongest > Slytherin image of the Battle of Hogwarts will be Pansy > Parkinson's words. SSSusan: Oh, wow. I hope not!! For me the stronger Slytherin images are Snape's gift to Harry at the end, helping ready him for the Battle... and Sluggy, fighting alongside Minerva & Kingsley! I'll grant, as I've said before, Pansy's words/action really upset me, but I seriously hope that that's not the strongest Slytherin image of the Battle of Hogwarts. :( Siriusly Snapey Susan, who submitted the following for the JKR chat, but it wasn't selected: "What would you say to those fans who are disappointed that you didn't do more to show that not all Slytherins are to be despised, particularly the children?" From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 00:25:15 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:25:15 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173871 --- "horridporrid03" wrote: > > >>Betsy Hp: > >> > >> JKR apparently looks at the world around her and > >> thinks, "I know in my heart that a quarter of the > >> people out there are evil, half of them are okay, > >> and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably > >> good." It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. > >> And it cumlminates in a rather ugly book with a > >> rather ugly message. > > > >>Shagufta: > >> So you think the world is made up of good people > >> and only good people? ... > > > > > > >>Shagufta: > > Hi > > Actually ... JK had a very cynical view of the > > world and the people in it. > > Betsy Hp: > That's what I was saying, yes. I'm obviously guessing > as to JKR's actual world view, but that's the message > DH is giving, IMO. > > > >>Shagufta: > > And my point is that, if that is her philosophy, I > > think it is more realistic than saying 'everyone is > > good' > > Betsy Hp: > I disagree. I'll admit to being a bit of an optimist, > but I really prefer to think that on the whole, most > people are basically good. That there's a fixable > reason societies descend into madness, and that a > prime function of civilization is limiting or fixing > those reasons. And that's something DH does not do. > > ... bboyminn: This is my appeal for perspective on the matter of Houses, especially with regard to Slytherin. JKR said herself that all Slytherins are not bad; that we are seeing the worst of them. A view that I have also held for a long time. There is nothing wrong or inherently evil about any of the Slytherin personality characteristics. But, those characteristics are likely to contain a group of people who seek power, and who are corrupted by it. Can we say that all high-level Corporate Executives are evil? Can we say that all Politicians are evil? All Wall Street Power Brokers are evil? All Lawyers are evil? Certainly we can, in fact. it is done all the time; by comedians, by commentators, in the news, over coffee, around the water cooler, etc.... But are they truly and uniformly evil with not a single redeeming soul among them? Oddly some will still say yes; though personally I say NO. Next, are they necessary? Well, they seem to be everywhere in every society, so that would seem to imply YES. Yes, someone needs to be at the top to make the big and bold decisions. Someone has to have the courage and cunning to do that. And I suspect they are usually Slytherins. Note, not all Gryffindors are as brave as Harry, nor as ethical, nor as admirable. Where was everyone when Harry/Ron/Hermione were out on their great adventures? Tucked safely in their beds. Do we call them cowards or evil for having done so? I don't think so. In the characteristics of every House are pluses and minuses. Loyalty of Hufflepuffs is good until it become blind unquestioning loyalty. Courage amoung Gryffindor is good until it becomes reckless or self- serving. Brains and intelligence among Ravenclaw is good until if fails to ask the hard questions of why and to what end. Slytherins are ambitions, cunning, wily entrepeneurs, and leaders. They get things done; and always to their advantage, but that is how corporations suceed. That is how financial empires are built. These characteristics are not a fault until they are turned to grossly unethical means. Politicians are people who seek and revel in Power. I'm sure they all start out with benevolent ideas, and those benevolent ideas generally hold true until they are corrupted by power, then it is time to elect someone new. So, my point is, that we are assuming that all Slytherins are evil, and that JKR, by extension, assumes that one fourth of all people are evil. But that is simply not true. There is not reason to believe that the average Slytherin is evil. There is no reason to believe that they will not go out, start businesses, and work very hard to see to it that that business succeeds. But, in striving with such fervor to succeed, occasionally one or more Slytherins migh cross some legal or ethical lines. But I think that is true of all houses. Become so obsessed with the objective that you forget about the methods is an aspect of human nature. Naturally, since a majority of Slytherins are highly ambitious, their are going to be a higher percentage of those willing to skirt the law, but that is not a brush all Slytherins should be painted with. JKR already said, not all Slytherins are bad. Steve/bboyminn From arboyko at shaw.ca Tue Jul 31 00:27:41 2007 From: arboyko at shaw.ca (Angela Boyko) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:27:41 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron and Hermione's children References: <786-46AE718F-4340@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: <006101c7d309$9b8883d0$427e4946@DellMain> No: HPFGUIDX 173872 ----- Original Message ----- From: > I haven't seen this mentioned but I was wondering if anyone knew the > origins of the names of Ron and Hermione's children: Rose and Hugo? I > could understand the Potter kids (Albus, James and Lily) but I have yet > to find any reference in the Granger or Weasley family lines to "Rose" > and "Hugo". > > Any thoughts? I believe that Rose shares her first initial with Ron, and Hugo shares his first initial with Hermione. Angela From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 00:40:50 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:40:50 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173873 SSSusan: > > > Does *anybody* here have a real inkling of what JKR was > > > thinking of when she chose the words 'abandoned his post'? krista7 wrote: > > > > He chose #4--to depart, and give the job of governing Hogwarts > > to McG. Since the main reason he leaves is to continue his job > > of protecting Harry, he's really given up his post as Headmaster > > of Hogwarts to McG. So, he abandoned post--for good reasons, but > > he still left his job at Hogwarts. > > > > I thought about how this fit with Dumbledore's example, since > > he too fled Hogwarts at one point (from Umbridge and the aurors), colebiancardi: > ahh, the nitpicker in me asks - did Dumbledore *abandon his post* > when he chose to have Snape kill him? In a way, DD got to flee > Hogwarts by using Snape to kill him in the manner of the type of > death & the time that DD wanted. SSSusan: Hee. I like this kind of nitpick! It's a good question! colebiancardi: > So, in a way, DD also abandoned his post at Hogwarts because he > defied the normal course of fate and got Severus to kill him on > command, as DD wanted to go out peacefully and not violently. > > I see no difference between the choice DD made at the end of HBP > and what Snape did in DH - they were both forced to leave > Hogwarts. I don't think Snape *chose* to leave - he was forced > to. He was trying to find Harry, as his conversation with > McGonagall shows us. SSSusan: I think the difference may be what Jen pointed out earlier in the thread: that Hogwarts or the Headmaster's Office itself or whatever magical power places the portraits is somehow somewhat partially *sentient.* It might not have known about motive, though, only action? So when DD was murdered, of course it would only see DD was dead and not know why; thus it tossed up a portrait. OTOH, when Snape ran, it would not recognize the motivation for his decision (Krista's #4, above), only that he skeedaddled. IOW, it *doesn't* know DD abandoned because it only knows he's dead & gone. And it does 'know' Snape abandoned because that's the surface read from the situation when he hightailed it out of there. Surface read in both cases. :) Heh. Not sure that works, but.... Siriusly Snapey Susan > > > colebiancardi > From prep0strus at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 00:47:00 2007 From: prep0strus at yahoo.com (prep0strus) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:47:00 -0000 Subject: Moments Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173874 So, in light of the heavy atmosphere and occassionally rancorous posting, I'm going to take a break from excoriating Snape, defending Lupin and the Maruders, and ignoring the Dumbledore discussion entirely to give a list of some of my 'best-of' moments. Moments whose categories are defined entirely based on how I could fit the moment into a category. Feel free to offer your own nominees, or to create new categories. But I thought I'd try to only mention things I thought were done well (as opposed to, say, Most Disappointing Character Development or Worst Phrasing). So here goes. Most 'Hell-YEAH' Moment of Awesomeness: I know people are partial to Neville slaying Nagini or Molly's triumphant curseword, but for me, it had to be.... "Dawlish is still in St. Mungos & Gran's on the run." (pg 576) :) Neville's Gran. Awesome. Creepiest Moment "panic made him turn and horror paralyzed him as he saw the old body collapsing and the great snake pouring from the place where her neck had been." (pg 340) Put together w/ the smell of death that had permeated the chapter... it gives me the chills. Most Entertaining 'Stage Directions' Since 'Exit, Pursued By a Bear' "he was pressed back against the wall as they ran past him, the mingled members of the Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore's Army, and Harry's old Quidditch team, all with their wands drawn" (pg 604) Harry's Old Quidditch Team? Sure, why not! Don't know how Wood got the message, and don't care. :) Most Heart-Tugging (Non-Death) Moment "Luna had decorated her bedroom ceiling with five beautifully painted faces: Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, and Neville...What appeared to be fine golden chains wove around the pictures, linking them together, but after examining them for a minute or so, Harry realized that the chains were actually one word, repeated a thousand times in golden ink: friends...friends...friends..." (pg 417) Awwwwwwwww..... Moment That Allows the Reader to Most Identify With Previously Primarily Loathsome Character "You didn't think it was such a freak's school when you wrote to the headmaster and begged him to take you."(pg 669) And isn't that just all our worst nightmare? Not that the WW doesn't exist... but that it does, and we can't be a part of it. Poor Tuney. Finally... Most Difficult Moment to Describe in All It's Awesomeness Except That It Exhibits Tension-Relieving Humor, Character Consistency, Poetic Justice, & the Word 'Bemused' "Harry stunned the Death Eater as they passed: Malfoy looked around, beaming, for his savior, and Ron punched him from under the Cloak. Malfoy fell backward on top of the Death Eater, his mouth bleeding, utterly bemused." (pg 645) That scene exhibits the spark of genius that allows me to enjoy the books even as I hav trouble following the plot or agreeing with character decisions. Pure joy. Hope you all have moments of your own! ~Prep0strus (Adam) From red-siren at hotmail.com Tue Jul 31 00:34:00 2007 From: red-siren at hotmail.com (Sue) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:34:00 -0000 Subject: Hegwig In-Reply-To: <658617.97514.qm@web54106.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173875 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Denise Leblanc wrote: > > Hedwig in my mind had to die. This showed they had the right Potter. With there being 7 the owl dying was the only way the rest were fake. But I was still sad. > > Denise > >From Sue: This is a good theory, but in the same scene, Harry also lost his Firebolt. Is there a chance that JKR wanted to use the lose of both the broom and his pet as a way for Harry to leave behind his childhood? Sue From kat7555 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 00:40:48 2007 From: kat7555 at yahoo.com (kat7555) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:40:48 -0000 Subject: Harrys attitudes to dying In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173876 > Geoff: > I have just started my second read of DH but before I did, I > re-read chapter 34 (The Forest Again). I am of the opinion > that this is one of the best chapters JKR has written. Despite > being the possessor of a Brit stiff upper lip, I was brought > close to tears. > I totally agree with your opinion of the Forest Again. I cry every time I read that chapter and I'm not someone who tears up when I read. I think Harry doesn't fear death in the earlier books because he knows noone will miss him if he dies. The Dursleys will never mourn him as the Weasley family grieves for Fred. Harry also wants to avenge the death of his parents and his godfather and if he dies that's the price he is willing to pay. Kathy Kulesza From jkoney65 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 22:51:23 2007 From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:51:23 -0000 Subject: Snape, again...(was Re: Come on folks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173877 > Carol responds: >> Instead of brilliant Snape banter resembling his exchange with > Bellatrix in "Spinner's End," we get a Snape who keeps repeating his > request with greater and greater desperation and who fears, as > Voldemort and Nagini slither out together, that all is lost. It isn't > fear of death, it's fear that everything he and Dumbledore have > struggled for will be over. Yes, his voice is silenced (except for > that surprising and IMO supremely meaning ful last request), but he's > dying. And the loss of his voice is almost compensated for by his last > amazing feat of magic, sending memories out from his own head. Jack-A-Roe: That's my whole problem with Snape in that scene. He wasn't prepared. As a double agent, he needed to be prepared for the moment he was found out. And while he wasn't found out, he put himself in grave danger by being unprepared. He had to know that something was coming, but did he try to reach for his wand? No. Did he try anything? No. All his cunning and guile left him when he needed it the most. We all know that the "medicore" Harry would have been looking for a way out of the situation, he would have been ready to fight back. We've seen him, over the prior six books, improvise his way out of dangerous situations. Carol: > I've already explained why I don't think a last Harry-Snape > confrontation would have worked. Jack-A-Roe: Agreed, Harry never would have listened to anything he had to say because the last time he saw him was when he killed Dumbledore. Carol: > At any rate, it's clear that Snape doesn't understand Harry and judges > him on his "mediocrity" (and Harry's performance in most of his > classes merits that description). Jack-A-Roe: Snapes effectiveness as a teacher leaves much to be desired. From what we can see through out the books his classes are not well taught. Only eight people received O's in his class. Many of them are probably like Hermione who learned it by reading and studying the books they had. Insults and snarky comments to the students are not a way to teach someone. The occlumancy lessons were a fiasco. The phrase clear your mind doesn't mean much if you don't explain what or how one is to do that. Giving him credit for teaching Expelliarmus is a stretch. It's a basic spell that they would have learned from one of their teachers as they went through school. I'd say he learned much more from Hermione as he studied for the TWT. Carol: He fears that Harry will be > inadequately prepared. And if Harry had not had Hermione to protect > him with spells that she may well have learned from Snape Jack-A-Roe: But most likely learned somewhere else like preparing Harry for the TWT, from the DA, or else from a book she read. From wana0525 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 30 23:17:38 2007 From: wana0525 at yahoo.com (Tawana Sharpley) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Lilly's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <528339.37658.qm@web81106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173878 --- eggplant107 wrote: > Snape is a complete basted, and there are no if and > or not about it. I hate Snape with a passion, I > really do; so why the hell were tears rolling down > my checks when I read the line "look at me"? What > is going on? what the hell is wrong with me?! You're not the only one. I basically cried through the whole book. Deep down I don't think that Snape really hated Harry if he ever hated him at all. I think it was just the fact that every time he looked at him he saw Lily's eyes and the fact that he also saw James. I really feel bad for Snape. Tawana Campbell From wana0525 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 00:43:24 2007 From: wana0525 at yahoo.com (Tawana Sharpley) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:43:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: <134868.42183.qm@web55008.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <879522.29515.qm@web81101.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173879 Christy: > What makes me curious, and I mentioned it before, is > assuming Snape did use his Patronus to alert the > Order in OOTP, didn't anyone wonder why this dark > wizard known for his cruelty had such a mild and > meek creature as his Patronus? (Did the other > Patronuses laugh at him?) Not that anyone would > have neccessarily made the connection to Lily -- > that is not important to me -- its the irony that > intrigues me. I can see Sirius saying, "hey, did > you guys know that Snape's Patronus is a doe?" Or, > maybe my assumption is wrong; maybe he had another > way to talk to the Order, but with Umbridge > monitoring all conventional channels of > communication I can't see how. But can't people make their patronus change? Tawana Campbell From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 01:22:14 2007 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:22:14 -0000 Subject: Victory for TEWWW EWWW?? Snape the hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173880 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > Leslie41: > > Well, there I would have to disagree. Names are incredibly > > important, most especially the names we give ourselves. They are > > often a profound statement of not only our interests, but what we > > admire, and with whom we identify. Lupinlore has and continues to > > make a statement with his name, and any perusal of his posts will > > show that his choice is apt in terms of what he admires. > > LL: > My goodness, how terribly, terribly, completely, > utterly, fantastically out of order! And, as with most > psychologizing, whether in English or History (which is where my > Ph.D. and 14 years of experience is, as well as my publications), > how completely and utterly manufactured of garbage. The > name Lupinlore was actually picked because I had about two minutes > before my ride left and I was reading a fanfic about Lupin at the > time that had to do with werewolf lore. > > Which is, in any case, totally irrelevant. As both Nora and Alla > have pointed out, what on Earth does Lupin's character have to do > with Snape's? The failings or perception of them in one man have > nothing whatsoever to do with the failings or perception of them in > another. No, but IMHO they have everything to do with how seriously we are supposed to take your opinion on Snape (it seems you have decided to stop calling him Snapey-poo, thankfully). In other words, it has to do with how good you are as a judge of character. Hey, I could be wrong about you. It's not like I've read every single post you've ever made. Do you think Lupin is a stronger, better, more responsible and braver person than Snape, even now? If you do, I've been wrong about you, and your name, and bending low, I apologize. > > Leslie41: > > To admire Remus Lupin and excoriate and loathe Severus Snape seems > > to me to reveal a basic refusal to come to terms with the > > characters of both men, and anyone guilty of that to me > > demonstrates that their opinions on Severus Snape are suspect. > LL: > Why? Because you admire Severus Snape and excoriate Remus Lupin? It's not either or. Not by a longshot. I admire Severus Snape, but I am not some happy-crappy "How could Lily desert him? Oh, he's just so lovable and wonderful" sort of Snaper. As I have said before, he's hardly likeable. And with regard to Lily he gets exactly what he deserves. As for Remus, I like him an awful lot. And I understand exactly where he's coming from. > Because somehow a Ph. D. conveys great insight? Actually, I am trained to read literary texts and interpret them. Insight? Perhaps not. Your mileage may vary. But experience and training, yes. > It doesn't, in either my case or yours or anyone else's. The > doctorate line at any graduate school commencement contains as > large a percentage of dolts, dimwits, and fools as you'll find in > any random sample. The same goes for any assemblage of senior > faculty. There, we certainly agree! > It would seem that anyone who admires Sirius Black and dislikes > Snape is in the same boat, as is anyone who admires James Potter and > dislikes Snape, as is anyone who admires Dumbledore and dislikes > Snape, as is anyone who ... well, anyone who dislikes Snape, period. Again, we are not talking about "like". I do not "like" him, mostly because (in accordance with the way JRK has constructed his character) he is manifestly not "likeable." Must one "like" to admire? Snape is an unpleasant man, but he possesses great wit and intelligence, and unfathomable loyalty and bravery. He is mean-spirited on the small scale. On the large scale he always does the right thing. Lupin is very likeable on the small scale. He's affable, friendly, and very kind to his students. But on the large scale, he fails to protect them. As a student, he failed to protect his peers. As a man, he marries and knocks up Tonks and them complains about it. He changes, but it takes him until the middle of the DH to do so. Snape made a terrible mistake as a very young man, and then negotiated the rest of his life to atone for it. > Including the person who invented him -- who, by the way, has > expressed great liking and admiration for Remus Lupin ... I like and admire him as well. It is liking and admiring him *to the exclusion* of Severus Snape that seems problematic to me. > I dislike Snape because he is petty, cruel, abusive, idiotically > blind to the truth, and contemptible. The fact of what he did to > help Harry (which he did not do for noble reasons, but because of > his own intense emotional burden) in no way excuses his sins. > True, Harry forgives him, even sees the good in him, but that's > what Resurrected Saviors do. Not being a Resurrected Savior, I > don't have to worry about being so divinely forgiving -- I leave > that to my priest in the confessional. I agree with you that Harry's journey, in the end, has very Christian overtones. But Harry is never ever presented as being like Christ in behavior or attitudes. JRK herself, in her most recent interview said "Like Snape, he is flawed and mortal." I would leave aside the matter of authorial intent but it seems important to you. > Lupinlore, who really IS getting to like JKR more with each passing > revelation And what do you think of her "revelation" that though deeply flawed, she believes Snape is a hero? That Lily might have loved him? From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 31 01:24:56 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:24:56 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173881 Magpie: > > > So I was just saying that it was not part of Harry's development to > > be humbled and see a real connection between himself and the uglier > > parts of his enemies, which I consider a bare minimum of a character > > who's a model of compassion. > Pippin: > But surely you don't have to be an evildoer yourself to have > compassion for evildoers? In fact, that sort of compassion might read > as self-serving. I think Harry does understands that he, Snape and > Riddle were all damaged through abandonment, and that it was luck more > than virtue that he, having received more love than they did, took > less damage than they. Surely baby Riddle and baby Snape > haddonenothing to make their families reject them. Harry, at any rate, > has no trouble at all understanding why they were so bitter and angry > once he has learned their history. Magpie: Of course not! I didn't realize I even implied you had to be an evildoer to have compassion for them. I know Harry likes identifying with people about things like being an orphan and abandoned--though no, I don't see him going as far as you're even going here. You don't have to be an evil doer to be in the state that I described--and though "evildoer" is a strong word, there's plenty of things Harry's done wrong in his life, of course. Regardless, I didn't say Harry was never compassionate, I said he was in no way a model of compassion, and I still think that. And I think that reflects the values of the rest of the books--many things take priority, certainly for Harry. Pippin: > > I haven't read all the posts, and what's more, my copy of DH is > somewhere in lost luggage limbo (grrrr!) but I'm concerned that it's > rapidly becoming fanon that there's been absolutely no change in the > sorting process. IIRC, that's not so. Magpie: Where is it canon that there's any change in the Sorting process? The most I've heard is an interview where JKR says Slytherins is "diluted" and no longer the "bastion of Pureblood superiority" whatever that means exactly, but that wasn't what it Sorted by in PS/SS anyway. Pippin: > > The Sorting process was a mystery and a Big Secret to Muggleborn and > pureblood alike in Harry's year; Ron thought he might have to wrestle > a troll. That isn't the case any more, to judge by Harry's > conversation with Al. So parents have relinquished some control and > they're doing what's right, helping the kids make their own choices > rather taking the easy path of puppetmastering them into the House the > parents think is best. Magpie: What can I say? I don't see any of that hinted anywhere in canon. Ron thought he had to fight a troll because he had older brothers who were winding him up. I don't see any big parental control there. Harry's conversation with Al is a conversation between one father and son, one that could easily have taken place in Harry's own first year, as long as that parent had been through the Sorting himself and could tell the kid what it was like. (And in Harry's case, he can tell the kid that you can choose against Slytherin, which only he knows because that's what he did--though he's never told anybody this before, including his elder kids.) Pippin: > Naturally Harry hopes that Al would be chosen for Gryffindor, and has > some concerns about Slytherin still, but I think it's clear that it's > better by far in Harry's eyes to be a brave Slytherin than a cowardly > Gryffindor. If you can only be brave for selfish reasons, that's > still better than being an altruistic coward. Magpie: Well, yeah. I think that was always the case. Of course Harry would prefer a brave Slytherin to a cowardly Gryffindor, and would have before. Brave is good. Pippin: > As we've learned, the Slytherins do *not* always save their own skins > first, and can fight fiercely for their beliefs, right or wrong. I > doubt any attempt to abolish the House would succeed unless the > Slytherins themselves wanted it abolished, which they clearly don't, > and why should they? Magpie: I don't want the house abolished--I would of course deal with it differently, but I would have done that throughout canon. I'm just reacting to the role it played in the story. And also saying that compassion is not a virtue I'd ever use Harry Potter to demonstrate. Not because he never feels it, but because I'm usually feeling more of it than he is for more people for more reasons at any given moment in his story. -m From ejblack at rogers.com Tue Jul 31 01:40:36 2007 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:40:36 -0000 Subject: JKR confirms again: Snape is a hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173882 > And as for his appearance! "I think it more likely that he valued other > qualities in himself!" Also considering that the only woman he loved was dead, and that he had no intention whatsoever of another romance, perhaps his persoanl appearance meant nothing to him. His body was just somewhere he lived, wether his hair was greasy or his nails were clean was totally unimportant to him. That part of himself was shut down if not dead. Jeanette From dougsamu at golden.net Tue Jul 31 01:49:20 2007 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:49:20 -0400 Subject: Rebounding curses (WAS Re:replies to 1000 posts) Message-ID: <0EB9A25D-D2F6-49F5-A9C8-5167BB308995@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173883 Bex: I believe that Moldy Shorts felt that Horcrux being destroyed (Harry's piece of Voldy soul) - I think the reason he felt it is that he did it to himself. doug: Reasonable enough, but why would Voldemort's AK in the woods necessarily kill the 'horcrux' soul and not Harry's? I believe it is the 'death' of the container which allows the separation and passing on? ?so does Avada Kadavra expel the soul rather than the life force? Seemingly, in this instance. ?de-horcruxing requires the destruction, or 'death' of the container... so Harry must have died (?) or was destroyed in some way (?). There is just too much deux ex machina. ___ __ From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 01:49:04 2007 From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:49:04 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173884 > Sydney: > > I agree with Magpie (shock!). I think I was reading Slytherin as > obviously the Shadow House and looking for Jungian integration, > whereas the concerns of the HP series were much more about spiritual > purification, something I suppose that comes from the Alchemy thing. > From what little I know, this features burning away and separating the > impure elements. Hence the ritual 'exclusion' scene for the > Slytherins at the end of every book, which (in my parallel universe of > HP) were set up to be reversed with an inclusionary scene in the final > book; but in fact were just recapitulated. I suppose there's a > certain kind of Christianity that shares these concerns about purity > and the separation of the saved from the unsaved, but right up until > the last chapters of HP I would never have associated it with Rowling. > For one thing I was putting a huge amount of weight on her favorite > children's book being "Little White Horse", a transparantely Jungian > allegory that DOES end in integration. lizzyben: I'm getting the sense that many of us were reading a totally different series than the one JKR intended. Because, in a series where the antagonists are actual "human beings", as opposed to orcs or monsters, you naturally think that they're going to have to find a way of reconciling or co-existing at the end. Because the alternative is slightly monstrous. But even if we accept the (IMO horrifying) contention that JKR intended her world to be a Calvinist split between the "divine elect" & the unclean, evil masses, it still doesn't make sense to me. Because how do we explain HBP? In that novel, Harry spends a lot of time learning about, and integrating, Slytherin qualities. He inherits the home of Slytherin wizards, rides the train in the Slytherin compartment, interacts positively w/Slughorn, shadows Draco all year, & learns from Snape's potion book. He actually considers young!Snape as a kind of friend, and feel a sense of pity & compassion for Draco (for the first time). The Slytherins were arguably the most interesting characters in that novel. It seems like all of this was about integration - internally, w/Harry integrating the Slytherin shadow side into his personality, and externally, w/Hogwarts integrating the Slytherin house into the school as well. Then, all of a sudden, in DH she suddenly reverses course and literally isolates & eliminates Slytherins from the narrative. All the subtlely of HBP is lost as Slytherin = evil once again, and Draco & Snape are marginalized & reduced to the stereotypes. That's what's weird to me. It's like she started writing about Jungian integration, and then suddenly switched to Calvinist pre-destination mid-stream. Sydney: > What it really breaks the story for me and turns into something that > makes me a bit ill, is that whatever your philosophy of life might be, > she's projecting this allegory of purification onto a bunch of kids. > Rowling's extraordinary gift for creating rounded human characters > for me resulted in a story about an actual society of human people > being being divided into the pure and impure. When she started to > bring in all the Nazi imagery it created some extremely weird > resonances in my head. lizzyben: Yeah, me too. All the imagery of the pure good Gryfindors vs. the impure evil Slytherins set off every type of alarm bell in my head. Because once you start talking about "pure" & "impure" people, it gets all kinds of ugly. Salman Rushdie has eloquently campaigned against just this desire for purity, & his quote says it much better than I ever could: "I have spent much of my writing life celebrating the potential for creativity and renewal of the cultural encounters and frictions that have become commonplace in our much-transplanted world. ... In the age of mass migration and the internet, cultural plurality is an irreversible fact; like it or dislike it, it's where we live, and the dream of a pure monoculture is at best an unattainable, nostalgic fantasy and at worst a life-threatening menace ? when ideas of purity (racial purity, religious purity, cultural purity) turn into programmes of "ethnic cleansing" or when Hindu fanatics attack the "inauthenticity" of Indian Muslim experience, or when Islamic ideologues drive young people to die in the service of "pure" faith, unadulterated by compassion or doubt. "Purity" is a slogan that leads to segregations and explosions. Let us have no more of it. A little more impurity, please; a little less cleanliness; a little more dirt. We'll all sleep easier in our beds." I don't want a mono-culture of pure Gryfindors feeling superior to the impure masses; I want a multi-cultural view, with each house & culture sharing & learning from the other, learning how to co-exist, learning how to appreciate their differences. That's the world we live in, and that's the multicultural world that children who read these novels will have to live in. Sydney: > What is she giving us in Slytherin House? I'm not trying to be > provocative, I'm just laying out what it is we're looking at here. > This book has given us a population characterized by 'ambition' and > 'cunning', they are often described as having 'greedy' expressions. > They always seem to be in positions of power and have more money than > seems right. They're not admitted into certain clubs and quite right > too. They can't be trusted-- their loyalties are not those of the rest > of society. > I'm not, please believe me, I'm NOT accusing Rowling of anti-Semitism > here (I will guarantee 90% of replies to this post will say "OMG > you're saying JKR is an anti-Semite!!!"). I wholeheartedly believe all > this stuff is entirely unconscious-- it is inconceivable that she > could have written that kind of symbolism otherwise. But believe me, > there are large parts of the world where this unconscious message, > will be recognized as a validation for something that I'm sure she > would be utterly horrified at. lizzyben: Sydney, thank you for going there! I agree that JKR never intentionally meant to give an anti-semitic message, but it's still sort of there. Just because Slytherin is an amalgation of every single type of negative stereotype out there. She throws in practically every negative ethnic stereotype, plus various evil groups, plus people that she personally Does Not Like - conservatives, aristocrats, plus your general thugs & bullies. Slytherin is just a big bowl of bad. It's every "other" that JKR could think of, all conveniently sorted into one house to make them oh-so-easy to hate. Sydney: Part of the reason I was so certain we > would get a reversal of Salazar's story, a proper reconciliation with > the Slytherin kids, and the destruction of the Hat, is that I didn't > think that someone who was gratuitously leaning on Nazi analogies left > and right could *possibly* not have realized what sort of imagery she > was using to construct Slytherin House. Not to mention the Goblins.. > yikes! lizzyben: I honestly think she doesn't have a clue. In her interview, JKR said that the one message she hopes kids learn from her books is "tolerance." OMG. Yikes indeed. Sydney > JKR tells us that she hates bigotry. When 11-year-old Harry looks > over at the 11-year-olds at the Slytherin table, after being told all > about 'what they're like', and thinks to himself that they do look > rather nasty, this to me was obviously about how bigotry works. When > an entire society has built itself on labels and tribalism, that's how > bigotry works. When what our tribe does is justified or at least > mitigated by our purer feelings, and what their tribe does has selfish > ulterior motives and is obviously wrong, when you can say, 'oh, he's a > Slytherin and Slytherins always do this or that', that's what bigotry > looks like. So, she's not advocating taking the kids sorted into > Slytherin aside and shooting them. She's just totally fine with the > idea that there is *something different about them*, but our Heroes > should be kind and magnanimous like they are to House Elves (and don't > even get me started on the House Elves). Oh, JKR wrote a book about > bigotry all right. lizzyben: Yes, she did. I had actually convinced myself that JKR used all this negative sterotypical imagery in order to subvert that type of bigotry with a reversal at the end. Because she did exactly that type of reversal in SS. Snape was the 'greasy foreigner' stereotype that everyone suspected of being a villain because he "looks the part". Then, in the end, it turns out that he was actually the good guy, and had saved Harry's life. Reversal of the stereotype. So, I foolishly thought that this meant that the negative stereotypes of Snape & Slytherin would be reversed as well in the final book. Silly me. This was also why I was almost desperate for a DDM!Snape, because it seemed like making Snape evil would totally reinforce those stereotypes. But what actually happened in DH is almost worse. Snape actually was DDM, and Lily's love, and Harry's protector, and none of it mattered. Because he was not redeemed. He was not able to join the divine elect, because he had been sorted into the house of evil, and nothing he did could change that. The most he could hope for is a compliment that he is *almost* (but not quite) as worthy as they are, and faint praise for exhibiting a Gryfindor trait. Sydney: > I could handwave and read between the lines and try to find a way that > this ends on a message of hope, but the bottom line is, Voldemort > tried to destroy the Hat, and Harry saved it. > > *sighs heavily* I really hate feeling like this. I wasn't being > facetious when I said this might be my favorite book. There was a lot > of beautiful stuff in it and Rowling is a storyteller of immense, > almost frightening power. I never heard a bad thing about her > personally in my life. But.. yeah, the total and utter validation of > labelling people, labelling them at such a young age, and then having > the people with good labels and people with bad ones.. it just goes so > deeply against me it makes me feel sick. Maybe I'm just bitter because > my vainglorious predictions were so totally wrong! And obviously I > have strong preference for reconciliation and reversal stories. "The > Little White Horse" is one of my favorite books. Bizarrely, it's also > one of Rowling's. I can't get my head around it. > > -- Sydney, heavy-hearted lizzyben: I wasn't hugely surprised by this, because IMO there's been an undercurrent of nastiness & cruelty throughout the novels. But I still hoped that there was a deeper message beyond Gryfindors rock! Alas. The oddest part, to me, is that JKR seems to consider "Gryf" qualities to be synonymous with goodness, when they are not. All of the Houses are pretty harsh & unforgiving - there's no house for kindness, mercy, or compassion in the Wizarding World. And while bravery & loyalty are usually good traits, it doesn't make you a good person. Because Bellatrix Lestrange is the ultimate Gryfindor. She is recklessly brave, charging into battle while people like Snape slither away. She is fanatically loyal, giving up family, friends, even her life for Voldemort. And she's totally evil. While DD, the "epitome of goodness", exhibits Slytherin traits of cunning, ambition, and using any means necessary to reach his goal. So, what? What's the message here? How can Slyth traits = evil, & Gryf traits = good, when those traits are seen in characters on the opposite side of the spectrum? I can't wrap my head around it either. lizzyben, who suspects she'd be a Hufflepuff & unable to join the divine elect. From Churchmouse365 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 01:29:12 2007 From: Churchmouse365 at aol.com (constant2chatter) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:29:12 -0000 Subject: Lilly's eyes another let down In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173885 > Eggplant Gellert Grindelwald: > Ok maybe I'm just a little bit dim but I just don't understand > this thread, this "Lilly's eyes another let down" thread. As a > charter (and recently resigned) member or the "I hate Snape club" > I find it difficult to imagine a more poignant scene. OK this is what I get from that, The eyes are the windows to the soul. A view of what is inside, Harry is Lily inside although he looks like his father. Snape loved Lily but hates the sight of James and that is why he treats Harry the way he does. Loved the book and have been waiting 8 years for this. Constant From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 01:59:30 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:59:30 -0000 Subject: Moments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173886 My choices: >Most 'Hell-YEAH' Moment of Awesomeness: Hermione finally giving it up to Ron after four years of verbal foreplay. >Creepiest Moment I would have to agree with you on the Nagini-inhabits-corpse moment. Second creepiest: Voldemort's Eyeballs in a Locket - and they talk! > Most Entertaining 'Stage Directions' Since 'Exit, Pursued By a Bear' Snape unceremoniously jumps out the window, leaving behind a "Snape- shaped hole." (Snape-shaped hole would make an excellent name for a rock band.) >Most Heart-Tugging (Non-Death) Moment Ron taking off his socks and shoes to dress Dobbby. > Moment That Allows the Reader to Most Identify With Previously > Primarily Loathsome Character Narcissa Malfoy deciding to screw over all the DEs to save her son. > Finally... > > Most Difficult Moment to Describe in All It's Awesomeness Except That > It Exhibits Tension-Relieving Humor, Character Consistency, Poetic > Justice, (Without the Word 'Bemused') Ron returning to the tent, dripping wet and wearing his most hopeful expression, and Hermione leaping to her feet and pummeling him to pieces. DH was really Ron's finest hour. He got all the best lines "Sometimes Death gets tired of running up to people, flapping his arms and shrieking" and shows the most character growth. The movie better do him justice, is all I'm saying. va32h From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 02:06:03 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 02:06:03 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic (wasRe: Deathly Hallows Reactio...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173887 > >>Betsy Hp: > > I disagree. I'll admit to being a bit of an optimist, but I > > really prefer to think that on the whole, most people are > > basically good. That there's a fixable reason societies descend > > into madness, and that a prime function of civilization is > > limiting or fixing those reasons. And that's something DH does > > not do. > > > >>Alla: > I don't know. I snipped out the most of your message, because the > mention of Anne Frank just made me realise how much I respect JKR's > world view. I mean, yeah, she remained optimistic and where did it > get her? > Woudn't that be better if she was fully aware that just as there > people in the world who will save jews, there are people who will > betray them in the blink of an eye? > I mean, whether it would save her, probably not, but one would > never know. Betsy Hp: It would not have saved Anne Frank, no. She'd have just spent her time in hiding bitter and angry. From what I've read Anne Frank was pretty beaten down once she was at the camps (IIRC the fate of the young Gypsy children affected her deeply). But the hope contained in her diary is, IMO, part of the reason her words are read so widely today. And why it resonates with so many people. > >>Alla: > I am reminded of half of my grandmother's family who was killed by > Natzis in Belorussia because they did not want to **run**, they > were thinking that Natsi are really **good** people who would do > them no harm. > Betsy Hp: That's a familiar story actually. Not that people thought Nazis were *good*. (Germany was invading countries that they'd invaded before, after all.) It was just hard to believe the level of atrocity they had sunk too. *However* what I'm referring to is the incredibly civilized way the Allies delt with defeated Germany. It would have been so easy to just massacre entire cities and towns. I'm sure some of the rescuers wanted to after releasing people from the death camps. But they didn't. They held the Nuremberg trials instead. They made sure the guilty were punished but they also enabled Germany to atone and move on. They allowed Germany to seperate itself from Nazism. *And* there were examples of Germans who did protest, who did rescue. (The same is true of Japan, actually.) Which is in contrast to DH in which Death Eaters and Slytherins were pretty much synonymous and Slytherin remains the "bad" house. Rather than say the house that builds really great cars. Oh, and no thought is given to *why* Voldemort rose up out of Slytherin. That maybe all of this shame piled onto Slytherin has given rise to a monster. Much as the shame piled on Germany after WWI gave rise to Hitler. > >>Alla: > I love stories about redemption as much as any other people, but no > matter how much I love "crime and punishment" for example, from > what I observe in RL ( from the newspapers and TV of course) people > who kill once, often enough go back to kill again, again, again > instead of showing remorse for what they did. > > I for once take my hat off to JKR for recognising that not > everybody is redeemable (IMO of course) and yes, putting it in > children's book (is it a children's book now, I am not sure) - or > this is how I think of it in any event. > Betsy Hp: Yes, and I wasn't expecting Voldemort or say, Bellatrix, to be redeemed. What I didn't like, what I found a rather dangerous message, is that *all* people of a certain group (water folk) are *all* incapable of being redeemed. That the best they can hope for is "not totally offensive". There's no such thing in real life. And it's odd that JKR decided to create such a thing in her grand finale. > >>bboyminn: > This is my appeal for perspective on the matter of > Houses, especially with regard to Slytherin. JKR > said herself that all Slytherins are not bad; that > we are seeing the worst of them. A view that I have > also held for a long time. Betsy Hp: Frankly, I don't care what JKR says outside her books. She could come up with all sorts of stories about "good" Slytherins. None of them appear in the books, ergo there are no good Slytherins. Which means an entire quarter of the school is designated no good. At age eleven they're able to be completely written off. [Just an aside to any who don't my little "interview" philosophy: While interviews can be interesting, if JKR says something that either isn't in or is contradicted by the books, it doesn't count, IMO. If she didn't get it in there, she didn't get it in there. No after-interviews can change that. I'm um, not sure how I'd feel about any encyclopedias that might occur. ] > >>bboyminn: > There is nothing wrong or inherently evil about any > of the Slytherin personality characteristics. But, > those characteristics are likely to contain a > group of people who seek power, and who are corrupted > by it. Betsy Hp: Yes, just as there's something inherently untrustworthy about Germans and you've got to keep an eye on them or else... Or does that sound a tiny bit bigoted to you? (And actually, profoundly dangerous. If we don't understand why Nazism rose up in Germany, if we write it off as something inherent to that country, we won't recognize the warning signals when they arise elsewhere.) Seriously though, an *entire* *quarter* of the school are more easily corrupted?!? And we figure that out at age eleven? I'm sorry, but it's an ugly viewpoint, IMO. No one should be able to right off a quarter of the human race like that. > >>bboyminn: > > So, my point is, that we are assuming that all Slytherins > are evil, and that JKR, by extension, assumes that > one fourth of all people are evil. But that is simply > not true. There is not reason to believe that the average > Slytherin is evil. > Betsy Hp: If that were true a few Slytherins would have stayed for the big battle at the end of DH. They didn't. They are less worthy than all the other houses. Souls just a tiny bit meaner, hearts just a tiny bit smaller. They probably don't even feel pain to the same extent as other houses. (Which is why dropping a Slytherin against a stone floor is good times. Any other house and it'd be horrifying.) > >>bboyminn: > JKR already said, not all Slytherins are bad. > Betsy Hp: I get the sense (from the DH) that it's more some Slytherins realize their mean and nasty natures. And they're duly subservient to the nearest blessed and golden Gryffindor. As I've said: not my personal view of the world. Betsy Hp From severussnape at shaw.ca Tue Jul 31 02:47:14 2007 From: severussnape at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 02:47:14 -0000 Subject: McGonagall's excellent decision In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173889 McGonagall did the best possible thing in sending away the entire Slytherin House as the battle unfolded. 1 - less chance of kids fighting kids, which is a win win situation 2 - less chance of kids facing their parents, or being caught between their parents and other kids's parents, or other kids who stayed to fight 3 - opportunity for those who are "basically good" to get out without compromising themselves, being targetted by their fellow housemates, and generally causing more death or destruction or division 4 - a quick decision done with an sturdy hand is the only way this could have been accomplished, dilly-dallying could have been costly The basic wisdom and goodness, if you will, of this decision says a lot about the Headmistress. And this decision matches in wisdom what marshaling the desks did by wit. dan From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 31 02:50:33 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 02:50:33 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic (wasRe: Deathly Hallows Reactio...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173890 > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > I disagree. I'll admit to being a bit of an optimist, but I > > > really prefer to think that on the whole, most people are > > > basically good. That there's a fixable reason societies descend > > > into madness, and that a prime function of civilization is > > > limiting or fixing those reasons. And that's something DH does > > > not do. > > > > > > >>Alla: > > I don't know. I snipped out the most of your message, because the > > mention of Anne Frank just made me realise how much I respect JKR's > > world view. I mean, yeah, she remained optimistic and where did it > > get her? > > Woudn't that be better if she was fully aware that just as there > > people in the world who will save jews, there are people who will > > betray them in the blink of an eye? > > I mean, whether it would save her, probably not, but one would > > never know. > > Betsy Hp: > It would not have saved Anne Frank, no. She'd have just spent her > time in hiding bitter and angry. From what I've read Anne Frank was > pretty beaten down once she was at the camps (IIRC the fate of the > young Gypsy children affected her deeply). But the hope contained in > her diary is, IMO, part of the reason her words are read so widely > today. And why it resonates with so many people. Magpie: Why assume that she didn't know that anyway? I mean, having an optimistic view of human beings does not mean that you must also be naive and just not know how the world is--a cynical, hopeless worldview can be equally naive. The girl was living in an annex because of what was being done to her family, she wasn't exactly living in a bubble of optimism to begin with. I don't think saying that people are basically good necessarily means that she expected every individual person to treat her well, more that even where there is evil, the human race was a good one. There are people who had similar experiences to Anne Frank and retained a positive view of the human race. Actually, one of my favorites was a guy in this documentary I saw which was about two friends. One had escaped the Nazis but later wound up in a Communist camp, the other was in a concentration camp and later became a Communist (but quit when he discovered they had such camps). And the second guy--okay, I should admit he was just really really cool to me personally, so I always love quoting things he said, but, like, at one point he was talking about how one day in the camp he was walking around with his feet cold and he looked at the guard and said, "Hmmm...if I were a guard, I'd have shoes." And he constructed this whole fantasy life for himself where he was a German boy and grew up a Nazi, it was very detailed. And at the end of it he said, "And I thought, how lucky I am to have been born a Jew!" The point being, this is not some naive guy who didn't see how ugly people can be. His whole family was killed and he's having these thoughts in a concentration camp. Almost all his stories ended with some truly horribly ironic ending. But his nature remained, and he was still always understanding other people. And that's maybe the thing for me, that while I see that plenty of people that I respect find this story resonates for them (people probably more of the temperment the guy's friend had--and he was a remarkable man!)--and I don't think that's wrong--it doesn't for me. I find it odd to hear how unrealistic it is to think that a bunch of teenagers who are racists could change. It's just a downer of a book for me--I know there are plenty of racists in the world, but this isn't the world, it's a 7 book series that's supposed to be about how important tolerance is, yet it just doesn't seem to say anything to me about tolerance. It seems more comfortable in extreme situations where you're fighting against incredible intolerance--which is a courageous thing, but without much focus on exactly what it is in all the people in this society that makes this happen so easily, it just doesn't say much. Harry just kills Voldemort. It's not like a focused study on the "why's" of bigotry-and the bigotry of the good guys is often answered with, "They're not Death Eaters, you know!" There seems like a real need for these people in canon. -m From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 02:52:47 2007 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 02:52:47 -0000 Subject: Moments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173891 My choices: Creepiest Moment The suggestiveness of what happened to Dumbledore's sister that provoked that level of violence from his father and that serious of breakdown from Ariana Most Heart-Tugging (Non-Death) Moment Naming Harry as Teddy's godfather, and the implications therein as his parents meet their fate Moment That Allows the Reader to Most Identify With Previously Primarily Loathsome Character Dudley: "I don't think you're a waste of space." Most Difficult Moment to Describe in All It's Awesomeness Except That It Exhibits Tension-Relieving Humor, Character Consistency, Poetic Justice: Harry thinking to himself that Hermione's question answering must be instinctive as she answers Scrimgeour's question about flesh memory. or Fleur's "Don't look at me Bill, I am 'ideous", when she is polyjuiceHarry psychobirdgirl From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 31 02:46:46 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 02:46:46 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: <879522.29515.qm@web81101.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173892 > > Christy: > > > What makes me curious, and I mentioned it before, is > > assuming Snape did use his Patronus to alert the > > Order in OOTP, didn't anyone wonder why this dark > > wizard known for his cruelty had such a mild and > > meek creature as his Patronus? (Did the other > > Patronuses laugh at him?) Anne Squires: I think they were so focussed on rescuing the kids from the DoM that they didn't laugh at Snape's patronus. The way I look at it a patronus is a representation of the caster's positive thoughts as well as an embodiment of the person to whom the caster owes their allegiance. The doe doesn't exactly represent Snape, it represents the person he loves. No, I don't think the others laughed. We don't even know Sirius' patronus. Christy continues: Not that anyone would > > have neccessarily made the connection to Lily -- > > that is not important to me -- its the irony that > > intrigues me. I can see Sirius saying, "hey, did > > you guys know that Snape's Patronus is a doe?" Anne Squires: I see that it could have been ironic. If Sirius had lived after they returned from the DoM he might have made those comments. As it stands he never got the chance. Christy: Or, > > maybe my assumption is wrong; maybe he had another > > way to talk to the Order, but with Umbridge > > monitoring all conventional channels of > > communication I can't see how. Anne Squires: Actually, I always thought Snape had used a mirror like the one Sirius gave Harry. This, of course, would make the fact that Harry didn't use his mirror even more ironic. I have no canon for this. It's just an idea I had before HBP came out and we learned about Patronuses (Patroni??). Anyway it was probably a patronus, not a mirror. I'm just saying it **could** have been a mirror. Tawana Campbell wrote: > > But can't people make their patronus change? > Anne Squires: The way I understand it, a caster's patronus **can** change; but the caster does not control this chage. At least not consciously. Nor can the caster control what form the patronus will take. The patronus changes when the person with whom a person most identifies changes. When your "protector" or your "love" changes your patronus changes automatically. Thus, when Tonks falls in love with Lupin her patronus changes to a wolf; but Tonks did not control this change in patronus. Another thing to remember is that DD continued to trust Severus Snape because his patronus continued to be a doe after all those years. That's why Snape cast a patronus in DD's office, to prove his continuing loyalty. If a caster could consciously control the form a patronus takes then DD would not have accepted this as proof of Snape's loyalty. As a matter of fact, if a person could control their patronus form then Snape would not have even bothered to cast the patronus, imho. Anne Squires From AllieS426 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 03:03:34 2007 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:03:34 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173893 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "allies426" wrote: > > > King's Cross Dumbledore told Harry > > that he expected Harry to survive. > > I don't see where Dumbledore told Harry that at Kings Cross he > expected Harry to live. He told Harry that he didn't die because > Voldemort had his blood and he was still alive, and Voldemort was > still alive because the snake was still alive. Dumbledore told Snape > that he expected Harry to destroy the snake before he confronted > Voldemort for the last time and he expected Harry to die. Allie again: I could be misinterpreting, because I really wanted Dumbledore to know, or at least suspect, that Harry would survive. Here's the canon: p. 708-710 (snipped) Harry: "- how can I be alive?" DD: "Think back, remember what he did..." Harry: "He took my blood!" DD: "He tethered you to live while he lives... His body keeps her sacrifice alive, and while that enchantment survives, so do you and so does Voldemort's one last hope for himself." ****Harry: "And you knew this? You knew all along?"**** DD: "I guessed. But my guesses have usually been good." I suppose one could argue that Dumbledore only knew this after Goblet of Fire when Voldemort took Harry's blood, and DD was intending Harry to be the sacrifice up until that happened. But... I still think Dumbledore intended Harry to live. DD misled Snape because Harry had to TRULY THINK he was walking to his death so he would allow Voldemort to AK the Horcrux out of him. He probably knew that in all likelihood Harry would be viewing those revelations through a pensieve; how could Harry allow Snape to discuss anything with him in a rational manner after he murdered DD? So Snape had to believe it too. From lpuhala at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 03:10:30 2007 From: lpuhala at gmail.com (aquilalorelei) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:10:30 -0000 Subject: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173894 Nothing spoilery in the title, nosirree. Just wondering what we think the flayed piteous child-thing is in the limbo!King's Cross station. I really have no idea, especially with why Dumbledore so specifically forbids Harry to aid it (him? her?) Was it a part of Tom Riddle, and so would corrupt Harry with its evil? Was it something of Dumbledore or his family that he did not want Harry to see? Was it a part of Harry himself best left unexplored? And last but perhaps most importantly, why was it there if it had nothing to do with Harry when, presumably, the "vision-space" was his? Discuss. Regards, AquilaLorelei From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:13:37 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:13:37 -0000 Subject: Locket and Umbridge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: > Early in HBP, if you will recall, when Harry does his first week of > detentions, Umbridge touches Harry's hand and his scar hurts as if he > were close to Voldemort. > > The implication I took, knowing that she ended up with the locket, was > that she might have acquired it early in book 6, so that by the time > of the detention scene it had begun to possess her Hi, Matt! You are probably right about Umbridge acquiring the locket in book 6, but Harry's detentions with her took place in book 5. She was evil before she got the locket! However, it's possible that the Locket! Horcrux made her even more cruel. I was so pleased JKR finally confirmed today that the evil toad was punished :-). zanooda From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:24:01 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:24:01 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707301130rca8d06fwb4e2ad8d2c407479@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173896 Magpie wrote: A universe in which compassion is a more important virtue, I think, it comes out quite differently, however. Sometimes the compassion might scald a person, yes, but usually it's based on true empathy and more importantly *humility* which is something Harry never ever has to learn, because he's superior. The story is not about Harry looking at his enemies and seeing himself in them, seeing himself as no better than them, which is at the heart of compassion, imo. It's Harry the Christ figure granting absolution to inferiors, which for me keeps him from ever really being a figure of any exceptional compassion at all. I think he's far more about justice. Snape *earned* the way Harry feels about him by spending a life protecting him and by loving his mother. Harry didn't look at Snape and see himself in him and forgive him from that position. To me, the courage-based system vs. compassion-based system is just very clear throughout the books and is very consistent, especially in the way many of the villains are viewed and forgiven. Even in death Snape owes his honor to Harry. Sorry, that was negative again. I don't mean to put anybody down who sees Harry as compassionate. I just don't think he is at all. He's got other virtues, but compassion's not something I've really seen him have to much develop. montims replied: > you see, I don't believe Harry is "superior" - he has been selected by the prophecy, and has to react to many different challenges because of it. But as he continually tries to explain, and Ron finally gets, most of it comes about by luck, the help of friends, and DD's guidance. He is a good person because he has suffered as a child and consequently has empathy for others who suffer. But he's not superior, and I think at the end would never claim to be superior. To what/whom? Slytherins? Muggles? House elfs? Goblins? LV? - well, maybe. But he sees too often how his initial judgements are incorrect, and that people are not black and white as they might first appear. If he is superior, who is his inferior? Carol responds: First, I think I agree with montims but I'm not quite sure. Perhaps you could follow up and clarify a little? Second, I think that all of us (and I'm not referring to anyone specific here though I am responding to this thread in general) could stand to sit down and calmly reread the books without imposing our hopes and preconceptions on them, and I certainly include myself in the advice I'm so blatantly ignoring. :-) I think that, at this stage, especially, we should keep our interpretations fluid. Aside To SSS from another thread: If JKR's statements don't seem to fit the text, maybe we should accept that as a clue that she's not fully aware of her own authorial intentions. (Snape abandoning his post? Does the headmaster's office somehow agree with McGonagall that he's "done a bunk" despite his having no choice in the matter, not to mention what would have happened had he *not* jumped through that window? Or has his name simply not yet been cleared when Harry shows up in the office minutes after his death to examine his memories? If JKR chooses to tell us that *Harry* will make sure that Snape has a portrait, let him think it. At least she believes that he merits one. The rest of us can choose to believe that the office or the new headmaster or even reinstated temporary headmistress McGonagall figures out that if Snape has "done a bunk," he had very good reason.) Anyway, these off-the-cuff responses aren't canon and I don't think we should put too much stock in them. As for Harry being in charge of Snape's redemption, which I think Magpie is suggesting, I don't think so. Snape redeems himself, expiating his sins, whether Harry acknowledges that or not. I agree that Snape has *earned* his redemption, but it's important for Harry to see that. And it isn't just a matter of forgiving the adult Snape, it's understanding Snape as a whole, even identifying with him--Harry and Severus and *Tom* as the "abandoned boys" who found their first and only home at Hogwarts. It's essential to the plot, of course, that Harry forgive Snape because had he not done so he could not have faced Voldemort in the right frame of mind, self-sacrificial, with no desire for vengeance even against Voldemort, who gets his chance for redemption and turns it down. Yes, Snape earns his redemption, but Harry must have an epiphany to understand that. And his compassion and empathy and forgiveness are so tied in with what he's witnessing that he's not even aware of them. There's no conscious admission that he was wrong, not recognition that he forgives Snape, but that he has done so is obvious from the public vindication and the name he gives his second son. But as far as repairing Snape's reputation is concerned, half the WW sees him as McGonagall does, the murderer of Albus Dumbledore serving Voldemort's evil ends, and only Harry knows the truth. Harry and only Harry can clear Snape's name, which he does in front of everyone from Death Eaters to the DA. I think it's wholly admirable of Harry to make sure that Snape, his former enemy, is vindicated, and if it takes Harry to make sure that Snape has a portrait in the headmaster's office, so be it. At least he'll have one. And I can just imagine the chats Portrait!Snape will have with Portrait! Phineas. (Didn't anyone else find it absolutely delicious that Phineas Nigellus Black, head of the Noble House Black, "worshipped" Headmaster Snape and took up DD's old line of correcting "Snape" to "Professor Snape"? I loved it! And I also loved Phineas near the end shouting, "And let it be remembered that Slytherin House played its part! Let our contribution not be forgotten!" (747). Even if that contribution consisted solely of Snape's immensely courageous final act, where would Harry and the WW be without it? But we also have Snape's seventeen years of lying and spying and risking his life for Lily (and, IMO, Dumbledore), we have Slughorn's belated entrance into the battle (in his pajamas, IIRC), and Kreacher's rallying cry of "Fight! Fight! Fight for my Mater, defender of House-elves! Fight the Dark Lord, in the name of brave Regulus! Fight!" (734). *Not* in the name of Harry Potter. In the name of *brave* Regulus, Slytherin Qiidditch player turned Death Eater turned hero and martyr and, finally, seventeen years after his unsung and horrible self-sacrifice, getting his due. Either Harry or Hermione will certainly make his story as well as Snape's known to the public. (Kreacher will make it known to the house-elves.) And Kreacher, too, is a reformed Slytherin of sorts, or at least the product of Slytherin values turned into a hero. Not all Slytherins are Death Eaters, and even Death Eaters--two of them--can be redeemed, as brave as any Gryffindor. And love is the motivation in both cases. What wrought the change in Kreacher from a cringing, cursing, scheming, filthy little bit of apparent scum to an aging Boy Scout among house-elves? Surely, it *was* Harry's compassion as he, too, has a change of heart, a change of perspective, a new understanding much like the understanding he gains of the dead Snape through the Pensieve memories, only in this case, he can extend his understanding and compassion to a living being. (I think the living Snape *did* want Harry to understand him, but he certainly didn't want his compassion.) To return to Kreacher, Sirius, the Gryffindor, treated Kreacher abominably. Regulus, the Slytherin, died avenging Voldemort's cruel treatment of him. Note that Harry, with his anti-Slytherin bias, at first assumes that Regulus made Kreacher drink the potion (DH 196). But even after he hears the story and understands Regulus's sacrifice, he still orders Kreacher around and jumps on him to prevent him from hurting himself. He still sees Kreacher as Sirius's betrayer. We can actually see the moment when the light dawns on Harry that he dirty creature in front of him, who has served the pureblood, Slytherin, "Mud-blood"-hating House of Black, is what Dumbledore said he was in OoP, "a being with feelings as acute as a human's" who is what wizards, including Sirius, have made him. Hermione (who seems finally to have grasped the psychology of house-elves) tells Harry that Kreacher is loyal to people who are kind to him and echoes their views witout examining their logic or validity, even if those people are Narcissa and Bellatrix, supporters of the Dark Lord whom Regulus died opposing and betrayers in Harry's rather simplistic view, of his beloved godfather (neither the Black sisters nor Kreacher actually expected Sirius to show up in the MoM, but never mind). Hermione says, "Sirius was horrible to Kreacher, Harry, and it's no good looking like that. You know it's true. Kreacher had been alone for a long time when Sirius came to live here, and he was probably starving for a bit of affection. I'm sure 'Miss Cissy' and 'Miss Bella' were perfectly lovely to Kreacher when he turned up, so he did them a favor and told them everything they wanted to know. I've said all along that wizards would pay for how they treat house-elves. Well, Voldemort did...and so did Sirius." Harry has no retort. Dumbledore's words come back to him as he watches Kreacher sobbing on the carpet, and instead of ordering him around as he's done before, even after hearing his terrible story, he tells him kindly to please sit up when he feels better. And then he gives him the important mission of finding Mundungus Fletcher, overdoes things a little (but all to the good) by giving Kreacher the otherwise useless fake locket as a memento of Regulus. Harry's reward is a happy, clean, obedient Kreacher (whose true allegiance is still to Master Regulus but is willing to serve Harry, and serve him well, for Regulus's sake--love, not principle, as the motive for redemption yet again). IMO, the scene where Kreacher, our stand-in for Figgy, hits Mundungus on the head with a saucepan is priceless. It's also his first blow in the battle against Harry's enemy, the same enemy that Regulus died trying to thwart. If Harry is a Christ figure (and I do think he is), it's not because he shows compassion to everyone or to his "inferiors" (though we've certainly seen him progress from virtual oblivion to the suffering of others to compassion for Neville, a Gryffindor; to Luna, an eccentric Ravenclaw; to Kreacher, the filthy and hostile house-elf he regards as betraying Regulus; to Snape, the hated Slytherin teacher who "murdered" Dumbledore. Harry's own suffering makes his compassion, or his empathy, or whatever it is, possible. Harry has suffered loss in a variety of forms (the death of Hedwig, along with the unlamented loss of his Firebolt, is a symbolic final farewell to innocence and childhood, occurring just before he becomes legally a man). He's lost parents, friends, and mentors. He can empathize with the loss that others suffer; he can reach out to save helpless strangers like Mrs. Cattermole (the "saving people" thing, but this time there's nothing personal involved. It's the right thing to do, for, IMO, the right reason. And that compassion, that ability to reach out to the suffering victims of Lord Voldemort and his minions, leads ultimately to the Christlike sacrifice that he must make to destroy Voldemort. Had he not known, himself, the pain of losing friends and loved ones and mentors, how could he have made such a sacrifice? Lily's love for her son is the universal love of a mother for her child (seen even in Narcissa and, earlier, in Mrs. Crouch), but Harry must, in some abstract and yet very real way, love the whole WW to sacrifice himself for it). The closest analogy I can think of, though there are many Christ figures in literature, is Frodo sacrificing himself (so he thinks) for the Shire. That does not make him Christ (he throws a Crucio in one of the most disturbing scenes in the book, and, no, JKR's rationalization does not excuse it for me). He doesn't bring redemption to the world or anything of the sort any more than Lily did (though her sacrifice made his possible). He defeats the enemy it was his destiny to defeat (destiny being malleable and the product of our choices, not an inevitable, predestined future), and then he becomes, to the extent that it's possible, Just Harry, a husband and father working in the job he always wanted. Yes, he's famous, but even to Ron, the eyes staring at Harry's scar are a matter for laughter. Hermione, too, is working to "do some good in the world." We don't know what it is. We don't need to know. It's best left to the imagination. And the Slytherins are not quite so stereotyped as some of these posts imply, especially by the end of the book. They do *not* all look like the stereotypical Jews of anti-Semitic literature (cf. the blond Malfoys and the jolly, straw-haired Slughorn and the handsome Blacks, not to mention young Tom Riddle) and are not all rich (cf. Severus Snape and Tom Riddle) and do not all become Death Eaters (it appears that unlike Draco, Crabe, and Goyle, neither Theo Nott nor Blaise Zabini has joined the Death Eaters). Regulus and Snape are as brave as any Gryffindor, Slughorn joins the fight for the right side, Portrait!Phineas loyally serves Professor Snape and snidely imparts valuable information without arousing HRH's supicion, the Malfoys show that they are at least capable of shame or love or repentance. By the end of the book, the Malfoys have come down in the world and are not likely to trumpet the pure-blood supremacy ethic that brought them so much grief. Draco is weak but he isn't evil; Narcissa performs an act of courage based on love for her son which, selfish or not, helps to save Harry. Admittedly, Pansy Parkinson would benefit from knowing what sort of "glory" becoming a Death Eater earned Draco--perhaps she'd keep her mouth shut--and the Slytherins sitting out the battle cannot be considered admirable, but it's much better than fighting for the wrong side, and as someone on the list pointed out, if they fought for Harry's side, they might be fighting against their own families and would certainly be endangering them if Voldemort won. After all their indoctrination in pure-blood supremacy and the wonderful regime Voldemort was going to bring about, it's surprising that only Draco (motivated by revenge for his father's arrest) and apparently his thug cronies, Crabbe and Goyle, became DEs, and only Crabbe is so ruined by the Carrows that he actually tries to kill Harry, getting burned to a crisp for his pains. By the time of the epilogue, Voldemort is long dead; Slytherin is no longer the House of budding Death Eaters. The Dark Arts, we can be sure, will not be encouraged. With the DADA curse gone, kids might actually learn what they are and how to fight them. If Harry wouldn't mind (too much) having his son sorted into Slytherin, the criterion must now be something other than blood status or cunning or interest in the Dark Arts. Ambition, the only neutral trait we've seen associated with Slytherin, seems most likely. Rome wasn't built in a day. Progress *is* being made. Curt civility between Draco and Harry isn't friendship but it isn't enmity, either. Draco does not need to be reminded of his terrible mistake. I doubt very much that he'll forget it. Perhaps he has nightmares about Crabbe. But at least he's free, out of Azkaban and making, we can hope, some sort of contribution to society, and judging from Harry's advice to his children, the sins of the father (Draco) will not, we must hope, be visited upon the son (Scorpius, who will probably end up changing his name to Steve). When we read a book, whether it's by Austen or Tolkien or Rowling, we cannot realistically impose our expectations upon it and judge it for failing to meet them. Am author, unless he's a hack writing for a specific market following a specified formula, is not writing what the reader wants. He or she has no way of knowing our precise expectations and could not meet them if she did because the author's imagination and values and experience are her own. He or she must write the book that is in her head and heart. It will never be exactly what it started out to be and it will never be without flaws. Tales, like posts, grow in the telling, and the writer sometimes loses conscious control and the plot and characters take on a life of their own. Who among us could have invented Severus Snape or rendered Kreacher a sympathetic character? This is a work of the imagination, not a moral tract. And JK Rowlimg, for all her fame and money, is just a human being, just a writer telling the story that has lived inside her mind for seventeen years. Nor do I think we can put too much stock in JKR's inconsistent commentary about her own work. (You were right, Alla. It wasn't just that the "Today Show" snippets were edited down so that they seemed to contradict the full interview on "NBC Dateline," the chat really does seem to show a different, more favorable, view of Snape than the earlier, more neutral, remarks.) I don't think we should judge her too harshly for that. It's unlikely that she can fully state her intentions, other than to write a gripping story with Harry as hero, Dumbledore as mentor, and Snape in a key role kept secret to the end. Certainly, some motifs and symbols are deliberate (such as the symbolic journey into the "underworld" in most of the books, foreshadowing the "King's Cross" scene in DH). But many intentions are unconscious. Others change or develop in the process of writing. And no author can really state, much less realize in the sense of fulfill, her intentions. It's like knowing what a newborn baby will become and controlling his growth and development to make sure he's exactly what we've foreseen. Did JKR intend to make Harry the "savior" of the WW? Savior in what sense? Does it matter? Did she intend him to be viewd as compassionate? If so, did she succeed? Did she intend to make Slytherin synonymous with evil despite saying that it represents aspects of the self that are less than desirable? Does the text support that interpretation, whether she intended it or not? Whatever her intentions, did she fully realize them (in the sense of making them real), showing in the text *exactly* what she intended to show? Of course not. Books have a habit of getting outside their author's conscious control, and they contain things the author doesn't know that they contain, reflections of values that the author takes for granted. And words never exactly express our thoughts. The most carefully crafted sentence never exactly conveys the intention behind it, and the larger the work, the more likely that the reader and the author will interpret it differently, just as no two readers interpret a book in the same way though they're reading identical editions. Words are human inventions, subject to interpretation by other human beings, who interpret them differently based on their own experience and value systems and ways of thinking. I do understand the impulse to criticize the books because JKR's value system seems inconsistent. I see that as clearly as you do, and I never liked having certain characters, especially evil or unpleasant ones, described as looking as if they had Troll blood (isn't that a form of prejudice?) or resembling toads (stereotyped ugly bad guy). But the main characters and some minor characters are exceptions to this rule. (HRH, fortunately, are all just ordinary-looking kids. Beautiful or handsome characters fall on both sides of the moral spectrum. Tom Riddle and G. Grindelwald start out handsome; Bellatrix starts out beautiful and Narcissa remains so. (Were it not for Draco's plight and Lucius's punishment, she would have remained a Voldemort supporter to the end.) In any case, before judging the books as a whole on the depiction of Slytherins or any other percieved moral failing, I think we should look closely at the individual scenes and their meaning and at individual characters. Surely, Harry has made some progress in his perception of Slytherins in general, not just Snape. Surely, he has come closer to seeing them as flawed human beings like himslef--not Umbridge or Yaxley or the Carrows, but Snape and the Malfoys and Slughorn and Regulus and Kreacher. (And the reader can appreciate Phineas Nigellus, even if Harry can't. Wonder if Harry still lives in 12 GP and Phineas still visits him?) And, surely, someone in the WW besides Harry has learned from this experience or benefitted from it. After an anguished first reading, a careful rereading of important or favorite passages, and several attempts at rereading the whole book but finding myself distracted, I'm finally settling down to a leisurely rereading in which I can both enjoy and pay attention to what I'm reading. I already see flaws in the book--gaps and inconsistencies and lapses in logic and even JKR's abysmal math, not to mention the confusion caused by the whole Hallows subplot--and I expect to find more in subsequent rereadings. But I also expect my perceptions and interpretations of the book to change, in response to the book itself and to what other readers are saying. None of us expected the book to be what it is. And we should have known that it would not be what we would have written had we been JKR. Please, everyone who's unhappy with the book because we expected "better." Let's reread it and see what's really there, not what isn't there that we expected to see. And let's realize that even when we read what's really there, we may not see what JKR expected us to see or feel what JKR expected us to feel. Our responses are, after all, as individual as ourselves. Carol, apologizing for the long post and the sermon and changing out of her vicar's robes now From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:32:00 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:32:00 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173897 > Lupinlore: > Except, of course, that JKR has told us (if you believe that > authorial intent means anything, which of course is a point of > argument) zgirnius: I am not a big fan of authorial intent. Prior to the release of DH interviews were a source of clues and an indication of which theories were worth considering. Now I do consider myself in possession of all of the facts. That said, my training is not in the humanities and I have little interest in debating the merits of different schools of literary criticism. > Lupinlore: > That is > (paraphrasing) "he is still a cruel, bitter, insecure man, all of > this is still true of Snape." As his cruelty and bitterness and > insecurity are the very things that constitute the dark within > himself from which he needs to be redeemed, he has by definition not > had a deathbed conversion, and thus has not embraced the possibility > represented by Harry. zgirnius: Actually, he's dead, so he's not any of the above. I therefore take the quote to be a general statement about his character. What I took the quoted text to mean was to remind those of us who are still recovering from the overwelming emotional experience that was Chapter 33 that Books 1-6 still happened. The new information does not erase what we saw about Snape and his relationship with Harry, it just finally gives us the explanation. I took the intent of the quote to be a refutation of certain DDM! theories that Snape's unpleasantness was always an act, a necessary part of his role as a spy. And I feel that even without the cited comment by Rowling, DH canon makes this point. Snape says the same sorts of things about Harry in private with the one man who knows all of his secrets as he does in public - so it was no act. Even though I attach some significance to Snape's choice to deliver the memories to Harry, had Hermione pulled something out of her bag of tricks that actually allowed Snape to survive, I would not expect that Snape and Harry would get along at all well after. The other thing Rowling said, that I also believe and get from the text as well, is that Snape loathed Harry until the end, unfairly. (Paraphrase). That does not preclude acting on a feeling that he wants to give Harry an explanation, any more than it precludes trying to help Harry. > Lupinlore: > Why did he provide the memories? An interesting question. Frankly, > my answer would be he provides them because JKR wants to fill in the > backstory and this is the convenient way to do it. zgirnius: She had creative freedom to choose how to get that information to us and to Harry, and the text of DH is what she chose. If it has possible implications that she did not consider, she still wrote it, it is still the solution that best fit her vision for whatever reason. Which makes it fair game for analyzing the book and the characters. Though, since I see nothing in her interview comments which precludes my interpretation that it was a conscious and deliberate decision by Snape to give those memories, I think she did intend it. > Lupinlore: > As far as your > point about a "meaningful gesture," a "yes" and an explanation to > Albus would have the virtue of being clear, whereas Snape's memories > contain no sense of regret over his treatment of Harry or an > acceptance of Harry -- at least none I can find in any way. His > anger at being told that Harry must sacrifice himself seems to be > anger at being used and lied to, as he in fact indicates when he > specifically denies caring for Harry. zgirnius: I don't necessarily think he *did* regret his treatment of Harry, particularly. I do not approve of it, but it has never mattered all that much to me. Snape wronged Harry far more greatly before they ever met, and while nothing he did or could ever do would make up for that, what he proved to have been doing all those years as a spy and protector of Harry matters more to me than his teaching issues. What the memories do show, quite clearly, is Snape's true remorse for his role in the death of Harry's parents (yes, I know, he cared a lot more about Lily, James was an afterthought), and his innocence in the matter of Dumbledore's murder; matters that are far more important to me, and I believe also to Harry. At the time Snape and Dumbledore had the 'pig to slaughter' conversation, Snape was not thinking of himself as an actor in a Pensieve recording he was making for the benefit of Harry Potter. I would have found a straightforward admission to Dumbledore of any sort of care of regret for the fate of Harry hard to swallow under those circumstances. The last thing I would expect Snape to do upon discovering that he was, in a sense, betrayed, would be to admit in any way to a new emotional vulnerability, supposing he had one. > Lupinlore: > If one wants a more plot-consistent reason for supplying the > memories, maybe he had little control over what memories leaked out -- > he was, as you say, dieing after all. Or even more likely he chose > them out of anger at Dumbledore -- a way of saying "look what a > cruel, manipulative liar the old man was!" zgirnius: The memories were not chosen to be maximally hurtful to Harry. Showing less of Dumbledore would have been far more effective for that purpose. Not showing any of his anger at young!Snape and not showing any of his defenses of Harry to Snape, would have been better. If the memories were consciously chosen, what they did best was to explain Snape to Harry while passing on the information Harry needed from Dumbledore. From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:38:14 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:38:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <775661.42530.qm@web55004.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173898 Anne Squires >Another thing to remember is that DD continued to trust Severus Snape >because his patronus continued to be a doe after all those years. >That's why Snape cast a patronus in DD's office, to prove his >continuing loyalty. If a caster could consciously control the form a >patronus takes then DD would not have accepted this as proof of >Snape's loyalty... I'm responding from memory because I'm too lazy to run downstairs to get my book... I thought Snape showed Dumbledore his Patronus to prove that he still cares for Lily (which is what drove his loyalty) and that it occurred the night that Dumbledore told Snape that Harry had to die, which happened during Harry's 6th on the same evening that Hagrid overheard Snape and Dumbledore arguing (the same argument that Hagrid relates to Harry in HBP). In response to Snape's anger over learning that Harry had to die, Dumbledore wonders if he (Snape) is starting to care for him (Harry). Snape said something like, "for him?" and then conjured his Patronus which showed that after all of those years (decades now) he still cared for her. He protected Harry for Lily, not for Dumbledore and certainly not for James or for Harry himself. Upon seeing Snape's doe Patronus twenty odd years later, Dumbledore couldn't deny just how much Snape really did care for her and continues to care for her 16 years after she died. The whole memory made me think that Dumbledore hadn't seen Snape's Patronus for a while or even if ever. (Since Snape is at Hogwarts, he wouldn't necessarily need to communicate with Dumbledore that way.) I was attempting humor (and apparently failed) when I asked if the other Patronus laughed and suggested Sirius teased him. Whether or not anyone in the Order ever saw Snape's Patronus, I love the fact that that that dark wizard, that cruel, vindictive man had such a meek creature as his Spiritual Guide (which is how JKR refers to Patronuses on her website). I love Snape -- I don't see him through rose-colored glasses though -- and his Patronus makes me love him even more. Christy From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:40:51 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:40:51 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione's children In-Reply-To: <786-46AE718F-4340@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173899 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Igrainna at ... wrote: > > Hello! New here and loving it... > > I haven't seen this mentioned but I was wondering if anyone knew the > origins of the names of Ron and Hermione's children: Rose and Hugo? I > could understand the Potter kids (Albus, James and Lily) but I have yet > to find any reference in the Granger or Weasley family lines to "Rose" > and "Hugo". > > Any thoughts? > > Thanks, > Grainne > TKJ: What were Hermione's parents names? TKJ :-) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Jul 31 03:41:47 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:41:47 -0000 Subject: Did Snape really abandon his post? Was: No progress for Slytherin? In-Reply-To: <72621.2123.qm@web30107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173900 Barbara: > I don't see him as abandoning Hogwarts either. He was > a soldier in the big war and his part to protect the > students was over. He needed to get back to LV to > fight there. > > If he had lived, he might have been headmaster but I > doubt if he would really have wanted the job. > > I don't think that Snape really liked to teach (just > an impression I get.) Jen: Yeah, I don't think he wanted the post either. Got outta there as fast as he could, didn't he? Whoa, who knew Snape could *fly* either, "Take that James Potter, I don't need a broom!" LOL About the word abandonment, wanted to say I took it as an offical term, not judgemental term. None of the terms to explain what happened are great, must have been invented by employers: 'Walked out; job abandonment; left without notice; absent without leave...' I'll bet we could think of some better terms to describe what happened; Snape would sneer at the official terms. Jen From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:15:59 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: <879522.29515.qm@web81101.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <607575.33310.qm@web55005.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173901 Christy: > What makes me curious, and I mentioned it before, is > assuming Snape did use his Patronus to alert the > Order in OOTP, didn't anyone wonder why this dark > wizard known for his cruelty had such a mild and > meek creature as his Patronus? (Did the other > Patronuses laugh at him?) Not that anyone would > have neccessarily made the connection to Lily -- > that is not important to me -- its the irony that > intrigues me. I can see Sirius saying, "hey, did > you guys know that Snape's Patronus is a doe?" Or, > maybe my assumption is wrong; maybe he had another > way to talk to the Order, but with Umbridge > monitoring all conventional channels of > communication I can't see how. Tawana Campbell >But can't people make their patronus change? A friend has my copy of HBP so I'm relying solely on my memory... When he meets Tonks and Harry at the front gates of Hogwarts in HBP, Snape insults Tonks's new Patronus, which prompts Harry to later ask Lupin about changing one's Patronus. I think Lupin said it can change as the result of a trauma or emotional distress or something of that nature -- I didn't get the impression that one can change his or her Patronus by choice. JKR refers to Patronuses as Spiritual Guides on her website so that leads me think that one doesn't choose -- that rather Patronuses are reflections of those who cast them and what's important to or indicative of those people. I'm OK not knowing or understanding how Snape communicated to the Order at the end of OOTP -- I just find it ironic that he might have used a symbol of Lily Potter to communicate with James's best friends. Considering that Snape stood outside the Gryffindor Common Room until Lily came out to talk to him so he could apologize after he insulted her, their friendship must not have been too secret. So, perhaps they wouldn't think anything of his Patronus being a doe anyway. Just one of the many things in the Potter universe that intrigues me... Christy --------------------------------- Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From random832 at fastmail.us Tue Jul 31 03:42:25 2007 From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:42:25 -0400 Subject: Many responses (Molly's age, Hagrid, JKR stuff, unforgivables, etc) - also, Moody's Eye In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AEAFA1.7020901@fastmail.us> No: HPFGUIDX 173902 (I hit some odd keys and the window closed, if I sent a previous message in this thread please disregard/delete) > bboyminn: > > On the first point you are wrong. Molly mentions, the > previous Game Keeper, the previous Caretaker, and mentions > the Whomping Willow was planted after she was in school. > > Filch, the Caretaker, has been on the job 25 years. The > Whomping Willow was planted when Lupin came to school, > that means Molly was there before Lupin, Snape, the > Marauders, and most likely Malfoy. The Marauders were > there more than 20 years ago. Random832: Right, but we don't know that she's any more than a decade, or even a year, older than Lupin etc. (I've always seen Arthur and Molly as being about half a decade older than Snape, Harry's parents, etc, and Lucius being in the same year as them. I'll also add that IMO the difference between Lucius and Arthur's interactions in book 2, and Harry and Draco's in the epilogue, at, as I see it, _about_ the same age (give or take a couple years) seems symbolic.) > bboyminn: > As to Hagrid and Ogg, what difference does it make if > Hagrid was Gamekeeper or Assistant Gamekeeper, it still > happened 50 years ago. Hagird is not exactly a pixie; > he is a little hard to miss whether he is stumping > around the grounds as Gamekeeper or Assistant Gamekeeper. Random832: A good portion of the grounds is the Forbidden Forest - which is, well, Forbidden (and, anyone not "in the know", particularly a little kid who might be utterly terrified by someone 10 feet tall and likely well over half a ton, might assume he lives there) > bboyminn: > And how long do you imagine Hagrid would be Assistant? > ...5 years? ...10 years? Random832: Until Ogg retires, and Hagrid's competence has nothing to do with this. > bboyminn: > He seems to have a natural > affinity for animals, I imagine he took to the job > very quickly. Random832: Right, took to the job of assistant gamekeeper, and thus would naturally be the first candidate for the gamekeeper job once the existing one dies or retires. > Allie: > > How would the elder wand know that Harry, unseen, defeated its "true" > > master, Draco, when the wand was possessed by a third party at the > > time? Random832: magic, of course. JKR Chat: "How exactly do muggleborns receive magical ability? JKR: Muggle-borns will have a witch or wizard somewhere on their family tree, in some cases many, many generations back. The gene re-surfaces in some unexpected places." Random832: Whoa. Kind of turns the whole "blood doesn't matter" message inside-out. Also means the department of mystery findings about muggleborns is going to be harder to overturn (since while the conclusions about "theft" are wrong, the basic findings are true rather than being something wholly fabricated by Voldemort and Umbridge) Also, how far back, exactly? All of humanity is descended from the same person some 8,000 years ago (at the most conservative estimate - it's considered more likely to be something like 3,000 years ago). J.K. Rowling: My very earliest plan for the story involved somebody managing to get to Hogwarts when they had never done magic before, but I had changed my mind by the time I'd written the third book. Random832: Whoa - didn't the 'late in life' quote come from some time after the fifth book came out? Or was that just people in here digging it up and hyping it on the assumption that that was the 'something more' to Petunia? (muscatel writes: "when she volunteered that information back in 1999, she'd already finished PoA and had embarked on GoF") Maybe she'd still hoped to work it in somehow. -- On unforgivables: A lot of people have said a lot of things about this and I don't have anything to quote - I do think that at least under the laws that were in effect before the ministry was taken over, they were truly _unforgivable_ - the law did not admit any exceptions, defenses, or anything beyond the fact of having done it. That's why they're "unforgivable". ---- Now, an old response that I wrote before DH came out but slipped through the cracks without being sent --- Pippin: > > But elves do not deserve to be inferior because they can adapt > > to their inferior status, Random832: It's a human assumption that working without payment makes them inferior. ---MOODY'S EYE--- Two things - the fact that it can see through Harry's "perfect" invisibility cloak, and the fact that it was so significant Umbridge went back and stole it after Moody fell to his death, to hang on her door. It would seem this is no run-of-the-mill magical eye. From darksworld at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 04:14:33 2007 From: darksworld at yahoo.com (Charles Walker Jr) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 04:14:33 -0000 Subject: Moments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173903 My moments: The "Hell Yeah!": Kreacher leading the house elves out to fight in the names of Harry and Regulus. My wife got a completely startled look on her face when I read that for the first time and shouted "Go Kreacher!" Creepiest moment: Mad-Eye's eye on Umbridge's door. *shudder* Most entertaining "stage directions": "Get back!" shouted Ron, and he, Harry, and Hermione hurled themselves against a door as a herd of galloping desks thundered past, shepherdd by a sprinting Professor McGonagall. She appeared not to notice them. Her hair had come down and there was a gash on her cheek. As she turned the corner, they heard her scream, "CHARGE!" *If this scene does not appear in the medium that must not be named I will be adding some folks to my permanent sh*tlist.) Moment That Allows the Reader to Most Identify With Previously Primarily Loathsome Character: Kreacher beating Mundungus over the head with a pot. Especially when he asks if he can hit him once more "for luck!" Charles, who thinks that the humor in DH was some of the best of the series. From lpuhala at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 03:27:18 2007 From: lpuhala at gmail.com (aquilalorelei) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:27:18 -0000 Subject: Several random Deathly Hallows questions... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173904 1.) How did Harry *not* die? (Still don't get that part--was it only that Riddle killed the part of *himself* within Harry, leaving the rest of Harry's soul alive, or some other reason heretofore unfathomed?) 2.) Did Peter heal his rift with the Marauders after all their respective mutual deaths? 3.) If a spirit is *not* at peace in death AND THEY ARE NOT A GHOST, will the Resurrection Stone ease their pain by returning them to the earthly plane? 4.) Is Lycanthropy/therianthropy present in HP universe beyond wolves, i.e. will people be so afflicted by a bite from another afflicted like hyenas, bears, tigers, coyotes, etc.? 5.) Spirit lycanthropes, or "heal" to become human, e.g. Remus? Metamorphmagi/Animagi spirits--can they still change shape or will they remain "baseline" wizard after death? 6.) Was Lily a doe animaga as a pair to James' stag, or was Severus' Patronus simply coincidence? aquilalorelei From lauren58 at snet.net Tue Jul 31 03:34:57 2007 From: lauren58 at snet.net (laureng1958) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:34:57 -0000 Subject: My 2 cents on the epilogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173905 verosomm: > Since there are about 100,000 posts in the last 18 hours or so, I > can't go through them all... but I think the fact that it's 19 years > later is HIGHLY significant. That will be Sept. 1, 2017, almost > exactly 10 years from now, and didn't JKR said other than the > encyclopedia she may revisist the WW from someone else's perspective > in "maybe ten years or so"? I've heard several fans attribute > this "10 years" quote to her, and, though I myself can't seem to find > it, I've heard it from several HP "fanatics" and ALL of them told me > this BEFORE Friday, so there's no way they read the book and took a > wild stab in the dark. > Something occurred to me about September 1, 2017. Harry and friends would be 37, the same age that his parents, Petigrew, Lupin, Snape and Sirius would have been at the start of the book. That generation is gone; all died untimely and violent deaths. None of them had much of a life. Snape and Sirius spent most of their adulthoods being incorrectly labeled DE. Lily and James died young. Lupin had a life full of prejudice and, like Lily and James, had little time to spend with his new family. I can't help but compare the happy, peaceful and contented Harry, Ron, Hermione and Ginny with the Marauders, Lily and Snape. They are having the life that the earlier generation could not have. laureng1958 From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 31 04:36:07 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 04:36:07 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: <775661.42530.qm@web55004.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173907 > > Anne Squires: > >Another thing to remember is that DD continued to trust Severus Snape > >because his patronus continued to be a doe after all those years. > >That's why Snape cast a patronus in DD's office, to prove his > >continuing loyalty. If a caster could consciously control the form a > >patronus takes then DD would not have accepted this as proof of > >Snape's loyalty... Then Christy wrote: > I'm responding from memory because I'm too lazy to run downstairs to get my book... > I thought Snape showed Dumbledore his Patronus to prove that he still cares for Lily (which is what drove his loyalty) and that it occurred the night that Dumbledore told Snape that Harry had to die, which happened during Harry's 6th on the same evening that Hagrid overheard Snape and Dumbledore arguing (the same argument that Hagrid relates to Harry in HBP). In response to Snape's anger over learning that Harry had to die, Dumbledore wonders if he (Snape) is starting to care for him (Harry). Snape said something like, "for him?" and then conjured his Patronus which showed that after all of those years (decades now) he still cared for her. He protected Harry for Lily, not for Dumbledore and certainly not for James or for Harry himself. Upon seeing Snape's doe Patronus twenty odd years later, Dumbledore couldn't deny just how much Snape really did care for her and continues to care for her 16 years after she died. Anne Squires responds: I just reread that passage. In the US edition it's from the last couple of sentences on page 683 through page 687. You remember everything absolutely correctly. You have an excellent memory. I suppose when I wrote that I meant two things: 1. Even though patronuses change, a person cannot consciously choose the form their patronus will take. 2. I was thinking of the scene in HBP when DD is assuring Harry that he trusts Severus Snape. IIRC, Harry asks how DD could continue to trust Snape. I got the impression that DD was on the verge of telling Harry why he trusted Snape. I realized when I read DH that one of the reasons DD continued to trust Snape even after all those years was because of the doe patronus. I think that if DD had proceeded to tell Harry why he trusted Snape he would have included the patronus in his explanation. In DH, of course, we learned that part of the bargain was that DD was to keep silent and not reveal "the best" of Snape to anyone. But, at any rate, you are correct and I was mistaken in the way I remembered the scene in which Snape casts his patronus in DD's office. Christy continues: > > I was attempting humor (and apparently failed) when I asked if the other Patronus laughed and suggested Sirius teased him. Whether or not anyone in the Order ever saw Snape's Patronus, I love the fact that that that dark wizard, that cruel, vindictive man had such a meek creature as his Spiritual Guide (which is how JKR refers to Patronuses on her website). I love Snape -- I don't see him through rose-colored glasses though -- and his Patronus makes me love him even more. Anne Squires: Actually, the image of different patronuses laughing at Snape's doe is humorous. :) :) :) Yet, the doe is so pure and noble that I think she would be impervious to their taunts. :) :) She's above all that. I also love Severus Snape. Like you though, I see all of his faults; but I love him despite all of his failings. To me he is truly tragic in the classic sense --- A man who because of hubris and pride condemned himself. His story made me cry especially when he wanted to look into Lily's eyes as he died. (Then, of course, the next chapter was "The Forest Again" and I completely lost it. My sister thought a family member had died when she found me in the kitchen with a box of kleenex.) I was so emotional while reading those two chapters that I think my memory of them is distorted. I need to reread them properly, without tears. If I can. Anne Squires (who wonders if the plural of patronus is patronuses or patroni.) From kiely78 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:54:11 2007 From: kiely78 at yahoo.com (Kiely78) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:54:11 -0000 Subject: A Little Something about The Wedding Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173908 I have read DH twice, and now I am randomly reading different passages and still finding excerpts that I haven't noticed before. Anyone else "found" new passages after reading a couple of times? Anyway I just found this odd excerpt in DH American edition page 173 chapter 8, The Wedding: "A host of white-robed waiters had arrived an hour earlier, along with a gold-jacketed band, and all of these wizards were currently sitting a short distance away under a tree; Harry could see a blue haze of pipe smoke issuing form the spot." So umm what were they smoking in that pipe. Am I reading too much into this book now? Or is this just slightly inappropriate for a Young Adult book? I know, I know these is a debate about all of Potterverse not being Children's lit or Young Adult lit but outside of that, was this reference misplaced? For the record this is one of the millions of reasons I love JKR. To me JKR's work is full of layers and I am just beginning to uncover them. If the reference is to a magical pot like substance then I think most kids will not get it, those who do will probably laugh and are of an appropriate age. I am not that worried but just wandered what you all thought. Also are there other excerpts with a shady reference that I have missed? Kiely78 From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 04:42:26 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 04:42:26 -0000 Subject: Many responses (Molly's age, Hagrid, JKR stuff, unforgivables, etc) - also, Moody's Eye In-Reply-To: <46AEAFA1.7020901@fastmail.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173909 > JKR Chat: > "How exactly do muggleborns receive magical ability? > JKR: Muggle-borns will have a witch or wizard somewhere on their family > tree, in some cases many, many generations back. The gene re- surfaces > in some unexpected places." > > Random832: > Whoa. Kind of turns the whole "blood doesn't matter" message inside- out. > Also means the department of mystery findings about muggleborns is going > to be harder to overturn (since while the conclusions about "theft" are > wrong, the basic findings are true rather than being something wholly > fabricated by Voldemort and Umbridge) > > Also, how far back, exactly? All of humanity is descended from the same > person some 8,000 years ago (at the most conservative estimate - it's > considered more likely to be something like 3,000 years ago). zgirnius: I assume Rowling meant a few generations back, far enough to ensure that the family is no longer aware of the witch/wizard ancestor. A real-life analogy: One of my sisters is a blonde. The hair colors of our parents are brown. The among our grandparents, three had browm hair, one had flaming red hair. As my grandparents were all immigrants to the US from Europe, and moistly died before I was born anyway, I have never met my great-grandparents, and have no idea what color any of their hair was. But someone going back far enough, must have been blond, which is where my sister gets it from. Were she a witch, this would be exactly what Rowling is saying about Muggleborns. My parents both carry the genes for blond hair without expressing them, and as luck would have it, one of their three children inherited them from both. All this says is that just as there is no such thing as a true pureblood, there is no such thing as a true Muggleborn. A pureblood is a 'half-blood' whose pedigree may be traced for a number of generations and contains only witches and wizards; a Muggleborn is a 'half-blood' who is not aware that his/her ancestors included witches or wizards. A 'half-blood' is a witch or wizard who knows s/he has both Muggle and wizard ancestors. This was what always made sense to me, anyway. I don't see how this in any way strenghtens the bloodist position - to me it illustrates its absurdity. From sk8maven at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 03:58:17 2007 From: sk8maven at yahoo.com (sk8maven) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:58:17 -0000 Subject: Two big questions about DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173910 klmtapir: > How did Dumbledore win the duel against Grindelwald? Grindelwald > had the Elder Wand - the wand that could never be beaten in a duel. > I guess Grindelwald could have been using a different wand, but > that seems unlikely, since he wanted the wand for world > domination and all that. Dumbledore could have done a number of things that didn't involve direct wand-to-wand attack, and he was sneaky (or "subtle", if you prefer) enough to think of them. You'll notice that Rita Skeeter hinted that there was something not quite kosher about the "duel", and that we never learn any details about it. Did Dumbledore resort to something as, well, mundane as a snare-trap to hoist Grindelwald wrong end up and catch the wand as he dropped it? Did he sneak in and just steal the wand while Grindelwald was asleep? klmtapir: > And my second question, which has no canon answer, but I'll put it out there anyway: > > How can Harry be sure the powers of the Elder Wand will die with > him? Apparently, all anyone needs to do is disarm him, whether or > not the Wand is in his possession at the time, and ownership of > the Wand will be passed on. Seems a little sloppy to me. Firstly, the someone would have to know what s/he was doing, and would have to have the...chutzpah to do what Voldemort did (break into Dumbledore's tomb and steal the Elder Wand). Secondly, although nothing is certain, Harry's best chance to achieve his goal is never to carry or use ANY wand again, not even his beloved holly and phoenix feather. And now that things are peaceful, he just might make it. Maven From sherriola at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 04:51:18 2007 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:51:18 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Little Something about The Wedding In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <46aebfd2.0f98600a.4573.3e29@mx.google.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173911 Kiely78 Anyway I just found this odd excerpt in DH American edition page 173 chapter 8, The Wedding: "A host of white-robed waiters had arrived an hour earlier, along with a gold-jacketed band, and all of these wizards were currently sitting a short distance away under a tree; Harry could see a blue haze of pipe smoke issuing form the spot." So umm what were they smoking in that pipe. Am I reading too much into this book now? Sherry: I just thought, if I thought about it at all, that they were smoking regular old pipes, like pipe tobacco and all. I actually never gave it a thought, and I think you put any spin on it you wanted for your own particular image. Sherry From bkwrm101 at att.net Tue Jul 31 04:32:34 2007 From: bkwrm101 at att.net (bkwrm1012002) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 04:32:34 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: <134868.42183.qm@web55008.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173912 I was under the impression, somehow, that Ginny's patronus, also is a doe. Am I wrong? Hermione's is a beaver, and Ginny's a doe/deer??? That would match that part of her and Harry together from way back in book 5! bkwrm1012002 From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 05:08:01 2007 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:08:01 -0000 Subject: Slapstick Comedy In-Reply-To: <46AA8ABD.8010204@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173914 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Jones wrote: >> Zanooda writes: >> As Aberforth has the second (Sirius') part of the mirror (he >> bought it from Mundungus), who else's eye can Harry see there? > KJ writes: > I find it pretty darn hard to believe that Aberforth bought > everything from Mundungus. I agree that there are lots of inconsistencies in the book, but I don't think Sirius's mirror is one of them. Aberforth buying the mirror is not a theory, it's from the book. Harry saw the mirror at "Hog's Head" and Aberforth told him he bought it from Dung (p.559-560). From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 05:43:17 2007 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:43:17 -0000 Subject: McGonagall's excellent decision In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173915 Dan: "McGonagall did the best possible thing in sending away the entire Slytherin House as the battle unfolded. 1 - less chance of kids fighting kids, which is a win win situation 2 - less chance of kids facing their parents, or being caught between their parents and other kids's parents, or other kids who stayed to fight 3 - opportunity for those who are "basically good" to get out without compromising themselves, being targetted by their fellow housemates, and generally causing more death or destruction or division 4 - a quick decision done with an sturdy hand is the only way this could have been accomplished, dilly-dallying could have been costly The basic wisdom and goodness, if you will, of this decision says a lot about the Headmistress. And this decision matches in wisdom what marshaling the desks did by wit." Amen. There wasn't any time to separate out the friendlies from the suspect. All of your reasons are dead on, and there's one more, one of the oldest military maxims: "Never leave effective (able to fight) enemies behind you." McGonagall has always been one to the right thing at the right time. Jim Ferer From kjones at telus.net Tue Jul 31 05:46:56 2007 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:46:56 -0700 Subject: Slapstick Comedy>> Zanooda writes:,,>> As Aberforth has the second (Sirius') part of the mirror (he,>> bought it from Mundungus), who else's eye can Harry see there?,,> KJ writes:,,> I find it pretty darn hard to believe that Aberforth bought,> everything from Mundungus.,,I agree that there are lots of inconsistencies in the book, but I don't,think Sirius's mirror is one of them. Aberforth buying the mirror is,not a theory, it's from the book. Harry saw the mirror at "Hog's Head",and Aberforth told him he bought it from Dung (p.559-560). Message-ID: <46AECCD0.4070407@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 173916 >> Zanooda writes: >> As Aberforth has the second (Sirius') part of the mirror (he >> bought it from Mundungus), who else's eye can Harry see there? > KJ writes: > I find it pretty darn hard to believe that Aberforth bought > everything from Mundungus. I agree that there are lots of inconsistencies in the book, but I don't think Sirius's mirror is one of them. Aberforth buying the mirror is not a theory, it's from the book. Harry saw the mirror at "Hog's Head" and Aberforth told him he bought it from Dung (p.559-560). KJ writes: Good catch! I missed that. I need some help with another question. We know that Dumbledore was far from perfect, but apparently was accepted into the misty afterlife, as was James, a bully as a kid, and Sirius who nearly caused a murder. So was Snape acceptable? Did he presumably "go on" to the afterlife? What about Peter? We don't see a whole cluster of damaged souls at the "station", just Voldie's soul. One would assume that if Voldemort could not pass, presumably the other "bad guys" couldn't pass either. Is there another station for bad people? Why would the bad ones go on the same as the good ones (must have been a Hell of a lineup up there)? Was that only for Harry's benefit, which in that case would seem to discount the impression of an afterlife? Somebody take a shot at explaining this, please. KJ From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 05:59:25 2007 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:59:25 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hegwig Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173917 JW: Three days ago, I was determined to catch up on the 500 messages that had accummulated in my inbox. After three days of doggedly reading these posts, I am now a mere 1400 behind. Would you all mind stopping your onslaught until I catch up? Sandy: Totally off topic but it will perhaps lighten things up a little. I had to laugh out loud at this statement. I have found, because of the volume of mail the list is generating, that my mailbox capacity is 1000. It has been shut down so many times I have lost count. I read 10 and by the time I get to the 11th I get a pop-up telling me I have reached my capacity and am shut down again. I am trying so hard to read them all but I am fighting a losing battle. I want to respond to so many of them but don't dare do it lest I shut myself down yet again. I am making an exception of this one, and I am sitting at 995 at the moment - hope you are all quiet for a few moments! I am storing the messages I want to respond to, and with any kind of luck might be able to do so by the end of next month. Sandy ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tkjones9 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 06:08:41 2007 From: tkjones9 at yahoo.com (Tandra) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:08:41 -0000 Subject: Two big questions about DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173918 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "klmtapir" wrote: > > First, I can answer one question: > > > Goddlefrood wrote: > > Another thing about which a reaction would be welcomed > was the ludicrousness of the whole sword in the lake > moment. Why not just leave it in an easily accessible > position? > > > klmtapir: > > Dumbledore told Snape (in The Prince's Tale) that "the sword must be taken under > conditions of need and valor". So he couldn't just leave it on the ground for Harry to find. > > My main question, and I really hope I've missed something, because it seems like a big one > to me: > > How did Dumbledore win the duel against Grindelwald? Grindelwald had the Elder Wand - > - the wand that could never be beaten in a duel. I guess Grindelwald could have been > using a different wand, but that seems unlikely, since he wanted the wand for world > domination and all that. > > And my second question, which has no canon answer, but I'll put it out there anyway: > > How can Harry be sure the powers of the Elder Wand will die with him? Apparently, all > anyone needs to do is disarm him, whether or not the Wand is in his possession at the > time, and ownership of the Wand will be passed on. Seems a little sloppy to me. > > On the whole, I loved the book, and was amazed at the number of tiny details that were > seamlessly tied in to the series. Reading DH was so difficult.... how can I sit and enjoy a > book if I never want it to end? JKR has worked some real magic -- I can't put my finger on > what exactly it is about the HP series that is so compelling, but I thank her for it. > TKJ: I would say the only reason possession went to Draco was because he disarmed DD then he died so he could never reclaim his wand. The same thing happened with Draco when Harry took his wand. He didn't have a chance to win it back. But if someone disarms you but you get your wand back, you have in a sense won back the loyalty of your wand. At least that's how I see it. I could be wrong. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Jul 31 06:13:28 2007 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:13:28 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173919 Lupinlore: > It seems clear to me that what JKR is getting at with her comments > is that Harry, as appropriate for a Christ-like figure, has > transcended much of what went before -- particularly he has > transcended and become superior to certain personalities. He has > moved beyond both Snape and Dumbledore. Dumbledore says that he > has long known that Harry is a better man than he. Harry is > becoming the true figure of forgiveness and light and compassion > that Dumbledore appeared to be but never really was. If Harry were > to be confronted with a living Snape, he would probably view him > with pity and compassion. Jen: Harry's appeal to me is he's just a regular guy who happened to be chosen by LV and everything that followed after that. Moving past Snape and Dumbledore? Yes, in a way, in the way most kids grow up to question those they idolized or hated as children, moving past the black/white cognitive abilities of a younger person and growing into an adult who sees the gray area. Re: compassion, the emotional state Harry feels most often in DH appears to be remorse. The opposite of Voldemort for a reason. He feels remorse for putting his friends in danger, for jilting Ginny, for goading Lupin...and that's all I remember up to about chap. 11 as I'm re-reading. When he's not feeling remorse, which keeps him protected from LV opening the connection in return, Harry is seeking Truth. He doesn't accept Dumbledore on faith anymore, choosing to just believe Doge and be done with it. He says to Ron and Hermione in chap. 12, 'forget Dumbledore, this is my choice.' And finally, entering Snape's memories, he learns truth again and has accepted it by some years later. The story doesn't read as a Christian allegory to me even with religious elements about souls and afterlife(and tons I've missed no doubt); I'm seeing it more as a coming of age of a guy who doesn't have salvation to offer anyone. Understanding, willingness to learn the truth, yes, but not salvation to give. His Polyjuice Potion may turn gold but that doesn't keep his friends from rolling their eyes at him or Snape from loathing him, 'cause he's just a guy. And Dumbledore saying Harry was always the better man, well, in Dumbledore's eyes he was! Because Harry doesn't seek power, which is DD's flaw. Lupinlore: > So, in that sense, Harry could be a savior to Snape in that he > offers an opportunity for salvation. But, as shown in the scene > where Snape reveals his patronus, the damage and bitterness and > hate and cruelty run too deep for salvation. Snape cannot find it > within himself to embrace the salvation Harry represents, and thus > it remains a door never opened. Jen: And yet, that bitter person helped save Harry's life and defeat Voldemort, thus saving thousands of lives. It seems like Snape would be a selfish to work on 'saving' himself when he can do more trying to help Harry rid the world of the current evil. Jen From dwalker696 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 05:14:46 2007 From: dwalker696 at aol.com (dwalker696) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:14:46 -0000 Subject: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173920 Hi, if you go back the last 2 days, there is a string of posts titled "That ugly baby thing" (or something close to that) that have quite a few good answers- many are very well written, and also display a good range of ideas and thought on this topic. Link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173580 Donna From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 31 06:19:35 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:19:35 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173921 This following post is rated R, it contains adult material, if you do not have proof you are 17 or older read no more; and I can recognize a fake ID when I see one! In the Seven Potters chapter I thought it would be interesting if when Harry was embarrassed he had said out loud what JKR tells us was going through his mind, "Hey, treat my body with a little more modesty". If Harry had said that, I'm certain that Ron or Fred or on somebody would have said what we were all thinking about our hero, "I don't see what you're so worried about Harry, you're hung like a horse". And yes, the fact that Hermione and Flur were among the six fake Potters is a bit kinky, but I didn't write it, JKR did. Eggplant Gellert Grindelwald From marion11111 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 05:38:46 2007 From: marion11111 at yahoo.com (marion11111) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:38:46 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173922 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "anne_t_squires" wrote: > > Christy said: > > >didn't anyone wonder why this dark > > > wizard known for his cruelty had such a mild and > > > meek creature as his Patronus? (Did the other > > > Patronuses laugh at him?) > > Then Anne Squires said: > No, I don't think the others laughed. We don't > even know Sirius' patronus. > If we're going with the unrequited love theory, then maybe Sirius' was a stag? But really after all the speculation about Snape's patronus being a bat or spider or snake or vulture, I certainly never expected Bambi! When I read that chapter, I ran through every possible woman who could have sent it and then just gave up. I get why JKR did it, but it was a little unexpected. And I love the image of the other patronuses laughing. Poor Snape. marion1111 From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 06:22:35 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:22:35 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic (wasRe: Deathly Hallows Reactio...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173923 > Betsy Hp: > > *However* what I'm referring to is the incredibly civilized way the > Allies delt with defeated Germany. It would have been so easy to > just massacre entire cities and towns. I'm sure some of the rescuers > wanted to after releasing people from the death camps. But they > didn't. They held the Nuremberg trials instead. They made sure the > guilty were punished but they also enabled Germany to atone and move > on. They allowed Germany to seperate itself from Nazism. *And* > there were examples of Germans who did protest, who did rescue. > > (The same is true of Japan, actually.) > > Which is in contrast to DH in which Death Eaters and Slytherins were > pretty much synonymous and Slytherin remains the "bad" house. Rather > than say the house that builds really great cars. > Neri: your analogy perhaps isn't very accurate. Being a Slytherin is not like being a German. No one is born a Slytherin, they choose to become one. Slytherin is an ideology, a racist ideology that is more analog of being Nazi, not of being German. The question that interests me isn't why after 19 years Slytherin still have a bad image (I doubt that 19 years after the WWII neo-Nazis in the USA or Britain, not to mention in Israel, would have a better image). The interesting question to me is why haven't all Wizard parents, especially those who grew up in Slytherin House, told their children "blood purity is an evil ideology. It was responsible for many atrocities during the war. When you go to Hogwarts to be sorted, you tell the Hat: don't put me in Slytherin. Not Slytherin, not Slytherin". After all, isn't this what Germans did after WWII? Didn't they renounce Nazism and racism? > Betsy Hp: > Oh, and no thought is given to *why* Voldemort rose up out of > Slytherin. That maybe all of this shame piled onto Slytherin has > given rise to a monster. Much as the shame piled on Germany after > WWI gave rise to Hitler. > Neri: I've always had the impression that Voldemort rose up in Slytherin because their ideology suited him so much. In the Wizarding World it was Voldemort and his DEs who gave rise to VW1, not the other way around. I don't know a single clue in canon that Slytherins suffered any shame before VW1. Neri, who also dislike Dumbledore browbeating Snape to kill him, but notes that Snape didn't seem to require that much browbeating. From amylpark at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 05:39:40 2007 From: amylpark at comcast.net (rncamy1956) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:39:40 -0000 Subject: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173924 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aquilalorelei" wrote: > > Nothing spoilery in the title, nosirree. > Just wondering what we think the flayed piteous child-thing is in the limbo!King's Cross station. > I really have no idea, especially with why Dumbledore so > specifically forbids Harry to aid it (him? her?) mcamy: Personally, I think that the flayed piteous child-thing is the remnants of the Voldemort Horcrux that was in Harry. As Harry had his own soul and the part of the soul of Voldemort as the AK curse was cast. Harry's appears whole because his soul is intact, the part of Voldemort is just a fragment, and as Harry said in book 2, what was left of him was foul and ugly. From amylpark at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 05:44:06 2007 From: amylpark at comcast.net (rncamy1956) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:44:06 -0000 Subject: Hegwig In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173925 > From Sue: > > This is a good theory, but in the same scene, Harry also lost his > Firebolt. Is there a chance that JKR wanted to use the lose of > both the broom and his pet as a way for Harry to leave behind his > childhood? Hedwig had to die in this book. Harry could not use her in book 7 while he was on the run. Very much like when in book 4 Sirius said not to use Hedwig to send him letters and things. She was too noticible. Like Hermione put it, Great Snowy Owls are not native to England. Harry using Hedwig would have shown both the Ministry and Voldemort just where HRH were. Amy From ciraarana at yahoo.de Tue Jul 31 06:51:16 2007 From: ciraarana at yahoo.de (Cira Arana) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 08:51:16 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Several random Deathly Hallows questions... Message-ID: <426324.34465.qm@web25911.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173926 aquilalorelei 1.) How did Harry *not* die? (Still don't get that part--was it only that Riddle killed the part of *himself* within Harry, leaving the rest of Harry's soul alive, or some other reason heretofore unfathomed?) Cira Hm, I think it had something to do with Voldemort sharing Lily's blood through Harry. Dumbeldore made Lily's blood Harry's sanctuary, meaning Harry can't be hurt by Voldemort as long as Lily's sacrifice is alive. It's alive in Harry and, through the blood transfer, in Voldemort. So, as long as Lily's blood runs through Voldemort's veins, he can't kill Harry. aquilalorelei 2.) Did Peter heal his rift with the Marauders after all their respective mutual deaths? Cira It isn't said in the book, I think, so we can draw our own conclusions. *shrugs* I think, if we take James and Lily as inherently "good", they would forgive him. aquilalorelei 6.) Was Lily a doe animaga as a pair to James' stag, or was Severus' Patronus simply coincidence? Cira Lily wasn't an animagus (or animaga; I like that. ^-^). Why her patronus was a doe? Perhaps it became the female pair to James's patronus after she fell in love with him. Although, it might just as well always have been a doe, marking her as the soulmate and perfect partner of James Potter. Severus's patronus was a doe because Lily's was and he loved her so much/ was so obssessed with her that his became a doe. Similar, I think, to Tonks's patronus, that became something wolf-like after she fell in love with Lupin. Although, I wonder how Harry did know that his mother's patronus was a doe. I've read DH twice, and I can't remember if it was ever really explained before Harry told Voldemort. As for your other questions, I'd like to know as well! ^-^ Toodles, Cira --------------------------------- Die etwas anderen Infos rund um das Thema Reisen. BE A BETTER WELTENBUMMLER! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jul 31 06:59:34 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:59:34 -0000 Subject: Hegwig In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173927 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, OctobersChild48 at ... wrote: > JW: > Three days ago, I was determined to catch up on the 500 messages that > had accummulated in my inbox. After three days of doggedly reading > these posts, I am now a mere 1400 behind. Would you all mind stopping > your onslaught until I catch up? > Sandy: > Totally off topic but it will perhaps lighten things up a little. > I had to laugh out loud at this statement. I have found, because of the > volume of mail the list is generating, that my mailbox capacity is 1000. It has > been shut down so many times I have lost count. I read 10 and by the time I get > to the 11th I get a pop-up telling me I have reached my capacity and am > shut down again. I am trying so hard to read them all but I am fighting a losing > battle. I want to respond to so many of them but don't dare do it lest I shut > myself down yet again. I am making an exception of this one, and I am > sitting at 995 at the moment - hope you are all quiet for a few moments! I am > storing the messages I want to respond to, and with any kind of luck might be > able to do so by the end of next month. Geoff: That's why I read my posts on line. I have to admit that I've only kept up by skipping a lot of threads. Today, for exampled, I logged off at about 01:00, and by 07:00 there were the best part of another 100 posts waiting!! I thought it was bad after HBP but heck....... From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 31 07:27:00 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:27:00 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173928 > I didn't see any indication that > LV had been knocked out. I did. Voldemort was flat on his back and embarrassed to find himself in such a undignified position, that's why he hastily refused Bellatrix's efforts to help him up. > Let's suppose the snake had been > destroyed before Harry entered the > woods. If Harry had entered the > woods after Nagini's destruction and > faced Voldemort unarmed the exact > same result would have taken place. Actually the truth or falsehood of the above statement depends on the exact physics of the Potter universe; and as JKR is the only Einstein in the Potter universe we mere mortals must just struggle along as best we can. Yes, perhaps Dumbledore knew from day 1 that Harry would live and be happy ever after, but I prefer the more interesting interpretation; Dumbledore is more (or perhaps less) than what he seems to be. And perhaps someday JKR will give her opinion on this matter; it won't fundamentally affect my thinking about her books; JKR has her opinion, I have mine. > I don't think he wanted Snape > (or Harry for that matter) to know > that Harry would not have to die. Why? Why would Dumbledore give a damn if Snape knew about it or not? Eggplant Gellert Grindelwald From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Tue Jul 31 09:04:45 2007 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:04:45 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DH as Christian Allegory Message-ID: <433989.67031.qm@web86211.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173929 lizzyben wrote: But even if we accept the (IMO horrifying) contention that JKR intended her world to be a Calvinist split between the "divine elect" & the unclean, evil masses, it still doesn't make sense to me. Because how do we explain HBP? In that novel, Harry spends a lot of time learning about, and integrating, Slytherin qualities. He inherits the home of Slytherin wizards, rides the train in the Slytherin compartment, interacts positively w/Slughorn, shadows Draco all year, & learns from Snape's potion book. He actually considers young!Snape as a kind of friend, and feel a sense of pity & compassion for Draco (for the first time). The Slytherins were arguably the most interesting characters in that novel. It seems like all of this was about integration - internally, w/Harry integrating the Slytherin shadow side into his personality, and externally, w/Hogwarts integrating the Slytherin house into the school as well. Then, all of a sudden, in DH she suddenly reverses course and literally isolates & eliminates Slytherins from the narrative. All the subtlely of HBP is lost as Slytherin = evil once again, and Draco & Snape are marginalized & reduced to the stereotypes. That's what's weird to me. It's like she started writing about Jungian integration, and then suddenly switched to Calvinist pre-destination mid-stream. Irene: One of my theories is that Rowling has planned the ending quite in advance. And she could not have planned the middle arch of the story in full details. So during the years of writing the story took her somewhere, and the characters has developed in unforseen ways. And then she had to take some artificial measures to bring them back to the planned route. My husband has a different theory, which I find more amusing. Rowling has confessed to reading some discussion boards, right? So can you imagine her reaction after HBP: "I gave you super-spy-suave-Snape in the beginning of the book, I gave you wicked-wizard-Snape in the end, and still you won't believe he is ESE, which I need for my book 7 surprise?!!! Right, I'm keeping him off page for the most of book 7! No more confrontations with Harry!" :-) lizzyben: Yeah, me too. All the imagery of the pure good Gryfindors vs. the impure evil Slytherins set off every type of alarm bell in my head. Because once you start talking about "pure" & "impure" people, it gets all kinds of ugly. Irene: Her own answers to the "Which house you'd be sorted into?" only reinforce this impression. It's usually "I'd like to be in Gryffindor, but I can only hope I'd be deemed worthy". She always uses the "worthy" word in this connection. Irene From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 09:11:06 2007 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:11:06 -0000 Subject: Slytherins / The South Seas (Off Topic portion) and the Sword of Godric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173930 In: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173923 > Neri: > Being a Slytherin is not like being a German. No one is born > a Slytherin, they choose to become one. Slytherin is an ideology, > a racist ideology that is more analog of being Nazi, not of being > German. The question that interests me isn't why after 19 years > Slytherin still have a bad image (I doubt that 19 years after the > WWII neo-Nazis in the USA or Britain, not to mention in Israel, > would have a better image). The interesting question to me is why > haven't all Wizard parents, especially those who grew up in > Slytherin House, told their children "blood purity is an evil > ideology. It was responsible for many atrocities during the war. > When you go to Hogwarts to be sorted, you tell the Hat: don't put > me in Slytherin. Not Slytherin, not Slytherin". After all, isn't > this what Germans did after WWII? Didn't they renounce Nazism and > racism? Goddlefrood: I disagree that it is entirely a matter of choice to which House one is sorted. There is also, as with several real world schools in the benighted isles, an element of tradition at play. The Black family, as one example, were universally sorted into Slytherin House until Sirius broke that trend and the implication of that, at least the one I took from the sorting system, was that there were traditional houses for certain families. To an extent, and despite the lack of confirmation from canon that Zacharias Smith was related to Hepzibah Smith, the same could be said of Hufflepuff. The Bones family is one more instance of that, as indeed was the Weasley family and their strong links to Gryffindor. It was certainly the case in post war Europe that a strong element of mistrust remained between the vicotrs and the vanquished and to some extent this mistrust lingers today. The classic example of the continuity of the stereotypical dislike between the English and the Germans was the Fawlty Towers episode entitled "The Germans". That took matters to a comical extreme, but the underlying attitude was there, and Fawlty Towers was not until over thirty years after the end of the second world war. Some time before Deathly Hallows' release there was a speculation somewhere, whether here or elsewhere I can't remember now, that basically set out how Tom Riddle had subverted Slytherin House from under Uncle Horace's control. While Slughorn has some prejudice towards muggle-borns it was a level of prejudice that was not overly likely to lead to the mass production of dark and dangerous wizards. Once Tom Riddle's brand of prejudice began to infiltrate the house of Slytherin then this situation changed quite rapidly and for more than half a century thereafter Slytherins were seen as almost universally evil and likely to join Voldemort's band of merry warriors at the drop of a hat. I certainly got the impression, as was expressed well by Siriusly Snapey Susan in her post of a day or two ago, that there was a movement back towards the situation that had prevailed in the house of Salazar before the influence of Lord Voldemort fell over it. When all is said and done you do not undo half a century of bias in an afternoon, but there were steps that had been made towards a little more unity between the houses by the end of the book. Give it several more decades and Slytherins will be no less vilified than Germans are today. If you are German and still feel vilified, don't, we're all friends now after all. Traditional values in long established schools should also not be wholly discounted and there is little need, IMO, to dispense with either the house system itself or with the sorting ceremony. Whatever else wizards and witches may be (apart from obviously fictional) they love tradition. From: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173927 (Precis) > JW: > After three days of doggedly reading these posts, I am now a mere > 1400 behind. Would you all mind stopping your onslaught until I > catch up? > Sandy: > Totally off topic but it will perhaps lighten things up a little. > I had to laugh out loud at this statement. I have found, because > of the volume of mail the list is generating, that my mailbox > capacity is 1000. Geoff: > Today, for example, I logged off at about 01:00, and by 07:00 > there were the best part of another 100 posts waiting!! Goddlefrood: There is an easy solution to the conundrum of multiplicity of posts. A simple expedient that I took 10 years ago. Move to the South Pacific. There's a period between about 5 o'clock of a Fiji afternoon and about 11 o'clock in the evening, and the same would apply to New Zealand and to an extent to Australia, when the list calms down. This is whilst the US slumbers and the majority of Europe slumbers and works. It's ideal for catching up with the latest thoughts on the list. >From (Quoted by TKJ from a much earlier post): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173918 > Goddlefrood wrote: > Another thing about which a reaction would be welcomed was the > ludicrousness of the whole sword in the lake moment. Why not > just leave it in an easily accessible position? > klmtapir: > Dumbledore told Snape (in The Prince's Tale) that "the sword must > be taken under conditions of need and valor". So he couldn't just > leave it on the ground for Harry to find. Goddlefrood finally responds: All well and good. The thing is that Snape took the sword from where it was hidden in the Headmaster's office and repaired to, I believe the Forest of Dean, with it to place it in the lake. Where was his taking of the sword under conditions of need and valour? Severus was passing it on to Harry. Harry had already taken the sword under conditions of need and valour in the Chamber of Secrets back in book 2. To dive into a frozen lake did not, in my opinion, meet the alleged condition of obtaining same, and neither did Snape's ability to just pick it up and pass it on. Of course there has to be a parallel between the Lady in the Lake of the Arthurian legend and the sword in the lake of what we might now describe at the Potterian legend. It just seemed obsolete to this reader and could have been handed over more simply. Or perhaps the use of Ronald Weasley is our king in book 5 was supposed to be a clue? Goddlefrood, who liked that Neville also took the sword from the Sorting Hat as had Harry all those years before. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Jul 31 09:46:02 2007 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:46:02 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173931 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" > wrote: > > > > "If I know him [Harry] he will have arranged matters so that when he > > does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of > > Voldemort." And if Harry had managed to kill that snake as Dumbledore > > expected before he so bravely walked into the Forbidden Forest to > meet > > oblivion then both Harry and Voldemort would indeed have died at that > > instant. This is what Dumbledore wanted this is what he expected. > > Allie: > > No - King's Cross Dumbledore told Harry that he expected Harry to > survive. The piece of Voldemort's soul inside Harry was all that he > expected to be killed. But in theory you're right, if Harry was the > last Horcrux Voldemort would have died so how would Harry have > survived then? (More unanswered questions, sigh.) > Dumbledore also knew people very well, and he knew that Voldemort would eventually discover his Horcruxes were being attacked and put Nagini under protection making it nigh impossible for Harry to finished her before giving himself to sacrifice, she would be too well protected, and the only thing that could make Voldemort remove those protections would be Harry's death. All in all I'd say DD figured Harry's odds of survival were pretty high, based on LV's predictable MO. But Harry was in the most very real danger of final death when he returned from the Kings Cross reality. Dumbledore probably predicted this with some accuracy too. As he said, knowing Harry will have arranged matters so that his death would be the end of Voldemort, Dumbledore would have rightly guessed that someone in Harry's trust was ready to take out Nagini as soon as her defenses were lifted. This meant that Harry could die if Voldemort killed him upon returning, the shared blood would probably have meant LV died *with* Harry, but neither would come back this time with no horcruxes left to bind them.... in any case... I would presume that DD rightly guessed that Harry had a very good chance of surviving the destruction of his horcrux, virtually no chance of surviving a second blow by Voldemort, but overall, the best chance of vanquishing Voldemort in the process however it played out. Valky From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 31 09:58:53 2007 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:58:53 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173932 allies426 wrote: > DD misled Snape because Harry > had to TRULY THINK he was > walking to his death Huh? So Dumbledore figured out that Snape would die, and he figured out that Harry would be there when he died, and he figured out that Harry would capture his last memories, and he figured out Harry would find a way to read them, and he figured out Harry would be profoundly effected by it? And Dumbledore figured out that Harry wouldn't die whatever he did? I'm sorry but that's just nuts. Face it, Dumbledore was being cold blooded, and being cold blooded is exactly what the world needed at that time. I love Harry as much as anyone, but better he die than the entire wizard world. > If Harry can forgive DD, then I can OK, I cannot deny that is a good point. That is a very VERY good point! Dumbledore had his faults there is absolutely no doubt about it; but the next time some mega evil villain tries to take over the universe I'd still like Dumbledore to be in charge of the resistance ! Eggplant Gellert Grindelwald From jamess at climaxgroup.com Tue Jul 31 11:08:45 2007 From: jamess at climaxgroup.com (James Sharman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:08:45 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) Message-ID: <495A161B83F7544AA943600A98833B530D06A02E@mimas.fareham.climax.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 173933 --- In HPforGrownups@ yahoogroups.com, "aquilalorelei" wrote: > > Nothing spoilery in the title, nosirree. > Just wondering what we think the flayed piteous child-thing is in the limbo!King's Cross station. > I really have no idea, especially with why Dumbledore so > specifically forbids Harry to aid it (him? her?) mcamy: Personally, I think that the flayed piteous child-thing is the remnants of the Voldemort Horcrux that was in Harry. As Harry had his own soul and the part of the soul of Voldemort as the AK curse was cast. Harry's appears whole because his soul is intact, the part of Voldemort is just a fragment, and as Harry said in book 2, what was left of him was foul and ugly. James: That makes sense, but I have another suggestion. The image of Dumbledore does say that the soul part in Harry was destroyed during the attempted A.K. of Harry. Both Harry and Voldemorte were knocked down from the spell, I think the main soul components from the bodies of both were put temporarily into the limbo thing. The Harry we read about in limbo was his soul, and the flayed piteous child-thing was what was left of voldemorts main soul after he's chipped bits off. -----Original Message----- From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rncamy1956 Sent: 31 July 2007 06:40 To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) --- In HPforGrownups@ yahoogroups.com, "aquilalorelei" wrote: > > Nothing spoilery in the title, nosirree. > Just wondering what we think the flayed piteous child-thing is in the limbo!King's Cross station. > I really have no idea, especially with why Dumbledore so > specifically forbids Harry to aid it (him? her?) mcamy: Personally, I think that the flayed piteous child-thing is the remnants of the Voldemort Horcrux that was in Harry. As Harry had his own soul and the part of the soul of Voldemort as the AK curse was cast. Harry's appears whole because his soul is intact, the part of Voldemort is just a fragment, and as Harry said in book 2, what was left of him was foul and ugly. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Jul 31 11:26:54 2007 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:26:54 -0000 Subject: Patronuses (was Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173934 > Marion1111 wrote: > If we're going with the unrequited love theory, then maybe Sirius' was a stag? Potioncat: No, it would have been a wolf. ;p > Marion1111 > But really after all the speculation about Snape's patronus being a bat or spider or snake or vulture, I certainly never expected Bambi! When I read that chapter, I ran through every possible woman who could have sent it and then just gave up. I get why JKR did it, but it was a little unexpected. > > And I love the image of the other patronuses laughing. Poor Snape. > Potioncat: Here's a link to the Lexicon's list of Patronuses (that's how JKR made the plural.) http://www.hp-lexicon.org/magic/spells/spells_p.html#Patronus1 Of all the ones listed, Snape's is the most gentle of animals. I'd say ironic, rather than funny. Based on Harry's experience, the Patronus's strength depends on the caster. Sometimes Harry's Patronus had no shape or strength at all. But I would think the strength of the Patronus doesn't depend on the animal itself. I'm not sure if I ever mentioned this before, but the Patronus reflects the caster's source of protection; it does not reflect the person who casts the spell. In some cases we can pretty well tell who inspired the Patronus: James the stag; Lily the doe. Arthur's is a weasal, and Hermione's an otter, both recall the name Weasley for me. In a few it seems a pet has inspired the form; goats for Aberforth; cat for Umbridge; phoenix for DD. I thought I saw McGonagall cast a cat Patronus. (I thought I thaw a puddy cat.) Whether that would mean she draws strength from within, I cannot say. On a side note. I'm sure Snape's comment to Tonks about her Patronus being weak, was his way of saying Lupin was weak. Still, I'd like to know what the earlier one was. From tfaucette6387 at charter.net Tue Jul 31 11:28:01 2007 From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:28:01 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173935 Anne Squires wrote: > > I didn't see any indication that > > LV had been knocked out. Eggplant wrote: > > I did. Voldemort was flat on his back and embarrassed to find himself > in such a undignified position, that's why he hastily refused > Bellatrix's efforts to help him up. Anne Squires: You are right, of course, that he is described as "getting to his feet." When I read that I interpreted it that LV had been knocked down, not out. I admit that other interpretations are very plausible. Anne from an earlier post: > > > Let's suppose the snake had been > > destroyed before Harry entered the > > woods. If Harry had entered the > > woods after Nagini's destruction and > > faced Voldemort unarmed the exact > > same result would have taken place. Eggplant: > > Actually the truth or falsehood of the above statement depends on the > exact physics of the Potter universe; and as JKR is the only Einstein > in the Potter universe we mere mortals must just struggle along as > best we can. Anne Squires: Point taken. All of this is just the way I interpret the events. I concede that I could be mistaken. I was just trying to explain the way I read the text. I am definitely a mere mortal. The merest mortal of them all. Eggplant wrote: Yes, perhaps Dumbledore knew from day 1 that Harry would > live and be happy ever after, but I prefer the more interesting > interpretation; Dumbledore is more (or perhaps less) than what he > seems to be. And perhaps someday JKR will give her opinion on this > matter; it won't fundamentally affect my thinking about her books; JKR > has her opinion, I have mine. Anne Squires: I think that for the most part we are in agreement on this point. I feel that DD thought Harry would have to die until he heard about LV using Harry's blood to resurrect himself. Even after that incident it was just a guess on his part that Harry could survive, imho. The "gleam" in the eye. Anyway, I think that DD was raising Harry as a "pig for the slaughter" and was less than grandfatherly in his approach to Harry. I think Skeeter's word "sinister" sums up his dealings with Harry very nicely. > Anne Squires in a earlier post: > > I don't think he wanted Snape > > (or Harry for that matter) to know > > that Harry would not have to die. Eggplant: > Why? Why would Dumbledore give a damn if Snape knew about it or not? Anne: In my opinion, he had two reasons for keeping Snape in the dark: 1. DD played his cards very close to the vest. He always gave out information on a need to know basis. 2. If Snape believed that Harry had to die then it would ensure that Harry would believe the same thing when Snape told him. DD could be absolutely certain that Snape would not tell Harry the truth. Otherwise, given the fact that Snape had devoted his life to protecting Lily's son for the sake of Lily's memory, I think Snape could have possibly told Harry that DD thought he wouldn't have to die. Anne Squires, mere mortal From amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 31 11:45:53 2007 From: amanitamuscaria1 at yahoo.co.uk (AmanitaMuscaria) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:45:53 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173936 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bkwrm1012002" wrote: > > I was under the impression, somehow, that Ginny's patronus, also is a > doe. Am I wrong? Hermione's is a beaver, and Ginny's a doe/deer??? > That would match that part of her and Harry together from way back in > book 5! > > bkwrm1012002 > AmanitaMuscaria now - Hermione's patronus is an otter - JKR says it's her favourite animal. I can't remember Ginny's being mentioned in the books, but in the film, it's a horse. Cheers, AM From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 12:01:13 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:01:13 -0000 Subject: Patronuses (was Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173937 > Potioncat: < BIG SNIP> I thought I saw McGonagall cast a cat Patronus. (I thought I > thaw a puddy cat.) Whether that would mean she draws strength from > within, I cannot say. Alla: You did dear :) In triple. Three silver cats spring out of her wand when she sends message in preparation for the battle of Hogwarts. Potioncat: > On a side note. I'm sure Snape's comment to Tonks about her Patronus > being weak, was his way of saying Lupin was weak. Still, I'd like to > know what the earlier one was. > Alla: Yeah, the nerve of him daring to say that ;) From jnferr at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 12:24:42 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:24:42 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Little Something about The Wedding In-Reply-To: <46aebfd2.0f98600a.4573.3e29@mx.google.com> References: <46aebfd2.0f98600a.4573.3e29@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <8ee758b40707310524w6b70daceue7b092b1c66beb8e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173938 On 7/30/07, Sherry Gomes wrote: > Kiely78 > Anyway I just found this odd excerpt in DH American edition page 173 > chapter > 8, The Wedding: "A host of white-robed waiters had arrived an hour > earlier, > along with a gold-jacketed band, and all of these wizards were currently > sitting a short distance away under a tree; Harry could see a blue haze of > pipe smoke issuing form the spot." > > So umm what were they smoking in that pipe. Am I reading too much into > this > book now? > > > Sherry: > > I just thought, if I thought about it at all, that they were smoking > regular > old pipes, like pipe tobacco and all. I actually never gave it a thought, > and I think you put any spin on it you wanted for your own particular > image. montims: wizards have traditionally been described as smoking pipes (see Gandalf), and a number of wizards and witches in HP smoke pipes. I think you are reading too much it, and it is a particularly American reading to imagine that there is just the one pipe. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Tue Jul 31 12:44:17 2007 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:44:17 -0000 Subject: FILK: Magic is Might Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173939 Magic is Might (DH, Chap. 1) To the tune of Magic To Do from Pippin You-tube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la25h4zEZXs Dedicated to Bart L. THE SCENE: The Malfoy Manor, with the Dark Lord and (most of) his minions in a festive mood CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS: Join us -- in our strength we tower Join us ? making Muggles cower Join us -- come obey the powerful few And You-Know-Who. Follow ? wicked darkness not seen Since the heyday of the Nazis Follow?or it will get knotty for you. Because magic is might, yeah, that's right When you've blood that is pure for sure We've got total control?racist goals, `Mentors who'll suck out your soul If your blood contains manure . YAXLEY: Malfoys ? they are in his pocket VOLDEMORT: Horcrux ? one of them's a locket BELLATRIX: Murder ? each death, what a shock it will be. CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS: Na-Nagini DOLOHOV: Aggression ? Muggle-lovers AK'd SNAPE: Ambush ? Potter shall be waylaid VOLDEMORT: So join us ? everyone is afraid of me! CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS: Because magic is might, yeah, that's right When you've blood that is pure for sure We've got total control?racist goals, `Mentors who'll suck out your soul If your blood contains manure . (The CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS improvise ridicule aimed at the Malfoys, and the babysitting werewolf cubs, then repeat the previous stanza.) (antiphonally) Magic is might that's `cause magic is might Yeah, that right, that's `cause Magic is might magic is might Magic is might Yeah, that right that's `cause ma- magic AK Yeah, that right, that's `cause magic is might that's `cause Magic is might Yeah, that right that's `cause we have conspired in cabals to And Burbage so long, and Burbage so long, and Burbage so long AK AK AK .. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 12:35:16 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:35:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <376979.22014.qm@web55012.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173940 Eggplant Gellert Grindelwald: > This following post is rated R, it contains adult material, if you > do not have proof you are 17 or older read no more; and I can > recognize a fake ID when I see one! >In the Seven Potters chapter I thought it would be interesting if when >Harry was embarrassed he had said out loud what JKR tells us was going >through his mind, "Hey, treat my body with a little more modesty". If >Harry had said that, I'm certain that Ron or Fred or on somebody would >have said what we were all thinking about our hero, "I don't see what >you're so worried about Harry, you're hung like a horse". And yes, the >fact that Hermione and Flur were among the six fake Potters is a bit >kinky, but I didn't write it, JKR did. I just have to pass on this little anecdote in case anyone missed it. In one of the many interviews Dan Radcliffe did in the US to promote movie 5 (I'm sorry I can't remember which one -- I think perhaps one of the morning news shows), he told a story of JKR coming to see a performance of Equus and coming back stage and saying, "that's it...you're going to be naked all through book 7." I had to laugh (no matter the seriousness of the book at the time) when the fake Potters stripped to change their clothes, when Harry stripped to his underwear to jump in the lake, and when Harry awoke naked in Kings Cross. (And, yes being just a few years older than JKR, I'm a bit freaked out to discover that we both apparently find Dan Radcliffe -- a teenager, I mean I have friends with kids his age -- to be a little hottie. I almost can't watch the first movies anymore...) Christy --------------------------------- Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 12:59:17 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:59:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Locket and Umbridge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <758780.35577.qm@web55003.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173941 Matt: > Early in HBP, if you will recall, when Harry does his first week of > detentions, Umbridge touches Harry's hand and his scar hurts as if > he were close to Voldemort. >The implication I took, knowing that she ended up with the locket, > was that she might have acquired it early in book 6, so that by the > time of the detention scene it had begun to possess her zanooda: > You are probably right about Umbridge acquiring the locket in > book 6, but Harry's detentions with her took place in book 5. She > was evil before she got the locket! However, it's possible that the > Locket! Horcrux made her even more cruel. I was so pleased JKR > finally confirmed today that the evil toad was punished :-). Oh goodie, another little tidbit to think about... I think it might be possible that Umbridge acquired the locket as far back as book 5. In book 7, does Kreacher tells us when Mundungus raids his cupboard? (I can't remember.) We do know that the locket was found and disposed of during the summer before 5th year while they cleaned the house. I think one can assume that Kreacher rescued it shortly after it was tossed in the "to be thrown out" pile. So, at any point during late summer until the time of Harry's detention (unless book 7 tells us otherwise), Mundungus could have taken it and Umbridge could have acquired it. (I don't think Sirius being alive would necessarily stop Mundungus from stealing; and what is Kreacher going to do? Certainly not complain to Sirius that Mundungus stole the locket that he stole...In fact, Mundungus could easily get away with stealing from Kreacher...) Yes, Harry discovers Mundungus with a bag of goods stolen from 12 Grimmauld Place in book 6, but the locket is not mentioned among the things that Harry sees (and I do think if it was in there JKR would have mentioned it) and it doesn't mean it was the first time that Mundungus tried to peddle goods stolen from Grimmauld Place. I'm liking Matt's theory...because I wondered why Harry's scar hurt when Umbridge touched him. If it hurt just because of evil, then it should have hurt because of the fake Moody or Rita Skeeter or any other number of unsavory characters. Christy From csh at stanfordalumni.org Tue Jul 31 12:54:49 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:54:49 -0000 Subject: Two big questions about DH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "klmtapir" wrote: > .. > How can Harry be sure the powers of the Elder Wand will die with > him? Apparently, all anyone needs to do is disarm him, whether or not > the Wand is in his possession at the time, and ownership of the Wand > will be passed on. Seems a little sloppy to me. > ... He cannot be sure. As you note, he doesn't necessarily have to "die a natural death" to lose the Elder Wand, another witch or wizard just needs to "beat" him (whether that just means disarm him or not is an interesting question--does the Elder Wand know the subtle difference between "disarming" and "beating?"). As noted in DH, the Elder Wand at times disappears from history but always manages to turn back up. This period will be one of those lulls, but be sure that it WILL turn back up. It might be sloppy on the part of Harry, but not on the part of JKR--she is guaranteeing the continuation of Wandlore surrounding the Elder Wand. Chuck From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 13:20:39 2007 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:20:39 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173943 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > Lupinlore: > > So, in that sense, Harry could be a savior to Snape in that he > > offers an opportunity for salvation. But, as shown in the scene > > where Snape reveals his patronus, the damage and bitterness and > > hate and cruelty run too deep for salvation. Snape cannot find it > > within himself to embrace the salvation Harry represents, and thus > > it remains a door never opened. > > Jen: And yet, that bitter person helped save Harry's life and defeat > Voldemort, thus saving thousands of lives. It seems like Snape > would be a selfish to work on 'saving' himself when he can do more > trying to help Harry rid the world of the current evil. I don't see why it has to be an either/or situation. For instance, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I really do believe that Dumbledore was setting up a situation for Harry and Snape to understand each other better back in OotP. Now, *if* Snape had been able (or really wanted to, in my opinion) to deal with some of his bitterness there, see who Harry actually is, ask him about his reaction, etc. etc. etc. all of those things which would open the door, the plot and especially the denoument of the book could have been much different. Arguably, Harry would have had more support and Voldemort could have been fought more effectively earlier on. -Nora pops in, pops out, sees another pile of things to catalog... From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 13:39:00 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:39:00 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173944 Lupinlore: > > > So, in that sense, Harry could be a savior to Snape in that he > > > offers an opportunity for salvation. But, as shown in the scene > > > where Snape reveals his patronus, the damage and bitterness and > > > hate and cruelty run too deep for salvation. Snape cannot find > > > it within himself to embrace the salvation Harry represents, > > > and thus it remains a door never opened. Jen: > > And yet, that bitter person helped save Harry's life and defeat > > Voldemort, thus saving thousands of lives. It seems like Snape > > would be a selfish to work on 'saving' himself when he can do > > more trying to help Harry rid the world of the current evil. Nora: > I don't see why it has to be an either/or situation. For instance, > with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I really do believe that > Dumbledore was setting up a situation for Harry and Snape to > understand each other better back in OotP. Now, *if* Snape had been > able (or really wanted to, in my opinion) to deal with some of his > bitterness there, see who Harry actually is, ask him about his > reaction, etc. etc. etc. all of those things which would open the > door, the plot and especially the denoument of the book could have > been much different. Arguably, Harry would have had more support > and Voldemort could have been fought more effectively earlier on. SSSusan: What a fascinating discussion. :) Heck yes, the ending would've been different if Snape had done this! But I'm not at all sure that Snape ever could have shown more of himself to Harry until the very end. Can anyone actually imagine him able to do so? He *might* have been able to get to know Harry better, I suppose... but was he capable? Was he in control of himself (his emotions, his bitterness & resentment, his responses to each of the Potters) enough to make the effort? I doubt it. And honestly, without some ability to lead in that direction and without an ability/willingness to reciprocate on Snape's part, I can't imagine Harry would trust Snape enough to do any revealing of himself either. I know what you're saying about DD, and that might well have been his intention or his hope. But I don't think there was a chance in hell of its ever having played out that way. Siriusly Snapey Susan From csh at stanfordalumni.org Tue Jul 31 13:12:58 2007 From: csh at stanfordalumni.org (chuck.han) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:12:58 -0000 Subject: Secondary Characters *Contains Spoilers (not huge) for eyemlynn* In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173945 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: > ... > Another foreign witch does make an appearance back in HBP. You know > from the end of GOF that Fleur is dating Bill Weasly. I'm not going to > tell you everything but she does come to play a bigger role in HBP. > ... I wish that JKR had developed Bill's character further--it is easy to see why Ginny reveres him with his combination of sharp mind, kind heart, and fun-loving nature: In GOF, Bill makes a significant impression on Harry as he steps out of the Burrow fire, will duel tables with Charlie, and does not mince words in chiding Ron for not understanding why the Death Eaters scatter at the appearance of the Dark Mark. In DH, JKR makes a point to note that he (and Fleur) accept Ron's faults in abandoning Harry and Hermione, but the real nugget is his dialog with Harry concerning the nature of Goblins. He is not judgmental (either towards Goblins OR Harry), and he departs with as much knowledge as he feels will be helpful on Harry's quest. Bill does not press Harry for details, but he seems to have surmised that the trio and Griphook are planning on breaking into Gringotts, but leaves it at that. So...cool... Chuck From marion11111 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 13:40:22 2007 From: marion11111 at yahoo.com (marion11111) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:40:22 -0000 Subject: Patronuses (was Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173946 Marion1111 wrote: > > If we're going with the unrequited love theory, then maybe > > Sirius' was a stag? > > Potioncat: > No, it would have been a wolf. ;p marion: Yeah, well, we all have our little ships. Do suppose the filmmakers gave Ginny a horse because it's a hoofed animal? Or weren't they thinking about that at all? > Potioncat: > I'm not sure if I ever mentioned this before, but the Patronus > reflects the caster's source of protection; it does not reflect the > person who casts the spell. marion: Yes, but in the version of the book that I was writing in my head, I wanted to see the patronuses as being similar to the daemons in Pullman's His Dark Materials triliogy. I imagined them as representative of the person and unchangable. I was willing to accept Harry having his father's as maybe a "passing on the tradition" thing, but I wasn't sure I liked that Tonks' had to change over Lupin. > Potioncat: > On a side note. I'm sure Snape's comment to Tonks about her > Patronus being weak, was his way of saying Lupin was weak. Still, > I'd like to know what the earlier one was. marion: At the time, I though he was being spiteful. And he was, but now I wonder if he was making a comment about himself also. From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 14:07:10 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:07:10 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173947 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: This following post is rated R, it contains adult material, if you do not have proof you are 17 or older read no more; and I can recognize a fake ID when I see one! In the Seven Potters chapter I thought it would be interesting if when Harry was embarrassed he had said out loud what JKR tells us was going through his mind, "Hey, treat my body with a little more modesty". If Harry had said that, I'm certain that Ron or Fred or on somebody would have said what we were all thinking about our hero, "I don't see what you're so worried about Harry, you're hung like a horse". And yes, the fact that Hermione and Flur were among the six fake Potters is a bit kinky, but I didn't write it, JKR did. va32h: Well I'm sure the Harrys kept their underwear on. (Which does indeed introduce an element of kinky as I doubt Harry has never seen himself in ladies' undergarments) Perhaps JKR was influenced by Dan Radcliffe's performance in Equus when she wrote in all these opportunites for Naked!Harry. va32h From jnferr at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 13:57:55 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 08:57:55 -0500 Subject: Dumbledore's Army - still recruiting? Message-ID: <8ee758b40707310657u3a8b939bpbec052d6d866919b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173948 I was thinking of Neville's rallying cry again - his bravery and persistence really resonated with me. And as I mentioned before, the message I take from the books is that it is important to do the right thing, and not to be put off by fear of social pressure, pain, or even death. It occured to me that Harry Potter fans number in the many thousands, and this list alone has nearly 27,000. (Wow!) We all appear to be against discrimination (the Slytherins), bullying (Umbridge), detainment of the innocent (Black, Shunpike, etc), cruelty in general, and we are all prepared to spend long periods of time (whether or not we really have it - I am typing this at work...) reading the books, reading and writing emails, and in many cases making Potter-related crafty objects. Wouldn't it be a tremendous acknowledgement of JKR's achievements if we channelled this energy and these numbers (and we could be an almighty force to reckon with) into writing emails on behalf of her pet causes? i.e. Amnesty International, the caged babies, etc. Or if we each contributed one pound or dollar or euro to MS or another of her pet charities, in her name? I just feel it would be a shame to let all this righteous indignation against the iniquities of the Wizarding World dissipate, when we could be working as a group to help right the wrongs of our real world. All the people who have felt disappointed that the WW did not change after the fall of LV can show how it can/should be done. Dumbledore's Army! montims [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Jul 31 14:16:13 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:16:13 -0400 Subject: Moody/Invisibility Cloak Message-ID: <001901c7d37d$5a7d43c0$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173949 Susan again: "And if Harry's Invisibility Cloak is so special, why can Moody's mad eye see through it?" CathyD now "I'm not entirely certain he can see through it. I think Dumbledore probably told Fake!Moody of Harry's cloak in GoF. I think that, unlike the naked muggle/wizard eye which can't see the cloak, something about Moody's magical eye can. And since he saw the cloak between Ron and Hermione (in the Pub), he concluded that Harry was the one under it. However, his magical eye may be so magical that it can see through the cloak." Answering myself and Susan. Yes, Moody can see through Harry's cloak. I couldn't find the reference yesterday, when I was posting, but found it later. I presumed someone on the list would correct me, but if they did, I missed it. Here is the quote from GoF: "Harry stared at him [Moody] in amazement....'Can your eye -- I mean, can you --?' 'Yeah, it can see through Invisibility Cloaks,' Moody said quietly. 'And it's come in useful at times, I can tell you.' " (Can Ed pg 282-283) CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 31 14:15:56 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:15:56 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173950 > montims replied: > > you see, I don't believe Harry is "superior" - he has been selected > by the prophecy, and has to react to many different challenges because > of it. But as he continually tries to explain, and Ron finally gets, > most of it comes about by luck, the help of friends, and DD's > guidance. He is a good person because he has suffered as a child and > consequently has empathy for others who suffer. But he's not > superior, and I think at the end would never claim to be superior. To > what/whom? Slytherins? Muggles? House elfs? Goblins? LV? - well, > maybe. But he sees too often how his initial judgements are > incorrect, and that people are not black and white as they might first > appear. If he is superior, who is his inferior? > > Carol responds: > First, I think I agree with montims but I'm not quite sure. Perhaps > you could follow up and clarify a little? Magepi: As I said in my response to that post, I think it became a different issue when taken out of context. I was responding to Lupinlore's view of Harry's forgiveness of Snape, not saying that in general Harry walks around saying he's superior. I do think the text clearly does say he's superior to many people. And I don't think that the hero can't be superior to anybody in a story--that's why he's the hero. I think it would be humanly impossible to never find yourself thinking your better than anybody ever. Carol: > Second, I think that all of us (and I'm not referring to anyone > specific here though I am responding to this thread in general) could > stand to sit down and calmly reread the books without imposing our > hopes and preconceptions on them, and I certainly include myself in > the advice I'm so blatantly ignoring. :-) Magpie: Yes, I think we could do that. I'm not sure I will, but a lot of what I'm saying is about realizing where I was imposing my own hopes and preconceptions on the text. In removing them, the story is still coherent, it's just got different priorities. Carol: Aside To SSS from another thread: If JKR's > statements don't seem to fit the text, maybe we should accept that as > a clue that she's not fully aware of her own authorial intentions. Magpie: Absolutely. Or that she's concentrating on saying something in a way that makes sense to her and isn't aware of the reactions every single reader is having. I don't think a reader getting something out of the story necessarily means the writer put that into the story on purpose at all. Carol: > As for Harry being in charge of Snape's redemption, which I think > Magpie is suggesting, I don't think so. Snape redeems himself, > expiating his sins, whether Harry acknowledges that or not. I agree > that Snape has *earned* his redemption, but it's important for Harry > to see that. And it isn't just a matter of forgiving the adult Snape, > it's understanding Snape as a whole, even identifying with him-- Harry > and Severus and *Tom* as the "abandoned boys" who found their first > and only home at Hogwarts. Magpie: No, I agree with you--I think Snape has earned his redemption and Harry is just seeing that--and his identifying with him as an abandoned boy is also something I totally acknowledge that Harry does. He tends to identify with abandoned boys and orphans in general. Snape earns his redemption through great bravery and love of Lily. Carol: Yes, Snape earns his redemption, but > Harry must have an epiphany to understand that. And his compassion and > empathy and forgiveness are so tied in with what he's witnessing that > he's not even aware of them. Magpie: Meh. It just didn't do it for me. The epiphany seemed limited to me (again, perhaps due to my own expectations projected onto the text). Harry sees that Snape has in fact loved Harry's mother all his life and has been incredibly brave and protected Harry his whole life. The scene just didn't beat with empathy and forgiveness for me at all. Carol: There's no conscious admission that he > was wrong, not recognition that he forgives Snape, but that he has > done so is obvious from the public vindication and the name he gives > his second son. Magpie: Yes, that's more what it read like to me. Harry sees Snape's memories and so now he taunts Voldemort with this and names his son after him. It's like knocking out a mountain troll. There are some things you can't know about a person without ending up respecting them, and the fact that they loved your mother your whole life and spent their life bravely protecting you with great danger to himself is one of them. Carol: > What wrought the change in Kreacher from a cringing, cursing, > scheming, filthy little bit of apparent scum to an aging Boy Scout > among house-elves? Surely, it *was* Harry's compassion as he, too, has > a change of heart, a change of perspective, a new understanding much > like the understanding he gains of the dead Snape through the Pensieve > memories, only in this case, he can extend his understanding and > compassion to a living being. Magpie: Harry needs to know what happened to the locket. Kreacher tells Harry a story of huge tragedy that's also about he and Regulus being really brave and Regulus dying to bring down Voldemort. This elicits compassion from Harry, but since he's still showing less compassion than I've had towards the character of Kreacher throughout the book when he wasn't that, Harry's behavior isn't that exceptional to me. (And he's certainly rewarded for it in the text beyond what most normal people could expect.) As I said, I know that Harry shows compassion at points, he's just one of the last characters I'd ever choose to illustrate a character who's about compassion. Carol: > Hermione (who seems finally to have grasped the psychology of > house-elves) tells Harry that Kreacher is loyal to people who are kind > to him Magpie: Again, not exactly a sophisticated examination of compassion at all. It's a perfectly good development in the story, but no, I don't read this section and think it's a great lesson in compassion. Kreacher's psychology sounds a bit more canine than the average human to me. Carol: > If Harry is a Christ figure (and I do think he is), it's not because > he shows compassion to everyone or to his "inferiors" (though we've > certainly seen him progress from virtual oblivion to the suffering of > others to compassion for Neville, a Gryffindor; to Luna, an eccentric > Ravenclaw; to Kreacher, the filthy and hostile house-elf he regards as > betraying Regulus; to Snape, the hated Slytherin teacher who > "murdered" Dumbledore. Harry's own suffering makes his compassion, or > his empathy, or whatever it is, possible. Magpie: I don't think Harry shows much empathy or compassion *at all* is my point. It's not something I'd use to describe the character any more than I'd say that Harry as a character is particularly nervous or gluttonous or inventive. He doesn't have to exemplify every positive trait to be a hero. Not that he doesn't show compassion at all ever, but if I'm looking for a Christ figure in the compassion department, Harry doesn't cut it. There are ordinary people walking around who are by nature far more compassionate than Harry even at the end of the series. I'm happy to give Harry props for all the virtues he has in abundance. Compassion and empathy are not among them. He's not completely without them, but he's no model for them, imo. Certainly not the point where he's approaching a Christ-like level! -m From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Jul 31 14:17:31 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:17:31 -0400 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter Message-ID: <001d01c7d37d$88f9e640$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173951 >From the live chat yesterday: "Lou: How did snape get into grimmauld place to get the second half of the letter, if there were protection spells on the house stopping snape getting in J.K. Rowling: Snape entered the house immediately after Dumbledore's death, before Moody put up the spells against him." If that is so, then in the chapter "The Prince's Tale," the memory order is wrong. It shows Snape finding the letter after he lops off George's ear. It does explain the tears, though, which I could not figure out. I certainly couldn't imagine him shedding tears over either Harry or George Weasley. Then I thought that 'Old Dusty' might have upset him a bit... I still have a huge problem with the letter being in GP in the first place. It just does not fit. CathyD TrentonON [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cottell at dublin.ie Tue Jul 31 14:39:36 2007 From: cottell at dublin.ie (muscatel1988) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:39:36 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: <001d01c7d37d$88f9e640$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173952 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > I still have a huge problem with the letter being in GP in the first place. It just does not fit. It's not that hard to come up with a partial hack - Shacklebolt was in charge of looking for Sirius in OotP, so he could have brought his effects back to HQ. Where Sirius's possessions were while he was in Azkaban is another matter - there was sufficient evidence against him after Pettigrew's explosion to obviate any need for an investigation of his stuff by the Ministry. Certainly it's unlikely that any Order memeber would have kept them carefully for him during his imprisonment. *Sigh*. Yet another thing that needs a post-hoc rationalisation. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Jul 31 14:41:27 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:41:27 -0400 Subject: Harry using Crucio Message-ID: <000e01c7d380$e0668c00$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173953 >From the live chat: "Barbara: I was very disappointed to see harry use crucio and seem to enjoy it his failure to perform that kind of curse in the past has been a credit to his character why the change, and did harry later regret having enjoyed deliberately causing pain J.K. Rowling: Harry is not, and never has been, a saint. Like Snape, he is flawed and mortal. Harry's faults are primarily anger and occasional arrogance.On this occasion, he is very angry and acts accordingly. He is also in an extreme situation, and attempting to defend somebody very good against a violent and murderous opponent." Amycus spat on McGonagall. Hardly an "extreme situation." I think McGonagall was quite capable of defending herself against "a violent and muderous opponent" after all, "We teachers are rather good at magic, you know." And she had, after all, survived three stunners to the chest, in OotP. I think the problem here isn't that Harry used Crucio. It is how much he appeared to enjoy it. JMO. CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 14:16:47 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 08:16:47 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hegwig References: Message-ID: <016401c7d37d$6e8a7950$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 173954 >> From Sue: >> >> This is a good theory, but in the same scene, Harry also lost his >> Firebolt. Is there a chance that JKR wanted to use the lose of >> both the broom and his pet as a way for Harry to leave behind his >> childhood? > > > Amy > Hedwig had to die in this book. Harry could not use her in book 7 > while he was on the run. Very much like when in book 4 Sirius said > not to use Hedwig to send him letters and things. She was too > noticible. Like Hermione put it, Great Snowy Owls are not native to > England. Harry using Hedwig would have shown both the Ministry and > Voldemort just where HRH were. Shelley: To put a singular reason on Hedwig's death is a bit shallow. I think Rowling considered multiple reasons for offing Hedwig. Only one of them was the childhood aspect. I think she also considered what to do with her while Harry was camping, but there is an easy way out of that (after all, Crookshanks is still alive, because Hermione left her cat at the Weasley's when the trio left abruptly, and therefore Hedwig would have also been left the same way). Harry's reaction to her death also helped to point out who he was (the real one, as the others only had stuffed toys, and wouldn't have bothered to react when their stuffed owls got AKed.) She said in an interview that she wanted the readers to feel, from the beginning, that NO ONE was safe, and the early deaths of Hedwig and Moody do that for me. In fact, when I read the death of Hedwig, I thought that exactly- if Hedwig wasn't safe, none of them were. I then wondered how far this bloodbath would go. It was a great set up for just how dangerous the world had become for all of them. From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Tue Jul 31 15:01:10 2007 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:01:10 -0000 Subject: The Genetics of Magical People In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173955 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Milz" wrote: > > > > From the Bloomsbury chat: > > > > "How exactly do muggleborns receive magical ability? > > JKR: Muggle-borns will have a witch or wizard somewhere on their > family > > tree, in some cases many, many generations back. The gene re- surfaces > > in some unexpected places." > > > > So on the surface, the magical gene appears to be a recessive gene. > > > > Milz > > > **** > Katie: > Hmmm...I don't love this explanation. So, basically, that means that > magic does have to do with blood and genetics. That's fine, and > obviously now it is canon, but I always liked to think of magical > ability as being bestowed upon those who could see the world > differently. Not necessarily always good people (obviously!), but on > people who were not so mundane...I guess I got that because Muggles > always are referred to as sort of clueless and unable to see the > magical things in the world. I am sort of bummed out that it's all just > a quirk in a chromosome. Katie > I think that stems from Rowling's personal life. Her mother had multiple sclerosis, which has a some sort of genetic/hereditary connection. So, I think it's kind of nice that she tossed a scientific explanation into it all. RE: Genius, genetics, etc. When I was in high school, I was really into psychology/psychiatry. I volunteered at mental health hospitals as a candy striper. At one of these places I met E. Fuller Torrey, MD. Dr. Torrey was a renown expert on schizophrenia and it was fascinating to talk to him and other mental health experts (at least for me, lol.) They told me that if you look at the families of "geniuses" they have first and second degree relatives with mental illnesses like schizophrenia and major depression. Sometimes the mental illness is within their generation (like a first cousin or an uncle). Some times the mental illness goes back several generations. The reverse was also true. That led them to believe that there is a genetic link between some forms of mental illness and that depending on how the gene was expressed in a person, it could mean the difference between life-long institutionalization and a MENSA membership. They also told me that some "geniuses" exhibit "soft signs" of mental illness. That is, they have enough of the diagnostic criteria to raise concern, but they don't have enough of the criteria to be diagnosed with the disorder. Fascinating stuff... Milz From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jul 31 15:04:47 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:04:47 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic (wasRe: Deathly Hallows Reactio...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173956 > Betsy Hp: > If that were true a few Slytherins would have stayed for the big > battle at the end of DH. They didn't. They are less worthy than all the other houses. Pippin: Whoa! JKR doesn't give us the reason none of them were in the fight. Why assume that it's because they're unworthy? There are emotional ties between the Slytherins and the DE's that Voldemort could have used to great effect. Harry rejected using the children as hostages against the parents, but Voldemort wasn't squeamish about using parents as hostages against their kids. Betsy Hp: Souls just a tiny bit meaner, hearts just a tiny > bit smaller. They probably don't even feel pain to the same extent > as other houses. (Which is why dropping a Slytherin against a stone > floor is good times. Any other house and it'd be horrifying.) Pippin: Huh? Hermione and McGonagall *were* horrified. We don't actually get a sense from Harry that it's good times, we get that from Ron. But Ron's reaction isn't about payback for being a Slytherin, it's about payback for all the times that Draco badmouthed him, and that started before Draco was a Slytherin at all. It's personal, not political, or rather, Ron doesn't have the maturity or the frame of reference to see it as political. The story can be read on different levels. You could see the Slytherins as a metaphor for the selfish side of humanity and the Gryffindors as a metaphor for the good, and you can think about how selfishness always defeats itself. We all have a selfish part that needs to be reminded of this. But I think JKR makes it very clear that a problem arises when this kind of thinking escapes from storyland and you dehumanize real people by seeing them as symbols or metaphors. That's what the golden fountain was all about, IMO. I don't doubt that Harry's vision of house unity has a touch of the golden fountain in it. Arrogance is one of his faults. But it's a bit of a leap, IMO, to say that JKR herself doesn't see that, especially since Dumbledore says frankly that the fountain is a lie and the wizards' attitude towards their fellow creatures is one of the causes of the war. Pippin From chaomath at hitthenail.com Tue Jul 31 15:14:45 2007 From: chaomath at hitthenail.com (Maeg) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:14:45 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10EA1B13-9181-4DDB-8C85-2C16D60250CF@hitthenail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173957 aquilalorelei wrote: > Nothing spoilery in the title, nosirree. > Just wondering what we think the flayed piteous child-thing is in the > limbo!King's Cross station. > I really have no idea, especially with why Dumbledore so specifically > forbids Harry to aid it (him? her?) I read the previous thread about what the thing is, and agree with the assessment that it is Voldemort (not the part of his soul that was in Harry, but what's left of him). But I still don't understand Dumbledore's insistence that Harry not help him. To me, it was more than just "you can't help him"; Dumbledore seemed to order Harry not to help. That seemed cruel -- but perhaps that is the point? From what we now know of Dumbledore, he's awfully cruel at times, even if JKR wants us to think he's on the "good" side. Maeg My mind isn't always in the gutter -- sometimes it comes out to feed. From dananotdayna at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 14:05:14 2007 From: dananotdayna at sbcglobal.net (dananotdayna) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:05:14 -0000 Subject: Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173958 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saxifrage_" wrote: > > >Goddlefrood says: > Dumbledore's back story I did like, it made a great > > deal of sense. He could quite easily have mentioned > > that Horcruxes are not too difficult to destroy, as > > they ultimately proved. That information seemed to me > > to have been withheld for no especially good reason > > before its revelation from the book Hermione had > > summoned. -WeasleyWannaB: > As I was reading your post, this just occurred to me. The whole "horcruxes are difficult to > destroy" is a giant red herring laid temptingly in our paths. After HBP, most of us think that > DD's blackened, dead hand came from destroying the Horcrux. Actually, it was from his > lapse in judgement in trying to use the resurrection stone. Much of the fun of good fiction is > that we don't see everything coming and we are led to misinterpret things. Dana now: Personally, I thought it was hilarious that the actual reason DD wouldn't tell Harry what happened to his hand was that he was clearly embarrassed about making such a goofy mistake. And that all the way to the end (even after the DOM debacle), he was hiding things from Harry for the short term priority of getting Harry to do what he needed him to do at the moment. I spent the last six months arguing the HiddenAgenda!DD to my HPBookClub to a reception of much rolling of eyes and protests like:"He's so wise and good, though, how can not have Harry's best interests at heart?" etc. The scene explaining the blackened hand actually had me LOL Dana, who loved that Harry did grow up before he saved the day and loved that DD was just as flawed and falliable as everyone else From intrignfantacie at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 15:31:50 2007 From: intrignfantacie at yahoo.com (Ann) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:31:50 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173959 Eggplant: > This following post is rated R, it contains adult material, if you do > not have proof you are 17 or older read no more; and I can recognize a > fake ID when I see one! > > va32h: > > Well I'm sure the Harrys kept their underwear on. Ann writes: imho, unequivocally, you all have your heads in the proverbial root cellar, lol, since wouldn't everyone wear dark slacks or jeans and trainers, knowing the plan before arriving, and only shirts and jackets would be exchanged for Harry's likely appearance. i seriously doubt any one of the women vain enough to wear heals on this specific mission. however, i do agree, as it was my first thought, that jkr apparently inserted a passage referencing his recent play 'Equus' performance. furthermore, i think very fondly and humorously of the first few lines of eggplants response. tysvm for the huge smile. and if an unemotional educated response beyond this is required: growing-up includes an intimate awareness of a body, as its changes are recordable as opposed to the mental and emotional maturity, which also changes as a person grows-up. these things are as natural as child- birth/dying, in my opinion, and extending as women and men have a distincly different socio-economic reactions to these changes. personally, i applaud jkr, for her tasteful 'innuendos', since we, as adults, know how painful growing-up really is without any parents and living with deaths of so many. the frequent interactions among friends results in a reality check, if you will, of normal emotions keeping one sane, (lol). I enjoyed them and had a good laugh as well. my children exaggerated the innuendos, glanced at each other smiling teasingly, and read on. I think it assists in creating and reinforcing our insistent child- rearing perspective of normalcy to bodily changes as well as a perspective policy, practice and procedural reactions as one 'grows- up'. ann From KJWhiteman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 16:08:48 2007 From: KJWhiteman at sbcglobal.net (Kelly Whiteman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:08:48 -0000 Subject: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) In-Reply-To: <10EA1B13-9181-4DDB-8C85-2C16D60250CF@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173960 Maeg wrote: > > I read the previous thread about what the thing is, and agree with > the assessment that it is Voldemort (not the part of his soul that > was in Harry, but what's left of him). > > But I still don't understand Dumbledore's insistence that Harry not > help him. To me, it was more than just "you can't help him"; > Dumbledore seemed to order Harry not to help. That seemed cruel -- I don't think DD was being cruel - I think he knew that it was too late. And Harry still tried to help. During the final duel he urged Riddle to "feel some remorse" because Harry had "seen what will become of him".... Just how I interpreted it. BonniDune From dgoldens3 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 14:02:31 2007 From: dgoldens3 at aol.com (Dawner) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:02:31 -0400 Subject: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) Message-ID: <8C9A19292368164-588-3B4D@webmail-md18.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173961 Hello, Finally finished the book last night. I was also confused in who the child was in the station. Do you think it is one of their souls? Dawn Wisconsin From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Jul 31 16:54:38 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:54:38 -0000 Subject: Rebounding curses (WAS Re:replies to 1000 posts) In-Reply-To: <0EB9A25D-D2F6-49F5-A9C8-5167BB308995@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173962 Bex: >> I believe that Moldy Shorts felt that Horcrux being >> destroyed (Harry's piece of Voldy soul) - I think the reason >> he felt it is that he did it to himself. doug rogers : > Reasonable enough, but why would Voldemort's AK in the woods > necessarily kill the 'horcrux' soul and not Harry's? I believe > it is the 'death' of the container which allows the separation > and passing on > > so does Avada Kadavra expel the soul rather than the life > force? Seemingly, in this instance. > > de-horcruxing requires the destruction, or 'death' of the > container... so Harry must have died (?) or was destroyed in > some way (?). > > There is just too much deux ex machina. Matt: As I read it, Harry wasn't exactly a horcrux, although Dumbledore ex machina (if you'll pardon my play on your words) calls him one. In making a horcrux, a wizard intentionally detaches a bit of his soul, which has been rended by committing murder, and performs a specific magical act in order to embed that bit of soul into the object that is to become a horcrux. The events that led a piece of Voldemort's soul to enter Harry, according to what the live Dumbledore told Snape, were quite different. The fragment of Voldemort's soul was detached not by an intentional act, but by the rebounding killing curse, and it "latched itself onto" Harry not only without Voldemort using the horcrux spells, but without him even knowing what had happened. And Voldemort certainly never used on Harry the "strong enchantments" that Hermione says are used to protect a horcrux from destruction by ordinary means. Since the soul fragment in Harry was not protected in the usual manner, it would not necessarily require extraordinary magic to eradicate it. Avada Kedavra, which typically has the effect of separating souls from bodies, would seem likely to do the trick. And of course it was not by chance that Harry survived, even though Voldemort's soul fragment did not. As Dumbledream says, Voldemort had tied Harry to him when he used Harry's blood in his resurrection ritual, so his curse *couldn't* kill Harry. The same connection explains why Voldemort himself was shaken by the unsuccessful curse -- he did not realize that he was trying to blast away a life that was in a sense tethered to his own body. -- Matt From dgoldens3 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 14:04:12 2007 From: dgoldens3 at aol.com (Dawner) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:04:12 -0400 Subject: Ron and Hermione's children Message-ID: <8C9A192CED80D36-588-3B73@webmail-md18.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173963 I was wondering in where those names came from too. I don't recall Hermone's parents names or if they were ever mentioned. And what is James Potter (Harry's oldest) middle name? Is it Sirius? Dawn Wisconsin From graynavarre at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 16:43:50 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: <001d01c7d37d$88f9e640$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <345745.47110.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173964 --- Cathy Drolet wrote: > I still have a huge problem with the letter being in > GP in the first place. It just does not fit. > I saw it as tears shed over the picture of the dead woman whom he still loved. He probably had not seen her face in 17 years. Barbara From graynavarre at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 16:54:22 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <962966.51214.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173965 SSSusan: > Heck yes, the ending would've been different if > Snape had done this! But I'm not at all sure that Snape ever could > have shown more of himself to Harry until the very end. Can anyone > actually imagine him able to do so? > > He *might* have been able to get to know Harry > better, I suppose... but was he capable? Was he in control of > himself (his emotions, his bitterness & resentment, his responses > to each of the Potters) enough to make the effort? I doubt it. I believe a lot of the problem lies with the fact that Harry is James Potter's son. Snape hated James (and as we can see, with good reason - put blond hair on James and he could have been another early Draco). If Lily had fallen in love and married Frank Longbottom, then I don't think Snape would have been as negative toward Harry. Every day, he had to look at the face of one of his main tormentors and the eyes of the woman he loved. He had to protect the boy and teach the boy and never let any DE know that he was doing it. In the first potions lessons in book one, when Neville makes a mistake about quills in his potion, Snape blames Harry for thinking that it would be a fun joke on Neville to encourage him to put in the wrong things. That is very unfair to Harry, but it something that James would have done. Snape could not get past what the treatment the James and the others (aka "the gang of four") did to him. In a way, it is the same with Kreacher. Those who treated him kindly, he loved and protected and fought. Which is a way of saying that Karma will bite you. Treat someone meanly and it will come back at you. Treat someone with respect and kindness and that will be repaid with kindness and respect. Barbara (YMMV) From k12listmomma at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 15:56:25 2007 From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:56:25 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore's Army - still recruiting? References: <8ee758b40707310657u3a8b939bpbec052d6d866919b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <028501c7d38b$59c38850$6501a8c0@your4cdmc4uqnt> No: HPFGUIDX 173966 >I was thinking of Neville's rallying cry again - his bravery and >persistence > really resonated with me. And as I mentioned before, the message I take > from the books is that it is important to do the right thing, and not to > be > put off by fear of social pressure, pain, or even death. > > It occured to me that Harry Potter fans number in the many thousands, and > this list alone has nearly 27,000. (Wow!) We all appear to be against > discrimination (the Slytherins), bullying (Umbridge), detainment of the > innocent (Black, Shunpike, etc), cruelty in general, and we are all > prepared > to spend long periods of time (whether or not we really have it - I am > typing this at work...) reading the books, reading and writing emails, and > in many cases making Potter-related crafty objects. > > Wouldn't it be a tremendous acknowledgement of JKR's achievements if we > channelled this energy and these numbers (and we could be an almighty > force > to reckon with) into writing emails on behalf of her pet causes? i.e. > Amnesty International, the caged babies, etc. Or if we each contributed > one > pound or dollar or euro to MS or another of her pet charities, in her > name? > > I just feel it would be a shame to let all this righteous indignation > against the iniquities of the Wizarding World dissipate, when we could be > working as a group to help right the wrongs of our real world. All the > people who have felt disappointed that the WW did not change after the > fall > of LV can show how it can/should be done. > > Dumbledore's Army! > > montims Shelley: I would take great offense if someone tried to take my love for Harry Potter and then translate that into a political or social cause that is the pet project for someone else. I can make up my mind on my own which "pet projects" I should support, thank-you-very-much. I absolutely hate it when a "star" or famous person puts the "love of them" right up there with "love also of my pet projects", so I would hate Rowling forever if she hijacked Harry Potter for a social platform. Frankly, I was a little afraid of that happening with the Madeline mention she had on her web page. While I sympathize that this little girl is missing, I would have been upset if I had waited hours in line for my book of Deathly Hallows only to find out that MY book had a flyer about her in it. Having said that, I would not mind if the FANS of Harry Potter bound together on their own to start a ministry or support a cause, because then that would be different all together. It would be Harry Potter fans uniting with other Harry Potter fans, and not the "star" telling us what to do. Rowling can support any cause she wants to with her millions of dollars- she's earned it, she has the right to spend it as she likes. But I hope she never gets into "using" her fanbase for a political agenda, because that would be a betrayal to us as readers. I would consider that to be as bad as the corruption of the Ministry of Magic by the Death Eaters and Voldemort supporters. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 17:57:14 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:57:14 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173967 > >>Neri: > your analogy perhaps isn't very accurate. Being a Slytherin is not > like being a German. No one is born a Slytherin, they choose to > become one. > Betsy Hp: No analogy will be perfect because JKR did not write an allegory. However, I take issue with an eleven year old being *old* enough to make that sort of political "choice". So for most kids, it's what house their parents prefer. Just like a child has no say as to what country he's born into. Which means that IMO, the analogy is accurate enough. (It's how I see DH anyway. Obviously others can and do disagree. ) > >>Neri, who also dislike Dumbledore browbeating Snape to kill him, > but notes that Snape didn't seem to require that much browbeating. Betsy Hp: Of *course* he didn't. Snape is a Slytherin so his soul is suspect. We know that from age, gosh was it nine?, he spoke highly of Slytherin. In some ways you can't judge Slytherins like normal people. They're a tad more animalistic than the average person. They're more suited to murder. Really, they just need a good Gryffindor to take care of them. Keep them on the straight and narrow. > >> Betsy Hp: > > If that were true a few Slytherins would have stayed for the big > > battle at the end of DH. They didn't. They are less worthy than > > all the other houses. > >>Pippin: > Whoa! JKR doesn't give us the reason none of them were in the fight. > Why assume that it's because they're unworthy? There are emotional > ties between the Slytherins and the DE's that Voldemort could have > used to great effect. > Betsy Hp: Yes, because it was all the Slytherin children who had Death Eater parents. Because Slytherins have lesser souls and are more easily corrupted by evil. The Slytherin flag was not hanging in the Room of Requirement. That tells everything we need to know right there. > >>Pippin: > The story can be read on different levels. You could see the > Slytherins as a metaphor for the selfish side of humanity and the > Gryffindors as a metaphor for the good, and you can think about how > selfishness always defeats itself. We all have a selfish part that > needs to be reminded of this. Betsy Hp: Exactly. Slytherins are lesser than. They're more selfish than Gryffindors, more easily corrupted, not to be trusted (unless they're suitably servile). Which, if this were a Roald Dahl book (who wrote inhuman human characters very well indeed) would work for me. But you don't show me a suffering child and then expect me to believe their suffering is less meaningful than another child's because they're evil because the author says so. I've heard that sort of rhetoric before. It never leads to a good place, IMO. (I'm thinking of Draco's agony in HBP that didn't go anywhere in DH.) > >>Pippin: > But I think JKR makes it very clear that a problem arises when this > kind of thinking escapes from storyland and you dehumanize real > people by seeing them as symbols or metaphors. That's what the > golden fountain was all about, IMO. > Betsy Hp: And the green and silver ties apparently. Which means, JKR was actually rather contradictory, IMO. Though I do agree she'd be horrified if children went looking for RL Slytherins. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173930 > >>Goodlefrood: > > It was certainly the case in post war Europe that a strong element > of mistrust remained between the vicotrs and the vanquished and to > some extent this mistrust lingers today. The classic example of the > continuity of the stereotypical dislike between the English and the > Germans was the Fawlty Towers episode entitled "The Germans". That > took matters to a comical extreme, but the underlying attitude was > there, and Fawlty Towers was not until over thirty years after the > end of the second world war. > Betsy Hp: Ooh, that is interesting. My dad said something similar when I lamented about DH to him. I wonder if my growing up in New York City where people come from all sorts of backgrounds is part of the reason I found the book so abhorrent? You kind of *have* to develop a certain amount of tolerence for different religions, countries and cultures when your grade-school classroom is like a miniature U.N. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173929 > >>lizzyben: > > Yeah, me too. All the imagery of the pure good Gryfindors vs. the > > impure evil Slytherins set off every type of alarm bell in my > > head. Because once you start talking about "pure" & "impure" > > people, it gets all kinds of ugly. > >>Irene: > Her own answers to the "Which house you'd be sorted into?" only > reinforce this impression. It's usually "I'd like to be in > Gryffindor, but I can only hope I'd be deemed worthy". She always > uses the "worthy" word in this connection. Betsy Hp: Oh, I think DH itself makes perfectly clear that there are the "pure" and "impure", the "worthy" and the "unworthy". And I agree with lizzyben that it makes a waste of HBP. (Gosh, there were so many plot-lines dropped between that book and DH.) Frankly, I didn't see the reason for books 2-6. A leap from PS/SS and DH would have worked quite well. There'd have only been a need for a few more character introductions. I also loved the quote from Salman Rushdie. He's absolutely right about the need for "a little less cleanliness; a little more dirt." The world is more beautiful when people deal with the frictions of cultural differences and learn to get along. (Like a good, healthy, vibrant city.) When Slytherin and Gryffindor stand side by side, rather than forcing Slytherin to wallow at Gryffindor's feet. It's unfortunate, but I could see one of Hitler's propagandists making great hay with DH. "You see blessed, Germans? You are Gryffindor -- good and golden -- and it's the evil Slytherns (read Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, etc.) keeping you down, making your beloved mother beg in the street! etc., etc., etc." Gosh, they could even do the old, "Yes we'll have to do some ugly things to win this war, throw a Crucio or two, but we are German, we're the Gryffindors! We are right and therefore we must do whatever it takes to win this battle and restore our pure and worthy race to its rightful place." Oh, and I'd say the DA would make a wonderful segue into how cool it is to be a member of "Hitler's Youth". Complete with the defying of parents and maiming of "traitors". I've finally concluded that JKR didn't actually *mean* for all of that to come out in her books. (I was quite honestly worried there for a few days.) But she made the mistake of humanizing her Slytherins. When she tried to force them back into the "every evil stereotype under the sun" box, it didn't work quite right. At least, not for me. Betsy Hp From dossett at lds.net Tue Jul 31 18:00:40 2007 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:00:40 -0000 Subject: Another HP Review Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173968 I know, I know, we've all read quite a few reviews of DH in the last week or so. But here's another I thought many of you would enjoy: http://www.ldsmag.com/bestbooks/070731potter.html ~Pat, trying to keep up with all the posts here! From GAP5685 at AOL.com Tue Jul 31 18:02:12 2007 From: GAP5685 at AOL.com (gwen_of_the_oaks) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:02:12 -0000 Subject: Ron and Hermione's children In-Reply-To: <786-46AE718F-4340@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173969 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Igrainna at ... wrote: > > Hello! New here and loving it... > > I haven't seen this mentioned but I was wondering if anyone knew the > origins of the names of Ron and Hermione's children: Rose and Hugo? I > could understand the Potter kids (Albus, James and Lily) but I have yet > to find any reference in the Granger or Weasley family lines to "Rose" > and "Hugo". > > Any thoughts? > > Thanks, > Grainne > Not my own idea, but one I particularly like was posted by "Potioncat" in message # 172522: Potioncat: It went something like this: Ron named the daughter. He "said" he was naming her for his Aunty Rose, but really it was for Rosmerta. Hermione named the son. She "said" it was for her favorite Muggle author. She just didn't mention to Ron what Mr. Hugo's first name was. Gwen (just passing it along) From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 31 18:17:29 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:17:29 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: <962966.51214.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173970 Barbara Key: > In a way, it is the same with Kreacher. Those who > treated him kindly, he loved and protected and > fought. > > Which is a way of saying that Karma will bite you. > Treat someone meanly and it will come back at you. > Treat someone with respect and kindness and that will > be repaid with kindness and respect. Magpie: Actually, one of the things I don't think I'm the only one to have noticed is that that's not really true. Karma often doesn't come back to bite the good guys. Their kindness to those who deserve it is especially praised and rewarded (sometimes overly so, imo), but so is their own nastiness to others. -m From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 18:18:23 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:18:23 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: <001d01c7d37d$88f9e640$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173971 --- "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > From the live chat yesterday: > "Lou: How did snape get into grimmauld place to get > the second half of the letter, if there were > protection spells on the house stopping snape getting > in. > > J.K. Rowling: Snape entered the house immediately > after Dumbledore's death, before Moody put up the > spells against him." > > If that is so, then in the chapter "The Prince's Tale," > the memory order is wrong. It shows Snape finding the > letter after he lops off George's ear. ... > bboyminn: Who says the Penseive scenes are in chronological order? I suspect, and always have, that they were in random order, and just happen to occur in a particular sequence to suit the stories need, but still, none the less, in apparent random order. > CathyD: > > I still have a huge problem with the letter being in > GP in the first place. It just does not fit. > > CathyD > TrentonON bboyminn: What is it about the letter that you (and others) object to or don't understand? It was a letter written to Sirius a long time ago, and it was in Sirius's bedroom. Which part of that causes a problem? Now, I could perhaps understand some confusion about the reference to Dumbledore. Since we the readers get this information in the present (Harry's present), but the letter supposedly occurred a long time ago. Well, that assumes Rita is the first person to ever discover Dumbledore knew Grindelwald. Yet, they hung around together for a summer. Certainly LOTS of people knew this; Aberforth, villagers, family friends, etc.... Keep in mind that the reference to the relationship between Dumbledore and Grindelwald comes directly from Bathilda Bagshot, not from Rita Skeeter. ---DH, Am Ed, HB, pg 180-181--- "Bathilda drops in most days, she's a fascinating old thing with the most amazing stories about Dumbledore, I'm not sure he's be pleased if he knew! I don't know how much to believe, because it seem incredible that Dumbledore .... ...could ever have been friends with Gellert Grindelwald. I think he mind's going, personally!" So, again, I ask, where and what is the confusion regarding this letter? Steve/bboyminn From mosu22 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 16:37:02 2007 From: mosu22 at yahoo.com (Monica) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:37:02 -0000 Subject: DH as Christian Allegory (was Classical & Biblical Quotations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173972 > Betsy Hp: > Hmm, but I think I have a problem in that the WW didn't even become > that much happier or nicer. It was the end of what I think amounted > to an almost school-boy king-of-the-hill (heh, or keeper of the wand) > type of squabble. There just wasn't much *epic* to it. Monica: Been gone all weekend and, it seems, missed quite a bit... especially about Slytherins as Jews? Will have to read that because I'm sure not seeing it. As far as the whole world getting happy and nice, I think Harry's transformation may be at least somewhat indicative of the rest of the wizarding world. He clearly realized that not all Slytherins are bad, evidenced by the naming of his son, and he told his son that there is no shame in becoming a Slytherin. Some old prejudices still exist, so the transformation was neither immediate nor all-inclusive, but I still believe that given time, they will begin to affect change in the wizarding world as a whole. > > Betsy Hp: > Well, it certainly depends on your own personal belief system, but I > think it can safely be said that the life, death and resurrection of > Christ made an impact. So much so that our calender system does a > before and after. Monica: Well, I would certainly agree that he made an impact. On the other hand (and I'm not saying this would be the case with HP) it took many years for the extent of that impact to be felt. Christ had to start by affecting those with immediate contact, and then it rippled out to affect the world. So maybe in Harry's case he made the sacrifice, and made the first step, and now it's up to everyone who witnessed it to go on and spread a message of equality and love (this sounds rather sappy, I think). > > > >>Monica: > > Radical change occurs primarily within people themselves, rather > > than on an outward level. Perhaps this is what happened in the case > > of Harry. > Betsy Hp: > If it did it all happened off-page. Which means (since this is the > end of the series) that it didn't happen. Harry doesn't change after > his fight with Voldemort. He's pretty much the same boy as ever. > Which, again, reflects the lack of epic, IMO. And makes it hard to > link with the Christ story. Monica: I think he did change though. He assured his son that he could be a Slytherin and that good men have been Slytherins, saw the good in a man he despised, and saw that even his hero, Dumbledore, was not perfect but was still forgivable. He came to terms with the fact that death was irreversable and he was willing to face it for the sake of the world. I would say Harry's acceptance of death, after his struggle with Sirius and his parents and Dumbledore and his strong desire to resurrect the dead (e.g. the stone deathly hallow, the mirror of Erised) was one of the central themes of the book. Although he did use the stone, it was more for the encouragement than to bring his loved ones back to life permanently. His "last temptation," if you will, was to leave humanity to its own defenses or to come back to finally end it. I would say Harry did "conquer death," in the sense that he came to terms with it. In that sense I can still see a parallel with Christ (although Christ conquered death in an entirely different sense). > Betsy Hp: > Except, the lack of good in the WW is exactly what gave rise to > Voldemort. And Harry doesn't change that. Harry attacks the symptom > but gives no thought to the cause. > Before Jesus there was a very small elect who had a relationship with > God, afterwards, that relationship was open to anyone interested, > IMO. But with Harry, there's still just a small elect. Monica: Well, without a more detailed synopsis of the House system at the end of the book, other than realizing Ron maintains his dislike for Slytherin (although it's interesting to note that he is opposed to his daughter marrying Scorpio not because he is a Slytherin or even Malfoy's son, really, but because he is a pureblood, even if it is in a joking sense). I also would have liked to see some interaction with the non-wizard magical beings to see if the wizarding world could learn to be at peace rather than constantly trying to repress them. > > >>Monica: > > Not having the book on me at the moment, I would say what is > > momentous about Draco's appearance at the end of the book is that > > he is alive, has children, and has been redeemed. > > > > Betsy Hp: > He cannot possibly be considered redeemed if he is still a member of > the unclean class. And since he is a Slytherin, and since the > Slytherins are still the bad house, Draco is, as he was, a non- > redeemable lesser-than. Yeah, here I do have a bit of an issue with the way things were portrayed, perhaps, but on the other hand, Draco went about as far over to the "other" side as he could get, of his own free will, and by all accounts should be dead or ostracized from all wizarding society or confined to a prison because of his choices, but he had a change of heart and is therefore able to live a seemingly good life. I admit I would have loved to find out that he had married a Mudblood or have his resolution flushed out a little more, but at the same time I think delving deep into Draco's psyche would have required a few more chapters. >> Betsy Hp: > Personally, I think these are incredibly immoral books that promote > bigotry and hatred, and possibly even suicide. Plus, there's the > whole might makes right and the blessed can do no wrong thing. Oh, > and the total lack of respect for any sort of guiding law. Monica: But the blessed did wrong, and a lot of it. Dumbledore was wrong, and evil Snape did right. The only ones in the book who made continuously bad choices were Voldemort and his more staunch followers. Even the Malfoys eventually made correct decisions out of love. > > > >>Susan McGee: > > Also, in answer to that commentary about how Harry doesn't struggle > > or his character doesn't change, etc. First, I don't agree, I think > > going to one's death willingly is an incredible struggle... > > Betsy Hp: > Actually, I think if so many people close to you have died, and your > one constant mentor has told you it's a good idea, and the dead are > telling you to jump in the water's great, suicide is easy. Times > like those, living is the hard part. Monica: Again, bringing up the whole Christian thing, Jesus knew that he had to die and chances are he knew that even though dying would be quite painful, what he had coming to him was pretty good. Does that invalidate the difficulty of what he did or make his sacrifice any easier? I don't think Harry's sacrifice/suicide/call it what you like was out of depression or the inability to continue living because of all the pain he went through. I think it was out of a love for the living. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173345 > > >>Geoff Bannister: > > > > He [Harry] sees his death as the only way to get rid of Voldemort > > once and for all. It is the altruism that leads people to risk > > their lives to rescue others in disasters or on the battlefield; > > the courage that led Captain Oates to walk out of Scott's tent in > > the Antarctic. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I think the reason I have such a hard time buying this is that Harry > left before his part was done. Nagini was still alive. I know Harry > told Neville to kill the snake, but it struck me as passing the > buck. Also, I didn't like it that it was all Dumbledore's idea, > rather than Harry's own. Even to the extent that Dumbledore arranged > for Harry's dead to tell him how cool death was when the time came. Monica: Harry passed the buck to Ron earlier in allowing him to destroy the locket horcrux with the sword, though, and I thought that was admirable. As far as Dumbledore's arrangement of things, arguably it wasn't his idea so much as the only possible conclusion. And when he arranged for Harry's dead to come in and help him along, I think it was because he was trying to give Harry what comfort and support he needed to do what he had to do. I think Harry HAD to die, or at least had to allow himself to die at Voldemort's hand, because he was the final horcrux in a sense and if he had not, Voldemort could have continued to survive. If Voldemort had realized this, he would have killed and then resurrected himself to rid himself of Harry's blood and then killed Harry. Just so happened that it worked the other way around. And initially Harry would have had to die, if Voldemort had not taken his blood in Book IV. That wasn't Dumbledore's plan, it was destiny I suppose. Monica From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 18:22:34 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:22:34 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173973 Betsy Hp: > Which, if this were a Roald Dahl book (who wrote inhuman human > characters very well indeed) would work for me. But you don't show > me a suffering child and then expect me to believe their suffering > is less meaningful than another child's because they're evil > because the author says so. I've heard that sort of rhetoric > before. It never leads to a good place, IMO. (I'm thinking of > Draco's agony in HBP that didn't go anywhere in DH.) SSSusan: You don't think readers could *sense* Draco's continued agony in DH? Wow, I felt Draco's agony! He seemed scared to DEATH, for his life and for his family, in those scenes at Malfoy Manor. He wasn't gleefully rubbing his hands together, saying, "My Lord! What's my next assignment?" No, he was trapped and didn't know how to get out. And I think readers understood that. At least that was my take. I didn't feel a lessening of Draco's agony in DH. No, it didn't come to a glorious resolution for him, but he and his family were together at the end, and free of Voldemort's evil and control over them. Maybe by 'going anywhere,' though, you mean him taking a some specific moves towards the White Hats? Or...? Betsy: > I've finally concluded that JKR didn't actually *mean* for all of > that to come out in her books. (I was quite honestly worried there > for a few days.) But she made the mistake of humanizing her > Slytherins. When she tried to force them back into the "every evil > stereotype under the sun" box, it didn't work quite right. At > least, not for me. SSSusan: I definitely understand this last statement. She could have done much more, there is no doubt about it, to have avoided giving the impression that Slytherins (*students,* at least) were all of a piece -- and that a lesser piece. Siriusly Snapey Susan From lori_randlett at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 17:56:04 2007 From: lori_randlett at yahoo.com (Lori Randlett) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) In-Reply-To: <8C9A19292368164-588-3B4D@webmail-md18.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <68321.77141.qm@web52404.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173974 Dawner wrote: Hello, Finally finished the book last night. I was also confused in who the child was in the station. Do you think it is one of their souls? lori_randlett: Here's some info to address this question from JKR's online Web Chat that took place on 7/29/07 on Bloomsbury.com: Jon: Since voldemort was afraid of death, did he choose to be a ghost if so where does he haunt or is this not possible due to his horcruxes? J.K. Rowling: No, he is not a ghost. He is forced to exist in the stunted form we witnessed in King?s Cross. The entire text of this web chat is posted on the-leaky-cauldron.com: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/7/30/j-k-rowling-web-chat-transcript ; [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 18:25:18 2007 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:25:18 -0000 Subject: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) In-Reply-To: <10EA1B13-9181-4DDB-8C85-2C16D60250CF@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173975 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maeg wrote: > > aquilalorelei wrote: > > > Nothing spoilery in the title, nosirree. > > Just wondering what we think the flayed piteous child-thing is in the > > limbo!King's Cross station. > > I really have no idea, especially with why Dumbledore so specifically > > forbids Harry to aid it (him? her?) > > I read the previous thread about what the thing is, and agree with > the assessment that it is Voldemort (not the part of his soul that > was in Harry, but what's left of him). > > But I still don't understand Dumbledore's insistence that Harry not > help him. To me, it was more than just "you can't help him"; > Dumbledore seemed to order Harry not to help. That seemed cruel -- > but perhaps that is the point? From what we now know of Dumbledore, > he's awfully cruel at times, even if JKR wants us to think he's on > the "good" side. > Ken: I'm not sure that I have ever seen Dumbledore do anything cruel. It is cruel to cause pain for no reason. It is not cruel to cause or allow pain if there is a reason to do so. After reading all the other responses and thinking about it previously myself, my opinion is this: the thing in the station is neither what is left of Riddle's soul nor the piece that was in Harry. It is a vision of what Riddle will be if he passes to the next life in the state that he is presently in. I think the reason that Dumbledore and Harry cannot help it is twofold. One is that it is only a vision, not Riddle's actual soul. The second is that if the vision is allowed to become reality it is permanent. Riddle made his choices in life without regard to the eternal state of his soul and once he passes through death his state is fixed. There is neither help nor comfort for him. Harry sees this vision precisely so that he can give Riddle the final warning about trying for remorse. I'm going beyond canon a bit but I think that the pitiful state of ugly-baby-mort was only partly caused by the missing soul pieces that were destroyed as horcruxes were destroyed. Part of the stunting, perhaps most of it, was due to the horrid state of the remaining part of Riddle's soul in his regenerated body. He commits several murders during DH and the part of his soul still left in his body must have been shredded beyond recognition. Some have previously called it a confetti soul and I think that description is apt. Harry tells the Tom Riddle that stands before him in the final showdown that remorse can still save him from this fate even though all the horcruxes are gone. Remorse would allow Riddle's shredded soul to heal as much as it was able. I think that Harry was being both honest and correct. Remorse at that stage could still have saved Riddle from the ugly-baby eternity even though by canon it could not have restored the soul pieces lost to the destroyed horcruxes. Remorse would have given him a significantly better eternal state, though without the soul bits lost to horcruxes probably not the best one he could have attained had he lived a decent life. This makes it all the more important that Harry not kill Riddle. In the end Harry only tries to disarm him, Riddle dies with murder on his lips and in his soul, at his own hand. He seals his own fate and Harry did everything he could to save Riddle in the only realm in which that salvation could be affected -- this present life. For those who were hoping or expecting to see a powerful Christian message in the conclusion it would be hard to imagine a more powerful one than this. Ken From aslitumerkan at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 17:46:43 2007 From: aslitumerkan at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-9?Q?Asl=FD_T=FCmerkan?=) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:46:43 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry using Crucio In-Reply-To: <000e01c7d380$e0668c00$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> References: <000e01c7d380$e0668c00$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <6467e1f0707311046o7db266d0yb98f9d362bd67681@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173976 2007/7/31, Cathy Drolet : > > I think the problem here isn't that Harry used Crucio. It is how much >he > appeared to enjoy it. I really don't understand that Harry is expected to be perfectly good. Every one of us is good and bad inside in some ways, and as a real character Harry must be also. It wasn't an extreme situation but it was a situation of extreme disrespect, and I think it was enough that Harry got out of using the Avada Kedavra. Asli From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 18:41:53 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:41:53 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173977 > bboyminn: > > Who says the Penseive scenes are in chronological > order? I suspect, and always have, that they were in > random order, and just happen to occur in a particular > sequence to suit the stories need, but still, none the > less, in apparent random order. zgirnius: The vast majority of the memories ARE in chronological order. Just look at them, in the order in which they appear in the book: 1) Snape's first meeting with Lily. 2) A later, but before school, conversation with her. 3) Their trip on the Hogwarts Express. 4) An argument at school, Lily confirms they are still best friends. 5) SWM 6) Their breakup shortly after SWM. 7) Adult Snape's first meeting with Dunbledore, Potters are alive. 8) Potters are now dead. 9) scene from time of PS/SS (Quirrell) 10) scene from time of GoF (Yule Ball) 11) Ring curse (after OOtP, beginning of HBP) 12) Forest scene (HBP) 13) continued discussion after forest scene 14) discussion of 7 potters plan 15) giving of plan to Dung 16) George's ear 17) GP scene with photo 18) the sword Note except for 17 (which Rowling in her chat places between 13 and 14) all are in strict chronological order, as can be deduced from information given within each scene. > > CathyD: > > > > I still have a huge problem with the letter being in > > GP in the first place. It just does not fit. > > > > CathyD > > TrentonON > > bboyminn: > > What is it about the letter that you (and others) > object to or don't understand? It was a letter written > to Sirius a long time ago, and it was in Sirius's > bedroom. Which part of that causes a problem? zgirnius: It is a timeline issue. The letter is from a married Lily Potter to Sirius, and is found in 12 GP. Sirius moved out of his parents' home and into the Potters' at the age of 16, before Lily married. Upon his majority he received an inheritance and got his own place, never moving to 12 GP until after he escaped Azkaban. So Lily wrote to him at his then place of residence, not 12 GP. How did the letter get there? We can explain it in a number of ways, but it does require explanation, it is not the natural place for such a thing to be. I figure that after Sirius was sent away, the Ministry boxed up his stuff and gave it to Ma Black, who dumped the items in his old bedroom. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Jul 31 18:49:27 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:49:27 -0000 Subject: Locket and Umbridge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173978 I wrote: > > Early in HBP, if you will recall, when Harry does his > > first week of detentions, Umbridge touches Harry's hand > > and his scar hurts as if he were close to Voldemort. > > > > The implication I took, knowing that she ended up with > > the locket, was that she might have acquired it early in > > book 6, so that by the time of the detention scene it > > had begun to possess her zanooda replied: > Hi, Matt! You are probably right about Umbridge acquiring > the locket in book 6, but Harry's detentions with her took > place in book 5. She was evil before she got the locket! > However, it's possible that the Locket!Horcrux made her even > more cruel. I was so pleased JKR finally confirmed today > that the evil toad was punished :-). Sorry, you're right, I had conflated books 5 and 6: The detentions were in OP, and we do not learn about Mundungus stealing items from 12 Grimmauld Place until HBP. I did realize this after I posted, but then I thought, as Christy points out upthread, that the timeline could still conceivably work for Umbridge to have acquired the locket in book 5, although this would imply that Mundungus was stealing from Sirius's house prior to Sirius's death. Having thought it through a bit further now, we do know that Sirius pitched the locket (and Kreacher presumably had saved it from the rubbish heap) before the kids went back to school. And we know that Mundungus was, ah, admiring the valuables in the house at around the same time: 'This solid silver, mate?' 'Yes,' said Sirius, surveying it with distaste. 'Finest fifteenth century goblin-wrought silver, embossed with the Black family crest.' 'That'd come orf, though,' muttered Mundungus, polishing it with his cuff. (OP chapter 5). So there is some support for the idea that Mundungus could have swiped the locket early on, and been caught trying to fence it before the school year even started. On the flipside, though, when Kreacher describes the theft in DH, he makes it sound as though Mundungus stole all of the valuables at once: "Mundungus Fletcher stole it all; Miss Bella's and Miss Cissy's pictures, my Mistress's gloves, the Order of Merlin, First Class, the goblets with the family crest ... and the locket, Master Regulus's locket." .... "Kreacher saw him coming out of Kreacher's cupboard with his hands full of Kreacher's treasures. Kreacher told the sneak thief to stop, but Mundungus Fletcher laughed and r-ran " (DH chapter 10). If all of the valuables were taken at once, the theft could not have taken place before Christmastime in book 5, and it therefore must have happened long after the September detention. At Christmastime in OP we know that Kreacher still has the family photographs in their silver frames and some other "small objects and coins" saved from the purge of the house because the trio see those items when they open up Kreacher's cupboard in order to deliver Hermione's present. On reflection, I think it's hard to support my original reading, but I am a bit disappointed, as I liked the idea of having that loose end about the detention tied up.... -- Matt From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 18:59:42 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:59:42 -0000 Subject: Malfoys in DH WAS: Re: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173979 > SSSusan: > You don't think readers could *sense* Draco's continued agony in DH? > Wow, I felt Draco's agony! He seemed scared to DEATH, for his life > and for his family, in those scenes at Malfoy Manor. He wasn't > gleefully rubbing his hands together, saying, "My Lord! What's my > next assignment?" No, he was trapped and didn't know how to get > out. And I think readers understood that. > > At least that was my take. I didn't feel a lessening of Draco's > agony in DH. No, it didn't come to a glorious resolution for him, > but he and his family were together at the end, and free of > Voldemort's evil and control over them. > > Maybe by 'going anywhere,' though, you mean him taking a some > specific moves towards the White Hats? Or...? Alla: Agreed, *I* felt Draco agony even. No, he did not become a fighter for the light, he did not show strong courage, which as many remarked is one of the chief values in potterverse, but he was not happy to be there. Personally, Draco's exhibiting courage I never expected. And to not make this paragraph a complete me too, may I just say that I think she was much more merciful to Draco than to many "white hats". Draco's parents were there with him, both in one piece. Draco did not ended up loosing his elders as Harry did, as Weasley loosing a son, Teddy losing both his parents, etc. AND I do not remember Lucius exhibiting a **slightest** bit of remorse for faithfully serving Voldemort, he did seemed eager to kill Muggle studies teacher, did he not? I think Malfoys did exceptionally well for themselves, frankly. I am guessing that she wanted to show mother's love from all sides, hence Narcissa with whom I was impressed, yes, doing something good for light side, but Lucius? Oy, I think he had been given a gift of life from the author that he did not nothing to earn, if one can say so about the character. JMO, Alla. From cottell at dublin.ie Tue Jul 31 19:09:42 2007 From: cottell at dublin.ie (muscatel1988) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:09:42 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173980 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > So, again, I ask, where and what is the confusion > regarding this letter? Mus responds: For me, it's how it came to be in 12 Grimmauld Place in DH, not how it got delivered to Sirius in the first place. Sirius wasn't living there at the time of the attack on the Potters in Godric's Hollow, so it must have been brought there later. I suppose it could have Sirius that brought it, by assumption some time before the beginning of OotP, probably with the rest of his belongings. This raises the question, though - at least in my mind - of where Sirius' possessions were between his arrest and his taking up residence in 12 Grimmauld Place. It's unlikely, since everyone (except Peter) though that he was a murderer, that anyone would have cared to keep them particularly safe for him. It's a (very) minor point, but it doesn't seem to me like solid continuity, and for my taste there's too much poor continuity in DH. My hackles first rose in the first chapter, where we encountered Charity Burbage, whom we *should* have come across by name in PoA. In PoA and in GoF, we were treated to some truly splendid clue-laying, with all sorts of things that seemed peripheral coming sharply into focus. It's just, for this reader, didn't seem remotely comparable. It's not that it's impossible to devise work-arounds, but rather that there are so many to devise and so little of the "A-hah!" that was so satisfying before. Mus From wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 19:08:42 2007 From: wendydarling6402 at yahoo.com (Wendy) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:08:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Fidelius charm and Tabooing the name Message-ID: <112841.63235.qm@web50004.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173981 I have a question about how exactly the Fidelius Charm works. I think I understand the basics but I wonder how powerful it is. The trio are found on Tottenhan Court Road because they say Voldemort's name. In number 12 they use his name twice and the Fidelius Charm isn't broken. There seem to be Death Eaters that arrive a day or so later that sit outside and watch, but no one is able to see Grimmauld Place. So is the taboo not strong enough to break the charm or does the Fidelius Charm work that well? I don't know what other kinds of spells people are using to keep themselves safe but they seemed like they broke quite easily when Voldemort's name was used. Wendy From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 19:26:23 2007 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:26:23 -0000 Subject: Malfoys in DH WAS: Re: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173982 > Alla: > I am guessing that she wanted to show mother's love from all sides, > hence Narcissa with whom I was impressed, yes, doing something good > for light side, but Lucius? Oy, I think he had been given a gift of > life from the author that he did not nothing to earn, if one can say > so about the character. zgirnius: Had Rowling killed Lucius, she would have taken away Draco's father and Narcissa's husband. I don't think she spared him for his own lovely and deserving self, but for them. (Not that they are especially lovely and deserving either, this is a relative statement). I think that the point was that among the Death Eaters, their love for one another set them apart from, and above, the others. Yes, Lucius could not care less about poor Charity Burbage, but he was quite obviously concerned about his son, which places him above people like the Carrows and Bellatrix. Draco and Cissy had even more going for them. Love, love, love... From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 19:43:34 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:43:34 -0000 Subject: A Buddhist reading of Harry Pottter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173983 --- doug rogers wrote: > > I never though there was much, overtly, of Buddhism in > the series. My insistent theory that Magic is Mind is > influenced by my Buddhism... anyway. here is an > interesting article as a review of the movie OOtP: > > http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=12,4459,0,0,1,0 > > that some might want to consider in light of the > Christian readings of the themes in the books. ... > bboyminn: Very good article; actually it is a review of the OotP movie from a Buddhist perspective. I've alway said that Harry Potters' universal appeal was because JKR draws on universal themes. It resonates with Christians and Buddhists because both those religions, as well as others, draw from a universal pool of morality. >From a universal sense of right and wrong, and a universal sense that mankind is flawed and will always struggle toward the 'light'. HP draws on universal moral themes in the same sense that pre-religion mythology draws on universal themes. It is this universal undercurrent of right and wrong, of ethics and morality, of human frailty and courage, that allows anyone of any religions to see themselves in the books. Is there an undercurrent of Christianity in these books? Yes, but only in the sense that under the undercurrent of Christianity, is a far more universal undercurrent. So says I. (...and I've said it many many times.) Steve/bboyminn From maccanena at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 19:48:16 2007 From: maccanena at gmail.com (Maria) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:48:16 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1f40e2480707311248l5473adf4w8d638cbf251741fc@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173984 Zara wrote: > > > CathyD: > > > > > > I still have a huge problem with the letter being in > > > GP in the first place. It just does not fit. > > > > bboyminn: > > > > What is it about the letter that you (and others) > > object to or don't understand? It was a letter written > > to Sirius a long time ago, and it was in Sirius's > > bedroom. Which part of that causes a problem? > > zgirnius: > It is a timeline issue. The letter is from a married Lily Potter to > Sirius, and is found in 12 GP. Sirius moved out of his parents' home > and into the Potters' at the age of 16, before Lily married. Upon his > majority he received an inheritance and got his own place, never > moving to 12 GP until after he escaped Azkaban. > > So Lily wrote to him at his then place of residence, not 12 GP. How > did the letter get there? > > We can explain it in a number of ways, but it does require > explanation, it is not the natural place for such a thing to be. I > figure that after Sirius was sent away, the Ministry boxed up his > stuff and gave it to Ma Black, who dumped the items in his old > bedroom. > Maria now: We can safely assume that, between the time he stayed with the Potters (probably until 17) and the moment the Potters died and he went to Azkaban, that Sirius had his own place. He could have rented, which would have caused some issue at the end of his lease regarding his personal possessions, but he could have as well bought. I don't have OofP with me, so I can't check, but I recall that one of Sirius's uncles gave him money to settle down, and i remember it as if he had bought his own place. Therefore, the place would still be his at the time of OotP, although unsafe to return, given he's still on the run. Surely some of his possessions must have been confiscated, but I doubt all of them were deemed dangerous, critical or worth taking by the ministry. Therefore, any order member could have gathered such things for him at the time and moved them to GP. Now, there is no mention of this additional place when Dumbledore mentions the inheritance, but it could have been sold by then and the equivalent gold be already in his vault. On the other hand, if he had rented, the Ministry would probably have a few boxes with his possessions, and as someone mentioned, Kingsley could have easy sneaked them out of the Ministry. Did I make any sense? I hope so! Anyway, as I mentioned in an earlier message, I was very touched about Lily's comment of James growing restless locked inside their house in Godric's Hollow, which must have given Sirius some comfort while he was locked in GP. Maria From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 19:55:29 2007 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:55:29 -0000 Subject: Malfoys in DH WAS: Re: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173985 > zgirnius: > Had Rowling killed Lucius, she would have taken away Draco's father and > Narcissa's husband. I don't think she spared him for his own lovely > and deserving self, but for them. (Not that they are especially lovely > and deserving either, this is a relative statement). I think that the > point was that among the Death Eaters, their love for one another set > them apart from, and above, the others. Yes, Lucius could not care less > about poor Charity Burbage, but he was quite obviously concerned about > his son, which places him above people like the Carrows and Bellatrix. > Draco and Cissy had even more going for them. > > Love, love, love... > Alla: Well, yeah, I understand that point - that Malfoys' love for each other sends them apart from other DE. I also understand and **hope** that Rowling did not save Lucius because of his lovely and deserving self. But that what was not quite my point. My point was just that - that Lucius was saved **for Draco** and I was trying to say that Rowling was quite merciful to Draco and rewarded him, if that makes sense? I was just trying to say that he got the rewards, Draco I mean that he IMO deserved much less than many good guys and that I suppose make me disagree that he was treated as less worthy character. I personally **loved** that he *curtly* acknowledged the Trio, said so much to me. Because I did not see great courage for example anywhere near in Draco, so while it was reasonable to expect Draco's redemption after HBP and I thought she would do it to somehow after HBP, I never expected Draco to show the bravery. But she showed Draco's repulsion for Voldemort, doesn't she? I think she made Draco's character arc perfectly consistent. Does it make sense? Oh, and yes, Malfoys' love sends them apart from other DE, but Lupin and Tonks' love for each other did not seem to save them for example. And I am not complaining about their deaths, I mean I would love for them to "live", but war is bloody, I know. I am just arguing against Malfoys' treated less favorably, less worthy. I think they had been treated **too favorably** for me, if that makes sense, because author killed so many people on the good side and let Malfoys not to be hurt at all. Not that it takes from my enjoynment of the books by the way, but Lucius committed quite a few things, for which he should have gotten some carmic punishment in my view. And now I am rereading Betsy's post and thinking whether Betsy did even make this argument, or I am just arguing against argument that I developed in my head, LOL. JMO, Alla From sassymomofthree at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 20:03:59 2007 From: sassymomofthree at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:03:59 -0000 Subject: Harry using Crucio In-Reply-To: <000e01c7d380$e0668c00$3a62acce@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173986 > Cathy: Amycus spat on McGonagall. Hardly an "extreme situation." Lisa: I think JKR was referring to being in the middle of a battle, a war, as being in the middle of an extreme situation. When emotions and adrenalin is running high during a war, I can easily see someone coming across the straw that broke the camel's back and enjoying retaliation. Lisa From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Jul 31 20:11:39 2007 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:11:39 -0400 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter Message-ID: <003601c7d3af$0245b9d0$5cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 173987 > CathyD: > > I still have a huge problem with the letter being in > GP in the first place. It just does not fit. bboyminn: "What is it about the letter that you (and others) object to or don't understand? It was a letter written to Sirius a long time ago, and it was in Sirius's bedroom. Which part of that causes a problem" That it was there at 12 GP at all, not the contents. Sirius hadn't been there since he was 16 until he was probably 35-36 (when it became OotP HQ). As others have said (thanks to Mus and zgirnius), Sirius was living on his own from the time he was 17 and came into money. The letter from Lily would not have been delivered to 12 GP, it would have been sent to where-ever he was living at the time. (I don't believe for a moment that he would have gone into hiding at 12 GP during the first VoldyWar. He may have believed his parents had gotten cold feet at what lengths Voldy was willing to go, but I'm sure he believed they would turn him over to the DE's in a heartbeat.) Had the letter been in his possession at the time of his capture (and really, why would it be?) after the event with Wormtail, the Ministry certainly wouldn't have allowed him to keep it in Azkaban. As others have said, the OotP members were so certain he was a traitor, would any of them bothered finding his possessions and shipping them home? Hardly. DD gave testimony against him as being the Potter's secret keeper. We know, from PoA, what Lupin's opinion of him was. Regulus was already dead. His family probably didn't know where he was hiding to go and collect his things if they even cared (probably not if you believe all that Kreacher had to say). muscatel1988 said: It's not that hard to come up with a partial hack - Shacklebolt was in charge of looking for Sirius in OotP, so he could have brought his effects back to HQ." Ok, I'll buy that (not really) but then Sirius would have shown at least the photograph to Harry. He knew how hungry Harry was for any information about his family. muscatel1988 said "Certainly it's unlikely that any Order memeber would have kept them carefully for him during his imprisonment. *Sigh*. Yet another thing that needs a post-hoc rationalisation." And that's my problem. CathyD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 20:11:25 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:11:25 -0000 Subject: Slytherin's redemption (Was: DH as Christian Allegory) In-Reply-To: <433989.67031.qm@web86211.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173988 lizzyben wrote: > > But even if we accept the (IMO horrifying) contention that JKR intended her world to be a Calvinist split between the "divine elect" & the unclean, evil masses, it still doesn't make sense to me. Because how do we explain HBP? In that novel, Harry spends a lot of time learning about, and integrating, Slytherin qualities. He inherits the home of Slytherin wizards, rides the train in the Slytherin compartment, interacts positively w/Slughorn, shadows Draco all year, & learns from Snape's potion book. He actually considers young!Snape as a kind of friend, and feel a sense of pity & compassion for Draco (for the first time). The Slytherins were arguably the most interesting characters in that novel. It seems like all of this was about integration - internally, w/Harry integrating the Slytherin shadow side into his personality, and externally, w/Hogwarts integrating the Slytherin house into the school as well. > > Then, all of a sudden, in DH she suddenly reverses course and literally isolates & eliminates Slytherins from the narrative. All the subtlely of HBP is lost as Slytherin = evil once again, and Draco & Snape are marginalized & reduced to the stereotypes. That's what's weird to me. It's like she started writing about Jungian integration, and then suddenly switched to Calvinist pre-destination mid-stream. > Irene replied: > > One of my theories is that Rowling has planned the ending quite in advance. And she could not have planned the middle arch of the story in full details. So during the years of writing the story took her somewhere, and the characters has developed in unforseen ways. And then she had to take some artificial measures to bring them back to the planned route. > > My husband has a different theory, which I find more amusing. Rowling has confessed to reading some discussion boards, right? So can you imagine her reaction after HBP: "I gave you super-spy-suave-Snape in the beginning of the book, I gave you wicked-wizard-Snape in the end, and still you won't believe he is ESE, which I need for my book 7 surprise?!!! Right, I'm keeping him off page for the most of book 7! No more confrontations with Harry!" :-) Carol responds: I agree with Lizzyben's reading of HBP, which is, in effect, the Book of Slytherin. But that focus can't be maintained in DH, which takes us away from Hogwarts for the first time and focuses during the camping trip segment on their isolation. Harry's pov is especially unreliable here. He (and the rest of the WW) think that Snape is a murderer and a loyal DE, so that everything he hears about Snape fits his preconceptions. The Harry filter is extended to at least half of the WW, (including Voldemort and the Death Eaters on the one hand and McGonagall and Flitwick on the other). Snape is in deep, deep cover, and the Snape we know from previous books has no reason or opportunity to appear. Even Harry's view of Dumbledore (who turns out to be more manipulative than most of us thought but is nevertheless not as bad as Rita Skeeter paints him) is skewed by Skeeter's book, Dumbledore's inability to set out a clear path, and the malign influence of the Horcrux. Our view of Snape (not, however, of Draco and the Malfoys, whom we see in all their weakness and disillusionment and fear) is a simple matter of misdirection and point of view serving plot structure. Harry has to see the worst of Slytherin, and especially of Snape, as does the unwary reader, for the reversal/recognition scene in "The Prince's Tale" and an acceptance of Snape's redemption to work. But, meanwhile, JKR is dropping hints that Snape is not evil but deeply undercover and working secretly for the side of good on DD's orders (his Occlumency in chapter one, Mundungus(!) coming up with the Poly-juiced Potters plan (strangely missing from Snape's revelations to LV), the doe Patronus, the "terrible" detention with Hagrid, Snape reinstituting Umbridge's decrees when he must know perfectly well what the result will be, the fake Sword of Gryffindor that Snape sends to Bellatrix (Does he know? I wondered as I read that), Snape as headmaster being able to use Dumbledore's office, Snape retaining McGonagall and Hagrid and as many staff members as possible rather than replacing them all with Death Eaters, no deaths at Hogwarts. JKR can show suave-spy!Snape hoodwinking both Voldemort and McGonagall and DADA-expert!Snape duelling McGonagall (if we're paying attention instead of letting ourselves get carried away by emotions as I did, we can see that he's using defensive spells, unlike Cruciatus!Harry), but she can't show Snape talking to Portrait!Dumbledore or let us know exactly how he's protecting the students from the Carrows. Obviously, he can't openly oppose them, but he's encouraging the growth of the resistance movement and not going after the rebels, allowing Hagrid to protect them. We have to read between the lines, but Good!Snape is there. And, of course, without Snape, Ron could not have rescued Harry or retrieved the Sword of Gryffindor, which in turn makes possible the destruction of the horrible locket Horcrux and the hostility and jealousy and despair it has been disseminating among the Trio. (On a side note, we don't see suave-spy snape in his death scene because he isn't lying to Voldemort about his loyalties and Occlumency can't save him; his sole concern is that he knows it's time to give his message to Harry--Nagini is in her bubble being magically protected--and he fears that he has failed.) But he doesn't fail. With his last gesture, his last amazing piece of magic, he gives Harry the memories he needs to know that he has to sacrifice himself to destroy the scar Horcrux and and to understand Snape, as the reader does, too, at last. (DD has, of course, concealed one last bit of important information from Snape, but only because Harry can't yet know that he has a chance to survive.) At any rate, DH does not undo the glimpse into the heart of Slytherin provided by HBP. IMO, it expands on that glimpse and adds to Harry's understanding of the "Shadow House." We have "good Slytherins" other than Snape, as I've pointed out elsewhere: Phineas Nigellus, Snape's go-between and spy, taking the role of the snide, snarky Slytherin; Slughorn and Kreacher joining the battle, surely an example for the students who will Be sorted into his House the next year; and Regulus, the champion of house-elves, finally getting the recognition he's due in Kreacher's rallying cry. Slytherin has its heroes, living and dead. And we see Draco, at first so gung ho about killing Dumbledore in HBP and left teetering between killing and being killed on the tower (and saved from either fate by Snape and DD together) now facing the consequences of his choice to join the DEs in DH. We see all three Malfoys humbled and powerless (Lucius hasn't fully learned his lesson as of "Malfoy Manor," IIRC, but Narcissa's love for her son turns her away from the Dark Lord and gives her the strength to lie to him. (She is not looking him in the face as she does it, but she lacks the immense courage or the superb Occlumency of Severus Snape.) IOW, HBP shows us the humanity of Slytherin (as Lizzyben nicely illustrates), even the execrable Bellatrix showing love for her sister, and provides new insights into Draco and Narcissa and Snape as the HBP with whom Harry can empathize. We have parallel scenes with Snape and Harry (revulsion and self-hatred) and the hint that Snape, too, has been bound by a promise to Dumbledore, which many of us suspected was a promise to kill him when the time came rather than let Draco do it. We get another set of parallel Snape/Harry scenes in DH. Harry, hating and distrusting Dumbledore through the sinister combination of Rita Skeeter's "biography" and the locket Horcrux (which is busily spreading doubt and division among the friends to the point of driving Ron [temporarily] away), sees himself as Dumbledore's unloved puppet: "Look what he asked from me, Hermione! Risk your life, Harry! And again! And again! And don't expect me to explain everything, just trust me blindly, trust that I know what I'm doing, trust me even though I don't trust you! Never the whole truth! Never!" (362). Snape, of course, gives him the truth that he wants, or most of it, through the Pensieve memory, and Redeemed but Dead!Dumbledore gives him more (along with comfort) in "King's Cross. (The rest Harry has to discover for himself.) It's important that he forgives both Snape and Dumbledore, one of whom is not nearly as bad as he thinks him and the other not quite as bad. Snape, though still bitter, dies giving him crucial information and the memories that make understanding possible and Harry publicly proclaims his bravery and loyalty to DD; DD's place on his pedestal is still rather shaky for many readers, but he's not the inhuman manipulator he appears to be throughout most of the book or even the advocate of the "greater good" who would have ruled the Muggles as benevolent dictator. (Where's Gandalf when you need him?) It seems to me that part of Harry's understanding of and compassion for Snape, the ultimate Slytherin, the second of the "abandoned boys," surely comes from Snape's doubts of Dumbledore, which parallel his own: "After you have killed me, Severus," begins DD, but Snape cuts him off. "'You refuse to tell me everything, yet you expect that small service of me!' snarled Snape, and real anger flared in the thin face now. 'You take a great deal for granted, Dumbledore. Perhaps I have changed my mind!'" (685). And later that night, after he learns that he must tell Harry that he has a soul bit in his scar and must face Voldemort ready to die, Snape says, "I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter's son safe. And now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter--" (687). This is not quite an accurate view of Dumbledore, nor is Harry's in the parallel scene, but it places brave Slytherin Snape in exactly the same position as the doubt-wracked Harry of the middle chapters of DH. No wonder he identified so easily with Snape in the Pensieve scene. No wonder he forgave him. Not only was Snape protecting Harry and risking his life on Dumbledore's orders, he was being used by Dumbledore, exactly as Harry is. And, though we're not told so explicitly, I think Harry recognizes the HBP in those scenes, the clever boy who was already his friend and is revealed to be a lonely outsider tempted to the wrong side, blind to the evil nature of his friends, exactly like Dumbledore with Grindelwald. So Gryffindor is not the House of perfection, as the revelations about Dumbledore, the arch-Gryffindor, reveal. Dumbledore, like Grindelwald and Voldemort, had been tempted by power. He had placed his less than laudable ambition to rule the world for "the greater good" above the welfare of his sister and brother, and his sister had died because of his friendship with Grindelwald. He had believed Muggles to be inferior beings (perhaps because of what the Muggle boys had done to his sister) who needed his benevolent dictatorship to control and "help" them. He was not, of course, nearly as bad as Grindelwald, and perhaps Grindelwald's later atrocities opened his eyes. But the much-later Dumbledore, the twinkling-eyed, eccentric, high-principled Dumbledore, champion of Muggle-borns and much-loved mentor, had manipulated both Snape and Harry. It's a step down for Gryffindor, just as brave Regulus, champion of house-elves, and bitter hero Snape who loved Lily and gave his all to atone for her death are a step up--a giant step up--for Slytherin. IOW, DH does not undo the revealed humanity of the Slytherins from HBP. It extends that theme, even though the plot structure setting up Harry's epiphany requires us to see Snape from the outside, in the role of ESE!Snape (with clues to the contrary), until Harry's epiphany. Only one Slytherin student, Crabbe, has become trly evil, and he's dead. Those who remain, or are newly Sorted into Slytherin House, will have neither the temptation nor the opportunity to become Death Eaters. (The DEs themselves, along with the execrable Umbridge, are either dead or imprisoned.) The Head of Slytherin House is the flawed but jovial and essentially good-hearted Slughorn, who fought against the DEs in the battle of Hogwarts. Snape (whose portrait will, JKR says, eventually appear in the headmaster's office) has been publicly revealed as a hero. Regulus, I hope, will be added to the Slytherin pantheon as well. Of course, Slytherin remains imperfect, but so does Gryffindor. The idea that Slytherins will save their own skins (like the Gryffindor coward Wormtail) rather than risking mortal peril for a cause or for love has been disproved, and Gryffindor's flaws (already hinted at by Sirius Black's recklessness and James Potter's arrogant bullying) have been revealed through the brilliant but all-too human Dumbledore. Nor did all the Gryffindors fight in the battle. IIRC, it was only those who had already been close to Harry: the DA (including Ravenclaws Cho and Luna), his former Quidditch team, and his first and most loyal fan, Colin Creevey. (And Percy, who has the temperament of a Slytherin.) The teachers, and perhaps the Order, represent a variety of Houses. (Tonks was a Hufflepuff.) We don't see Romilda Vane rushing onto the battlefield to fight for Harry. BTW, did anyone notice that James Potter didn't go down bravely fighting Voldemort? He would have done so, no doubt, if he hadn't been wandless, but he's just coldly murdered. The only difference between his death and Lily's is that she could have survived but tried to offer her life in exchange for Harry's. Carol, who thinks that the blinders are off Harry's eyes at the end of the book and he at last sees Slytherin clearly From la_dy_di at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 19:48:50 2007 From: la_dy_di at yahoo.com (Diane C) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:48:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <749401.92450.qm@web50312.mail.re2.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173989 > Mus responds: For me, it's how it came to be in 12 > Grimmauld Place in > DH, not how it got delivered to Sirius in the first > place. Sirius > wasn't living there at the time of the attack on the > Potters in > Godric's Hollow, so it must have been brought there > later. Grimmauld Place was Sirius's ancestral home, wasn't it? So while he was imprisoned, it makes sense that his things would be stored at his residence, even if the expectation was that he would never be claiming it. Since his will wouldn't go into effect until his death, the belongings would simply be left there until whoever legally could claim them after Sirius's death, in this case, Harry. muse ____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 20:43:05 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:43:05 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Big Snip > So, again, I ask, where and what is the confusion > regarding this letter? va32h: Because the letter was written when Harry was one - which would make his parents and Sirius about 21. Sirius ran away from 12 Grimmauld Place when he was 16. So either Sirius brought a bunch of mementoes back to 12 GP when he moved back in during the events of OoTP (and assumed Harry wouldn't be remotely interested in a picture of himself as a baby and a letter from his mother??) or JKR has made a goof. va32h From moosiemlo at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 20:51:46 2007 From: moosiemlo at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:51:46 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Little Something about The Wedding In-Reply-To: <8ee758b40707310524w6b70daceue7b092b1c66beb8e@mail.gmail.com> References: <46aebfd2.0f98600a.4573.3e29@mx.google.com> <8ee758b40707310524w6b70daceue7b092b1c66beb8e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2795713f0707311351y7712d2d8x25236f5276930e2c@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 173991 kiely78: So umm what were they smoking in that pipe. Am I reading too much into this book now? Or is this just slightly inappropriate for a Young Adult book? I know, I know these is a debate about all of Potterverse not being Children's lit or Young Adult lit but outside of that, was this reference misplaced? Lynda: This is one of the reasons I love JKR. They were smoking whatever you want them to have been smoking. Use your imagination! Lynda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jul 31 20:55:17 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:55:17 -0000 Subject: The Real HP for GrownUps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173992 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "va32h" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" > wrote: > > This following post is rated R, it contains adult material, if you do > not have proof you are 17 or older read no more; and I can recognize a > fake ID when I see one! > > In the Seven Potters chapter I thought it would be interesting if when > Harry was embarrassed he had said out loud what JKR tells us was going > through his mind, "Hey, treat my body with a little more modesty". If > Harry had said that, I'm certain that Ron or Fred or on somebody would > have said what we were all thinking about our hero, "I don't see what > you're so worried about Harry, you're hung like a horse". And yes, the > fact that Hermione and Flur were among the six fake Potters is a bit > kinky, but I didn't write it, JKR did. > > va32h: > Well I'm sure the Harrys kept their underwear on. (Which does indeed > introduce an element of kinky as I doubt Harry has never seen himself > in ladies' undergarments) Geoff: I'm not so sure. If they had only been shirtless, I don't think that Harry would have thought of asknig them to show a little more respect for his privacy. Being shirtless is no great problem.... whether Ginny was lying about the tattoo or not. :-) va32h: > Perhaps JKR was influenced by Dan Radcliffe's performance in Equus > when she wrote in all these opportunites for Naked!Harry. Geoff: Don't take this the wrong way but it was an interesting experience going to see "Equus". From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Jul 31 21:00:54 2007 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:00:54 -0000 Subject: I am about to rant/the hardest part In-Reply-To: <88843CAC-6D6A-4E57-B406-B12FE78BD6E4@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173993 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maeg wrote: > > Geoff Bannister wrote: > > > I realise that members can be constitutionally optimistic or can be > > Eeyore types (Winnie-the-Pooh if you don't recognise the reference). > > I'm usually a half-full glass type. There must be something within > > the books which pleases you or encourages you - surely? Something > > at which you go "at last" or "wow" and punch the air? I have to say > > that I find the continual complaints about certain events in DH > > annoying After all, it has been pointed out that JKR wrote the books > > as she wanted to. If you cannot accept what she has written, why are > > you here like a house elf, agonising over to and banging your head on > > a wall? Maeg: > If you find "continual complaints" annoying because you don't agree > with them, am I allowed to find continual praise of DH equally > annoying if I don't agree it? It sounds like you think I'm not > allowed to be annoyed. In other words, I'm to tolerate what I don't > like, but you're free to ban everything you don't like. I don't think > that's in the best interest of this list. > As for what pleases me in DH, yes, there were some things. I'm not > really interested in discussing them, though you may be. Again, why > do I have to conform to you way of thinking? Is it really better if > we only talk about sweetness and light? Certainly, some think so. I > do not; in fact, I think it is dangerously banal. Geoff: I am not trying to proscribe people from writing complaints. I have frequently said, especially in the Christian threads, that we have a perfect right to disagree with one another. Another group member has suggested to me in an off-list email that my Eeyore reference might not have been recognised as being humorous - perhaps in retrospect I should have used a smiley. In the UK, Winnie-the-Pooh is well known by children and adults alike and to refer to someone jokingly as an "Eeyore person" is to suggest that whatever happens, they will always see the gloomy side of it. My father was like this in his later years; there was bound to be a fly in the ointment, a flip side, a catch. On a sunny day, he always saw the risk that it might rain. :-) I also quite agree that it would not be accurate to only talk about sweetness and light. But it would be pleasant if we did talk a little *more* about it. As I wrote, one of the problems with contemporary newspapers and the media is that the only news is bad news. There is a UK saying "Good news doesn't sell papers". Maeg: > I accept that JKR has written the books the way she wanted to; DH is > now canon. I really don't like it, and I really don't like the > twisted, fatalistic message that the entire series now appears to be > about. I keep posting to this list, hoping someone will be able to > explain where I went wrong. I really loved this series passionately > until DH, and I'm in mouring about losing faith with it. It's only > been a little over a week since the book came out -- can't I have a > little more time to work out whether or not to abandon it? Geoff: I personally don't see a twisted fatalistic message but there are parts of the book which, for want of a better description, I am puzzled about. I have embarked on a second read to see whether some of my first impressions were hasty. But obviously taking more time is your privilege and choice. I think I had a difficult time with HBP when it first came out. Geoff (previously): > > I am merely asking - nay pleading -for a little more consideration for > > opposing views and perhaps a walk on the bright side. Maeg: > I haven't seen anyone being terribly inconsiderate of people who > found things to like in the book. If the majority of posts seem to be > negative, then your only real recourse is for you to post positive > things. If others argee with you and want to discuss it, they will. > If they don't, then they won't. Geoff: Which is what I am trying to do. :-) Maeg: > Pleading and badgering probably won't get you anywhere. Certainly, > you've annoyed the heck out of me and made me only want to keep > talking about the problems I have with DH. Geoff: Well, I can only apologise. I had no intention of stopping anyone talking about problems. I was trying - and still am - to persuade people to stand back and take a wider look and see if there are any green shoots to encourage you that it's not all desert. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 21:10:02 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:10:02 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173994 > >>Betsy Hp: > > Which, if this were a Roald Dahl book (who wrote inhuman human > > characters very well indeed) would work for me. But you don't > > show me a suffering child and then expect me to believe their > > suffering is less meaningful than another child's because they're > > evil because the author says so. I've heard that sort of > > rhetoric before. It never leads to a good place, IMO. (I'm > > thinking of Draco's agony in HBP that didn't go anywhere in DH.) > >>SSSusan: > You don't think readers could *sense* Draco's continued agony in > DH? Wow, I felt Draco's agony! He seemed scared to DEATH, for his > life and for his family, in those scenes at Malfoy Manor. > Betsy Hp: Oh, yes. Draco continued to suffer in DH, in exactly the same way he suffered in HBP. I was referring more to the lack of change, that Draco wasn't allowed to change even a little... Eh, but that's more personal preference and wouldn't have bothered me too much (except to wonder why the heck JKR even *created* Draco in the first place). Really, it all comes down to the lack of Slytherin flag in the RoR, and the lack of any Slytherins on the side of good at the final battle. Not a single one of Harry's generation. So the only so- called "good Slytherins" were those who'd fallen under the sway of Dumbledore's cult of personality. So the logical conclusion is: Slytherins are lesser than, impure, unworthy. As Pippin said, they'd represent the selfish side of human nature (though frankly I think JKR meant for Slytherin to mean all of the negatives of human nature). But then she wanted to eat her cake too. So she made Draco almost three dimensional. So much so you feel some sympathy for him. But that doesn't work with the Slytherins = anything and everything bad. So why waste time creating a pitiful creature that we're all supposed to spit on anyway? Part of it is I think JKR prefers creating real characters to stereotypes. So she creates Draco who's supposed to be "spoiled little rich boy" (tm) but then she screws it up by giving the kid a father who *doesn't* spoil him and is actually rather hard on him instead. It confused the issue. And I do wonder if future readers, who'll be able to zip through the books in a few weeks or so might not get as caught up in it we did. They might boggle a little in a sort of "wait, didn't he have what should have been a sea-change moment back in... Ah, well, moving on" way. But there won't be as much invested, I guess. Sort of like the pointlessness in the entire "Half-Blood Prince" thread. That was another story line that went no where. > >>SSSusan: > Maybe by 'going anywhere,' though, you mean him taking a some > specific moves towards the White Hats? Or...? Betsy Hp: Yeah, I made the mistake of thinking House Unity was going to be a big deal in the last book. And Draco symbolized the other side. That house unity had nothing to do with it meant that Draco didn't have any reason for being, really. Which surprised me as much as the lack of meaning in the Sorting Hat song. Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 21:09:53 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:09:53 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173995 allies426 wrote: > > > DD misled Snape because Harry had to TRULY THINK he was walking to his death > Eggplant GG answered: > Huh? So Dumbledore figured out that Snape would die, and he figured out that Harry would be there when he died, and he figured out that Harry would capture his last memories, and he figured out Harry would find a way to read them, and he figured out Harry would be profoundly effected by it? And Dumbledore figured out that Harry wouldn't die whatever he did? I'm sorry but that's just nuts. Face it, Dumbledore was being cold blooded, and being cold blooded is exactly what the world needed at that time. I love Harry as much as anyone, but better he die than the entire wizard world. Carol responds: Of course DD didn't figure out that snape would die and Harry would be there with him. (What if he'd been AK'd or swallowed by Nagiin? How could he possibly anticipate Snape's last bit of magic, releasing memories from his own head?) What Dumbledore knew, or at least anticipated, was that Voldemort would discover that his Horcruxes were being destroyed and start keeping Nagini beside him, magically protected. That was to be snape's signal that the end was near; it was time to deliver the message to Harry that Harry had a soul bit in his scar and must walk willingly to his death for that soul bit to be destroyed. That's the message Snape is so desperate to deliver, the reason he keeps saying "Let me go to the boy." Having Nagini kill him rather than having LV AK him (which he doesn't attempt because he thinks Snape is the Elder Wand's master) gives Snape the chance to deliver the message in his own unique way. (Also, of course, LV doesn't have Nagini swallow Snape. Instead, he releases her from her bubble, wrongly thinking that she's safe. Harry, as DD anticipated, has taken the precaution of telling a friend to destroy the snake.) DD has not told Snape that the scar is a Horcrux, only that it contains a soul bit that must be destroyed. He knows that Harry will understand why it's so important to have Voldemort kill him without resisting. And DD knows that for Harry's sacrifice to work, he must go willingly to his death. Neither Snape nor Harry must know that Harry has a chance for survival (a chance that depends on the Hallows, as I understand it). DD did not anticipate Snape's death any more than he anticipated that Harry's holly-and-phoenix-feather wand would break. Snape's murder by Nagini was a matter of chance, the consequence not only of Draco's becoming the master of the wand (Snape still had to kill DD on the tower to survive the UV and carry out the rest of DD's plan) but a series of coincidences. If the DEs hadn't figured out which was the real Harry, if Harry's wand hadn't attacked LV of its own volition, if Voldemort hadn't found Grindelwald's picture at Bathilda's and figured out the identity of the thief, if he had not realized that the wand (whose power DD intended to destroy when he chose to die by Snape's hand) was not working because he was not its master and (wrongly) assumed that he had to kill Snape to solve that problem, Snape would not have died. "That bit didn't work," as Harry understatedly point out in "King's Cross." "Poor Severus," an integral part of DD's plan in everything from protecting the students at Hogwarts and getting the Sword of Gryffindor to Harry to passing on the last key piece of information the moment LV started fearing for Nagini's life, had to be alive to fill the role that DD had assigned him. And part of that role was somehow convincing Harry that he had to die to kill the soul bit, which is what he was trying to get away from LV to do. DD tells snape after the argument in the forest when Snape resists the plan to kill DD, "Harry must not know until the last moment, not until it is necessary, otherwise, how could he have the strength to do what must be done? . . . . Now listen closely, Severus. There will come a time--after my death . . . when Lord Voldemort will seem to fear for the life of his snake. . . . If there comes a time when Lord Voldemort stops sending that snake forth to do his bidding, but keeps it safe beside him under magical protection, then I think it will be safe to tell Harry . . . that on the night Lord Voldemort tried to kill him . . . a fragment of Voldemort's soul . . . latched itself onto {Harry). . . . And while that fragment of soul . . . remains attached to and protected by Harry, Lord Voldemort cannot die." "So the boy....the boy must die?" asks Snape, and DD responds, "And Voldemort must do it himself, Severus. That is essential" (DH Am. ed. 685-86). This is the message that Snape must deliver when he sees Nagini magically protected, the reason he so urgently wants to find the boy. And DD could hardly have expected Snape to deliver it as he was dying by means of memories issuing from his head. He expected the clever and dependable Snape to find a way to deliver the message as he did with the Sword of Gryffindor. But from the moment that Draco disarmed DD, "that bit" started to go wrong. It was important, however, that Snape not give Harry a possibly false hope of surviving. Harry could not know, and therefore neither could DD's messenger, Snape, that Harry wouldn't die from this sacrifice because of the shared drop of blood (the soul bit would die instead). It was, however, still possible that he would die from a second AK. DD had tried to disable the Elder Wand via Snape so that LV couldn't use it against Harry (or anyone). He also gave Harry the chance of assembling the Hallows and becoming the Master of Death. But "King's Cross" shows Harry that if he does die, death is nothing to fear (unless you're Voldemort, who has sacrificed his own soul for power, and faces eternity as a tortured fetus). Snape's death, of course, was not part of DD's plan, which requires him to be alive to deliver this last-minute message. His death scene works perfectly for *JKR* as the means of Snape's redemption and the necessary understanding and compassion that Harry needs to feel as he goes willingly into the arena to die for the WW, but it was no part of DD's plan. Carol, who wonders how child readers are supposed to figure all this out if we adults (even Grindelwald ) are having so much trouble From Nickismom1228 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 20:35:38 2007 From: Nickismom1228 at aol.com (Nickismom1228 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:35:38 EDT Subject: Jo's OWN Words about Political and Religious Overtones in... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173996 anigrrrl2: She didn't keep her spiritual stuff secret because Harry was a symbol for Jesus - I've read the books and watched all the movies. My Family is under the impression that the writer is a practicing Wiccan and therefore not Christian in any sense of the word. Can someone tell me what views she has expressed in other interviews regarding her beliefs. You can write me off line if that is more appropriate. Jeannie From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Jul 31 21:24:02 2007 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:24:02 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173997 > va32h: > > Because the letter was written when Harry was one - which would make > his parents and Sirius about 21. Sirius ran away from 12 Grimmauld > Place when he was 16. > > So either Sirius brought a bunch of mementoes back to 12 GP when he > moved back in during the events of OoTP (and assumed Harry wouldn't be > remotely interested in a picture of himself as a baby and a letter from > his mother??) or JKR has made a goof. > Pippin: It's not that kind of story, or we'd have seen Harry sit down with Sirius and go through the photograph album. It would make a three hanky fanfic, but JKR made Harry reticent about revealing his emotions about his parents to anyone (no surprise considering the way the Dursleys treated the subject.) All we get is a brief regret from Harry in OOP that he never tried to find who was the better Quidditch player, he or his father, -- and then having thought of this question, he never asks Lupin either. But we know Sirius kept control of his Gringotts vault. He may have put many things there for safekeeping, in preparation for going into hiding as the false secret keeper. I see no reason why the letter from Lily couldn't be one of them, in which case he got it out the same way he got the money for Harry's Firebolt. I do have a question about the timing since we were told in PoA that the Potters had only been under Fidelius for a week before they were murdered, and the letter must have been written months before that. But as we know, wizards have other ways to hide. Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 21:27:51 2007 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:27:51 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173998 > Betsy Hp: > No analogy will be perfect because JKR did not write an allegory. > However, I take issue with an eleven year old being *old* enough to > make that sort of political "choice". So for most kids, it's what > house their parents prefer. Just like a child has no say as to what > country he's born into. Which means that IMO, the analogy is accurate > enough. (It's how I see DH anyway. Obviously others can and do > disagree. ) and Goddlefrood wrote in: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173930 > I disagree that it is entirely a matter of choice to which House one > is sorted. There is also, as with several real world schools in the > benighted isles, an element of tradition at play. The Black family, > as one example, were universally sorted into Slytherin House until > Sirius broke that trend and the implication of that, at least the > one I took from the sorting system, was that there were traditional > houses for certain families. Neri: I certainly agree with both of you that it wasn't just a matter of choice of 11 yrs old kids (although the 11 yrs old Sirius showed that it *was* possible to break the tradition, and Regulus showed it was possible to renounce it after being sorted). But of course, most of those 11 yrs old kids have been indoctrinated by their parents in a racist ideology. My question (upthread) was why wouldn't the *parents* renounce it after they saw where it brought them and the WW in two Voldy wars. Why wouldn't them educate their children to choose differently? Or can't they renounce it because it's "traditional"? That would be equivalent to hypothetical Germans refusing to renounce racism after WWII on account of it being a family tradition. Instead, the solution that JKR came up with was to "dilute" Slytherin. This strikes me as roughly analogous to the Allies keeping the Nazi party in Germany after the war, but trying to soften its ideology. You know, keep the flags with the swastika (why not? After all it was originally a benign Buddhist symbol) but put a few Jewish and Black kids in the Hitlerjugend. Well, this method might actually work, especially if it JKR herself writing it in her book , but even she wasn't able to realistically pretend that only 19 years after the war nobody would have anything against the swastika anymore. Anyway, what personally disturbs me is those Slytherin parents that won't renounce Slytherin on account of it being a family tradition. Why would they do such a thing to their own children? > Goddlefrood: > Some time before Deathly Hallows' release there was a speculation > somewhere, whether here or elsewhere I can't remember now, that > basically set out how Tom Riddle had subverted Slytherin House > from under Uncle Horace's control. While Slughorn has some > prejudice towards muggle-borns it was a level of prejudice that > was not overly likely to lead to the mass production of dark > and dangerous wizards. Once Tom Riddle's brand of prejudice began > to infiltrate the house of Slytherin then this situation changed > quite rapidly and for more than half a century thereafter Slytherins > were seen as almost universally evil and likely to join Voldemort's > band of merry warriors at the drop of a hat. Neri: It's a nice speculation, only JKR doesn't support it in DH more than she does the rest of the series. Phineas Nigellus was a Slytherin Headmaster before Riddle's time, and he uses the mudblood word without even thinking about it. Or was his portrait infiltrated too? The Sorting Hat is our sole source from the founders' days, and it tells us that old Salazar wanted to teach only those "who's ancestry was purest". Or was the Sorting Hat infiltrated too? Lets face it, the official position of the series is that Salazar left an XXXXX class monster in a secret room at Hogwarts so that his heir can release it and "purge" the school. I don't see why someone would want that kind of family tradition, unless someone still likes to believe that his "pure" blood makes him better than the mudbloods. Neri From autr61 at dsl.pipex.com Tue Jul 31 21:39:19 2007 From: autr61 at dsl.pipex.com (sylviampj) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:39:19 -0000 Subject: A Little Something about The Wedding In-Reply-To: <2795713f0707311351y7712d2d8x25236f5276930e2c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 173999 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lynda Cordova" wrote: > > kiely78: > > So umm what were they smoking in that pipe. Am I reading too much > into this book now? Or is this just slightly inappropriate for a > Young Adult book? I know, I know these is a debate about all of > Potterverse not being Children's lit or Young Adult lit but outside > of that, was this reference misplaced? > > Lynda: > > This is one of the reasons I love JKR. They were smoking whatever you want > them to have been smoking. Use your imagination! > > Lynda > I believe that JKR respects the boundaries of young adult fiction and to me her books seem to be innuendo-free. Of course you can read what you like into them, whether it's the size of wands or the tobacco they smoke, but I have a huge respect for JKR that she doesn't descend into a kind of pantomime innuendo - ha, ha let's have a dirty laugh over the children's heads. After all a large part of her audience are savvy young teens _ I've read some very impressive and perceptive on-line reviews of DH from 12 and 13 year olds. In OOTP Mundungus Fletcher smokes a very smelly pipe which emits green smoke in the kitchen of 12 Grimmauld place. Molly Weasley tells him off for smoking in the kitchen but there is no suggestion that he is smoking anything illicit. I just think that because we are in the wizard world everything is more colourful and interesting, even tobacco smoke. Sylvia. From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 21:40:56 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:40:56 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174000 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: (snip) JKR made Harry reticent about revealing his emotions about his parents to anyone (no surprise considering the way the Dursleys treated the subject.) (snipped the rest) va32h: Well that would explain why Harry wouldn't go seeking photos - but why wouldn't Sirius offer to show it? Hagrid assumes that Harry would enjoy photos of his parents in PS (and Harry does). Even Mad-Eye, not the most sensitive of souls, assumes Harry would like to see a picture of his parents (and Mad Eye happens to be wrong about that particular picture). I suppose that Sirius could have forgotten about it, or could have deduced that given Harry's lack of questions about his parents, that no information should be volunteered either. But even so - look at all the gymnastics we've had to do to explain how the letter got there and why Sirius never showed it to Harry in the first place. Personally, I think it's the author's responsibility to make sure her own story makes sense - and not our responsibility as readers to go thinking up explanation after explanation for questionable continuity. This is just one of good dozen small, easily fixed continuity gaffes. Which means either the editors were lazy and sloppy or JKR was lazy and sloppy, or they all thought fandom would just be too grateful to get the last book to care if it was any good or not. MHO, of course. va32h From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 21:45:10 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:45:10 -0000 Subject: Feeble child-thing in train station (From Deathly Hallows) In-Reply-To: <10EA1B13-9181-4DDB-8C85-2C16D60250CF@hitthenail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174001 aquilalorelei wrote: > > Just wondering what we think the flayed piteous child-thing is in the limbo!King's Cross station. > > I really have no idea, especially with why Dumbledore so specifically forbids Harry to aid it (him? her?) Maeg replied: > I read the previous thread about what the thing is, and agree with > the assessment that it is Voldemort (not the part of his soul that > was in Harry, but what's left of him). > > But I still don't understand Dumbledore's insistence that Harry not > help him. To me, it was more than just "you can't help him"; > Dumbledore seemed to order Harry not to help. That seemed cruel -- > but perhaps that is the point? From what we now know of Dumbledore, > he's awfully cruel at times, even if JKR wants us to think he's on > the "good" side. Carol responds: JKR herself says that Voldie will spend eternity in the form he witnessed in the station, but that still doesn't indicate whether it's part of Harry's vision or whether LV himself is having an out-of-body experience. (I think the latter because his followers are gathered around him, apparently fearing for his life.) If, like Harry, he has crossed over into the afterlife without being dead, he has not had a pleasant, edifying experience. His brief exposure to his future as a mangled fetus beyond help or hope or redemption, condemned to suffer eternally, would merely confirm his view that death is to be feared and avoided at all costs. He does not understand that remorse is his only chance to avoid such a fate. Touching or trying to comfort the horrible maimed travesty of a soul will not help it, whether it's Harry's vision or an experience he shares with Voldemort. It is, as Dead!DD says, beyond help. But whether it's a vision of Voldemort's future or whether LV's mangled soul has actually passed with Harry's into what Harry perceives as King's Cross Station, the thing is not a soul bit. The soul bit within a Horcrux cannot survive outside its container, even if that container is Harry (DH Am. ed. 103). The soul bits don't go beyond the Veil or into the afterlife. They are utterly obliterated. And Harry tells Voldemort that he has seen Voldie's future if he doesn't repent: "Think, and try for some remorse, Riddle," he says. "It's your last chance. It's all you've got. I've seen what you'll be otherwise" (741). Carol, who also posted on this topic in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173668 if anyone's interested From erikog at one.net Tue Jul 31 21:48:33 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:48:33 -0000 Subject: Snape's death scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174002 Jack-A-Roe: "That's my whole problem with Snape in that scene. He wasn't prepared... but did he try to reach for his wand? No. Did he try anything? No. All his cunning and guile left him when he needed it the most." Oh, I think Snape was indeed prepared--and his "preparation" was a decision to stick with his cover, to try to deny anything that would alert Voldemort's suspicions, and *then* to get himself out alive, if possible. If Voldemort figures out what Snape knows, before killing him, then Snape's death would have been a double blow to the side of the Order--he'd have insight into anything Dumbledore shared with Snape. Which, granted, wasn't everything, but still, quite a lot. I believe Snape chose not to "fight back" because he did not want to alert any suspicion within Voldemort. He felt his cause was more important than his life. It takes a lot of nerve to stand your ground when you believe you are on the brink of death. Krista From keywestdaze at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 21:30:34 2007 From: keywestdaze at yahoo.com (Christine Maupin) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:30:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <171676.26845.qm@web55004.mail.re4.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174003 Steve: > So, again, I ask, where and what is the confusion > regarding this letter? va32h: >Because the letter was written when Harry was one - which would make > his parents and Sirius about 21. Sirius ran away from 12 Grimmauld > Place when he was 16. >So either Sirius brought a bunch of mementoes back to 12 GP when he >moved back in during the events of OoTP (and assumed Harry wouldn't > be remotely interested in a picture of himself as a baby and a > letter from his mother??) or JKR has made a goof. I failed to see anything unusual and wonder as Steve does what's the confusion. The room had been ransacked; the letter could have been any where in it and with anything. I don't remember every exact letter and photo I have tucked away in various boxes, drawers, files, etc. As for having mementos at Grimmauld Place to begin with, I stored things at my Mom's long after I left home. Yes, Sirius left home at 16 (and lived first with the Potters and then in a flat paid for with money his uncle left him) and distanced himself from his family...but nothing tells us (that I remember) that he never saw them again (it's not easy to totally cut ties with one's entire family). And we don't know exactly when his parents died (again that I remember). He might have inherited the house before October 31, 1981 and stored things there. He went into hiding himself when James and Lily did -- with all the spells his father put on the house, 12 Grimmauld Place might have been a good hiding place for him. Even if he had no contact with the house before OOTP, Lupin could have cleaned out Sirius's flat after his went to prison and kept things he thought were important, esp. things that reminded him of the good times (he had in a matter of 24 hours lost his three best friends and Lily and, in a way, Harry). Explaining how the letter got there is easy...we just have to resign to the fact that we probably won't know the true details... Christy From sistermagpie at earthlink.net Tue Jul 31 21:51:07 2007 From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:51:07 -0000 Subject: Jo's OWN Words/Harry using Crucio/I am about to Rant/Danger Designating the In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174004 > Jeannie > I've read the books and watched all the movies. My Family is under the impression that the writer is a practicing Wiccan and therefore not Christian in any sense of the word. Can someone tell me what views she has expressed in other interviews regarding her beliefs. You can write me off line if that is more appropriate. Magpie: She's stated she's Christian--she's never been Wiccan. Asli I really don't understand that Harry is expected to be perfectly good. Every one of us is good and bad inside in some ways, and as a real character Harry must be also. It wasn't an extreme situation but it was a situation of extreme disrespect, and I think it was enough that Harry got out of using the Avada Kedavra. Magpie: I don't think people being surprised that Harry used an Unforgivable- -and the torture spell at that--in this situation translates into wanting Harry to be "perfectly good." Most of the characters in canon manage to avoid doing it without being anywhere near perfectly good. The point is they feel Unforgivables were presented in a way that said they were bad, and then suddenly Harry used one just for a cool moment and they thought that was significant. Geoff: I am not trying to proscribe people from writing complaints. I have frequently said, especially in the Christian threads, that we have a perfect right to disagree with one another. Another group member has suggested to me in an off-list email that my Eeyore reference might not have been recognised as being humorous - perhaps in retrospect I should have used a smiley. In the UK, Winnie-the-Pooh is well known by children and adults alike and to refer to someone jokingly as an "Eeyore person" is to suggest that whatever happens, they will always see the gloomy side of it. My father was like this in his later years; there was bound to be a fly in the ointment, a flip side, a catch. On a sunny day, he always saw the risk that it might rain. :-) Magpie: I can't speak for Maeg, but I suspect that the problem with the Eeyore reference isn't that she didn't get it but that as humorous as it is intended to be, it's still suggesting that her reaction to the book means that she always sees the gloomy side of things, when she might be a perfectly sunny Pigletty sort of person yet saw something bad in the book. Conversely, if somebody really liked the bok or something in the book they probably wouldn't appreciate being told they were just being a Pollyanna. Neri: It's a nice speculation, only JKR doesn't support it in DH more than she does the rest of the series. Phineas Nigellus was a Slytherin Headmaster before Riddle's time, and he uses the mudblood word withouteven thinking about it. Or was his portrait infiltrated too? The Sorting Hat is our sole source from the founders' days, and it tells us that old Salazar wanted to teach only those "who's ancestry was purest". Or was the Sorting Hat infiltrated too? Lets face it, the official position of the series is that Salazar left an XXXXX class monster in a secret room at Hogwarts so that his heir can release it and "purge" the school. I don't see why someone would want that kind of family tradition, unless someone still likes to believe that his "pure" blood makes him better than the mudbloods. Magpie: It is hard not to notice the difference between Slytherin and the other houses even without the clear distinction between it and the rest of the school in every book including the last one. Not only has it apparently always been based on blood Purity, the other houses are all Sorted for virtues...and Slytherin isn't. I don't think "cunning" or "ambition" have ever been really considered virtues the way courage, wisdom and loyalty have been. (I don't think the kind of Purity found in the house counts as Chastity!) So it's not a surprise that one is at a loss to really think of it integrating along with the other houses, or that non-Slytherins displaying Slytherin qualities ennoble the Sytherin qualities, while Slytherins using the qualities of other houses ennoble the Slytherin. > >>Pippin: > The story can be read on different levels. You could see the > Slytherins as a metaphor for the selfish side of humanity and the > Gryffindors as a metaphor for the good, and you can think about how > selfishness always defeats itself. We all have a selfish part that > needs to be reminded of this. Betsy Hp: Exactly. Slytherins are lesser than. They're more selfish than Gryffindors, more easily corrupted, not to be trusted (unless they're suitably servile). > But I think JKR makes it very clear that a problem arises when this > kind of thinking escapes from storyland and you dehumanize real > people by seeing them as symbols or metaphors. That's what the > golden fountain was all about, IMO. > Betsy Hp: And the green and silver ties apparently. Which means, JKR was actually rather contradictory, IMO. Though I do agree she'd be horrified if children went looking for RL Slytherins. Magpie: I admit this seems like mixing the message in the very same book. How do you create a group of actual people--schoolmates--within the fictional world who are a metaphor for the selfish side of human nature of people, and then say that a statue shows how dangerous it is when this kind of thinking escapes from storyland? Isn't that rather "do as I say, not as I do?" That sort of reflects how I feel about the way racism was handled in general--it's clearly bad in the book, but more like an entity. It's what the enemy does, or something horrible that exists in the world outside us, not something in ourselves. -m From va32h at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 21:51:29 2007 From: va32h at comcast.net (va32h) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:51:29 -0000 Subject: Jo's OWN Words about Political and Religious Overtones in... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174005 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nickismom1228 at ... wrote: > I've read the books and watched all the movies. My Family is under the impression that the writer is a practicing Wiccan and therefore not Christian in any sense of the word. Can someone tell me what views she has expressed in other interviews regarding her beliefs. You can write me off line if that is more appropriate. va32h: JKR has said that she is a member of the Church of Scotland - I have never read any interview in which she has remotely hinted that she is a practicing Wiccan. You can access all of JKR's published interviews at a site called accio- quote.org and search for her views on religion. va32h From muellem at bc.edu Tue Jul 31 21:56:54 2007 From: muellem at bc.edu (colebiancardi) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:56:54 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174006 > Neri: > It's a nice speculation, only JKR doesn't support it in DH more than > she does the rest of the series. Phineas Nigellus was a Slytherin > Headmaster before Riddle's time, and he uses the mudblood word without > even thinking about it. Or was his portrait infiltrated too? The > Sorting Hat is our sole source from the founders' days, and it tells > us that old Salazar wanted to teach only those "who's ancestry was > purest". Or was the Sorting Hat infiltrated too? Lets face it, the > official position of the series is that Salazar left an XXXXX class > monster in a secret room at Hogwarts so that his heir can release it > and "purge" the school. I don't see why someone would want that kind > of family tradition, unless someone still likes to believe that his > "pure" blood makes him better than the mudbloods. > > colebiancardi: well - Phineas Nigellus is of a different era - it wasn't like he was headmaster within recent memory. What was commonplace to use to describe *people* back then are slurs today. Just look at a few decades ago - The US had a border program where it caught illegal Mexicans and sent them back to Mexico in the 1950's - I won't mention the name, but you can google it to find out what they called it. Operation W......(you can fill it in). Today, no one unless they are racist, would call Mexicans that. But in the 1950's, it was perfectly acceptable. colebiancardi From autr61 at dsl.pipex.com Tue Jul 31 22:06:34 2007 From: autr61 at dsl.pipex.com (sylviampj) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:06:34 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174007 > > > He *might* have been able to get to know Harry better, I suppose... > but was he capable? Was he in control of himself (his emotions, his > bitterness & resentment, his responses to each of the Potters) enough > to make the effort? I doubt it. > > And honestly, without some ability to lead in that direction and > without an ability/willingness to reciprocate on Snape's part, I > can't imagine Harry would trust Snape enough to do any revealing of > himself either. > > I know what you're saying about DD, and that might well have been his > intention or his hope. But I don't think there was a chance in hell > of its ever having played out that way. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan>>>> One scene that struck me in DH was when the Dursleys and Harry say goodbye for the last time. When Dudley, who had systematically bullied and tormented Harry throughout his childhood, made some small effort to make amends Harry was willing to shake hands cordially and wish him well. Harry is always portrayed as being human - he often felt very angry and resentful towards the Dursleys but when it came to the final parting he was able to put his bitterness behind him and move on. So different from Snape who nursed his anger and bitterness towards James and Sirius for his entire life. One thing I was amazed to read in JKR's online interview was that she felt that possibly Lily might have become romantically involved with Snape. From the brief clues she gives us from the Pensieve scenes in HBP and DH it appears to me that from their very first meeting as small children Snape's vindictive and sly streak caused Lily some anguish, and was a cloud over their entire relationship. It was a part of his nature that he seemingly could not overcome, and I can't ever imagine that she could have fallen in love with him, even if James Potter hadn't come on the scene. I agree with you Susan that there wasn't "a chance in hell that it would have played out that way." I'm a huge Snape admirer and so sad that it had to end so tragically for him but I found the way JKR finally explained his character in DH made sense. Sylvia. From kaleeyj at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 22:06:52 2007 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:06:52 -0000 Subject: Fidelius charm and Tabooing the name In-Reply-To: <112841.63235.qm@web50004.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174008 Wendy: > I have a question about how exactly the Fidelius Charm works. I think I understand the basics but I wonder how powerful it is. The trio are found on Tottenhan Court Road because they say Voldemort's name. In number 12 they use his name twice and the Fidelius Charm isn't broken. There seem to be Death Eaters that arrive a day or so later that sit outside and watch, but no one is able to see Grimmauld Place. So is the taboo not strong enough to break the charm or does the Fidelius Charm work that well? > > I don't know what other kinds of spells people are using to keep themselves safe but they seemed like they broke quite easily when Voldemort's name was used. Bex: Wow, Wendy, good eyes!! I completely forgot about that - the Taboo was in place when they went to #12 - which is how the DEs found them. I think the FC completely covers the Taboo. It seems to have taken the DEs (letssee here, that night, plus the day Kreacher confessed, plus the next day, plus the day after that) 3.5 days to track them down. (Granted, JK doesn't say what day they showed up - but the language suggests two whole days after Kreacher left.) Possibly, the Taboo alerted the ministry to the closest they could get to #12 (the street), but they couldn't find where the signal was coming from (obviously not the houses next door). I suppose that someone might have checked the signal, then started sniffing around for magic charms, then determined that the FC was in place, and made the connection that Harry Potter owned the house. All they could do was wait out the occupants. That seems far fetched. If the FC completely nullified the Taboo, then no one would have been alerted to the Trio in the house. The DEs did some homework and started looking everywhere for Harry. Someone (Trixie, maybe) mentioned #12, since Harry owns the place, and it was still under the FC protection, so they'd have to wait it out (since Snapey-poo couldn't tell them the secret - or pretended he couldn't tell them). I think complete nullification explains the time lapse the best. As for the Trio's protections, I think the FC requires the protected to stay in the same place - defninitely not for those on a hunting mission. The Taboo disrupts a larger scale charm - somehting that could "forcefield" that charm away form you (effectively creating a bubble around you) may be difficult to create at best - we know form POA that the FC is a very difficult charm to cast. Good catch! ~Bex From mros at xs4all.nl Tue Jul 31 21:51:08 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:51:08 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory References: Message-ID: <000901c7d3bc$e868c080$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 174009 Neri: >>>Instead, the solution that JKR came up with was to "dilute" Slytherin. This strikes me as roughly analogous to the Allies keeping the Nazi party in Germany after the war, but trying to soften its ideology. You know, keep the flags with the swastika (why not? After all it was originally a benign Buddhist symbol) but put a few Jewish and Black kids in the Hitlerjugend.<<< Marion: As long as those Black kids aren't Hutu or Tutsi, of course... Racism and genocide aren't the prerogative of Germans or just plain White people, you know... Ask the people of Rwanda, or just any Palestinian... Marion, whose mailbox bounced her HP4GU mails for three days, who is only now catching up and who hugs Sydney, BetsyHp and Leslie41nd LizzyBen04 to her hart for writing the things she's been thinking for the past week {{hugs!}} [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jnferr at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 22:14:45 2007 From: jnferr at gmail.com (Janette) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:14:45 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8ee758b40707311514sb5da15h4f00caa57a3288ed@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174010 > > > Goddlefrood: > > Some time before Deathly Hallows' release there was a speculation > > somewhere, whether here or elsewhere I can't remember now, that > > basically set out how Tom Riddle had subverted Slytherin House > > from under Uncle Horace's control. While Slughorn has some > > prejudice towards muggle-borns it was a level of prejudice that > > was not overly likely to lead to the mass production of dark > > and dangerous wizards. Once Tom Riddle's brand of prejudice began > > to infiltrate the house of Slytherin then this situation changed > > quite rapidly and for more than half a century thereafter Slytherins > > were seen as almost universally evil and likely to join Voldemort's > > band of merry warriors at the drop of a hat. > > Neri: > It's a nice speculation, only JKR doesn't support it in DH more than > she does the rest of the series. Phineas Nigellus was a Slytherin > Headmaster before Riddle's time, and he uses the mudblood word without > even thinking about it. Or was his portrait infiltrated too? The > Sorting Hat is our sole source from the founders' days, and it tells > us that old Salazar wanted to teach only those "who's ancestry was > purest". Or was the Sorting Hat infiltrated too? Lets face it, the > official position of the series is that Salazar left an XXXXX class > monster in a secret room at Hogwarts so that his heir can release it > and "purge" the school. I don't see why someone would want that kind > of family tradition, unless someone still likes to believe that his > "pure" blood makes him better than the mudbloods. montims: OK - what if I make a comparison with the Cambridge Apostles? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Apostles) gives a brief intro. Cambridge itself got a bad name after the discovery of the spy ring of Burgess, Philby et al. But people still line up to go there, usually to the college their families went to. The Apostles still exists, as do many other traditional societies, with archaic beliefs. Trinity was not closed down, and while I am sure they are not proud of their connection with the spies, this is just a blip in their total history, and a very small sample of their students since inception. Slytherins are purebloods - there is no disputing that. All the way through the books we see Slytherins through Gryffindor eyes - Harry's, Hagrid's, DD's, goodness even JKR herself if Hermione is really based on her. As I've said before, it's the jock/geek split - there is ancient rivalry there. Nobody says Slytherins are evil, and they are not on the whole - this particular period has been corrupted by LV and circumstances. Gryffindors are happy not to be like them, and Gryffindors do not understand Slytherins, and vice versa. If the story had been told by a Slytherin, the focus would have been very different. There was no Slytherin flag in the RoR because there was no Slytherin student there. But if one of them had tried to join, would the other students have let him/her? Or would they have suspected a trap? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jul 31 22:14:08 2007 From: dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk (Dracojadon) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:14:08 +0100 Subject: The Ghost of Tom Riddle and Re: Feeble child-thing in train station In-Reply-To: <492943.21773.qm@web55104.mail.re4.yahoo.com> References: <492943.21773.qm@web55104.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174011 AnitaKH: > Yeah, yeah, I know Tom Riddle's not a ghost.... or is he? J: Would Tom slink away to death in embarrassment from having failed in life and made a pretty big fool of himself to our eyes, though there are DEs who appear not to think so? (Did Tom care for dignity?) Or might he reconsider the dying thing and make ghosthood his aim? The next few hundred years at Hogwarts, popping up through the breakfast table and ranting on the suppression of muggle-borns, stalking likely- looking Slytherins and trying to give them lessons in Parseltongue or coax them into the Chamber of Secrets, squabbling with Myrtle over who gets the best cubicle? Myrtle: Oooh, what are you doing with that innocent first year, Tom? Just wait till I tell -- Riddle: It's 'Lord' to you, you nasty little muggle-friendly ghost -- *Myrtle somersaults into loo, flooding Tom's side of the bathroom* *innocent first year rushes off to find his two best friends to join the audience* Tom couldn't bear to be a ghost. All that opportunity, yes, for poisoning young students' minds, but he would be _dependent_ on them to carry his works out. The ghosts at Hogwarts don't have power, and that's not Tom. Perhaps he's contemptuous of ghosts, as he is of house elves. And do ghosts _care_, as the living do? (Their great purposes faded, they become comical, shadows of what seemed so important years ago...) A ghost is dead; it wouldn't save Tom from his fear of death, which was greater than his Dark Lordly aims in life. Would Hogwarts allow the ghost of Riddle to walk its halls? ==== *reads transcipt of webchat*: "Jon: Since voldemort was afraid of death, did he choose to be a ghost if so where does he haunt or is this not possible due to his horcruxes J.K. Rowling: No, he is not a ghost. He is forced to exist in the stunted form we witnessed in King's Cross." I'd thought it was made clear in the book that he was _dead_ -- gone, not existing in _any_ form. ("Tom Riddle hit the floor with a mundane finality, his body feeble and shrunken, the white hands empty, the snakelike face vacant and unknowing." [etc.]) Otherwise the horcruxes work even destroyed, don't they, keeping some stunted part of Riddle in existence? BonniDune: > During the final duel he urged > Riddle to feel some remorse because Harry had seen what will become > of him J: Oh dear, what a complicated lot of ways of being dead there are. Jadon From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 22:18:13 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:18:13 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174012 SSSusan: > > You don't think readers could *sense* Draco's continued agony > > in DH? Wow, I felt Draco's agony! He seemed scared to DEATH, > > for his life and for his family, in those scenes at Malfoy Manor. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Oh, yes. Draco continued to suffer in DH, in exactly the same way > he suffered in HBP. I was referring more to the lack of change, > that Draco wasn't allowed to change even a little... Eh, but > that's more personal preference and wouldn't have bothered me too > much (except to wonder why the heck JKR even *created* Draco in > the first place). > > Really, it all comes down to the lack of Slytherin flag in the > RoR, and the lack of any Slytherins on the side of good at the > final battle. Not a single one of Harry's generation. So the > only so- called "good Slytherins" were those who'd fallen under > the sway of Dumbledore's cult of personality. > > So the logical conclusion is: Slytherins are lesser than, impure, > unworthy. As Pippin said, they'd represent the selfish side of > human nature (though frankly I think JKR meant for Slytherin to > mean all of the negatives of human nature). But then she wanted > to eat her cake too. So she made Draco almost three dimensional. > So much so you feel some sympathy for him. But that doesn't work > with the Slytherins = anything and everything bad. SSSusan: You know, I find, then, that we are not really very far apart, in the sense of what it is which was the disappointment. It is precisely this, yes, that NONE of the children were written to stand up and be counted... or hell, to slither off to the side and feebly raise their hands. ;-) I read what Dan said yesterday; I understand some justifications for the way JKR wrote the Slyth kids. Still, I share your frustration that we didn't at least get a couple! We got the beginnings with Draco. And like you said, she did build things up in HBP so that many of us did feel some sympathy -- HARRY even felt some sympathy. And I thought we might get more than just Draco being scared senseless of Voldemort and wishing he weren't trapped. Alas, the RoR scene during the Battle of Hogwarts erased any possibility of that (unless I'm misreading Draco there?). I mean, he, Crabbe & Goyle there, trying to foil Harry, trying to capture him to take him to Voldemort? This does seem like Draco willingly going along with the Dark Lord's plans. :( So I can see why this is a frustration, if you were expecting Draco to have taken his own reservations & hesitations to heart, DD's words on the tower to heart... because it didn't come to fruition. Betsy: > It confused the issue. And I do wonder if future readers, who'll > be able to zip through the books in a few weeks or so might not > get as caught up in it we did. They might boggle a little in a > sort of "wait, didn't he have what should have been a sea-change > moment back in... Ah, well, moving on" way. But there won't be as > much invested, I guess. > Yeah, I made the mistake of thinking House Unity was going to be a > big deal in the last book. And Draco symbolized the other side. SSSusan: I wonder if you're right about those who will come to the books later, and read them quickly in sequence. I think that might well be the case -- more of an "Eh, wait a sec... what's up with that?" instead of a humongous disappointment. Maybe not. But I could see it. I would not use the word 'mistake,' though, Betsy. Like you said, you had time between books to reflect a lot on this over the past few years, and you had a lot invested in a particular vision and outcome. I expected more in this area, too, even though I'd readily confess that I was never as invested in it as you & several others were. I admit that I came to these books and was entranced by the magical world JKR presented -- the fun, the fantasy, the escape -- just like a kid, yeah, I know >;-). And I was enthralled by Harry's story itself. This kid, this really rather wondrous kid (to me), who in spite of having a pretty damn crappy upbringing, still somehow managed to care a lot about doing the right thing, still seemed incredibly willing to reach out and care for those in need -- the more dire, the more willing. No, he didn't reach out in a friendly way to everyone, not at all; but when someone was in immediate danger, he stopped thinking about friend or stranger, loved one or enemy, really. Sirius, yes. But Gabrielle. Dudley when the Dementors attacked. Even Draco in the RoR when it was burning up. Here's Ron shouting, "IF WE DIE FOR THEM, I'LL KILL YOU, HARRY!" but Harry acting just like he had in the past, just like Ron (& I) expected. Goodness knows his moral compass wasn't perfect, and he could engage in nastiness with Draco just as Draco did with him, but when something life-threatening was in front of him, he tried to protect people. And I admired that about Harry. ::takes off D'oH badge and shines it up:: Um. I think I went on a little digression there. Heh. ANYWAY, my point was that all of us came to these books for different reasons, were drawn to them in varying degrees, and latched on to particular characters or mysteries or storylines. Most of us invested a lot of time, thought & energy into thinking about it all, developing theories (or riding along with others), building up expectations or hopes within ourselves. It wasn't a mistake for anyone to expect house unity, given what was laid before us. It wasn't a mistake for anyone to wish for a big change in Draco at the end. My big issues, as one can guess from what I wrote above, happened to be more about Harry's story, the mission to vanquish Voldy... just "the story" itself, I think I'd say. So I end up with a few shocks and some "Gee, whiz, why'd she do that?" moments, but I don't have to experience a total letdown. Others, invested in different things, did. :-| Man, that's a long way of saying thanks, Betsy, for writing more on this. I feel like I understand better where you were coming from. Siriusly Snapey Susan From erikog at one.net Tue Jul 31 22:20:18 2007 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:20:18 -0000 Subject: Snape finding Lily's letter: why the letter was there, and why was Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174013 Zara writes: > So Lily wrote to him at his then place of residence, not 12 GP. How > did the letter get there? > > We can explain it in a number of ways, but it does require > explanation, it is not the natural place for such a thing to be. I > figure that after Sirius was sent away, the Ministry boxed up his > stuff and gave it to Ma Black, who dumped the items in his old > bedroom. I think there is a strong suggestion of just this in the text. Harry notes it looks like someone had shaken books "roughly," almost separating books from their spines. Amongst the pages on the floor with the letter, for example, are pages from a motorcycle manual, clearly Sirius' book. So the context suggests (in the absence of a spilled box) that the letter came, like the pages of the manual, from one of those roughly- shaken books, that Sirius had tucked that letter and photo into a book and forgotten it. So, somehow, his books got back to GP. My guess is that his things were sent back to GP when he went to Azkaban, and Kreacher was told to sort them out. That's why the books got onto the shelves, not in a box stashed away somewhere. As for why Sirius didn't show Harry this photo before--again, because it was in his book, I suspect he just didn't know he had it. The only other photo of Harry's parents present in the room is of the Marauders, and it is permanently glued to the wall. And now for a question: what *exactly* was Snape looking for in the house? Krista From autr61 at dsl.pipex.com Tue Jul 31 22:22:25 2007 From: autr61 at dsl.pipex.com (sylviampj) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:22:25 -0000 Subject: house elves' secrets Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174014 I read OOTP for the first time fairly recently (I seem to have read all the HP books in the wrong order - sigh - at least I noticed the foreshadowing!) At the beginning of OOTP Sirius is showing his family tapestry to Harry at 12 Grimmauld place and says: ' I see Tonks isn't on here. Maybe that's why Kreacher won't take orders from her - he's supposed to do whatever anyone in the family asks him -' Tonks is the daughter of Andromeda nee Black, Sirius' cousin. So if Kreacher is supposed to be taking orders from her then he should also take orders from her sisters Narcissa and Bellatrix. At the end of the book when Dumbledore is explaining to Harry how Kreacher betrayed Sirius he says 'He was bound by the enchantments of his kind, which is to say that he could not disobey a direct order from his master, Sirius. But he gave Narcissa information of the sort that is very valuable to Voldemort, yet must have seemed much too trivial for Sirius to think of banning him from repeating it.' Any explanation for this seeming inconsistency? Is it a slip on JKR's part or have I misunderstood? From pair_0_docks at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 21:50:54 2007 From: pair_0_docks at yahoo.com (pair_0_docks) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:50:54 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174015 > >>Carol: >> >> DD had tried to disable the Elder Wand via Snape so that LV couldn't use it against Harry (or anyone). << pair_0_docks: I'm still confused...so had Snape disarmed/killed DD on his orders the E. Wand wouldn't have worked? Why wouldn't Voldy have just then still killed Snape under the theory that he was the Master of the Wand and been right? How could DD not have seen that he was ultimately putting a bulls-eye on Snape? pair_0_docks From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 22:35:46 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:35:46 -0000 Subject: Patronuses (was Re: Dumbledore: Patronus and Dementors (specifically Snape's) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174018 > > Potioncat: > > I'm not sure if I ever mentioned this before, but the Patronus reflects the caster's source of protection; it does not reflect the person who casts the spell. Carol responds: I have. :-) Can't get the search engine to work now, or I'd provide a link. However, JKR refers to a Patronus as a wizard's "spirit guardian." Harry's reflects James, who lives on in his heart according to DD ("the dead we love never leave us") even though he never really knoew his father. Tonks', whatever it was before, reflects Lupin, not herself; Snape's reflects Lily. (McGonagall, who apparently never fell in love, has a Patronus to match her Animagus, but that doesn't seem to be usual. And it's a bit disturbing that Umbridge's is also a cat.) Anyway, I think Hermione's otter Patronus reflects Ron, not her own playful spirit! :-) And the etymology of Patronus, as I've said before, supports this idea. "Patronus" is an actual Latin word meaning" protector, defender, patron," which was used in Medieval Latin to mean, "patron saint" and is derived from "pater" (father)--another link to James, in Harry's case. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169350 I explored the subject in more detail in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/167259 if anyone's interested. Potioncat: > > On a side note. I'm sure Snape's comment to Tonks about her Patronus being weak, was his way of saying Lupin was weak. > marion: > At the time, I though he was being spiteful. And he was, but now I wonder if he was making a comment about himself also. Carol: I think he's being snide, all right, but I think he's also expressing his real view of Lupin, who reveals himself as weak in SWM, throughout PoA, and again in DH when he comes close to deserting his wife and unborn child. Maybe Snape saw that sort of breakdown coming; certainly, he could not have missed Lupin's premature aging and depression whenever they were together in Order HQ. And he sees what unrequited love is doing to Tonks, who is wearing her heart on her sleeve, which in his view, is a sign of weakness. (He has concealed his own love at least since Lily's death, if you don't count a sour disposition and wearing black.) I do wonder what other form of communication he used to communicate with the Order. (I wonder if Lupin would have understood what it meant and why DD trusted him; Black, however, would probably have sneered at it. They would not, however, have laughed or called it weak if they knew it represented Lily.) His students, however, would not have understood that a Patronus does not represent the caster, and I can see why he chose not to teach that spell. I'm guessing that in OoP he used Dumbledore's fireplace rather than his Patronus to communicate with Black and later with the Order members Black had presumably called there. Umbridge said that all the fireplaces were being monitored except her own, but she couldn't get into DD's office and neither, I suspect, could the MoM. Snape, however, knew the password. In any case, there's nothing weak about Snape's Patronus, which reflects Lily, not himself. It's as bright as Harry's, and would probably be just as powerful against Dementors. "It was a silver-white doe, moon'bright and dazzling, picking her way over the ground, still silent, and leaving no hoofprints in the fine powdering of snow. She stepped toward him, her beautiful head with its wide, long-lashed eyes held high. harry stared at the creature, filled with wonder, not at the strangeness, but at her inexplicable familiarity. . . . They gazed at each other for several long moments and then she turned and walked away" (366).I read this passage as meaning that Snape's Patronus is the mate to Harry's, reflecting not the relationship between Harry and Snape (which is still antagonistic despite Snape's careful and secret protection of Harry) but the relationship between their guardian spirits, his father and his mother. The gentleness and exceptional beauty of Snape's Patronus does not make it weak. It was Lily's sacrifice, not James's, that made him the Boy Who Lived. "Moonbright and dazzling," her "burnished image still imprinted on his retinas" after it disappears. "It obscured his vision, brightening when he lowered his eyelids, disorienting him. Now fear came. Her presence had meant safety" (367). That's quite some Patronus, as Lupin says of Harry's in PoA. I think that she would have held up a lot better than Hermione's otter in the MoM, a fit companion to Harry's stag (and would have scared the Dementors in PoA away had not the stag Patronus already done so). Carol, tantalized by our glimpses of Snape's magical prowess and wishing that he could somehow have lived And Snape can do more than deliver messages with it. He uses it to lead both Harry and Ron to the spot where he's hidden the Sword of Gryffindor. From graynavarre at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 22:22:53 2007 From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:22:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's death scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <208692.45803.qm@web30113.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174019 > Jack-A-Roe: > "That's my whole problem with Snape in that scene. > He wasn't prepared ... but did he try to reach for his wand? > No. Did he try anything? No. All his cunning and guile left > him when he needed it the most." > Krista: > Oh, I think Snape was indeed prepared > He felt his cause was more important than his life. It takes a > lot of nerve to stand your ground when you believe you are on > the brink of death. Which is exactly what I thought also. All through the books, none of the DEs that LV killed tried to fight back. If Snape had done so, LV would have suspected something was wrong with his most loyal follower. Spoiler for a movie: In the movie, The Constant Gardiner, Ralph Fiennes portrayed Justin Quayle, a man who realized that his wife had been murdered. He searches for the evidence and then when he has everything he needed, he went back to the place where his wife had been murdered and allowed the killers to murder him. He put up no fight. At his funeral, his friend revealed the evidence that showed the conspiracy. My husband and son could not figure out why he didn't at least fight. I had to explain that his appearance of giving up signaled the killers that he had no fight left in him and that they were safe. If he had fought, they would have looked for the evidence that he had left with his friend. This was the same with Snape. If he had fought, then LV would have known or suspected that Snape had not been his supporter and that would have thrown every action Snape had done into doubt. So he not only gave up his life, he gave it up without a fight in order to protect the Order and the people who were fighting LV. Barbara From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 22:31:54 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:31:54 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174020 Carol: Snape redeems himself, > expiating his sins, whether Harry acknowledges that or not. I agree > that Snape has *earned* his redemption, but it's important for Harry > to see that. Redeems himself? Hmmm, I'd have to say no, NO, and H@!! NO to that one. In fact he explicitly condemns himself in his admission that he does not care for Harry, and the implication is that he is not in the least sorry for his years of child abuse. Now, that is not to say he isn't forgiven -- obviously he is. But forgiving people especially people who don't deserve it and haven't redeemed themselves -- and I don't think for one moment that Snape has redeemed himself from his abuse of Harry, nor does he deserve forgiveness -- is what Christ- figures do. In fact, under at some understandings of what a Christ- figure is, the concept of redeeming oneself is rather a dangerous idea. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > > SSSusan: > > He *might* have been able to get to know Harry better, I suppose... > but was he capable? Was he in control of himself (his emotions, his > bitterness & resentment, his responses to each of the Potters) enough > to make the effort? I doubt it. > > I know what you're saying about DD, and that might well have been his > intention or his hope. But I don't think there was a chance in hell > of its ever having played out that way. > Well, this gets us into the extremely thorny issue of Dumbledore's character (and I know he's another figure who many feel doesn't deserve forgiveness but receives it anyway). But let's think of this for a bit in the light of what we've seen, and been told, of Dumbledore. JKR has said (if you believe that what she says means anything, we have to add these days) that Dumbledore makes emotional mistakes despite being extremely intelligent. She has said he especially did so in OOTP. I, for one, have always been a little vague about exactly what she included in DD's emotional mistakes, other than not telling Harry the truth about the prophecy (if what he said in OOTP was even the truth about THAT, as he appears to contradict himself in HBP and then to make yet ANOTHER turn in DH). But, to stay on subject, in OOTP Dumbledore said he had Snape do the Occlumency lessons because he thought that Snape could overcome his feelings about James. Now, let's grant for the moment he was telling the truth (which has been revealed to be a dangerous assumption, I know). This would seem to indicate that Dumbledore at least thought Snape had the potential to move in the direction we have outlined in this thread. The question is, WHY? What could lead Dumbledore so far astray as to think that, contrary to all evidence and years of abuse, Snape could put aside his feelings about James? I would suggest two things. One is that Dumbledore admittedly has, at the very least, strong favorable feelings where Harry is concerned. He also seemed extremely dismissive of Snapey-poo's initial complaints about Harry ("you see what you expect, etc.). It could be that he overestimated the obvious appeal of Harry's character while underestimating Snape's stubborness. We also have to remember that his relationship with Snape is mostly brisk and mostly businesslike. He may simply have thought "okay, time for Severus to get over it, we don't have time for this foolishness, anymore." To put a more positive spin on Dumbledore's approach, it is to be remembered that the Occlumency episode comes a year or so after DD's backhanded compliment concerning Snape's bravery ("we sort too soon..."). He may be thinking that Snape has proven himself brave -- brave enough, surely, to face the truth about Harry. One of Dumbledore's emotinal mistakes? Maybe. It would certainly fit the bill. Lupinlore From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue Jul 31 22:51:24 2007 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:51:24 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174021 Betsy Hp: > Yes, because it was all the Slytherin children who had Death Eater parents. Because Slytherins have lesser souls and are more easily corrupted by evil. The Slytherin flag was not hanging in the Room of Requirement. That tells everything we need to know right there. Ceridwen: This gives a whole rounded meaning to Snape's comment to Bellatrix that DD didn't give him the DADA position because he was afraid it would tempt him back to the Dark Arts. Everyone expects Slytherins to be tempted. It's so normal, it's used as an explanation, and accepted without comment. *Of course* that would be DD's reasoning. Isn't it everyone's? Betsy Hp: Exactly. Slytherins are lesser than. They're more selfish than Gryffindors, more easily corrupted, not to be trusted (unless they're suitably servile). Which, if this were a Roald Dahl book (who wrote inhuman human characters very well indeed) would work for me. But you don't show me a suffering child and then expect me to believe their suffering is less meaningful than another child's because they're evil because the author says so. I've heard that sort of rhetoric before. It never leads to a good place, IMO. (I'm thinking of Draco's agony in HBP that didn't go anywhere in DH.) Ceridwen: I had a disconnect with Draco in DH. When we see him with the DEs at Malfoy Manor, he seems uncomfortable. His first mention in the book is of watching the revolving Muggle Studies teacher above the table. He is uncomfortable cursing the big blond DE. He looks down. He looks away. He doesn't seem to want to really be a part of this. Then, in the RoR, he is suddenly trying to be SuperDE. He gets slapped down by Goyle, I think it was (daughter still has the book), but he keeps on playing DE. When and where did this occur? When did he change? What happened to uncomfortable Draco? I just didn't get that. Betsy Hp: Oh, I think DH itself makes perfectly clear that there are the "pure" and "impure", the "worthy" and the "unworthy". And I agree with lizzyben that it makes a waste of HBP. (Gosh, there were so many plot- lines dropped between that book and DH.) Frankly, I didn't see the reason for books 2-6. A leap from PS/SS and DH would have worked quite well. There'd have only been a need for a few more character introductions. Ceridwen: It felt as if the dimensions which were added were only illusions, as if CoS-HBP had complementary 3-D glasses, and DH came without. House unity, Draco's beginnings toward remorse, Snape's entire storyline, eleven year olds can't be reprobate, were figments of our imaginations based on astigmatized text. When you take the glasses off, you have two distinct sets of lines, one red and the other blue, and they never were really integrated. Betsy Hp: "You are Gryffindor -- good and golden -- and it's the evil Slytherns keeping you down, making your beloved mother beg in the street! etc., etc., etc." Gosh, they could even do the old, "Yes we'll have to do some ugly things to win this war, throw a Crucio or two, but we are... Gryffindors! We are right and therefore we must do whatever it takes to win this battle and restore our pure and worthy race to its rightful place." Ceridwen: I've removed some of your analogy, because it so completely works for me just like this. Gryffindor = Predetermined Saved, Slytherin = Predetermined Everything Your Mother Warned You About. It seemed inconceivable to me that the books would imply that just by following the great Harry Potter, or the Divine Albus Dumbledore, you could break the law, use despicable tactics, and get away with them. The Ministry was Less by not following Harry's directions regarding Stan Shunpike, sure, and Harry was proven wrong. But, that was very little, and there was no firm resolution or follow-through. The story never makes it clear beyond debate that Stan was indeed one of LV's marked and adoring followers. I also don't think JKR intended this to be in the books. I think it was from following the outline written up almost two decades before the series was finished. She changed, her characters grew along with storylines and needed to be freed, but it didn't happen. I suppose she might have thought it would all get away from her and instead of being seven books, would turn into seventeen or something, but I think some tweaking of the outline as events changed in the story might have been beneficial. IMO, of course. Ceridwen. From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 22:44:56 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 06:44:56 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AFBB68.1040005@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174022 melrosedarjeeling blessed us with this gem On 31/07/2007 06:45: > and the horcruxes basically abandoned as a plot line This is the one that struck me the most: after all the build-up in book six, along come the Deathly Hallows to derail them as a major plotline. It was almost like trying to listen to a radio tuned halfway between two radio stations. And neither plotline resolved satisfactorily. Harry abandons the Hallows, and in the end, after all the build-up over how difficult the horcruxes were to find and destoy, they just start popping up and dropping like flies. With only three or so destroyed (I didn't keep strict count), Harry and Co. dash madly off to Hogwarts in search of the diadem where all the rest of the Horcruxes a bit too conveniently turn up to be destroyed (one, as you pointed out, off-page). The whole story would have been tighter without the Hallows plotline at all (the whole wandering-in-the-wilderness stuff could have been pared way down, for one thing), as in the end they didn't contribute much; or was I the only one who just didn't track with the whole Evil-Wizard-Desparately-Seeks-Better-Wand theme? And was I the only one who thought Harry, instead of rambling on and on during the climactic duel about "Guess the Wand's True Master", should have just said, "Look, Voldy, you idiot -- *I'm* the Seventh Horcrux. Kill me and your dead."? As to Pettigrew, I always cringed whenever the sniveling little weasel he popped up, so I didn't personally feel disappointed over his resolution, although the hand Voldy gave him had some intriguing possibilities. And, yes, Lupin and Tonks dropping off-page was a bit disappointing. Without the Hallows plotline, there might have been room to resolve some of these arcs more satisfactorily. CJ, Taiwan From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 23:02:15 2007 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:02:15 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174023 > >>Neri: > > I certainly agree with both of you that it wasn't just a matter of > choice of 11 yrs old kids... > My question (upthread) was why wouldn't the *parents* > renounce it after they saw where it brought them and the WW in two > Voldy wars. Why wouldn't them educate their children to choose > differently? Or can't they renounce it because it's "traditional"? > That would be equivalent to hypothetical Germans refusing to > renounce racism after WWII on account of it being a family > tradition. > > Instead, the solution that JKR came up with was to "dilute" > Slytherin. This strikes me as roughly analogous to the Allies > keeping the Nazi party in Germany after the war, but trying to > soften its ideology. > Betsy Hp: Yes, I see your point here. And actually, I *agree* that it's odd that JKR doesn't destroy Slytherin. Exactly for the same reasons Germany has totally repudiated Nazism. And I think it's because she's tripped up on her message. Because Slytherin is more than just the house of a certain founder. It's also the Water house, balancing out the Fire, Earth and Air houses. So there's a symbolism there that this is four sides of human nature. In which case they should, all of them, be fairly neutral, capable of both good and evil. So the story I *thought* was being told (I think this is what Magpie and others have called the Jungian version? which makes sense because I tend to love those sorts of tales) was of how an imbalance entered Hogwarts, through the Founders' fight (which we were told by the Hat was a four founder thing). The blame for the fight focused on Slytherin. Slytherin became the scapegoat house and so it became dark. Only its dark side showed. But that Harry, by uniting the Houses to defeat Voldemort, would help cleanse Slytherin and Hogwarts would be whole again. Which would bring the promise of a more balanced WW. Instead we're left with this weird ending where Slytherins *are* evil, but we're going to have them stick around anyway because... it's nice to have people to pound when you're in a bad mood? Honestly, I don't know what JKR was thinking with this one. Which is why I equate (knowing this is absolutely *not* what JKR had in mind) DH with the end of WWI, where Germany kept its sovereignty (not broken up between other countries) but was still designated the "evil" country. Which lead to bad things. Does that make sense? I know in actuality Slytherins are just bad. It's just, why keep them around then? Why not shut the House down? > >>Magpie: > > That sort of reflects how I feel about the way racism was handled > in general--it's clearly bad in the book, but more like an entity. > It's what the enemy does, or something horrible that exists in the > world outside us, not something in ourselves. Betsy Hp: Another reason I thought JKR took the easy, dangerous way out. It's so much more comfortable to think racism is someone elses problem. Sort of like saying Nazism happened in Germany because Germans are just "that way". It discourages understanding and therefore prevention, IMO. > >>SSSusan: > > So I can see why this is a frustration, if you were expecting Draco > to have taken his own reservations & hesitations to heart, DD's > words on the tower to heart... because it didn't come to fruition. > Betsy Hp: A shoe that didn't drop. And I'll admit, the person I most related to in the series was Draco. He was just so spazzy and needy and trying so incredibly hard to live up to his father's ideal. And it turned out he wasn't those things after all. Just a racist. Made me sad. (So did Zach being reduced to a coward.) Betsy Hp From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 22:46:16 2007 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:46:16 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174024 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviampj" wrote: > > One thing I was amazed to read in JKR's online interview was that > she felt that possibly Lily might have become romantically involved > with Snape. From the brief clues she gives us from the Pensieve > scenes in HBP and DH it appears to me that from their very first > meeting as small children Snape's vindictive and sly streak caused > Lily some anguish, and was a cloud over their entire relationship. > It was a part of his nature that he seemingly could not overcome, > and I can't ever imagine that she could have fallen in love with > him, even if James Potter hadn't come on the scene. > > Sylvia. > Well, as I recall JKR said that Lily could have loved Snape romantically (paraphrase) "if it had not been for his attraction to the Dark Arts and the Death Eaters." I think it is important to remember that the personality flaws you mention are intimately bound up with Snape's attraction to the Dark Arts. It is true that his sly and vindictive nature was not, strictly speaking, created by the Dark Arts -- although it WAS shaped by a family that had in turn been shaped by the Dark Arts. But certainly his attraction to Dark Magic and the people who practiced it strengthened and magnified the cruelty and evil in his own soul. Many people have mentioned in the past that the Dark Arts seem to be addictive, and I think this is a useful way of thinking about this situation Many an alcoholic suffers from a personality riddled with flaws that might not be created by drink, but are certainly greatly worsened by alcohol. Similarly in this case I suspect a Snape who managed to turn away from the Dark Arts and the Death Eaters would be a Snape who exhibited a very different kind of behavior and attitude. Lupinlore From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Jul 31 23:10:07 2007 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:10:07 -0000 Subject: Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174025 >> Betsy wrote: >> >> JKR apparently looks at the world around her and >> thinks, "I know in my heart that a quarter of the >> people out there are evil, half of them are okay, >> and there's one quarter that's just unquestionably >> good." It's an ugly view of the world in my opinion. >> And it cumlminates in a rather ugly book with a >> rather ugly message. >> >> [And, from a later post] >> I disagree. I'll admit to being a bit of an optimist, >> but I really prefer to think that on the whole, most >> people are basically good. > Steve (bboyminn) replied: > > There is nothing wrong or inherently evil about any > of the Slytherin personality characteristics. But, > those characteristics are likely to contain a > group of people who seek power, and who are corrupted > by it. > > [snip] > > Note, not all Gryffindors are as brave as Harry, nor > as ethical, nor as admirable. Where was everyone when > Harry/Ron/Hermione were out on their great adventures? > Tucked safely in their beds. Do we call them cowards or > evil for having done so? I don't think so. > > In the characteristics of every House are pluses and > minuses. Loyalty of Hufflepuffs is good until it > become blind unquestioning loyalty. Courage amoung > Gryffindor is good until it becomes reckless or self- > serving. Brains and intelligence among Ravenclaw is > good until if fails to ask the hard questions of > why and to what end. > > Slytherins are ambitious, cunning, wily entrepeneurs, > and leaders. They get things done; and always to their > advantage, but that is how corporations succeed. That > is how financial empires are built. These > characteristics are not a fault until they are turned > to grossly unethical means. > > [snip] > > There is no reason to believe that the average > Slytherin is evil. Steve makes very good points, and I read Rowling's portrayal of the House characteristics much as he does (and not as Betsy and others on the thread have). Slughorn was an ultimate Slytherin in the sense of seeking ways to advance his own cause (and, for the same purpose, the causes of his proteges) but without any apparent attraction to the dark arts and without any real pureblood prejudice. (He was certainly interested in lineage, but principally in an old-boys, networking sort of way.) I do think that Rowling views ambition and cunning and attributes that lead to worldly success as morally suspicious -- this is, after all, the root of the dark skeleton's in Dumbledore's closet -- but she accepts that those attributes are valued by the world at large. The Dumbledore backstory also leads me to another point that comes through loud and clear in DH, namely that human beings are far too complicated to be described by a single attribute. The greatest failing of the Gryffindor Dumbledore is allowing his selfish ambition to overshadow his sense of loyalty to and responsibility for his sister. Slytherin Snape is the bravest man Harry ever knew. Gryffindor McGonagall continues (as she has throughout the series) to act more reliably out of loyalty to Dumbledore than out of bravery or any other motive. (It was that same loyalty, and not bravery, ambition or intelligence, that saved Harry in CS.) Bellatrix, too, seems more driven by loyalty than by any personal ambition; how is she a Slytherin? Not only are people complicated, but they change. Take Percy, for example. We don't know much about his youth, though we get a hint from Fred's last words of a less disciplined young Percy. In any event he was sorted into Gryffindor; by the time of his fifth year he was dominated by ambition (again, portrayed as a moral failing of grand proportion); and by the end of DH he has found within himself the bravery to walk out on the Ministry and stand up for what is right, not easy, even against the Minister for Magic himself. In my view it is this ability to change that Dumbledore is recognizing when he makes the comment to Snape about sorting too soon. It comes back to the moral about choices, which we have heard in many forms from Rowling since CS -- a person's character is defined not by the family into which he or she is born, nor by some set of characteristics he or she is born with, but by the choices he or she makes, particularly the hard ones. -- Matt -- Matt From hpfreakazoid at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 23:10:34 2007 From: hpfreakazoid at gmail.com (Jeremiah LaFleur) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:10:34 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron and Hermione's children In-Reply-To: <786-46AE718F-4340@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> References: <786-46AE718F-4340@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: <948bbb470707311610l5b2751bdx88239402927d0e0e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174026 Hello! New here and loving it... I haven't seen this mentioned but I was wondering if anyone knew the origins of the names of Ron and Hermione's children: Rose and Hugo? I could understand the Potter kids (Albus, James and Lily) but I have yet to find any reference in the Granger or Weasley family lines to "Rose" and "Hugo". Any thoughts? Thanks, Grainne =============== Jeremiah: Maybe they were just bing origional in their thinking... (And decided that Rose starts with an R like Ron and Hugo starts with an H like Hermione). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mros at xs4all.nl Tue Jul 31 23:25:14 2007 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 01:25:14 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory References: Message-ID: <000701c7d3ca$0e489200$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 174027 BetsyHp: >>>Instead we're left with this weird ending where Slytherins *are* evil, but we're going to have them stick around anyway because... it's nice to have people to pound when you're in a bad mood? Honestly, I don't know what JKR was thinking with this one.<<< Marion: I'm thinking of St.Augustine of Hippo here. One of the Church Fathers. Lived from 354 to 430 AD. Many Protestants, especially Calvinists, consider him to be one of the theological fathers of Reformation. He framed the concepts of original sin and just war. Augustine's theological views in the early middle era were revolutionary, perhaps none so much as his clear formulation of the doctrine of Original Sin that has substantially influenced Catholic theology. His idea of predestination rests on the assertion that God has foreseen, from time immemorial, all the choices every person who would ever live on Earth would make, and whether they would cooperate with Grace or not. The number of the people God knows would be saved are the elect, the number who God knows will not be saved are the reprobate. God has chosen the elect certainly and gratuitously, without any previous merit (ante merita) on their part. Augustine argued that God had allowed the Jews to survive as a warning to Christians, thus they were to be permitted to dwell in Christian lands. Augustine further argued that the Jews would be converted at the end of time. Scary, no? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From doliesl at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 23:18:54 2007 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's death scene Message-ID: <804392.85850.qm@web82215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174028 > Jack-A-Roe: > "That's my whole problem with Snape in that scene. > He wasn't prepared ... but did he try to reach for his wand? > No. Did he try anything? No. All his cunning and guile left > him when he needed it the most." > Krista: > Oh, I think Snape was indeed prepared > He felt his cause was more important than his life. It takes a > lot of nerve to stand your ground when you believe you are on > the brink of death. Barbara> D: I always see it this way too, he would not fight back to expose his cover. That's why his death was more of a sacrifice to the cause than a warrior death, like how JKR compared the difference between James and Lily's death. It was a spy's death, he kept to his role till the end of his life. If he were to resist and save his own skin, he would blown his cover and raised all sort of suspicion on LV's mind (for instance, he would start doubting the Elder Wand). Though a bloody dark arts duel showdown between Snape vs LV+Nagini would be awesome to see (better, if they were to fight outside in open air with all the flying in the sky) ...alas that would only happen if Snape were the main character of a video game. D. remembering all those endless brave Snape vs oh soooo crow eating Snape-is-coward debate. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jul 31 23:19:01 2007 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:19:01 -0000 Subject: Jo's OWN Words/Harry using Crucio/I am about to Rant/Danger Designating the In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174029 Jeannie: > > I've read the books and watched all the movies. My Family is > > under the impression that the writer is a practicing Wiccan and > > therefore not Christian in any sense of the word. Can someone > > tell me what views she has expressed in other interviews > > regarding her beliefs. Magpie: > She's stated she's Christian--she's never been Wiccan. SSSusan: As another member already noted, JKR's stated her church affiliation to be the Church of Scotland. Also, the quite oft-referenced quote (though for some reason also oft-hardest to find, even at accio-quote), is this one from the Vancouver Sun, Oct. 26, 2000: >>> [Journalist's words:] Harry, of course, is able to battle supernatural evil with supernatural forces of his own, and Rowling is quite clear that she doesn't personally believe in that kind of magic -- "not at all." Is she a Christian? "Yes, I am," she says. "Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books." <<< Magpie: > I can't speak for Maeg, but I suspect that the problem with the > Eeyore reference isn't that she didn't get it but that as humorous > as it is intended to be, it's still suggesting that her reaction > to the book means that she always sees the gloomy side of things, > when she might be a perfectly sunny Pigletty sort of person yet > saw something bad in the book. Conversely, if somebody really > liked the book or something in the book they probably wouldn't > appreciate being told they were just being a Pollyanna. SSSusan: LOL! A perfect explanation, Magpie! :) Siriusly Snapey Susan, thinking she'd rather like to be sunny in a Pigletty sort of way... From laurel.coates at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 23:27:21 2007 From: laurel.coates at gmail.com (Laurel Coates) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:27:21 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wasted potential in Pettigrew and my overall disappointment with DH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3cd952930707311627l53fda7b3m3e336e433fdf1762@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174030 Julie: And I thought this was a great use of Peter's character, and that JKR made a point well. Peter's end was perfect to me. He lived an ignonimous life--he had very few redeeming qualities (the barest hint of mercy toward the son of his "friend" James being one of them), and he was a coward (I still don't know how he could have been sorted into Gryffindor, unless he simply *wanted* to be there and the Sorting Hat bowed to that desire even though Peter had no apparent Gryffindor qualities, which sets up a whole other discussion about the sorting and the Sorting Hat!). So to me Peter deserved an ignomious death, which is exactly what he got. Laurel: I saw Peter's role as entirely different. I think it is likely that Peter knew what that silver hand was for -- keeping untrustworthy Peter in line -- and it took great courage for him to try to defy it -- and, therefore, Voldemort -- by protecting Harry and the others in the dungeon. Hopefully by that act Peter was able to redeem himself. Laurel [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 23:35:16 2007 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:35:16 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather - Elder Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174031 --- "pair_0_docks" wrote: > > > >>Carol: > >> > >> DD had tried to disable the Elder Wand via Snape > >> so that LV couldn't use it against Harry (or > >> anyone). << > > > pair_0_docks: > > I'm still confused...so had Snape disarmed/killed DD > on his orders the E. Wand wouldn't have worked? Why > wouldn't Voldy have just then still killed Snape > under the theory that he was the Master of the > Wand and been right? > > How could DD not have seen that he was ultimately > putting a bulls-eye on Snape? > > pair_0_docks > bboyminn: Simple... at that stage of the game, Voldemort does not know about the Elder Wand or the Legend of the Three Brothers. If Snape is in control of the Elder Wand, and Voldemort still knows nothing about it, then Dumbledore can be reasonably assured the wand will never be used against Harry. It is only when Voldemort finds out about the Twin Cores, that he realizes there is a problem. Then when a borrowed wand fails; he senses an even bigger problem. Only then did he seek out the most powerful wand of all; Dumbledore's Elder Wand. Though of course he doesn't yet know that Dumbledore has it. So, I think the plan was for Snape to say he didn't know what happened to the wand. That it was either buried with Dumbledore or turned over to Dumbledore's family or amoung Dumbledore's artifacts at Hogwarts. So, that would lead Voldemort on a wild goose chase, searching for that which was right under his nose. True, at some point he may have suspected that Snape was the Master of the Wand because of his defeat of Dumbledore, but being the Master is irrelevant unless you have access to the wand. As long as Snape kept it hidden, there wasn't much Voldemort could do. Also, since Snape never really intended to captured the wand from Dumbledore, he couldn't be his true Master. In an odd way, Dumbledore gave Snape the Wand the same as Harry might hand his wand to Ron and ask him to hold it. That doesn't constitute a capture or defeat. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From Meliss9900 at aol.com Tue Jul 31 23:44:49 2007 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:44:49 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Deathly Hallows thoughts etc. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174032 In a message dated 7/25/2007 4:24:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, elync at eclectic-egg.com writes: Lyn: I'm wondering if the "Accio" only works on things, not people... did we ever see anyone "Accio" another person to themselves? Well Harry did try to "Accio Hagrid" when Hagrid fell off the bike but instead of pulling Hagrid to Harry it seemed to pull the bike to Hagrid. (of course that could be due to Hagrid's size) So in theory it might be possible but I think it would have serious size and distance limitations. Melissa ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From julie.strangfeld at gmail.com Tue Jul 31 23:49:58 2007 From: julie.strangfeld at gmail.com (jastrangfeld) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:49:58 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore the Godfather - Elder Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174033 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- "pair_0_docks" wrote: > > > > > >>Carol: > > >> > > >> DD had tried to disable the Elder Wand via Snape > > >> so that LV couldn't use it against Harry (or > > >> anyone). << > > > > > > pair_0_docks: > > > > I'm still confused...so had Snape disarmed/killed DD > > on his orders the E. Wand wouldn't have worked? Why > > wouldn't Voldy have just then still killed Snape > > under the theory that he was the Master of the > > Wand and been right? > > > > How could DD not have seen that he was ultimately > > putting a bulls-eye on Snape? > > > > pair_0_docks > > > > bboyminn: > snip > > If Snape is in control of the Elder Wand, and Voldemort > still knows nothing about it, then Dumbledore can > be reasonably assured the wand will never be used against > Harry. > > snip > So, I think the plan was for Snape to say he didn't > know what happened to the wand. ACTUALLY - Dumbledore is allowing Snape to kill him, thus giving permission, therefore never losing control of the wand. If all had gone according to plan, Dumbledore would have been the last master of the wand, as Snape would not be master as he had permission to kill Dumbledore, therefore, not taking the wand by force. My understanding is the wand has to be taken without the owner's permission. Julie From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 23:32:35 2007 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:32:35 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape's Salvation (Re: No progress for Slytherin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 174034 Carol earlier: > > Hermione (who seems finally to have grasped the psychology of house-elves) tells Harry that Kreacher is loyal to people who are kind to him > > Magpie: > Again, not exactly a sophisticated examination of compassion at all. > It's a perfectly good development in the story, but no, I don't read > this section and think it's a great lesson in compassion. Kreacher's > psychology sounds a bit more canine than the average human to me. Carol again: I think maybe you don't like the whole idea of house-elves wanting to serve human beings. You probably hated that line about wanting to ask Kreacher for a sandwich at the end! I was a bit surprised by it, but what I meant by Hermione understanding the psychology of house-elves is that (as I read it) something in their natures makes them want to serve wizards. Not that they're inferior in loyalty or courage or intelligence or magical ability, just that it's their nature. With the rare and perhaps unique exception of Dobby, they don't want to be free. They just want to be treated with respect and kindness and use their magic to do what they do exceptionally well. (So where did Kreacher get the ingredients for French onion soup and treacle tart when all the kids could find to eat was moldy bread? Is House-elf magic that superior to wizards' magic?) Also, Harry has to understand not only to be kind to Kreacher (which is not enough initself to transfer his allegiance) but to respect and honor Kreacher's devotion to Master Regulus. Giving him the locket acknowledges that it's okay for Kreacher to love and honor the Slytherin turned Death Eater who turned against Voldemort and died to avenge Kreacher by subverting Voldemort. That's a huge turnaround from regarding Kreacher as beneath contempt for what he did to Regulus's brother Sirius. (It was actually Harry himself who was being set up to be kidnapped, used to get down the Prophecy orb, and then killed, but Harry doesn't see that clearly.) At any rate, it may not be the attitude that you want Harry to adopt toward house-elves, but surely giving a dog a clean kennel and treating it with kindness is better than letting it live in filth and treating it with contempt? (Or treating Kreacher as the Malfoys once trated Dobby?) I'm not sure what you think would be better than letting the house-elves serve happily with kind and fair treatment. Giving the house-elves wands, letting them go to Hogwarts, and letting them choose their own profession? Wouldn't that just be conforming them to the norms of wizard society instead of letting them happily serve as domestics? I'll bet that the surviving house-elves immediately returned to the Hogwarts kitchen and resumed their normal lives the moment the battle was over. And no doubt they served equally good meals for Headmaster Snape as for Headmaster Dumbledore. > Carol earlier: > > If Harry is a Christ figure (and I do think he is), it's not because he shows compassion to everyone or to his "inferiors" Harry's own suffering makes his compassion, or his empathy, or whatever it is, possible. ,snip> > > Magpie: > I don't think Harry shows much empathy or compassion *at all* is my > point. It's not something I'd use to describe the character any more > than I'd say that Harry as a character is particularly nervous or > gluttonous or inventive. He doesn't have to exemplify every positive > trait to be a hero. Not that he doesn't show compassion at all ever, > but if I'm looking for a Christ figure in the compassion department, > Harry doesn't cut it. There are ordinary people walking around who > are by nature far more compassionate than Harry even at the end of > the series. I'm happy to give Harry props for all the virtues he has > in abundance. Compassion and empathy are not among them. He's not > completely without them, but he's no model for them, imo. Certainly > not the point where he's approaching a Christ-like level! Carol: Sorry about that. My own complex sentence structure, wanting to bring in the people to whom I think he's shown compassion or empathy, tripped me up. What I meant to say is that I don't think ist's his compassion per se that makes him a Christ fiugre if he is one. It's his willingness to sacrifice himself for the WW. And I don't think that would have happened if he hadn't gotten past his hatred of Snape, replacing it with empathy and understanding and, IMO, compassion, just as he's learned empathy and compassion for the formerly scorned Luna and Neville. The compassion, or the empathy with the others who have suffered at Voldemort's hands, first glimpsed in GoF: "It was Voldemort, Harry thought, staring up at the canopy of his bed in the darkness, it all came back to Voldemort. He was the one who had torn these families apart, who had ruined all these lives" (GoF Am. ed. 607). And by DH, Harry can add Severus Snape and Regulus Black to the list of ruined lives and Andromeda Black Tonks' family to the list of those torn apart. I could quote passages where Harry shows compassion for Neville and Luna and perhaps others because I think it's important to his preparation for sacrificing himself after he receives Snape's last message. But I didn't mean that compassion is his defining trait or that it alone is what makes him a Christ figure (or interpretable as one by those so inclined). Of course, his defining trait is courage, as, oddly enough, is Snape's. (Much more so than Dumbledore's, BTW.) But to the extent that the HP series is a Bildungsroman, a journey from Innocence through Experience to Wisdom, I think we're meant to see the development of compassion and of perception (seeing the good in others who are unlike himself) as the chief fruits of his experience, making the man at the end of the books (no Dumbledore, thank heaven!) much wiser and open-minded than the boy we see throughout the series, including the bulk of DH itself, before he encounters that other "abandoned boy" in the Pensieve. Carol, who must stop letting parenthetical asides strangle her sentences like the locket Horcrux strangling Harry From leekaiwen at yahoo.com Tue Jul 31 23:59:13 2007 From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen) Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:59:13 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Sense of Betrayal / Unforgiveables In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46AFCCD1.90205@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 174036 Matt blessed us with this gem On 31/07/2007 08:00: > The act of murder (i.e., intentional homicide), if done in > self-defense, is viewed as justifiable I chose the term murder specifically because murder is defined as unjustifiable or inexcusable killing. Not all killing is unjustified; all murder is. > the circumstances rendered the proscribed act morally > or legally acceptable. In which case it is not called murder. >> Just because war necessitates killing does not mean all >> killing in wartime is justified. > But by the same dint, the circumstances that make killing a war crime > are not defined in terms of absolutes, but in terms of competing > principles and surrounding circumstances. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. If you mean that in order to distinguish justifiable killing from unjustifiable (i.e., murder) we must look at the circumstances surrounding the act, I agree. But that does not affect my basic assertion that "Murder is unjustifiable" is an absolute. > Is there any weapon of war in the real world that is viewed as > immoral because of its efficiency in killing a single enemy > combatant? There are certainly weapons of war whose use is, in all cases without exception, viewed as immoral and hence illegal. Two that spring to mind are chemical and biological weapons, whose use under any circumstances is proscribed by international treaty (specfically, the Geneva Protocol of 1925). > And while you say that torture is never excusable, that is not true > at least in a legal sense (necessity would be a defense) Torture is yet another "tool" who use is, under any and all circumstances, proscribed under international treaty. Help me here, but I can't imagine any circumstances which necessitate torture. Now, it may well be true that there are legal wranglings over the definition of torture (the Bush administration has been doing a lot of that lately), but arguing over exactly what constitutes torture is not the same as arguing over the absolute principle that torture is unjustifiable. > Whether we call what Harry did "understandable" (your words) or > "excusable" (my mischaracterization ) Yes, pardon me, but that is a mischaracterization. Again, I chose my terms specifically. "Understandable" does not mean "excusable". And such extenuating circumstances do often reduce the severity of the crime (in the US, say, from "murder" to "manslaughter"), but they do not excuse it. >> Even assuming your moral code permits euthanasia, euthanasia >> hardly justifies an Unforgivable Curse. > Why should the means of death make any moral difference? But it makes all the difference in the world! Even in the US, which still permits capital punishment, the form of death is chosen to be as humane as possible. To say that killing is justified is not at all to say that ANY FORM of killing is justified. Note that I am not making an argument about the humaneness of the AK. From all accounts in the canon the AK seems to be quick and painless. The point is that an immoral (and yes, I do believe the canon establishes that the UCs are immoral, not just illegal) method of killing is unjustifiable even when the killing itself is not. Since, in the wizarding world, the AK is unforgivable, even if one argues that the killing of Dumbledore was justifiable, the method Snape chose was not, particularly in light of the fact that other methods were equally available to Snape. > I think that in distinguishing based on the form of curse used you are > putting more weight on the term "unforgivable" than Rowling ever did. Could you cite a passage on this? The text, as far as I can see, simply establishes the UCs as (morally) unforgivable. Is there a passage which discusses the exact degree of "unforgivable"? Outside of the incidents we're discussing, JKR never shows us a justifiable use of the UCs. Even when the MoM authorized their use in the first Voldemort war, the authorial point of view seems to be that the use degraded the moral standing of the good guys (they were associated with ruthlessness and cruelty which was disapproved of in the end). > Is there some reason that the use of Avada Kedavra is unforgivable > above and beyond the immorality of ending another person's life? I don't have any idea. JKR never discusses that. There is, apparently, at least one other "killing curse", demonstrated by Molly against Bellatrix, which is not "unforgivable". So as to WHY the AK is unforgivable, you'll have to wait for JKR to explain. I only know from reading the text that it IS. > Aside from the different types of moral distinctions we are making, I > don't think we disagree terribly much. I'd venture that the whole issue boils down to the definition of "unforgivable". As far as I can tell from a reading of the text: a) it most certainly is a moral, not just legal, issue; b) outside of book 7 and the end of book 6 (which are the points of contention) there are no clear examples of a morally justified use of the UCs; and c) any discussion of the "degree" of unforgivability lies outside the canonical texts; i.e., in the realm of speculation. Which means, to me, that "unforgivable" must mean "unforgivable" until proven (i.e., from the canon) otherwise; and on that basis the good guys' use of them cannot be justified. > people frequently do terrible and unjustified things in the name > of war. Rowling clearly has one authorial eye on that fact I think she has also tried to make that point in several of her interviews. She has specifically discussed Harry's use of the Cruciatus in the Ravenclaw commons room in terms of wanting to show that Harry was no saint. I'll accept that much, while arguing that I think she botched the job. In order to show that Harry is no saint, she has to show him performing a morally reprehensible act. But she doesn't make clear that his use of the Cruciatus in that case WAS reprehensible. Certainly, the reaction of McGonagall (calling it "gallant" of all things, immediately followed by an equally casual UC of her own!) doesn't help. And some reflection after the fact on the vileness (even if justified) of the act would have also gone a long way toward making her point. After all, as you've said, even good people do terrible things in war. But good people also agonize over it afterward. To my mind, the casualness with which the UCs are tossed about by the good guys works against the point JKR is trying to make. And, as you have said, saying "in war, good guys do terrible things" cannot be used as a defense of those "terrible things". CJ